Lets talk about morality!

[DeletedUser198]

Okay so Im having a little hard time with the morality stat. If I am taking out a player, and take his big villages and all he has left is smaller ones, it makes it much harder to be able to wipe him out. I get that its to try and stop big players from just dominating, but there are some problems here. If a player once had 20k points, and you take his villages accumulating to 15k of his points. Killing the last one is near impossible because your troops are fighting at 3/4- 1/2 combat strength. This makes wiping out players extremely difficult.

Not sure why morality even plays a roll, why are my troops fighting bad, because im hitting smaller players? That really doesnt make sense to me. They have had the same amount of time to grow as I have, but they may be inactive etc and now I have to send sometimes DOUBLE the troops to clear a 3K point village. So my option is to either waste a bunch of extra troops and put me behind or just let him live and grow in my area.

I have a few suggestions here : Morality shouldn't have an effect with the paladin, same as faith. This will limit mass attacks on smaller players, but ONE of your attacks can be guaranteed to fight full force.
Another possibility is to tie morale into time, If a player has had the same amount of time to expand and be successful as I am ( IE joined the same time) I should not endure a penalty because he is not active enough. ( I understand it is linked to time, but the wiki says that is stops at 50 percent, why not allow it to go to 100?)

These are just my thoughts, it frustrates me that I have to just let players live for longer than I want to because my army will only fight at 70 percent. I personally think this feature needs tweaking, but im posting it here to try and generate some discussion and see how other people feel as well.

 

[DeletedUser30]

mo·ral·i·ty
məˈralədē/
noun
[COLOR=#878787 !important]

• principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

[/COLOR]

vs
mo·rale
məˈral/

noun
[COLOR=#878787 !important]

• the confidence, enthusiasm, and discipline of a person or group at a particular time.
  [COLOR=#878787 !important]"their morale was high"[/COLOR]

[/COLOR]

Your troops have low morale fighting lower level players because people can still join a world that is in progress with players already at 100k, 200k, 300k power. Now say I'm said low level player, I join I move my way up to 2k before my protection ends, now a player nearby has 100k power and sees a 2k village. Well guess what this 2k village will be an easy target for me because I have 100k power.
See how that could be less than fun? It's not a bad system, it deturs players from picking on fresher/newer players that haven't had the time to build up. Yes there are issues IE: the ones who have been around a while and haven't grown. Some of which because they're inactive. But eventually they'll fix it and inactive players will go grey and slowly lose their troops anyway.

 

[DeletedUser198]

Im not so much talking about new players, I get that the system is there for that but if you have been playing for the same amount of time, there should not be a morality penalty.

 

[DeletedUser193]

You have a point bigpapa.

 

[DeletedUser]

I think it stops players with multiple villas going for an easy main villa from a person with 1 or 2... also gives the defending player somewhat of a fairer chance defending.
think about it... a big player has dozens of villas to provide defence with while a low player has only a handful. in a head to head situation, the low player wouldnt stand a chance if the attacking strength remained the same while there one nuke can easily be cleaned up

 

[DeletedUser193]

If they both started on the same day, and one player gained 10,000 points in the same time it took the other player to gain 2,000, why does the 2,000 player deserve the bonus? Unless the 10,000 grew so fast because of coins... so there's the hole in my reasoning.

 

[DeletedUser]

If they both started on the same day, and one player gained 10,000 points in the same time it took the other player to gain 2,000, why does the 2,000 player deserve the bonus? Unless the 10,000 grew so fast because of coins... so there's the hole in my reasoning.

I see what you mean, but if the higher level player already has 10k points it wouldn't be such a burden to knock a lower level player with so many troops, shouldn't anyway I'd assume. Not to mention the farms or even the fact that pits on TW2 yield much more in total than classic to allow for much quicker resource gain and less dependency on farms or other villas. Slightly off topic yet still pertaining, I believe if the issue of non-barbing inactive players was resolved this issue might be in a different light, if at all.

 

[DeletedUser216]

I wish people would read the whole thread before posting a comment. Fank 009, read the whole thread. He understands the point difference for newer players. He's saying the problem he has, is with players in his current province. So obviously they're not newer players with low points.

 

[DeletedUser198]

Thanks 300, glad there are people who understand the point I was trying to make. Although there hasnt been much discussion here on this feature, I believe there needs to be a change.

 

[DeletedUser216]

No problem. I too get frustrated when people just jump into the middle of a Forum Post when they have only read the opening post. What's the point of making a comment lol? And I agree with you on that matter. I still have villages that have not gone barb in my area, and they're still 51 points.

 

[DeletedUser]

so what are you all going too do when you run every one off the game? seems pointless too me

 

[Tokano]

Win the world. xP

 

[DeletedUser]

They should make tribe size a factor in morality. It is ridiculous that a 140 member tribe can establish a nap with virtually every other tribe and then pounce on all the tiny tribes.

 

[Tokano]

That's definitely an interesting concept.
I'll suggest that for a world option, not a blanket option. I'm very curious as to how that would change the dynamics of a world. Tribes would be much, much more selective about who they let into their tribes. It would be a world of small, very coordinated, elite tribes all squaring off against each other. Wanting to expand but without more members.