• Hello, Guest!
    Are you passionate about Tribal Wars 2 and like to help your fellow players?
    We currently have open positions for Forum Moderators!

    >> Join the Tribal Wars 2 Team now! <<
    We would love to hear from you!

Losing Noble Coins

DeletedUser

Guest
So now you have the player that had 23 villages down to 5 villages and you have all the villages you took from them. Yes morale does work like that, we want people to continue to fight and play the game, not move to the next world because they are losing so bad. Alnwick is dead, between MRTS and monsters the game play has grown stale. People eating barbs just to fill out their percentages. I really think instead of changing all this you guys should wait to see what a real endgame looks like before we change the way to get and keep nobles.

So you are telling me that nobling a player with lower morale, the system weights the nobles effectiveness down, so it is more likely he is going to roll a lower loyalty reduction than if I were attacking a player of the same size? I'd like some confirmation from the devs on that, as that is never how that was presented in either TW1 or TW2, and if that is the case, that's just wrong. A random number is a random number no matter what the case...
 

DeletedUser

Guest
It is not pushing if it is 2 players the problem with that comes in when people abuse the co-op player.

It is using strategy to combat the morale issue. Some people can't handle 100 villages and quit when they get forced to play that way. If a member of your squad wants to play but keep a handful of villages. That is the way they want to play.

It is forbidden to use one or more accounts that solely exists to advance the progress of another account.
It is forbidden to create trades in any form (resources, attacks, favors etc.) that involve multiple worlds and/or servers.
Example:
  • Transferring resources or troop support frequently to another account or other accounts to solely push their progress instead of your own is forbidden.

So a smaller player who attacks a village, nobles it, then pushes it to a bigger player repeatedly is without a doubt pushing.
 

DeletedUser1260

Guest
Is it not true that as someone gets smaller your attack percentage decreases as you take his villages?

That is if you as an individual are using the accounts in that way. That is if you have The Nexus and have The Nexus 2 to do as I put out.


If you have a player that wants to be big bad Mike and another that wants to play smaller, working together as a team is not bad.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
So now you have the player that had 23 villages down to 5 villages and you have all the villages you took from them. Yes morale does work like that, we want people to continue to fight and play the game, not move to the next world because they are losing so bad. Alnwick is dead, between MRTS and monsters the game play has grown stale. People eating barbs just to fill out their percentages. I really think instead of changing all this you guys should wait to see what a real endgame looks like before we change the way to get and keep nobles.

The game grows stale because it takes 2 years to finish a world because there is no end game and domination is impossible due to things like THIS. If worlds only lasted 6 months, things would be far better. Sure, I got rimmed on 11... do I start again or HEY! 13 comes out next week... a fresh start!!! Sounds much healthier to me...
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Is it not true that as someone gets smaller your attack percentage decreases as you take his villages?

That is if you as an individual are using the accounts in that way. That is if you have The Nexus and have The Nexus 2 to do as I put out.

Morale yes, it does not affect Nobles though... they still hit 20 - 35, randomly.

Yeah that is what I am saying. Jaded if this is not the case, can you confirm that with the devs, as I am pretty sure morale has NO affect on the random 20 - 35 of the noble.

And Jaded, having both worked for a game similar to this, and played TW1 for about 10 years now I am 100% positive you are wrong on the pushing definition. Doesn't matter if it is one person with multiple accounts (multi-accounting) or two players with their own accounts doing the pushing....Utilizing an account solely for the growth of another account, even between two players as in your example, is pushing...
 

DeletedUser1260

Guest
Think about it this way The Nexus is it true that your attack percentage goes down when you attack someone with 1 village and you have 5 and no matter if you use the pally with level 5 statue you can't attack them at 100%? So their defense trumps your attack.


So now instead of just troops you send nobles at them? Wouldn't that defense still trump those nobles?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Think about it this way The Nexus is it true that your attack percentage goes down when you attack someone with 1 village and you have 5 and no matter if you use the pally with level 5 statue you can't attack them at 100%?

What does that have to do with whether or not a noble lands a 20 or a 35. The calculation in question is whether morale has any affect on the random number selection of a noble's effect. Whether I have 100% morale or 10% morale if I attack with a noble it should be hitting with the same random chance of a number between 20 - 35, though I may take more damage because of my lowered attack strength from my other troops...Two separate issues....
 

DeletedUser1260

Guest
Why should a noble attacking at 100% or attacking at 52% take away the same morale?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
This discussion is more pointless than the game itself. If Jaded can't stop bringing up morale and team work and pushing in a discussion about how to prevent someone who just lost a village from immediately using the benefit from having lost that village to take a new one... I'm done.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Why should a noble attacking at 100% or attacking at 52% take away the same morale?

Nobles don't take away morale, they take away loyalty. Dear God.

As the largest account on the server, I can tell you that morale does not affect the loyalty hits of Nobles.
 

DeletedUser1260

Guest
And I have 500 things other then this conversation going on so I am so sorry that I get a word wrong. Typos happen? :p

So you think that the strength of your attack should not effect the noble bringing down the loyalty of a village?
 

DeletedUser1260

Guest
Nope I have been trying to answer all of you in one post.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
So how would a cool down period fundamentally alter the game? It would give people a chance to combat massive over expansion without a huge penalty to standard players... what's the fundamental strategy change?
 

DeletedUser142

Guest
I agree the taking of barb villages is an issue. Rather than change the whole noble program why not just give barb villages a loyalty of say 500 or more making them less attractive and more difficult to take them? Yes they would still be taken out but instead of 3-4 noble runs it would take 15-20 and slow the process of taking them.
 

DeletedUser1260

Guest
Now here is a solution that don't penalize anyone but the person taking the barbarian village.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Sorry, how do you eat them?
I have say 140 villages... 12 trains... I want to eat a 30 village barb Nobler.
Day 1, I hit him with all 12 trains and say 24 Nukes and knock him to 18 villages dropping myself down to 36 Nobles (from 48).
Day 2, he Nobles 12 new barbs cause bouncing Nobles off barbs is fast and easy. I hit him with 9 more trains and drop him to 21 villages (30 - 12 + 12 - 9).
Day 3, he nobles 9 new villages, now I'm down to like 27 Nobles... and can only take 6 villages. I'm falling behind!

To stay status quo, all he has to do is rebuild a Noble. I need to mint 220 coins just to build a new Noble... only so he can rebuild the Noble and cost me 221 coins to take that village... so he can rebuild the Noble and cost me 222 coins...

There are a couple solutions. The easiest is, you use a Noble, it's gone. You'll get some push back from people Over Nobling villages (5 Noble trains) but that's life.

You could increase the cost of Nobles significantly and make the Noble itself more of the cost versus the coins. That could help some.

You could GREATLY increase the loyalty of Barbs... to say 400 loyalty. Now if I want to eat a 30 village player, I can potentially take over his entire account faster than he can re-Noble 29 new villages.

All of these would help stop this BS.

If only someone had mentioned that earlier...
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I agree the taking of barb villages is an issue. Rather than change the whole noble program why not just give barb villages a loyalty of say 500 or more making them less attractive and more difficult to take them? Yes they would still be taken out but instead of 3-4 noble runs it would take 15-20 and slow the process of taking them.

Problem with this is it alters the strategy for moving into a new province... generally you send a Noble train... pop a church... and then let all your other attacks on players hit at 100% faith instead of 50%... if you have to send 15 Nobles to take the barb, it's a much different strategy. Which is the smaller change to strategy... a cool down period before you get your Noble back after losing a village... or needing to send a 15 Noble train at a barb?
 
Top