Jump to content
World Warfare
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

MkV

Moderator
  • Content count

    486
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    66

MkV last won the day on September 4

MkV had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

358 Sergeant Major

About MkV

  • Rank
    Sergeant Major

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. MkV

    Master List of Generals

    He replaced Zedong Mao
  2. MkV

    Map Rotation

    Thats why i think the best option is a 15 player limit with one ally
  3. MkV

    Map Rotation

    In my mind, the main reason to have these discussion here is to provide the devs player feedback and ideas. Unfortunately, the majority of their feed back comes through "contact us" and is usually threatening, self centered and rude. This can and has lead to "knee jerk" changes which are rarely a good thing. A better solution to the diplomacy thing is to return the League Size to 15 (or 20, but I think 15 is a better number) and limit leagues to one ally. I don't know if this is possible though. Another option is leagues of 20 and no allies. That would cause other issues though and is a bad idea in my opinion. I 100% agree on the speed vs life. There never should have been speed increases in the first place. I know that it was asked for a lot, but the unintended consequences have been far worse for the game than it has helped. For the most part, players weren't leaving the game due to its slow speed, but they left in droves over the lag and other issues the speed caused. When I say the game is having an identity crisis, here is an example. It started out as a slow paced, long term strategy game that gave players time to develop their economies and armies and have slowly building battles that culminated in huge battles towards the end. The 24/7 persistent environment means the pace has to be slow enough so that you can manage and survive in the times when you are offline doing "life" stuff. Activity was an advantage, but with league sizes and the slower speeds it wasn't mandatory to be online constantly. Class tech sped up certain units, and Battlefield Tech sped the game up slowly so that by the mid to late game units were moving pretty quickly. The people who like that, loved it. The people who wanted fast paced rts stuff played other games. In an attempt to grab the other crowd, the game was sped up causing all sorts of issues. With the higher speeds out the gate and Class/BF tech making speeds INSANE, you HAVE to be online constantly or your whole league can get rolled very quickly. Maps ending too quickly is also discouraging the spending on map infrastructure (general slots, research slots, etc.) This has led to both sorts of players being unsatisfied. I realize this is an over simplification, but the concept is valid. It is leaving it's core concept and trying to be all things to every sort of player. As a result is becoming good at nothing. it's a shame, because it has been and can be the best strategy game of this type in existence. The fact that it isn't for every one is just a reality.
  4. MkV

    Map Rotation

    I don't think that's why the League size change was made. The fact that the tendency of the player base is to come in with large leagues and sister leagues, plus permanent allies creates a situation where global gets all green very quickly. This creates many many request to the GMs to close maps early. In part to compensate for this, the voting system on global was changed from "8 days, vote to extend adding +2 days" to "8 days vote to end the map after 3 days". (which is silly. at a minimum the vote to end should be on day 5, not 3) When the speed was changed to x2 this exasperated the problem. Maps are ending very quickly. I believe the League size was changed in part to offset this. Those quick maps are bad for their revenue. In my opinion, the best solution would be to remove the speed maps all together. If they don't want to do that, then they need to fix them because the combat system is broken. The game is going through an identity crisis right now, and in trying to please everyone, they are pleasing no one. This fact does not invalidate the original poster's suggestion. It reinforces it. I offered, but they don't seem interested in selling. One of the worst decisions imaginable was to go to the PC platform and create a different game. It would have been FAR better to make the mobile game cross platform and bring those players into the mobile version, increasing and expanding their player base. This also would have allowed their dev efforts (In house or contracted) to concentrate on one product. I'm still shaking my head over that one.
  5. MkV

    Defense: Explained More

    It was originally one time per minute. Now it is once in 15 seconds and then once per minute thereafter. The issue as I understand it is that while the speed can be adjusted per map, the combat resolution is the same across all maps. that was the reason for the initial change. With the all the maps now 2x speed maps, it would be best if it was standardized at once per 30 seconds. That means that other things need to be adjusted as well. Speed is x2 so you need to do the following to get every thing back in balance: Combat resolved every 30 seconds Shorter combat resolution means the towed units should lose their setup time (or have it drastically reduced) Unit build/expand times times and costs need to be 1/2 (not resources income. those should be left the same. If you 1/2 the cost, you are effectively doubling the resources. This allows for the fact that units move and die faster so they need to be built cheaper and faster. 1/2 the xp gained for each unit kill to keep the rate that players gain battle level the same (this affects battlefield tech and troop count, which needs to stay the same ) The build times should NOT change. the "pace" of the game needs to be the same (When bombers are available, LC advancements, etc)
  6. MkV

    Islands of War

    Agree. It is game breaking
  7. MkV

    Questionnaire on Tactic "Life-Saving"

    Your message is lost in its delivery
  8. It suits me for you to remain uninformed on this. Good Luck.
  9. MkV

    Questionnaire on Tactic "Life-Saving"

    sometimes I feel this not a fight but mostly a challenge who’s have more life savings tickets alts will win
  10. MkV

    The best Armada for all situations?

    Excellent thoughts, you're definitely on the right track.
  11. To be clear, he said Combined Arms, not just tanks. We've seen it many times.
  12. Because Your M-40 spam with max gold, max generals, expanded and pre-buffed is somehow better than the other M-40 spam with max gold, max generals, expanded and pre-buffed we kill? That you are aware of. It's very arrogant to think that just because you don't understand something, no one else does. There is clearly an enormous difference in experience. It seems that you have never seen M-40 spam defeated by something other than M-40 spam, and because you have never seen it, it can't be done. We, on the other hand, have seen it many times. Honestly though, I don't really care if you believe us or not.
  13. MkV

    Questionnaire on Tactic "Life-Saving"

    I think the issue goes a bit further than Lifesaving or the alts.. I think its the diplomacy system. There should be no way to ally 1/2 the map. (Or in one case vs Wefew ALL the map) The proposal of making it league mates only is a 1/2 measure. The large leagues will still have an advantage over the small leagues, and not all alts are in separate leagues. I'd rather see The Diplomacy changed (I know its much harder to do) Something like 20 is the max. one league of 20, or one alliance of up to 20. (maybe the alliance of 20 isn't the right number, It could be 25 or 30, I'm not sure) If that's not an option, I'd leave it alone. If it has to be changed, Leave the heal at 30% and make it leagues mates only.
  14. MkV

    Gigant upgraded cargo capacity

    They have always weighed 3 at level 1
×