BTW - if no-one's paid any attention - new BOB with Objectives code has been released... if you have anything to add - please add it in the AJAX BOB thread (i.e. not here!)
Coleman wrote:Herakilla do you lose to people that use your strategy as well or have you not found one yet?
i havent found any1 who goes by my exact strategy but the ones that run something close i usually beat.
but most people i run into dont use anything like mine making their destruction pretty one sided lol
have we met in battle yet ? i have a nice mix of strategies for 1 v1 worked out at this stage depending on the various variables - so far I have gained over 500 pts in my 87 completed 1 v 1 games with a win % of 56% (this % was higher but its starting to drop)
Don't now why people on here don't like being cooks, remember under siege: A former SEAL, now cook, is the only person who can stop a gang of terrorists when they sieze control of a US Navy battleship.
Coleman wrote:I'm not surprised your win % is dropping, more people are figuring it out.
true but im now up to 1673 (i was at 1023 48 hours ago) - all thanks to age of might (my previous high score was 1350)
Don't now why people on here don't like being cooks, remember under siege: A former SEAL, now cook, is the only person who can stop a gang of terrorists when they sieze control of a US Navy battleship.
Have you looked at the option of reducing the value of castles but increasing the value of resources/Castles?
For example:
Castles= +3
Castles + Resource pair= +5
Castles would still be important, but more in combination with the resources. It might encourage players to attack more neutral territories before going all out on other players. Just a thought.
Have you looked at the option of reducing the value of castles but increasing the value of resources/Castles?
For example:
Castles= +3
Castles + Resource pair= +5
Castles would still be important, but more in combination with the resources. It might encourage players to attack more neutral territories before going all out on other players. Just a thought.
I thik a better idea is to have the castle bonus auto deploy
Have you looked at the option of reducing the value of castles but increasing the value of resources/Castles?
For example:
Castles= +3
Castles + Resource pair= +5
Castles would still be important, but more in combination with the resources. It might encourage players to attack more neutral territories before going all out on other players. Just a thought.
I thik a better idea is to have the castle bonus auto deploy
chapter 2 will incorporate many changes. however chapter 1 will remain as it is.
for crying out loud, it's been less than 5 days and it has 37 pages of games. this means it's played and people like it.
i am not 100% satisfied with the map but seeing how happy most people are i've decided not to change it. but chapter 2 will be different.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
DiM wrote:chapter 2 will incorporate many changes. however chapter 1 will remain as it is. for crying out loud, it's been less than 5 days and it has 37 pages of games. this means it's played and people like it. i am not 100% satisfied with the map but seeing how happy most people are i've decided not to change it. but chapter 2 will be different.
But are they playing it as its meant to be played? It seems a majority are playing two player where the dynamics are radically different at best and a cheat map at worst.
There is no point in leaving a map with such obvious game play bugs. It's often hard to predict the gameplay in the development stage, we try our best, but don't peg it correctly sometimes. There is no harm in continuing the development with minor changes to the benefit at all.
If a map of mine has 37 pages rife with abuse of its game play, I dont think I would be too proud.
maybe someone can quote this since DiM is ignoring my posts
hulmey wrote:The test of time shall tell DIM...Its too early to say if a map is popular when its just been released, coz every one wants to play on something new!!
of course the test of time shall tell, but so far 37 pages in less than 5 days is a lot especially when you look at other maps that have been quenched for a month 2 months 6 months or a year and they don't have 37 pages.
it's obvious the enthusiasm of a new map gathers a lot of players and in time their number falls. it happens to all maps. perhaps when nobody will play it i'll give the map a facelift and a new gameplay to revitalize it but until then why change something that is popular?
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
DiM wrote:chapter 2 will incorporate many changes. however chapter 1 will remain as it is. for crying out loud, it's been less than 5 days and it has 37 pages of games. this means it's played and people like it. i am not 100% satisfied with the map but seeing how happy most people are i've decided not to change it. but chapter 2 will be different.
But are they playing it as its meant to be played? It seems a majority are playing two player where the dynamics are radically different at best and a cheat map at worst.
There is no point in leaving a map with such obvious game play bugs. It's often hard to predict the gameplay in the development stage, we try our best, but don't peg it correctly sometimes. There is no harm in continuing the development with minor changes to the benefit at all.
If a map of mine has 37 pages rife with abuse of its game play, I dont think I would be too proud.
maybe someone can quote this since DiM is ignoring my posts
I love this map. I think alot of hard work and effort went into creating it.
The map has a fundemental flaw however. There should never be a map where a player can be eliminated in the first round BEFORE he takes his turn. If a player puts himself in a posistion where they can be eliminated in round 1, I'm fine with that. This map allows for a player to be eliminated before he can play the game. That's not right.
Exactly nothing happened except run for the closest dock and kill the enemy. No resource pairs, no sanctuary. And no im not bitter being killed off. Its just messed up the way it is (although it looks great and the ideas behind it are great too).