Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiba
In my eyes the risk is that no fleet equals no reward. Those that win will prosper, those that don't won't. But if it didn't decrease your score, only potentially increase it then it has to be worth more risks ergo more combat.
The premise that actually engaging in combat with another can bring success would change the whole mind set of the game. To be able to grow your empire whilst smashing into your foes would make it enjoyable and produce some amazing breps, another thing to increase irc chatter and activity. I genuinely don't see a downside to it, napping would intact become detrimental to the cause as no combat would only get you so far.
What's your thoughts on the last part? I'm interested in other view points
|
Not often I agree with Kaiba, but this isn't a stupid suggestion*. I am a value player and will probably be so in the future as well, but I really like the idea.
I still would want to remove ally fleets as it's a terrible feature for an interesting round. It's far to easy to cover. I'm in Norse and we're probably one of the alliances benefting the most, compared to how we usually would do, of ally fleets, but we still think it's a terrible feature.
Also increase counting planets to either 60 or avg score * number of counting players. Would make it less benefical of def planets. They would still help to keep roids, but as it is now an ally can have 20 def planets which won't count to ally score. Def planets is another thing that makes for less interesting rounds.
Get these three things done and we might finaly have a fun round again.
*After reading the suggestion Kaiba made I would actually say I really like the idea!