There's no need to go down the rabbit hole of starting new worlds with different rules when there's a perfectly good alternative game already available. ![]() It's basically a carbon copy of FoE gameplay with a different skin and no PvP. ![]() How many different worlds with different rules packages have to be introduced before everyone's satisfied? My guess is it's the same as it always is in situations like this-no matter how many different iterations there are, someone somewhere will find something to whine about and say "why was 's request granted and mine wasn't? It's not fair, Inno needs to make a new world the way I want it, they did it for why won't they do it for me?"yada yada yada. Once you do that it's opening Pandora's Box. Reason: I hope Ill make it clear in the Details, but there are 2 reasons: 1. Removing plundering would effect entire cities instead of a single production at a time. Many buildings in the game give defending army bonuses for the purpose of defending your city. Still others have suggested a world where GBs are capped at a certain level. A third of the games GBs have a impact or interact with plundering / attacking neighbours in some way. Others have floated the idea of worlds without the Arc. ![]() Because it's ridiculous to start crafting new worlds with different rules packages. Plundering is a part of the game and always has been, if you can collect on time do so, if not, try asking the person or persons plundering you to only plunder certain types of buildings - example - 'I do not mind being plundered, however, please do not plunder goods buildings or premium buildings.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |