(05-05-2015, 02:45 PM)Punisher5431 Wrote: Well Britain is still Britain, America is still America, France is still france.
However I don't recall any empires being around. Also gallia is running out of resources, they can only absorb so many losses before they go poof.
I'm talking about the system not the countries, theres none that works and oddly theres nothing wrong with that. Its only natural that nothing's perfect. See China as an example - its one of the oldest countries in the world, but that does not count for its system.
And yeah, gotta agree with the resources part thought.
P.S. You can't compare today's France to France in the Napoleon's time, thats what I mean, systems come and go, its just that it takes time, usually a lot longer than one lifespan just so you can notice it.
(05-04-2015, 10:43 PM)Toris Gray Wrote: In terms of the Go game... Gallia pushing into Bretonia is like a lot of placed stones inside opponents territory, trying to contest it... but connections between these stones and their own secured stones are pretty weak, what may lead them into being surrounded and "dead" or captured.
lightbulb Thanks Toris, you gave me a great idea.
I've just noticed that Go prefectly mirrors the situation with Gallia right now. Unlike in chess, actual "attack" in the game arrives after 50 to 90 moves, which is pretty long (given in the most games winners are determined between 290-310 move - Go, unlike Chess, ends when both players pass after each other).
Gauls, in simple words, rushed too hastily without securing their lines. There's huge difference in "weak" and "strong" connections in game of Go.
(05-05-2015, 10:14 AM)Snake Wrote: Yeah well, only problem is that the Bretonia side are mostly nubs compared to GRN and always loose. This isn't balanced if you have PvPwhores on one side.
Exactly. Fix this, balance the teams, and then having player-driven outcomes will be much more exciting than ONLY pre-determined. Or, as some already said...have different semi-predetermined paths, but allow player events to have some influence on direction.
(05-05-2015, 08:13 PM)Highland Laddie Wrote: Exactly. Fix this, balance the teams, and then having player-driven outcomes will be much more exciting than ONLY pre-determined. Or, as some already said...have different semi-predetermined paths, but allow player events to have some influence on direction.
Funnily enough, some of the hardest things to do for a successful event is balancing the teams. In most areas where there is war between 2 sides there's pretty much always an obvious attending numbers imbalance. The LN vs RM war was at first plagued with problems owing to LNS mass raiding into Hamburg then New Berlin, then when it turned around it was the exact same situation except this time in Texas and with the sides switched.
Since we have dynamic NPC fleets now, we can sort of support open events now without needing to slot them instead of abandoning event if slots are not filled. It's not ideal, but the expectation of a "fair fight" (as in fair in numbers) is what most frequently creates grievances.
I don't mind if they're not slightly imbalanced on straight numbers. The key is making sure the aces are evenly distrbuted somewhat evenly somewhat evenly, although having the bott/batt system might make that play a bit less of a critical role as they now can't simply have infinite regeneration.
(05-07-2015, 02:09 AM)Highland Laddie Wrote: I don't mind if they're not slightly imbalanced on straight numbers. The key is making sure the aces are evenly distrbuted somewhat evenly somewhat evenly, although having the bott/batt system might make that play a bit less of a critical role as they now can't simply have infinite regeneration.
Well thats kinda impossible given you cant force people to play one side or the other they will log what they want?