New Building Idea: Bank

Quote from Scythe

I'm looking for a compromise between what would be ideal for me, and what would be ideal for you.

Here in another idea to discuss. what do you think about getting 10% (maybe 20%) of town gold income when you occupy a town?

If people don't want to fight you they will loose 10% of their gold income, especially if they go in gold mode.

The attacker would need to maintain the occupation, which costs gold, so it would be harder to steal from person who is actively resisting.

If players keep their towns undefended (plus having no resources over safe limit, that you could pillage and punish them that way) you could occupy them with light force for couple of hours (overnight) and you will earn your gold back.

You could still somewhat punish people who leech from your miracle.

If player has already collected a lot of gold he would be able to keep it safe.

This change would in my opinion punish people that go in gold mode, refusing to fight, while leaving the normal players less affected

I still say it should be tied to the cost of the next trade ship or freighter. That means they can't just store gold indefinitely and they need to spend it.

Quote from Scythe

Quote from nosorog

Quote from Scythe

I'm looking for a compromise between what would be ideal for me, and what would be ideal for you.

Here in another idea to discuss. what do you think about getting 10% (maybe 20%) of town gold income when you occupy a town?

If people don't want to fight you they will loose 10% of their gold income, especially if they go in gold mode.

The attacker would need to maintain the occupation, which costs gold, so it would be harder to steal from person who is actively resisting.

If players keep their towns undefended (plus having no resources over safe limit, that you could pillage and punish them that way) you could occupy them with light force for couple of hours (overnight) and you will earn your gold back.

You could still somewhat punish people who leech from your miracle.

If player has already collected a lot of gold he would be able to keep it safe.

This change would in my opinion punish people that go in gold mode, refusing to fight, while leaving the normal players less affected

Display More

A variant of that would be that the occupied party has to pay the upkeep of the troops occupying them.

Display More

No way! That would be way too abusable.

Lets continue with that line of thought. you would sent your entire army to another player city. and another army to another player. You could have nearly unlimited army and have to pay nothing. you would simply jumping from one city top another destroying their gold and just being no good gold sink.

No, the gold you already have has to be kept safe! The attacker should never cause the defender to loose the gold reserve they have. Maybe we can do something with the gold they earn per hour. so players cannot simply go in gold mode and earn colossal sums of gold. (but again not too much %, or they would end up in irrecoverable spiral (where they could not build troops, since they got no money -> without troops could not fight back and end occupation -> and with beeing occupied they could not earn any gold)

And as i already sayed many times before you can steal resources the player has in his city. And most players have unprotected resources, so you could punish them that way. Gold in a way puts an upper limit on activity of pillagers. they can only build so big army and attack so many towns. if they could earn other people gold, or make other people pay for their upkeep this would snowball to absurd proportions.

If you want to have bigger army build bigger account - more towns, higher town level and so on.

Once you reach some point in development (10s of millions of resources for 1 building) you cannot advance without having loads of unprotected resources in your towns. so you are forced to keep them protected, no need to worry about gold too.

Quote from Scythe

Quote from nosorog

No way! That would be way too abusable.

Lets continue with that line of thought. you would sent your entire army to another player city. and another army to another player. You could have nearly unlimited army and have to pay nothing. you would simply jumping from one city top another destroying their gold and just being no good gold sink.

Ok, to keep it balanced, a third of the upkeep. The attacker is still paying 2/3 of the upkeep and as a result cannot do it indefinitely without cost to self. This also applies pressure to the occupied.

This could work but with some limitations.

The upkeep for the occupied party cannot be more than 70% of what his city produces. Otherwise larger player could simply occupy a town of small player and make them go bankrupt, while suffering acceptable gold loss for them.

For example if a town has 1000 citizens the max foreign upkeep tax for that player could be 700*3 = 2100 gold per hour. If they go in gold mode in this scenario they would earn 900 gold per hour in this town instead of 3000.

If you ask me even 70% is too much. this means that if you want to build up army to kick them out of your towns you only have 30% capacity, since 70% is spent on other player upkeep. Around 40 - 50% would be high end limit if you ask me.

Quote from nosorog

Here in another idea to discuss. what do you think about getting 10% (maybe 20%) of town gold income when you occupy a town?

While I don't hate the idea, this would mostly result in gold sums that are very insignificant.

Take a higher level town sporting 5000 population.

They turn off the production to gold mode, generating 15 000 gold an hour.

You, as an occupier, getting 1500 or 3000 gold an hour is doing pretty much nothing for you.

I would even say that if we were to alter this idea so that occupying capital gives the occupier access to same yield % but instead across the income of the account, not only said one town, it would still be insignificant. Same values over twelve towns for 18k-36k still isn't a lot; however this iteration opens up possibilities of taking over multiple capitals and snowballing that way, which your original iteration did not make possible.

On the topic of people being upset about multies on their island leeching etc. issues;

Sorry, but it's your fault to not close your islands.

Yeah, the other guy is a tool for leeching, but you also got punished for your lack of planning.

Quote from Scythe

Quote from Madmadic

On the topic of people being upset about multies on their island leeching etc. issues;

Sorry, but it's your fault to not close your islands.

Yeah, the other guy is a tool for leeching, but you also got punished for your lack of planning.

Unfortunately, especially on the older servers, you have no control over who GY and opens up spots on your island.

If you have no control over who GYs on your island, then your island lacked the necessary planning in the first place. Seriously, just make islands with a committed group of friends/allies and at this point, multies to cover.

If you choose to reside with randoms, then you indeed do open up the possibilities of a mixed bag, both good and bad.

These island issues definitely do not need to be a part of your game with proper planning and I hope with merge players take the necessary precautions to save themselves.

A lot of stories have been changed in this topic, so I don't know where to get involved, I agree with a lot of things, but I don't agree with a lot of things. Whoever mentioned that gold is hard to collect, I completely agree, I also agree that the most important thing is to have good neighbors, because if you don't have a good relationship with them, faith suffers, mines suffer. And of course there is always the risk that they will allow opponents easy access to the island. And I know that the neighborhood era is a big process, I'm not bragging, but I started good relations with my neighbors by being the first to show how to act, I was there to help them militarily as well as with resources, I'm a good donor, and they believe me always at maximum level. Because of some of these things the construction suffered and I slowed down the progress, but now I have a healthy environment where people help each other and we invest together.

Nosorog still don't get it, he thinks sitting on a multi leecher in gold mode is some how a punishment because their capped on the big projects they can start.

oh sweet innocent child

But what ever, we're just chasing our tails here.

Everyone has an opinion on the subject and guess what? it doesn't matter if you're for it or against it.

GF's opinion is the only one that counts they don't give no F's on this one.

Multi's are just a fact of life these days, like it or not and I don't see that getting any better, infact it's going to get worse in 24hours, so get use to it.

I don't know why I still play this game.. oh wait I do.. because normally it takes a few minutes here and a few minutes there.

and that whole sunk cost fallacy of the years I've been playing it but what is there to do in it anymore?

It'll eventually collapse under it's own mass of mutl accounts and won't shed a tear when they flip the big red switch.

Quote from Adalya

I also agree that the most important thing is to have good neighbors, because if you don't have a good relationship with them, faith suffers, mines suffer. And of course there is always the risk that they will allow opponents easy access to the island.

This is true, but it's also true you can't stop people from ghosting out and opening up spots on your island, only way to fix that is to have people who want to build/warp there you can trust or to have multi's to plug up holes, a single player would find it difficult to secure even 1 island by them selves.

There is no way to enforce compliance on another player esp one that is content with gold mode like a leechers mutli.

True enough even with gold pillaging it wouldn't force compliance because it's like threatening a bomb.. the bomb is there to do bomb stuff it doesn't care about it's own existence.

But at least it wouldn't allow the accumulation of an untouchable asset.

Quote from Madmadic

Take a higher level town sporting 5000 population.

They turn off the production to gold mode, generating 15 000 gold an hour.

You, as an occupier, getting 1500 or 3000 gold an hour is doing pretty much nothing fo

If you occupy 10 towns of somebody in gold mode this would result in you having an extra town or 2 (assuming they ignore you completely and you have only token garrisons). not so insignificant if you ask me 15000 - 30000 gold an hour EXTRA is a lot (it is 1000 less than i make an hour in all of my towns combined, and i have Plutus active in shrine). Anything over 20 % would be too excessive for me.

The person in gold mode would still earn money, although less of it, and you would get a compensation for him refusing to fight, since that was the original problem, that you can go in gold mode and suffer no consequences.

It cannot be much more than that, otherwise it would make it impossible for the one attacked to reasonably defend against you. not talking about gold mode, but normal accounts. if you would earn 50% less gold for example, and the attacker spends his 50% stolen from you on maintaining garrison. you only have 50% of the gold amount than him to spend on military. So if you actually want to fight back it is an uphill battle, especially if you are smaller player.

Quote from nosorog

Quote from Madmadic

Take a higher level town sporting 5000 population.

They turn off the production to gold mode, generating 15 000 gold an hour.

You, as an occupier, getting 1500 or 3000 gold an hour is doing pretty much nothing fo

If you occupy 10 towns of somebody in gold mode this would result in you having an extra town or 2 (assuming they ignore you completely and you have only token garrisons). not so insignificant if you ask me 15000 - 30000 gold an hour EXTRA is a lot (it is 1000 less than i make an hour in all of my towns combined, and i have Plutus active in shrine). Anything over 20 % would be too excessive for me.

The person in gold mode would still earn money, although less of it, and you would get a compensation for him refusing to fight, since that was the original problem, that you can go in gold mode and suffer no consequences.

It cannot be much more than that, otherwise it would make it impossible for the one attacked to reasonably defend against you. not talking about gold mode, but normal accounts. if you would earn 50% less gold for example, and the attacker spends his 50% stolen from you on maintaining garrison. you only have 50% of the gold amount than him to spend on military. So if you actually want to fight back it is an uphill battle, especially if you are smaller player.

Display More

I do not think 15k to 30k to be anything but insignificant, very small drops in an ocean, but this is merely a matter of perspective.

I do agree that the defender should not suffer an increasingly uphill battle.

However, the middle ground you tried to approach with this suggestion does not hit its mark in my opinion.

It's not punishing enough for the punishment-driven crowd, or rewarding enough for the proactive crowd.

My ever so humble take (even if dramatic in its ultimatum) is this iteration does not add enough impact for either attacker or defender, and might as well not exist entirely.

Then again, I'm hard to please, I guess.