Great new option for warriors!
Catastrophic crippling of econ players - how shall i finish the games that I'm playing Monument-focussed?

Everything nice, bravò.
Everything except this:

• Limited Maximum number of Monuments Lvl 5 to one per game per player.
  

Why you have made this limitation?
Do you want to speed up the game or make it more and more slow?

love the new building
people wanted it and they asked for it.

... nerf to monuments? [ why? ]
nobody wanted that or asked for it....

Well it is level 5 monuments that is my path to victory so I don't like the move, Once again they are trying to move the base game to a straight military game which in the long run may get them the normal run of the mill game players that hop from game to game but you will not get the hardcore gamer that wants all the paths to victory to be viable.

If I core my original 10 provinces to level 10 cities and build 10 level 5 monuments. as if I were stuck in the Swiss alps, and ventured out and did a little colonization to provide the balance I need in resources. I might have 1800 VP's but I will still need 400 more to win so I have to venture out and do more colonization or snipe a few AI provinces and do the same thing. If the militarist needs his victory then he will have to climb the mountains and break thru my level 4 fortresses. Or finish off his militaristic partner that was cheating on him and only battling a little bit and established 80 colonies with lvl 3 trade companies who is also only 400 points away and although he has captured 327 provinces (assuming 5.5 avg) and also has 1800 VPs and needs 400 pts more why doesn't he have the win already because our VP's for monuments, and trade houses were dilutive as all he did was capture existing VP's, that's the ideal way to a 3 person draw.

The colonist guy will probably be most at risk here why the military guys military is much bigger and or his colonies will be unable to stop his military from sweeping his undefended colonies, or my concentrated Colonial army is just enough to take 23 of his colonies. Again the game writers are bowing down to the warriors and they will never gain a following of the people that don't want to particularly go to war. I recently wrote a thread that would solve the issues your having trying to meld opposing view types.

Your never going to make the game fast enough for an action junkie and those are the ones that abandon first, the military dominion guy pushes out all the colonist/economic growth people , or they get frustrated that they are only fighting AI's oh and its still too slow
.
The solution is map options, warrior maps and mixed and cooperative race maps. I would still like all building times cut in half, and especially the level 1 and 2 buildings take 30 40 days for any payback on material costs so again warrior advantage they don't bother building markets and workshops or colonists or trade houses etc.



The installation of the level 1 and 2 buildings should be reduced 75% in cost so they payback there cost by the end of an age now 5 days. I know this has been mentioned in 4 different threads yet a tax building takes 18 hours to the barracks 1 long excruciating minute is there any unbalance there. Yes and why because if the warrior couldn't even produce a military unit in a day they wouldn't even try to play.

p.s. so you ruined 2 of my other games which have 5 level 5's built is this that they just don't count in my VP's ?
and the other 5 that are in day 2-4 of build. Oh and the third game why would I waste leveling cities to 10 are there military buildings that can only be built in level 10s?

Just a thought I had that might not be at all feasible but seems like it might make more people happy. Would it be so difficult to offer versions of the game that features/settings that are oriented toward style of play (military v. economic)I realize that this might dilute the player base some, but it is a solution that would seem to keep everyone happy. Plus there are some people who may want to test their skill in both versions of the game so the result could be a higher level of activity overall.

I think it would be a much better game if you would just let us play. You guys have more regulations than Democrats.

One more building to fit into our tiny little building slot box. If someone wants to put a merc camp, barracks, and colonial office in every city, why should you care? Do real cities run out of ground to build things?

if someone wants to build more units than their economy can support, why should you care? Make them start losing morale if there is a shortage of upkeep stuff.

Cities have huge upkeep. Troops have hardly any. You have a unit cap because everything is backwards already. Cities would manage to provide for themselves even if there was no government whatsoever. LOL. Are people gonna stop farming unless the government feeds them?

I have tried to explain this to you before. Cutting a foot off one end of a blanket and sewing it onto the other end does not make a longer blanket.

I can afford about a billion units, but I can't afford to increase my unit cap. Makes sense right?

Cutting a foot off one end of a blanket does not make a longer blanket.

I really feel like you guys have a way you want to force us to play and you just corner us at every turn so that we can only play one way because there is only one way out of the maze.

Riddle me this? If manpower is a representation of people, then why does an administrator take 500 manpower? Is that like cops and firemen? Firemen have axes. Cops must have something. (unless they are in Great Britain) If we sent 500 weaklings along with every administrator, shouldn't that make the city producing them stronger?

Ok, lets, assume, for argument's sake, that its cops and firemen. So I upgraded this city 7 times with over 10,000 manpower, and they can't defend themselves when natives arrive?

Do all of these people say, "you may rape and pillage us at your leisure because we do not have room in our unit cap to defend ourselves"

"We would have built a fort, but that costs a lot of upkeep, yeah, I don't know why either, because fortresses managed to last hundreds of years after they were shot up by cannons. We're all yours. Do with us as you please."

Why does recruiting natives cost manpower? Especially 1500 manpower for a terrible unit. Has anyone even built natives? Can you query the server to find out? If they are natives, why do they cost manpower at all? If they were your people, they wouldn't be natives. Mercenaries cost manpower too. They aren't your people either. I suppose they could cost womanpower, if you're a sick narcissistic leader like Nero or Caligula or Caligula's uncle. No one remembers him. He was quietly sick.

Speaking of messed up leaders, isn't Germany kind of socialist now? Not as socialist as say... Greece. Yet they aren't allowed to talk about Da Fuehrer? He was a socialist. So you can speak kindly about the messed up political system that gave the guy that can't be talked about nicely power? I am confused. Apparently I'm not the only one. In fact, I live in a nation full of confused people where 2 socialists are running against each other for president.

Get rid of all of the caps. All you are doing is what socialism does, making everyone miserable. But make combat units cost something. And make them cost something to maintain, because people don't often put their lives on the line for free, unless its for something important, like freedom.

No matter what you do someone will get ahead. Like me. I have 200,000 free manpower in one of my games. If I so choose, I could ram units down their throat until they are dead despite not even bothering to research most of the silly caps. I'm not ramming units down their throat, its their first game. I want them to learn how to play. But they are struggling to learn how to play because there are so many bizarre limitations placed on them.

Cutting a foot off one end of a blanket doesn't make a longer blanket. It just makes strange seams.

Perhaps it is time to go back to the drawing board. I'm a gardener. Its kind of like cutting something back that has gotten too leggy.

I have a wonderful combat system I would like to explain to you, but its more complicated than the current x factor combat system so it could take a while.

Unfortunately, I am spending my time doing tedious things to beat the other people doing tedious things so I don't have time to explain it to you.

20 likes received. 90 posts. I think everyone else is too terrified to like my posts because they were raised to be participation trophy winners.

I want stats on wins. Stat.

If I'm going to endure these trials, I want a record of it.

Why the ducats system? Are the Banksters making you do this? Do they just want to conquer the whole map with their 12, permanently healed, royal guards on forced march? Then they don't upgrade anything because they can buy 5000 coin and 5000 manpower with ducats? While everyone else can't get any coin or manpower...

Did you take out a loan to provide for yourselves while you made this game? Are you on the hook? The borrower is slave to the lender. If you want to be free you might need to get off the Kostritzer because its effecting your judgement.

I felt it was pretty obvious that there was too little coin in the game when I pointed out that no one buys anything in the market. That was weeks ago. You're programming war offices and not fixing the early game coin shortage?

I am accustomed to playing online games and instructing people how to stop being complete failures. But I'm not usually instructing the developers.

Hey Vigor, keep calm man!
In 12 hours I received 14 notifications, all these are yours...
Why you not try to enclose the speech in a single post? This way you're driving me crazy!

Please do not spam this thread... No need for so many posts when one can do just fine. :)

I am also unhappy about the monument nerf. This was not asked for.

I think the monument nerf was asked for. I can't understand why monuments give victory points at all. The winner is the one who builds the most churches? Building churches is great and all, but why would it make you the winner?

Monuments should have some other purpose or not be in the game I think. Give them 10% to all production including manpower and 10% faster unit speed and 5% to morale or something per level. Then give them the building requirement of level 10 city. No victory points though.

Because that's their purpose? Give the econ players something to dump their excess ressources into and win? Give the military player some prime targets to conquer from the econ player? Just like Trade Companies for the colonial player?

I do confess that they should have some side effect besides VPs, but no production bonus. High-level core province give far enough production right now. Monuments should not be nerfed, but instead be made even more special:

- keep the VPs as they have been
- increase both the build costs and the maintenance costs, so only a really strong economy can build and maintain them
- let the monument improve the moral both of the province where it is built and the neighbouring provinces.

Province moral is a real issue late-game, so there would be a real incentive to build Monuments bewsides just "finally ending the game". If the "distance to capital" is several days, but the "distance to the closest monument" is just few hour, that should up your province moral significantly - the higher the monument level, the further it's positive influence.

so when all of the econ players (which I am one of them who just refuses to build monuments) have all built their monuments, the number of victory points in the map has changed and still, none of them have the required victory points. They blew a lot of resources, and are in the same place they were before.

If I see anyone building monuments they're getting attacked. My economy will be better because I haven't been wasting my resources on monuments and I will win.

Colonies are so easy to take. It requires almost no effort. A full colony with trading posts doesn't produce many more VP than a maxed out core province.

In my first game, as an economy player. I got attacked by the bum rushing war player, he was gone in 1.5 days. Then I told the other players I had no intention of attacking them and that they should take their time and learn the game. I have even offered tips.

I colonized almost all of Africa, but was too close to the VP point win threshold and they didn't want the game to end yet, so I started messing around. I moved colonists to most of the colonies in South America, but didn't colonize any. They're just standing there eating my production. Then I got bored with that and have started spy nuking AI.

I haven't logged into the game in a while. I wouldn't be surprised to log in and see I have a million food. I'm basically logging in so I don't go inactive. its day 36

What would make the game interesting is if other players started making better decisions. So far, I have seen 2 types of players. 1. wipes out their economy colonizing. 2. wipes out their economy conquering.

The VP system for monuments and trading posts encourages players to make bad decisions. Then, on day 90, after 3 months of bad decision making, they complain about resources being imbalanced.

I think I see how you got all of your points.

Do you realize even infrastructure increases the morale in the surrounding provinces? Do I need to explain it to you or can you figure it out?

I have never had an issue with province morale. My capital is in Edinburgh Scotland and I don't have morale problems in the southern tip of Africa. Are you leaving every colony a colony? I bet you are, which would be more evidence that trading post and monument VP's encourage bad decision making.

You could also move your capital to encourage province morale. Moving it to a shore is likely to make the capital more effective at improving morale. (distance by sea should be shorter, I think they changed the formula they used since Spring 2016 in COW. I think distance is measured in time now (as I suggested they change it)) COW actually did have province morale issues late game.

so, short meaning of a long speech, you are the one to decide what are "good decisions" and "bad decisions" in playing this game? WTF has this to do with the recent update? Have the Monuments been nerfed at your personal request and now you're pissed that other people don't like it?

Follow staff directions to avoid warnings or removal from the forums.

I feel it in my bons that War Office is going to be OP building
ofc not for small empires but for the empires that can afford to buil 10-30 of them at once , increse cap 2-3 times in a matter of 10 days and spam 2-3 new armies to conquer everything around

I alone with only 150 provinces am developing "only" 15 of them without any problems
I see that I would be able to build another 15 , but this wou limit my "10 lvl province" program - so I will wait with new war offices.
If my calculation are correct I would be able to build and sustain 1 War Office in 33% of my 10 lvl Provinces

more provinces = more WO = more cap = more army = more conquered province ....
empire building circle

ofc you need also lvl 4 barracks alomost everywhere to make this perpettup mobile work but this is very easy to do with huge empires


so bigger empires get even bigger advantage over small ones and this IMHO destroys good balance that we had till last week. Small wont be able to fight or roughly equal terms of 275 cap ith big one


-----------------
doing so research it looks that for 10 WO we need production of 15 k of every resource per day
you can achieve that with 5 colonies lvl 10 but that is your limit which you can support and you will have to buy resources for army production from others
so these means you can have WO in every second 10 lvl province ..... count that for empire of 200 prows
200 provs = 100 WO = ++ 2300 cap

so your cap is no longer 275 but 2575 ... maybe ideal for ultra offensive players , but not good for game balance

even if I go on it easy and build WO only in half of possible spots :
200 provs = 50 WO = ++ 1150 CAP
it is 4 times more than initial 275

ehh, maybe set up limit of them 1 for every 10-20 provinces? It cannot be like that War Offices were created in evey second village or hamlet

Lord Druzus wrote:

more provinces = more WO = more cap = more army = more conquered province ....
empire building circle

that's great - it need way more preparation than in Supremacy, but finally it is possible to conquer the world!

I still have to understand one thing: what is the goal of the game developers?
Because if the system is designed solely for military confrontation, it is evident that it is too slow;
Instead if their goal is to create a system with greater thickness -style the famous Sid Meier's Civilization- (and the historical period chosen it offers full potential), then it is obvious that missing too many important factors.
In both cases, that of Unit Cap is an unnecessary limitation that they seek to continually increase rather than eliminate it permanently.
The impression that I have, is that they themselves (the developers) do not have very clear ideas about what they want to create.

first this is replying to many people and my own views of war office.
Bytro games are meant to play slow. Most online games require no thinking and aren't really strategy games. More like who is online the most or spends the most. While being online and spending here gives advantage. If you do it wrong it wouldnt help you as much as you think.My view of bytro,maybe their goal is different.
If your speaking from your 1st game experience,you are likely speaking about what amounts to a single player game. When a game has more actives resources do tend to move. Resources are needed to replace dead troops lost in pvp wars therefore food and raw minerals stay in demand. Ships lost means building materials for ships stay in demand. Silver problems are reduced as resources can be sold. As for the unit cap. Remove it and you change the balance of units. Colonials become pointless,navies can grow infinitely as with unit cap you need to balance army and navy to fill the cap. So more people mean better market if people are playing to win and lux and goods will move if someone is sitting quietly in a corner building a monument/colony empire as everyone else kills each other. The point is a busy active game is potentially different than 1-3 real actives. If the game has a good balance of actives the game is very well balanced.
The war office while useful and a good addition to the game. It is a building that requires thought. Building them instantly in a competive game problay shouldnt be a priority. Like the market,workshop,and infracture. Building them as soon as you can is a bad idea generally unless you are sure of your strategy. Better to unlock better troops. Since you now have to research warfare tree you might as well increase your unit cap by 25 and 25 rather than build the war office which is huge drain on resources. Also getting 200plus better troops seems better than researching the war office for a measily 3 more unit cap then later 22.
But,I still feel the colonist needs strengthing to make it a better option for more peaceful players. Maybe make the cost to create a colonist 500 manpower instead of 1000manpower. Also on a related note. When a capital falls their explored map should be revealed or at least part of it. Maybe even make getting some explored territory a possiblity from economic silver spying.

It is not true: this system is not in line with the speed of other Bytro products.
I will not boast of my achievements in the other games, but I can guarantee that this game is at least 3 times slower than the others. Even in 30kingdoms in the European map, normally I can finish a game in 25-30 days. In this system instead it seems that the average length is around 70-100 days.