De-populated worlds over time

[arthurv]

One of the key mechanics in the game that leads to depopulated worlds which are more work than fun for the few that remain is that that taking over medium or large cities is still useful to people with 5-10 cities. This isn't analogous to the way that 1k or 2k cities aren't that interesting to take over vs. barb cities. Morale is a mechanic that was probably designed to do part of this - but frankly it doesn't work. Probably the easiest way to do this is to make loyalty work differently so that a single city is frequently taken "razed" in increasing percentage with the number of cities you have in your empire. So second city taken intact 90%, ... by the time you have 5-6 have that down to 20-30%, ... as you get to 20+ cities 10%. A mechanic like this might keep people playing and dis-incent the behavior that gets people to leave.

I am a good example of this - I am probably going to quit the first world I joined (W36) because I am getting crushed by someone who is #6 in the world. I have 2 cities and very good defense in my main city -- but not good enough to keep up against sustained attack from someone that high. He is part of the dominent guild - I am in a guild which is the people who got together as the first set of weak people got picked off. Decent players - but not pros. What I have noticed is that more than 75% of the people I used to interact with slowly got picked off. So the dynamic is you get a main guild with momentum and fragmented opposition. Restarting is a laughable option - you won't even be close to your friends. Combined with the fact that you can't join or be near people who may have ditched a week before - unless you plan to move at the same time which people don't do. This fragments the game compared to other social competitive games where the dis-advantage of death is lower and it is easier to remain in a community. I wouldn't argue to make the disadvantage to conquest/death lower, ... but there needs to be counter-veiling mechanics which allow people to grow, develop and remain connected to the friends they make.

Thanks for the fun, I enjoyed the last 5 or so weeks of play, but I won't continue playing something that has such a flawed mid-game. Its sad really - because the early game is pretty good with lots of counter-balances. I think there are some fairly easy fixes that wouldn't change the balance of the game dramatically.

[Orlor]

Thank you for this post I will make sure this gets reviewed by the devs .

This type of post is what gets changes made in Valor.

[bananabandana]

I totally agree with you...though pro players should have the right to pwn, victims of that pwnage should not resort to having to start from scratch. It doesn't seem to be that way in other games, unless you choose some sort of "hardcore" option. I'm not saying the current establishment is unfair, but it is severe, and I totally empathize with the players who are turned off by this severity.

[arthurv]

If demolish took at flat 8 or 10 mins per level - it might go a long way. Its kind of crazy it takes 8.5 hours with level 30 buildings -- demolishing in real life is much easier. It makes sense that creating takes that long - but the demo time reduction would give people options.