Feedback on Domination world

[metroman]

ID is just part of the point. With or without ID the issue remains.
Weak castles are the same issue of being easily and instantly razed.
The game would be more interesting if razing and capturing were more difficult.
If we actually had castles that were Strongholds, then more strategy would be needed.
That would lead to greater slug it out fighting between castles, instead of instant A-bomb annihilation.

Well I had 4 parish attacks on me, and they didn't even make it to my Keep...I'd have to say easy Razes aren't out there....before that I was in an attack where there were at least 10 on the way and only 4 survived...and the attacks were timed.

[metroman]

Domination World is the best rule set world.
But, there is not much point in playing on a world that ends so quickly.
You barely get developed and the game ends.

That's the point...those who don't want to pay, jump in here to simply support those who pay. Not like we've got anything to lose....oh wait, I've got 7 Parishes and holding votes that I could use to take a County...

[Odin29]

The real issue is that castles need to be stronger, so that razing and capture are not so easy.

Now, people either ID for complete safety, which takes their castle out of play,
or they go fully exposed, making their cardboard castle an easy instant raze when offline.

Stronger castles would make the game more interesting as people would use less ID, making combat targets more available.
The war would shift to prolonged slugfests between castles, using ransacking to wear an enemy down.
And you could go offline with greater confidence of having something still there when you return.

I feel that castles are perfectly strong. Today I lost 2 villages on the domination world to 18 perfectly timed attacks (9 to each village.) The attacks barely made it in, and I think if I would have been just a little smarter on my defense I might have actually held at least 1 village. Now, that being said, let's take a look at what I lost VS what it cost him to attack me.

I lost 2 villages that will take me about 1 week to fully reconstruct, as well as cost me about 500k gold to repurchase the charters. He spent about 850 catapults total, plus a ton of other troops. All in all, he spent about 350k gold and used 850 of the most rare resource in the game to take my villages.

Now, let's analyze my losses for a moment. Villages produce honor, gold, faith, catapults, and other weapons (I separate catapults and other weapons because you can buy other weapons and it's easy to make enough that you'll never have to even worry about them, catapults are gold.) The most valuable resource that my villages produce is catapults, followed by gold, then faith, then honor, then weapons. As soon as his captains landed, I purchased the charters right back and put down catapult makers and my religious buildings, then food and markets to get gold flowing, then hovels to get tax gold going again. Within 12 hours my catapults, gold, and faith production were back at 100%. Within 2 days my honor production will be back on track and within a week the entire village will be fully rebuilt at the approximate cost of (including wood / stone purchased, charter price, AND lost income) about 350k per village. Net loss was about 1 days worth of gold production for both villages.

So, who really won that battle? I feel like he did so much work to raze me, AND risked failing, and I still come out on top. If I need gold, I can play a couple merchant cards and food production cards and make 2 million gold in about 3 hours, at the cost of about 70 card points. On the other hand, even with 27 villages and cat production / guilds maxed, you're only making about 210 catapults per day. So he spent 4 days worth of catapults on those 2 villages. Even efficiently carded it would take 2 small catapult production cards and an entire day, at the cost of 300 card points. So again, who won that battle?

[AuKhan]

You can't rebuild your castle in one week.
And you can't rebuild a good village in one week either, unless you use a lot of cards.

The cost comparison you cite is of little significance.
Of course it costs more to attack than to defend.
But the resources used for the attack have no other purpose.
So, their cost is not an important decision factor.
They are there to be used. And are wasted if not used.

Bottom line is your two villages fell, probably in a matter of seconds.
And you will spend a week recovering in Domination world with lots of cards.

In the regular worlds it would take a full month to fully recover with no cards.
By that time your attacker could raze 20 other villages of yours or others.
And pillage enough goods to pay for most of his costs.

As you say he used 4 days of cats to destroy 2 villages, so 2 days of cats for one village.
Cost him 2 days of production per raze, and cost you a full week or more just to recover.
He can easily sustain a pace of razing one village every two days. That would not end well for you.

[Odin29]

You can't rebuild your castle in one week.
And you can't rebuild a good village in one week either, unless you use a lot of cards.

The cost comparison you cite is of little significance.
Of course it costs more to attack than to defend.
But the resources used for the attack have no other purpose.
So, their cost is not an important decision factor.
They are there to be used. And are wasted if not used.

Bottom line is your two villages fell, probably in a matter of seconds.
And you will spend a week recovering in Domination world with lots of cards.

In the regular worlds it would take a full month to fully recover with no cards.
By that time your attacker could raze 20 other villages of yours or others.
And pillage enough goods to pay for most of his costs.

As you say he used 4 days of cats to destroy 2 villages, so 2 days of cats for one village.
Cost him 2 days of production per raze, and cost you a full week or more just to recover.
He can easily sustain a pace of razing one village every two days. That would not end well for you.

but I still had 25 villages churning out gold, weapons, faith, armies, monks, etc. He took 8% of my production, and in less than one week (remember, domination builds at 4x) that will be back. I am not a carder and I will have these villages back at 100% in under a week, meanwhile my other 25 villages will continue to do what they were doing. I literally don't even care that I lost 2 villages.. it doesn't even effect my war effort. It was a slight inconvenience because I had some defensive vassal armies there, but fortunately all vassals were online at the time and could cover their castles (not that it mattered, they weren't attacked or even scouted.)

So again, I feel as though it cost him as much to attack me as it cost me to lose my villages.

[AuKhan]

I think you are not counting the full resource cost of fully rebuilding a new village and castle.

But, the bottom line math is simple:
A good player with many villages and vassals, and several parishes, can easily raze your villages faster than you can replace them.

[kwud]

with proper research i can replace 10 villages in as many hours,

[Pestbeule]

I really like and support the idea of a premium player only server.

Whether you won't let people build without a premium token or you can't enter the server without paying a certain amount of points doesn't matter - it's a limited time server with special rules for dedicated players who are willing to pay for it.

But to make things more interesting no card packs (or only a limited amount) can be bought, which obviously hurts a few top carders but gives regular players a much stronger reason to pay for the premium tokens.

That established, there should be very strong incentives for participation in politics/war and a premature win of a strong house with supporting houses prevented. Either have in-game quests to attack members of the strongest house(s), eliminate honour penalties for everyone attacking them or combine house glory with a negative production/defense bonus.
The reason for that should be clear: it must be rewarding, but incredibly difficult for one house to lead in glory points and it should be an increasingly uphill battle to remain the leading house.

In short, the leading house members should feel like rich kids in a tough neighbourhood, everyone wants a piece of what they have, and defending the riches should be very hard indeed. That guarantees an incredibly exciting game until the end, rather than the masses of people realising they can't win anymore after half the world duration.

[metroman]

but I still had 25 villages churning out gold, weapons, faith, armies, monks, etc. He took 8% of my production, and in less than one week (remember, domination builds at 4x) that will be back. I am not a carder and I will have these villages back at 100% in under a week, meanwhile my other 25 villages will continue to do what they were doing. I literally don't even care that I lost 2 villages.. it doesn't even effect my war effort. It was a slight inconvenience because I had some defensive vassal armies there, but fortunately all vassals were online at the time and could cover their castles (not that it mattered, they weren't attacked or even scouted.)

So again, I feel as though it cost him as much to attack me as it cost me to lose my villages.

Umm...... 25 Villages, and NOT a carder?

[Odin29]

villages don't cost honor on the domination world, you can get 27 villages at Prince by just capping them or buying charters.