S Keillan
-
Posts
163 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
23
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by S Keillan
-
-
21 minutes ago, Mr. D said:
So these days I am really doing my best not to add any more unnecessary complexities to the existing rules, as I really believe that a game can be made fun without needing a spreadsheet to understand the rules.
However, as stated above, I am still reading and considering every suggestion; your ideas is what powers the progress.
What? People don't like spreadsheets? And here I am, excited that I was able to make one game-related that used the inverse cosine function!
I definitely understand the rationale for keeping it simple. Ultimately, it's a better user interface. But something can easily be too simple. Tic-tac-toe is simple, and it's boring. A happy medium needs to be found, obviously. Hopefully we as a game community can find it.
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, Eerienkah said:
That's pretty much what you suggested, so... Why would you be complaining?
What part of not that I'm complaining was construed as complaining? 🙂
Indeed, I am mostly fine with the changes. I was simply noting that others would probably not be, and subsequent replies demonstrated that.
38 minutes ago, Eerienkah said:I think, the simpler we keep the system, the less "tactics" that would lead us back to this kind of situation we'll have 🤷
And I don't want to get nerfed again because someone's gameplay is borderline cheating 🙃
There may be some merit to this, although I've never been impressed by a simpler system. For example, the simplest tax system is give the government all your money. No deductions, no calculating percentages, etc.
The main point of my proposal was to serve as a corrective for those whose legitimate strategies were nerfed by the recent rule changes with minimal alteration of existing rules. Certainly the proposal could be subject to comment, especially if there was something that I might have missed. To simply dump on an idea because it adds an option is pretty unfair, in my opinion.
-
Well, this renders my proposal in the General Discussions thread moot. Not that I'm complaining, but I will note that this will impact some strategies significantly.
-
Even more information. At my workplace, I can see my wife's secondary land, but only if my lands are not on the screen. Attached are screenshots of the same area seconds apart. One is with my lands (in blue) filtered on, the other is with them filtered off. My wife's land with multiple sandbags is showing when my lands are off but not when they are on.
-
Some more information on this. Looking at my wife's lands, I notice that I can see her secondary land when I am at my workplace and not under it. However, I was not able to see it last night when I was under it. Strange...
-
With the new Travel Points system, there has been consternation expressed on the Discord server. The basic issue is that some players have created a number of lands in one area with the intent to merge them, only now this is rather expensive. However, I will note that upgrading an existing land to level 100 costs no points or resources. Players are finding that their lands are unable to grow once those lands come in contact with an innocuous small land.
What I propose for consideration would be a two-step solution. The first step would be to allow for the intentional deletion of existing structures on all lands. A player would be allowed to remove sandbags and guard towers from existing lands with no cost but also no reimbursement of resources. This would be akin to being able to delete such from level 100 lands. If the land would require such structures for growth, they would not be allowed to grow.
The second step would be to have a reduced cost of Travel Points for mergers that do not generate added base points, hence the reason for deletion. I propose that the cost would be reduced to 1 TP for each level on the resultant land under the following conditions:
- All lands merged into the primary land would have no structures on them, so no base points added.
- The resultant land would not be greater than level 100.
- If the resultant land would overlap another land post-merger, it would not be allowed under this system.
- The merger would have to be entirely conducted under these conditions. No mixture of lands with defenses and no defenses would be permitted.
The goal would be to allow for mistakenly placed lands to be dealt with. The 1 TP cost would generally cancel the benefit of creating a new land next to an existing land. It would be possible to generate travel points artificially by building such lands rather than upgrading them, but I note that this would be done by...travel!
Respectfully submitted,
-
Actually, the cost for moving a base is capped at 5 Unobtainium, not exponentially increasing.
I will agree that the prices for base movements are not clear, and they should be. I believe that the first move is free, the second costs 1 Unobtainium, and it is 5 Unobtainium after that.
-
Tracking does not work either. Also, I checked with another ally and he was unable to see my lands in question.
-
There might be an issue with the map and the visibility of lands of other players, including allies. On my wife's phone, she is unable to see most of my nearby lands, including both those that predated the update and those made since. She can see my level 500 land, but nothing else within a few kilometers. Similarly, I cannot see a decent-sized land of hers, even though I am right under it. With her land, it is overlapped by a level 500 land and thus might be "covered", but my lands are mostly not under another land. Is this intentional or some map glitch?
-
6 minutes ago, The one true king said:
Sorry for being a dimwit.... bit can the lands now once more get larger than 500 or is there now a max? I just want to make sure I have this correct...
My understanding is that they can grow through merging with adjacent lands, but it will take a lot of Travel Points. At least 5000 points plus 10 times per level of the lands merged in.
-
Today I captured two lands in succession 1.55 km from each other. The second capture garnered one travel point. Does this mean that except for less than 1 km that the number of travel points earned is the distance in kilometers rounded down? The answer would impact tactical planning.
Thanks in advance.
-
Hi, and welcome back. Recently all lands larger than level 500 were reduced to level 500 along with a significant rule change, so that would explain the loss of land levels. As far as the war is concerned, it's possible that yout opponent started a conflict prior to your lands going into hibernation, and you lost on points. Your army need not have been involved if the attack was on a structure, and that could happen if he grew into a sandbagged land of yours. If you want to be able to see your opponent again, offer or accept a truce request.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Mr. D said:
Deleting a Utility structure will now deduct its levels from your base.
When the "delete" button was introduced it was purely due to a large number of requests wanting to switch solar panels for turrets, turrets for silos etc. etc.
So the fact that this button is currently used to clear the same spot and continuously re-create the utility structure is another couching technique that we've been meaning to address for a long time.This makes sense, and while it impacts play for me, it is certainly consistent with the game theme.
However, I'm not sure if it is a bug or a feature, but as I am going through the process of removing extraneous sangbags from some of my lands, I noticed that base points are being deducted as well, as seen in the image. As there were no base points awarded for placing these, I would suspect that it is a bug. If so, this should be fixed.
-
OK, next question regarding lands being built toward each other. At present, when two lands are adjacent to each other, if one of the lands is trying to be upgraded and that land is of greater or equal land level than the other, there is an automatic merge between the two lands. However, if automatic merges no longer occur, does this mean that the upgrade would fail? I am imagining a situation where a level 1 land is blocking an adjacent level 99 land from growing.
-
1 hour ago, Mr. D said:
One of each of these structures (the highest level or a randomly picked structure if they're all of the same level) still awards base points for merging.
Example: I have one level 3 sandbag wall and 99 more sandbag walls of level 1 on my land. Merging that land will award my base with 3 points only from the highest level sandbag wall. If I also have a guard tower there, it will award my base with extra points separately.So lands below level 100 are unaffected by the new rules in that aspect.
Thank you very much for the clarity, although this does raise one minor point. Would utility structures convert to base points? If so, would only the highest level convert? If so, would one of each kind convert or simply the highest?
-
Question on the issue of merged structures. The example provided seems to indicate that extra structures, such as sandbag walls on a level 100+ land will not contribute to the advancement of associated base progression. Just for the sake of clarity, does this change apply to ALL structures on a land, including the naturally existing ones? If it does, this would eliminate a strategy that several players use for base progression, even among frequent travelers.
-
I mentioned this to my wife, who has one of those "obscene" level 4000+ lands, that she might lose her land. Her response was kind of a meh. In a sense, this might a nice reset for her.
-
I have noticed connection issues very regularly in the time frame mentioned. I basically say the app goes stupid for about 30 minutes. My guess is there's a daily server refresh or backup that takes place at this time. It's annoying but at least it's predictable.
-
Hi. The tracking satellite does not use the perks; only collecting with the hand button activates the perks. This is designed to encourage travel.
-
1
-
-
I can relate to this as well. My style of play relies on controlling when mergers take place. I generally wish that they were not automatic, but Олег has a decent proposal.
-
This sometimes happens to me if the app has been running for a long time. I think in general, some of the buttons become non-functional, not just the Capture button. Rebooting the app clears this up.
-
I've seen that happen to me as well. I'm not sure of the regularity as I have considered it a minor issue, but I do agree it's worth investigating.Â
-
I have 16 slots available, but I often grab 17, and once 18. My guess is that if one is rapidly tapping to transfer items, it somehow overshoots the counter before it catches it. (Pardon my crude assessment as my programming literacy has atrophied since BASIC.)
-
I'm seeing a map. Thanks!
-
1
-
Base Move Cost
in General Discussions
Posted
I can attest to this strategy. Sometimes it makes more sense to move a base than sit around for an hour to create one. More like 80 minutes to build the base then get a level 1 warehouse to access said power ups. However, I will leave the base there and create a new base near my home rather than move it back.