Today I'm very concerned and just had to write this statement. I know that this will offend many player and that it's just my personal opinion so please see it as such. This is not meant to insult anybody and I hope we can discuss politely here.
I've recently noticed that it is a very common practice to just sell your big home/work land to a friend/partner/relative to build a new land from your couch/desk and afterward trade your big land back and merge them. That way players can keep expanding from their couch bypassing the restrictions you (@Mr. D) made this February (making nested lands no longer possible to prevent couch expansion). As long as I remember couch expansion is something you always wanted to prohibit and Utility Structures are something made to be a compensation to have something to do at home/work.
Clearly the current situation divides the players into two groups. Those who bypass the restrictions meant to prevent couch expansion and those who don't. The first group is expanding very fast, climbing leaderboards and leaving the second group behind which focuses more on capture land outside their home land every now and then and planning trips for new bases our lands on remote locations. If both groups proceed to play as they do we'll soon have an elite much more powerful than the second group and the second group having no chance to ever catch up again.
So I see the need of you deciding into one of both directions. You could either allow couch expansion (nested lands) again once and for all so everybody can do the same and nobody is heavily disadvantaged or implement some sort of restriction to prevent couch expansion via trades (for example huge fees on trades including big lands of level 100+ or something since they should be something which is not traded often/usually)
I'm an "anti-coucher" and would have to change my style of play hugely if you decide for the second direction since if I would then just proceed playing as I do now I'd be far behind everybody else very fast. I also think that the "couchers" would at least have a reason more to play as I do if you implement the Utility Structure suggested by @Oлer Поленин. As you might have noticed I prefer the second direction.
Question
Ruvox
Today I'm very concerned and just had to write this statement. I know that this will offend many player and that it's just my personal opinion so please see it as such. This is not meant to insult anybody and I hope we can discuss politely here.
I've recently noticed that it is a very common practice to just sell your big home/work land to a friend/partner/relative to build a new land from your couch/desk and afterward trade your big land back and merge them. That way players can keep expanding from their couch bypassing the restrictions you (@Mr. D) made this February (making nested lands no longer possible to prevent couch expansion). As long as I remember couch expansion is something you always wanted to prohibit and Utility Structures are something made to be a compensation to have something to do at home/work.
Clearly the current situation divides the players into two groups. Those who bypass the restrictions meant to prevent couch expansion and those who don't. The first group is expanding very fast, climbing leaderboards and leaving the second group behind which focuses more on capture land outside their home land every now and then and planning trips for new bases our lands on remote locations. If both groups proceed to play as they do we'll soon have an elite much more powerful than the second group and the second group having no chance to ever catch up again.
So I see the need of you deciding into one of both directions. You could either allow couch expansion (nested lands) again once and for all so everybody can do the same and nobody is heavily disadvantaged or implement some sort of restriction to prevent couch expansion via trades (for example huge fees on trades including big lands of level 100+ or something since they should be something which is not traded often/usually)
I'm an "anti-coucher" and would have to change my style of play hugely if you decide for the second direction since if I would then just proceed playing as I do now I'd be far behind everybody else very fast. I also think that the "couchers" would at least have a reason more to play as I do if you implement the Utility Structure suggested by @Oлer Поленин. As you might have noticed I prefer the second direction.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
16 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.