December State of the Nations 2016

[JMoney]

From the way it was worded it would appear that the stronghold will greatly favour the dock for donated troop tactics. This however would imply that the dock will be used a lot more. I hope that if and when you do release the stronghold that the dock will see changes or improvements; one of such changes I had brought up in the past was a resource cost instead of worker cost for expeditions.

Also while on the notion of nerfing demolition tactic on storages you guys should also consider nerfing the usage of zeppelin/bombers on storages. Both of such tactics are a constant nuisance that ought to be punished more than they reward.

 

[Deepesh]

Yet another update focused towards spending money!
Previous release was focused towards spending money for offence and now this one for defence.

You guys have done a good job by developing a game like Dominations, please don't ruin it by making it money eccentric.

Emperor Deepesh
LEGENDS™

 

[Tower]

Geezers... come no Nexon... this must be the most stupid idea ever..
donate troop cards in war? So now we risk heving 20 pathfinders or10 veteran bazooka or 10 veteran machine guns etc spawning out of the stronghold during war? Or 35 fire lancers..

have you even tried out this stupidity?

 

[Master Contrail Program]

I'll take a wait and see approach on all this. Still think you should give alliances a yes or no option about including card armies when looking for a war matchup.

You still get to promote all these cards, and alliances can choose whether or not to include them. Seems like a win-win.

​​​​​Hopefully a reorganization of the troop bar is included in all this wizbangery.

A defense log in wars is long overdue. I'm indifferent to replays at this point, but would like to see who is hitting me with what at least.

Credit where it's due, there hasn't been a post about the nonsensical AI decisions, for ground troops at least, in months. Not that the AI has improved, it's just been pushed down the issues queue.

All kidding aside, thanks for providing a game that we're all pretty passionate about, for better or worse. Here's to 2017!

 

[Woody82]

Agreed with basically everything above. The Stronghold in war able to be filled by other members - thing sounds terrible, it will bring only more card armies to war, now even on defense.

While we're at it:

1) Anything on the 5.3 patch? Still waiting for the Trap Blessing to return
2) Can you please stop advertising that Estate for the exact same price in my screen?
3) For 2017, can you improve your announcements. In a discussion with Nb4 about the korean forum receiving announcements earlier then this forum, he stated it could be due to timezone-differences. Yet we dont receive announcements at all lately. In fact, that last discount event for forests amongst others was only announced by an in-game pop up when you log in. Not even an in-game message, nothing on the forum.
4) Ow yeah, and fix replays. As another member suggested on this forum, the inaccuracy of replays could likely be caused by one thing: The forest defenders spawning randomly in replay, then causing a butterfly effect. Sounds like an easy fix to also record where the forest defenders spawn from, next to the users input. Should eliminate all random factors in replay.

 

[Jakob_888]

Thank you for the info Brian. I look very much forward to playing Dominations in 2017

First and formost I look very much forward to see restrictions on using extra troops in war. Personally I would love only 1 extra troop in the tool bar. Or even ZERO.

Another defence building like the "stronghold" I look very much forward to too. Another defence building in Atomic Age (which truely allready is a great "defence" age) is only good. But please dont make the awful mistake of letting the spawners be the bought extra troops. The game will ONLY be "pay to win" and only favours the most paying custormers. Let the spawners be ordanary donated troops from your allies! Please dont ruin our great game!

I recommend you to change the alliance gifting so it doesnt include extra troops. Stick to blessings, trade goods etc. Or even crowns! No more extra troops please!

Personally I have never seen the demolitions tactic been used for oil on my own base. And I dont really care. I see no difference in being raided my oil or being demolished my oil. I recommend you on the other hand - besides the war/glory leaderboard - also have a medel leaderboard like you used to (where the teams get rewarded for winning the leaderboard in the end of the month or so). Rewards could be crowns, trade goods etc. This will end most of the purposely medel drop to get easier targets for loot.

 

[British Coffee]

Stronghold will also allow Alliance members to donate Troop Tactics to a player’s War Base in World War. Once donated, those Troop Tactics will spawn out of the Stronghold on defense (like a Garrison) for the duration of that World War.

I don't like the sound of this. It looks like Someone donates some OP troops like elephant archers or something like that so dominations still remain as cash wars.

 

[Halsjen]

Granted we still don't know much about the Stronghold, not trying to jump to conclusions but it sounds like it's going to cater more and more to paying to win in World Wars.

It's rather saddening seeing such a good game going to waste. And frankly speaking if this is the case it would be curtains for me.

 

[Europeos]

Agreed 100%

 

[Europeos]

Not everyone, Vixen. I personally hope we never see WW replays. When everyone see how top alliances attack it'll make developing strategies useless. I completely understand others want them though.

 

[S_How]

1. Thank you for listening to the community on troop tactics. I am glad a limit is being put in place for their ability to be used offensively. Hopefully 1-2 per battle at most.

2. The idea of having a defense building that spawns paid troops is very bad. I hope this is not implemented as it favors spending a bit too much imo. Why offset the good you are doing with offensive restrictions, with a defense paid troop introduction.

3. I cannot believe the sandbagging issue is still not being addressed. I think atomic defenses + troop tactic restrictions (if done right) will lessen stalemates some. That is good. But none of this matters when you enable teams to bring a dozen or more players stronger than the opponents strongest by sandbagging, which is happening constantly. None of the good you do matters until this issue is fixed for many teams. Its horrible.

 

[GailWho]

I'm wondering how many complaints there were about demo on rss buildings. I mean compared to complaints about stalemates and sandbagging. Our latest complaint about troop cards was answered but I think possibly this was by design. You know release the troops cards in maddening proportions so we complain about it and they ''come to our rescue'' with a shiny new building they've been working on. Wow! I think I'm jaded. This game has actually jaded me I used to be perky, optimistic and full of life, now I'm shriveling up like a sour old grape.

 

[Toryon]

Let me sum up this post for people who don't like reading.

We are going to focus on lesser issues, make you pay to win stalemates, and ignore sandbagging completely.....


Pretty sure my positive nature and outlook has been squelched, for this game anyway.

 

[Tenacious D]

Take an alliance with 5 global, 10 Industrial, 5 EA, 5 GP and 5 medieval. They will streamroll any opponent due to their stacking. The bottom 15 won't even be assigned targets because their attacks aren't needed.

 

[Tenacious D]

I tend to hoard bonus troops. Several times I had no tactics in a war because they weren't visible. The bonus troops occupied the slots.

 

[Tenacious D]

They only difference is that the raider may not make it to your oil. The guy with 6 demos has no problem. With that said, I rarely see this.

 

[Tenacious D]

Not a word about fixing the multi-age sandbagging that so many alliances are using to game war matchups. Any alliance with 4 or more different ages in their war lineup is cheating. That should be easy for Nexon to fix. An alliance that spans global to medieval will be matched with an alliance that is IA and EA and the sandbaggers will get an easy victory.

 

[S_How]

Hi. I know you're being sarcastic, I just wanted to say in my own experience, we have faced many alliances that have EA/IA/GA/AA, some even gunpowder....never once did it create a mismatch even close to what we see when we meet teams full of AA/GA and then 5-15 Iron age bases, which is happening all the time. So, I dont think your last scenario is accurate, or relevant to the problem of sandbagging that most teams here are concerned about.

 

[Quovatis]

I fear this stronghold building will be able to be upgraded and let you take 5+ troop tactics in war. Please don't do this. Only 1 troop tactic please

 

[poop_]

Clearly, your oil is too easy to get to with raiders and players don't have to use the demo tactic.

I joke, I joke. Don't eat me.

The demo tactic means no peace treaty, no troops on the ground. There is no way to stop it on defense.