Vorrei un Punta di più al Parlamento

[Gelonia]

Vorrei inserire più risorse nel Parlamento senza limiti per puntare più Leggi non 15 volte ma infinite volte sfruttando risorse ottenute .Forse non vi siete accorti di Mercati e Mulini pieni di risorse per alleggerire anche noi assidui giocatori.

 

[Sega]

I Agree! This is a much better investment than walls. Maybe not an infinite number, but increase the number of investments in laws at least to 25-30, of course, with an increase in the amount of resources at each step of investment into laws in Parliament. In reality, sometimes there is nowhere to put resources, and expensive walls are such nonsense! And, in fact, there is nowhere else to put more resources while you are waiting for improvements to buildings or research.

 

[nobodyknowsthetrouble]

この投稿は取り下げられました

 

[ZenDen]

それは私からの大きなノーです！
議会は、ゲーム内で全員が本当に協力しなければならない唯一の要素です。 だからこそ、この制限は良いことだと思います。急速に進歩するにはチームワークが必要な唯一の方法だからです。

Are you bad at math? If all members of the alliance have a more opportunity to improve laws, then in the end alliance will get an even more advantage than one person. It seems to me that this is more about greater use of resources, isn’t it?

 

[nobodyknowsthetrouble]

この投稿は取り下げられました

 

[ZenDen]

観察するのが苦手ですか？ ほとんどの同盟は多額の研究ポイントを寄付しません。 進歩は良好なチームワークにかかっています。 多くの同盟には当てはまらないようです。その合計は理論的に可能なポイントよりも小さいためです (domistats の統計を比較してください)。

複数回寄付できるということは、少数の人だけが議会を建設し、大多数が傍観して議会の支持に任せているという事実の問題に対処するものである。
より多くのリソースを処理できるようにしたいだけの場合は、価格の値上げを要求することもできます。 たとえば、v9.6 アップデートを元に戻すことができ、コストが大幅に削減されます。

Then this is a problem for an alliance if there are not enough players in it who are able to invest a lot in the development of laws. Why should this fact be a deterrent for everyone else? If you cannot “jump higher,” then you don’t need to set the same “ceiling” for everyone - there are those who will be aigle than you.
You're talking about teamwork, aren't you? So it's poor teamwork if you're only hoping that the others will be held back by that "ceiling".

 

[Sega]

Guys, BHG, seriously, why not give the opportunity to invest resources for greater benefit than in walls? There is a strong conviction that you are very much afraid, God forbid, to give the players (I emphasize - active players) something more, to let them “breathe more freely".

Moreover, people (@nobodyknowsthetrouble) argue that many players are not particularly concerned about the improvement of laws, then why is this restriction for everyone? Give freedom to those who want and can improve laws more and faster.

We are not asking for freebies, but just to raise the bar before “payment in crowns” in Parliament - to give the opportunity to spend resources more wisely.

I’m not bragging, but I, for example, have been simply “throwing resources down the drain” for some days now - I have nowhere to spend them. Powerful, expensive and bright (this is especially) are not to my liking at all, but this is a matter of taste, I understand. But somehow it turns out that way in the game that there is nowhere else to invest other than walls.

As an option, well, come up with a Blessing to be able to invest more resources in laws. Expand your list of blessings in Temple along with this, for exampe. Why not?

 

[nobodyknowsthetrouble]

この投稿は取り下げられました

 

[Sega]

議会は設立されてから 4 年が経ちます。 ちょっとしたチームプレイのある同盟は、ずっと前に終わってしまう可能性があります。
同盟メンバーに議会を高く評価してもらいましょう。 そうすればチームプレイでかなり早く議会を終えることができます。
しかし、誰かがさらに寄付するのは間違った方法です。

I'm sorry, but how absurd! Can you hear yourself? Appreciate for what, for that there is a limit that prevents you from spending resources to greater benefit?

What do I care about others? Let them develop as they wish, or not develop. Some people can research laws faster than others, so why stop them from doing so?

It seems that @ZenDen was right to note that you seem to be bad at math. The Alliance will only benefit even more from its active players who will not have this limit.

P.S. I don't want to offend anyone, I'm just expressing my opinion.

 

[nobodyknowsthetrouble]

この投稿は取り下げられました

 

[Sega]

図書館とは対照的に、議会は連携研究として設計されました。 これは、ここで成功するには、同盟全体も参加する必要があることを意味します。

So let EVERYONE participate, this is not about that, but about providing a greater opportunity for investment in laws.

 

[nobodyknowsthetrouble]

この投稿は取り下げられました

 

[ZenDen]

I'm sorry, but how absurd! Can you hear yourself? Appreciate for what, for that there is a limit that prevents you from spending resources to greater benefit?

What do I care about others? Let them develop as they wish, or not develop. Some people can research laws faster than others, so why stop them from doing so?

It seems that @ZenDen was right to note that you seem to be bad at math. The Alliance will only benefit even more from its active players who will not have this limit.

P.S. I don't want to offend anyone, I'm just expressing my opinion.

At least someone understood what I mean, otherwise I already thought that I was the only one here suffering from meaningless and useless restrictions.
Built "ceilings" for the people.

 

[Sega]

特に熱心な同盟にはボーナスを考えてもいいかもしれません。 例: すべてのメンバーが 15 回の寄付を完了した場合に限り、原材料のさらに 5 回の寄付がロック解除されます。

Don’t you think that this is an infringement of the rights of ordinary active players, huh? What if suddenly I am able invest into laws alone as much as your entire alliance together cannot handle? Why should I oriented on the poor teamwork of a bunch of weaklings? No, let's be honest, shall we? You hide behind the alliance, but you yourself are simply not able to actively play and develop.

 

[ZenDen]

図書館とは対照的に、議会は連携研究として設計されました。 これは、ここで成功するには、同盟全体も参加する必要があることを意味します。

It is quite possible that Parliament was designed for team work - that’s what it really is - everyone contributes to a common “pile” of laws. The mechanism does not change, the meaning does not change at all. But let each player invest more. After all, that's all we're talking about. Why suddenly there are some oppositions between the players and the alliance, in the end everyone wins.
I don't understand your train of thought at all. Why are you so zealous in advocating restrictions?
Let's look at all this a little differently? Parliament is a tool for each player in the alliance, with which the player can invest something in the development of the alliance. You argue that it is necessary to maintain restrictions. For what purpose? So that the entire alliance ultimately has fewer opportunities for development? Everyone invests together in the overall development of the alliance - this main idea.

 

[ZenDen]

Parliament is generally not the right tool to force the players in your alliance to move faster, and especially when there are some restrictions. If you are a leader, then lead the entire team behind you, and there is no point in making excuses about the poor performance of the alliance. Give those who need it the opportunity to develop, the rest - let them do whatever they want.
Let us still perceive Parliament as an instrument for development. In an alliance, it works more efficiently due to the participation of many players in a common joint cause. But it's just a tool. It will in no way force players to be more active if they themselves are lazy.

 

[Sega]

I can make a comparison to the "Rise of Kingdoms" game. There, too, there is a similar research system for aliance, and in the same way there is a certain limit. But! The situation with resources is much more complicated there. And there are many other areas where resources are needed to invest. So you have to choose where best to invest your resources. Yes, there must be a limitation, but it must be reasonable and adequate.

I don't want to brag or belittle anyone's strengths or capabilities. Just facts. I’m here in Dominations at my level of the game’s development, I can get 10-30M resources (both gold and food) per game day (believe me, I tested this in practice when I built walls), and I simply have nowhere else to invest them, except walls. There are no alternatives! Here's of what I talking about.

But the main reason, it seems to me, lies a little differently. Let's imagine a large alliance and all the players are active. This is a nightmare for BHG! Players (and Aliance whole) research all the laws, but what next? BHG they simply have nothing to offer yet.

P.S. A very negative factor of this game is the deterrents. No matter how well you play, no matter how successfully you fight and receive resources, one way or another you will still “run your nose into the wall” - a limitation for the average player.

 

[ZenDen]

特に熱心な同盟にはボーナスを考えてもいいかもしれません。 例: すべてのメンバーが 15 回の寄付を完了した場合に限り、原材料のさらに 5 回の寄付がロック解除されます。

Yes, sure! Don't you contradict yourself? If the alliance is weak, then it will never reach this “ceiling”, and the stronger one will receive even more opportunities. But the active players were simply left behind again.
Maybe stop praising teamwork so much? Let everyone have opportunities that they themselves are able to master. Let it be fair, and not so as to “pull up by the ears” the idea of alliances in any way. Alliances already have many advantages over regular players. And in general, what is this obsession with “huddle in heaps”?

 

[Sega]

Yes, sure! Don't you contradict yourself? If the alliance is weak, then it will never reach this “ceiling”, and the stronger one will receive even more opportunities. But the active players were simply left behind again.
Maybe stop praising teamwork so much? Let everyone have opportunities that they themselves are able to master. Let it be fair, and not so as to “pull up by the ears” the idea of alliances in any way. Alliances already have many advantages over regular players. And in general, what is this obsession with “huddle in heaps”?

Both obsession and “huddle in heaps” - this is very accurately noted! And now we are already watching how they are "foaming at the mouth" and proving to us the extreme necessity of teamwork. After all, we can’t do without it no way, right?

Everything is quite prosaic and simple. It's just a trend in games (and indeed in society as a whole) lately - communities, alliances, groups. Although, by and large, they are of no particular value for PvP battles - on the battlefield you are one on one. Yes, the alliance will help with troops, but these are only combat units on the battlefield. But the idea itself is being introduced - you are part of a team, you are a human, and, therefore, a social being!

But in a more global sense... It is easier to control a crowd; in a crowd there are no individuals, no personalities.
And then think for yourself.

And if I don’t want to be part of something bigger, don't want be a part of teamwork, if I’m alone, it’s not bad at all, because it’s just a game and I want simple to enjoy the game? Then let's come up with a Parliament where individuals won't be able to develop so quickly, but only teamworkers. So be it! I don't mind at all! But if I have the strength, power and resources to invest more than they whole weak alliance, why hold back my capabilities?

BHG, let's come to some kind of reasonable compromise? Alliances participate in World Wars, donate troops to help each other - they have many advantages. Raise at least the threshold in Parliament so that you can more productively improve laws for resources, because in the end, all players and each player in the alliance and the alliance as a whole will receive this advantage.

P.S. By the way, I have already written a similar sugest before - the wording is different, but the meaning is still the same. So that no one would think that I cleverly clung here to someone else’s idea.

 

[nobodyknowsthetrouble]

この投稿は取り下げられました