Forums / Miscellaneous Discussions / No More Merging

cant you just leave the kingdom you were in and then join your kd allies

Lol. They took it out so people couldn't mindlessly spam troops and throw them in an army they don't even lead. This is perfectly fair... get used to it.

i totally agree with pimps

Pimps: For most of the time LGC was around there were no merges with kd mates - was a relatively late development. As with great walls.

I was pondering the merge issue last night (as you do) and thinking about the its relationship to the change that was proposed (?) regarding lots of different alliance members filling the same city ('unbreakable blockers'):

Not sure exactly how it was proposed originally - something like the city owner suffers no penalty, then the biggest loses -10%, the next biggest 20%, down to the ninth additional player losing 90% (after that, you are wasting your time).

Seems to me that multi player merges would be 'reasonable' if exactly the same principle was applied?

So the maximum number of players that could contribute is 10.

A further attack penalty might be incurred for the total number of multi player merges within a kingdom (-10% per multimerge above 1, cumulative) making it something of a 'special event'?

I don't see any reason to stop inter-race merges, but careful thinking would be in order to get the best from them?

Its fine to have no merge, just no effective solution is offered at spamming armies into blockers. If all can contribute to defence, then all should be able to contribute to attack. come up with a civilised solution to breaking blockers, and the "no merge" policy is justified.

I'm missing the merges as well. They added need for cooperation to the game and created more need for strategy and planning. Now this game is pretty dull and you need to focus on single big army.

You cannot do anything neither if you are a little less active, since active players will have two times bigger armies than you and your effort is totally for nothing.

Other problem is that since single huge army can become almost invincible, it makes sense to protect some member in a KD just to farm and then pump a huge army for the end half of the game, while other player loose their troops in battle meanwhile. It's annoying that one 500k army can kill ten 100k armies with no problem.

Why not let armies merge but with -5% or 10% penalty to all merged armies for each army over one? That would be simple rule and it would make it stupid to have small armies merged with big ones... armies with same size could merge up maybe to 5 or 6 armies after which it makes no sense anymore.

Cooperation? They did not. People mindlessly threw them together which screwed all the smaller kingdoms over, while one person got all the plunder. There is cooperation NOW with the asking for casts of things like CW. Final thoughts: No merges.

lol i remember merges and armageddon (spell) crazy old days. i coulnt follow anything i just merged armies and let the others do the crazy running ...

I don't know whats going on, but I agree with Billious... lol

i though this game is a strategy game.  you put back merges and this game becomes a one player game while the rest of the people just borringly farm and merge there troops to who ever is most active. wow where the fun in that?

without merge requires cooperation with you KD ans activity.

i would rather play a game where manny people play than just one person playing.