Forums / Miscellaneous Discussions / No More Merging

No More Merging
16:10:29 Aug 21st 09 - Mr. Dragonknight:

of all things to take away they take out merging with kingdom allies

that was a awsome part why was it removed deos anyone know why

16:38:26 Aug 21st 09 - Mr. Shame:

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

16:47:00 Aug 21st 09 - Mr. Scipii:

Lol i think he means with kd mates not kd allies

17:13:29 Aug 21st 09 - Mr. Vuggy:

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.

17:27:33 Aug 21st 09 - Mr. Pimps:

this game is starting to lose it's soul.... Why still have kingdom? They are worthless! We use to have walls were we could defend cores and could merge to break trough these walls. That was friendship this was cooperation. This was what made Legacy legendairy.
Then we had worlds. Fantasia the big (tactical) world, mantrax the warworld and zeta the noobieworld....
In the days you could move a troop in a core and use REAL Kamikaze attacks by burning and destroying cities....
Next era zeta please!! Make a new world: Retrotopia!! Back to basics

21:04:28 Aug 21st 09 - Mr. Dragonknight:

i totally agree with pimps

04:32:36 Aug 22nd 09 - Mr. Piece Maker:


05:36:10 Aug 22nd 09 - Mr. Jet:

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.

12:51:35 Aug 22nd 09 - Mr. Philippe Chrisey:

Mr. Jet


04:36:10 Aug 22nd 09 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.

.... :|

13:52:35 Aug 22nd 09 - Mr. Billious:

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?

16:51:14 Aug 22nd 09 - Sir Struddle:

eh i dont know having merges taken out didnt ruin anything but the only real problem was scout merging and mindlessly throwing troops in a merge.

Merging could come back but I dont really think there is a need this has made it more about the kingdom working as a whole not just who can spam thousands and throw em in a merge and leave. I say keep it the way it is besides this makes mages extremely useful again. And to be honest RVL hasnt had an issue with a blocker. so ya.....

01:54:31 Aug 23rd 09 - Mr. Brett The Hitmanhart:

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.

22:43:48 Aug 23rd 09 - Mr. Jellybean:

I hated merges for this reason.

Say im a 3 man kd with a secure core

Then a 20 man kd declares war they send a merged army at us and wipe us out how that fair ?

Now a 20 man kd if they would come at are blockers would find it much harder.

13:06:17 Aug 24th 09 - Commander Baldwin:

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.

13:57:35 Aug 24th 09 - Duchess Sexxy Minx:

bring back merges but double the upkeep of all armies in merge.

and half upkeep in cities again, thus a merged army will be normal upkeep in city, double in field, and half in city unmerged... /me likes :)

02:15:43 Aug 25th 09 - Mr. Vuggy:

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.

11:27:39 Aug 25th 09 - Mr. Ungrounded Again:

no merges is a good thing

13:54:20 Aug 25th 09 - Mr. Dread:

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 ...

14:18:30 Aug 25th 09 - Commander Baldwin:

Well. Some people like them and some don't :-)

I agree that merging in the old way is not probably the best way, but with some rule alterations it could be possible to get best from both ways. I'm at least stopping playing VU for now after this era, one reason being the merging, and the fact that one cannot do much if less active.

Should do my own game so there wouldn't be much to complain ;)

14:58:58 Aug 25th 09 - Mr. Doomhammer:

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

23:46:41 Aug 25th 09 - Mr. William The North:

i think merges should come back, but i agree it has to be with restrictions. maybe lowered morale is an option?

05:43:43 Nov 24th 09 - Mr. Jaime:

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.

05:54:27 Nov 24th 09 - Mr. Jaime:

the only solution to this is when KD armies are close to each other is that they should have the ability to attack together like a join attacj. its like having a merge but each person controls there own army and Improvements&t=JoinedAttack instead of Merge&replies=16&vuid=

[Top]  Pages:   1 

Username: Don't have an account - Sign up!
Password: Forgot your password - Retrive it!

My bookmarksOld forum design

- close -
  Copyright © 1999-2024 Visual Utopia. All rights reserved. Page loaded in 0.08 seconds. Server time: 8:52:45 AM