Forums / In game politics / I dont get it

The wars on Val have nothing to do with this. Easy kills were over there, so everyone rushed.

Change the scoring slightly from

Land on fant+Troops on fant+Battles won^2 + Experience from hard battles^3

to

Land on fant+Troops on Fant+Battles won^2 + Experience from hard battles^1.2

However, change the rule for experience which is currently 1 exp if you win a fight against 5k DP or more.

to

1exp point for every 500 DP you kill.

So if you kill about 50mil DP over the era you get 100k points^1.2, not everyone is gonna kill 50mil DP in an era. Hell some people look as if they didnt even beat 1mil DP all era.

If you manage to beat 50mil DP in the era you get 1mil worth of points for doing so. However if you do very little and only kill 5mil DP over an era you only get 63k points from experience battles.

Thereby its no longer overpowering attacking. Its still got Fant as the place to be, and the only way you can win it through attacking is if you really go for it and kill as much as you can.

I doubt people are gonna make 50mil gaia and feed them to someone just so they can get 1mil points from fighting.

I like the sound of that. Zeta! Theres your new scoring system right there!

But I was thinking, perhaps make some adjustment as to the experience gain of a merge. Like the leader only gets half the exp from the battle, the other half is divided on the other people in the merge.

two heads one mind.

= Cobra.

In that case I really want to choose which world to start, not allow a VERY biased Zeta do it.

Id think all that would matter is how you where able to help empire/members and how you personally thought you went .
Game has so many options on how players should be ranked only rank that should matter is who era is named after (whether they attacked/farmed both options need skill to do ).