i used to play this game that was cell phone/internet based. and the way it was done there was the clan with the most points that ruled the world for eight days straight was the winner of the game and then it was reset and everyone started fresh again. there were different rules also. such as there was only 8 members to a clan allowed. so you didnt get 30 guys in one monster clan. but it might be an idea if you are looking for a way to have the super powers duke it out more often. the threat of a reset makes people hungry for a fight. that way there is a winner and a bunch of upset losers :) makes it interesting on the next reset for sure!

On this topic, I've been playing for a weeks now and I've realized a few things.

1) There is no reset or even a plan to reset the game periodically
2) If you're a donator you need not have any cities to save up a bagillion geos
3) If you sat back gathering just ressources for 1 month you'd up up with 28K geos (assuming 500 geos a day from ressources) after 2 months you'd have 100K geos, and after 3 months you'd have over 300K.
4) If you had 300K+ geos you'd make some 12K+ geos a day (Interest makes it mad)
5) If an entire alliance decided to do nothing for 3 months, then no one could stop them (unless some other players did the exact same thing)

Now I've considered doing this, but just recently found out that 1 alliance is planning to do this. So although we're all fine for now to play the game the way it's meant to be played, I can forsee my alliance being wiped out in about 1-2 months from now (The alliance doing this has already told us this is how they are going to kill us off - apparently we've pissed them off since they've been letting their cities go and we've been grabbing them naturally)

**Ok so I think in light of this, a cap on the amount of geos you can horde (as a donator should be in place) it could be something like 20K or 30K or 40K, but I think this would atleast help stop ppl from trying to get 300K geos and then being unstoppable from the interest. 40K geos is still a lot and quite a bit of interest, but it's not an insane amount, plus then if ppl really want 300K geos for the interest they HAVE to hold at least one city for it...

Also if more and more ppl notice this (and I'm sure they will after reading my post) we might find less and less warring, more and more saving and well.... the game getting a little boring??

I suppose other options could be
1) Cap interest at only the first 40K geos (you can still have more geos without a city but your interest gained would have a max per day)
2) Raise the income cities make AND possibly lower interest rates (So holding cities is a bigger boost to income then holding lots of geos)


Just my thoughts,
PS: I brought up the no reset pnt because ppl can wait 2-3 months and not care, the game won't be reset anyways...

Diety, there are many threads going on about some of the things you're talking about. Most people acknowledge that there are things about the game that are not optimal. It's not "broken" necessarily, but it can be hard to n00bs to break in.

Know and understand this fact above all else: The people running the game and the regulars playing the game want nothing but the best for the game. This means that they will do what they can to make improvements to make it the best game possible, but it takes time, discussion and patience to make it happen.

also birq, its a beta version.. so any input he can give us is nice..


Right birq? Right?

and BTW deity, i fully agree, and suggest you read my tackling the immortals thread so you can read we're on top of this. Too late of course, but we cant all have my brilliant flashes of insigh cant we.

As birq said, there are many threads like this.
In short:
Infrastructure will make cities much more valuable when you invest in it.
Thus making cityholders richer then those who are just quietly saving up.
Stealing from homebases should prevent people from being able to save up forever.
Needing a certain value of cities to be able to own a certain amount of money and still receive resources and bank interest would make it harder for them and mean you can sabotage them.
Lots of new things coming to stabilize the game and still make it so that resets won't be needed after it comes out of beta.

As birq said, there are many threads like this.
In short:
Infrastructure will make cities much more valuable when you invest in it.
Thus making cityholders richer then those who are just quietly saving up.
Stealing from homebases should prevent people from being able to save up forever.
Needing a certain value of cities to be able to own a certain amount of money and still receive resources and bank interest would make it harder for them and mean you can sabotage them.
Lots of new things coming to stabilize the game and still make it so that resets won't be needed after it comes out of beta.

you've got to love this guy (as soon as he turns to your ideas)!

but thats about it, and ofcourse, superbly trained helicopter ninja clown sniper giants. cant forget about those..

why should the donators be capped an amount of geos they can have when they are the ones helping to pay for server costs and other things?

If you want normal users and donators to be on the same level then become a donator! I dont earn much money because im a student, but i still donated even though I couldnt really afford to.

donators have perks, taking those perks away means Luke wouldnt get any new donators and would not be able to fund hosting costs and other costs. which would ruin the game.

It'd be best if we could entirely separate noobs and experienced players.

Not just through the test server, because that's not really a game of strategy. Let's create a server for donators that doesn't automatically give its members $500,000.

why should the donators be capped an amount of geos they can have when they are the ones helping to pay for server costs and other things?

If you want normal users and donators to be on the same level then become a donator! I dont earn much money because im a student, but i still donated even though I couldnt really afford to.

donators have perks, taking those perks away means Luke wouldnt get any new donators and would not be able to fund hosting costs and other costs. which would ruin the game.


I apologize for not having time to browse through the forums, I am new to the game still.

Well I've heard that the main thing Luke wants for the game is a reason to compete for cities so my thoughts are that if you need a city to hold more then x amount of geos ppl will fight to have/keep cities.

But keeping 40K geos or something like that is a BIG perk for donating VS only keeping 2500 geos IMO. What if you have 50K geos stocked then you lose your last city... well as a non-donator you're pretty much f'ed, but as a donator you at least keep 40K geos (Which is a LOT still) Anyways I'm sure there's a million other suggestions out there and it's not like I think the game sucks as it is.... I'm just worried that some major abuse of the interest system is a brewing.

*Again I apologize for stating the obvious

But keeping 40K geos or something like that is a BIG perk for donating VS only keeping 2500 geos IMO. What if you have 50K geos stocked then you lose your last city... well as a non-donator you're pretty much f'ed, but as a donator you at least keep 40K geos (Which is a LOT still) Anyways I'm sure there's a million other suggestions out there and it's not like I think the game sucks as it is.... I'm just worried that some major abuse of the interest system is a brewing.



How do you mean exactly?
A non-donator also doesn't lose anything when losing his/her last city. He/she would just have to reoccupy a city before receiving additional resources and bank interest above this 50k geos.
And the most important reason why this was done, was to stop fake accounts.
Some made more then 10 accounts to buy resources on and could just keep this on for several months and then do a massive attack.

ps: in stocks the maximum is always 2500 geos(donators and non-donators) and you always lose them when losing the last city(donators and non-donators again).

Oh maybe I've been confused on something? I'm not a donator, so if I got 50K geos and then lost my city I can still keep those geos? I've been a lil paranoid now that I've gotten over 6K geos that if I lose my only city I'll be set back to 2500.... if that's not the case then I won't worry if I lose the city anymore, I can just take it back AND keep my geos.....

and if that is the case then I want to suggest that it changes. Would make ppl want/need to hold cities more

*Now I apologize for my ignorance in the matter, there just isn't very much good info on the exact game concepts. I've picked up most from hearing other ppl blab about it. :sealed

You just stop earning interest and resources. Read this for the real explanation: http://www.gewar.net/forums/showthread.php?t=240

i was just mentioning how the other game was played as possible suggestions. that way instead of a never ending game it goes until the top clan can longer be defeated. then the game resets and everyone top dogs included starts fresh. so at some point in the game a noob and a super player are all even and have a fair chance from the start. plus when one clan wins it gives them braggin rights till another top clan takes em down next game just ideas to possibly better the game