Page 1 of 2

Verdict - has non-stacking kings improved gameplay?

PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:26 pm
by carter j burke
It's been a month without kings stacking. What's everyone's thoughts on gameplay now?

Re: Verdict - has non-stacking kings improved gameplay?

PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 8:40 pm
by scottimus
No it hasn't. Stacking kings helped make the game challenging.

Re: Verdict - has non-stacking kings improved gameplay?

PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 8:50 pm
by drasticaction
scottimus wrote:No it hasn't. Stacking kings helped make the game challenging.


Its certainly difficult to fight someone who'd effectively doubled his drill count by stacking kings, I'll give you that. A fair difficulty, not really.

And it wasn't too exciting to have the main counter to stacking was more stacking, either of your own kings or SCs.

I think it's an improvement.

Re: Verdict - has non-stacking kings improved gameplay?

PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 10:24 pm
by silverberg
Before, king stackers were predictable and easily countered with specialists not related to your own driller count - letting you head off the main attacks with specialists while sending your own drills on a flank. Now, people are stacking more effective specialists such as the Tycoon, making flanking maneuvers more difficult and throwing off my predictions about which direction a given player may drift.

Re: Verdict - has non-stacking kings improved gameplay?

PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 12:00 am
by rlin81
It made the game a bit more predictable. The max you got to worry about from any player is 1 king where as before he may get a 2nd king suddenly but then kings become a bit weaker to stacked admirals and generals so the penalty for kings is now very harsh since admirals and generals have no penalty.

Re: Verdict - has non-stacking kings improved gameplay?

PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 8:46 am
by blobbydude
I actually think it's been a good improvement. There's more to think about when you hire specs, and domination games are no longer decided by kings. Now instead of having one spec that is always the best, now you have tycoons, admirals, and maybe generals competing for the too spot.

Re: Verdict - has non-stacking kings improved gameplay?

PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 7:44 pm
by nojo34
I have always been on the "Kings are just a tad overpowered, and just a tad too easy to use" train. I do agree with what Ron changed, however only slightly.

The old state allowed anyone with half a brain to hire a hypno, promote it, rinse and repeat a few times to victory unless one of three things happened.
1) A majority of the lobby caught this early, and swiftly executed the king stacker
2) A veteren player stacked admirals or generals (I'd argue he isnt broken, but not to hijack this thread)
3) Somebody else went kings

Enough on the old King, a coup d'etat just overthrew the ruling monarchy.
As of now, the King's upside just barely beats his downside. No shields is a big issue. You need 30 drills for 10 shielders, and 60 drills at a 20 shielder to negate his downside on the defensive end. On the O' however, just throw as many drills as you can on board.

In conclusion, i agree that change was needed, yet the implimation should have been at least told to the community a few days before it went live, to judge feedback. I still love and respect you to death Ron.

Re: Verdict - has non-stacking kings improved gameplay?

PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:55 pm
by carter j burke
Polling is in after a week.

Results are surprising:

Only 17 votes.
Hell yes - 0
Moderately Yes - 41%
Indifferent - 12%
No - 24%
Undecided - 12%
Don't care - 6%
Infiltrator is OP - 6%
Sab joke - 0

Obviously more people will vote in time, but here's my thoughts:
* Low voter turn out for what has been such a long running and contentious issue.
* Opinion seems divided.
* While feel the update is a 41% moderate improvement -- nobody voted an overwhelmingly positive yes.

I'm in the middle of a couple of games, and my initial impression is that kings are more of a defensive mechanism now for a player being reduced into a turtle.
Admirals and generals are the hiring choice, and stacking engineers seems to be the alternative to kings for allowing steam-rolling effect.

Re: Verdict - has non-stacking kings improved gameplay?

PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 7:39 pm
by carter j burke
New poll result -- infiltrator is OP and needs to be updated. ;)

Re: Verdict - has non-stacking kings improved gameplay?

PostPosted: Wed May 03, 2017 3:01 am
by mathwhiz9
Am I seriously the only person who just likes voting, not caring what for?