DeletedUser10193
Guest
What a horrible, horrible change!
From the announcement ehm well Inno you must be confused. We as players are notbut also because we feel that using this strategy is annoying to the player in the long run
That is correct, there is now a Cultural cost for roads, I have updated the announcement.
As I said in the other thread, what happens if I build roads, then destroy them, having less than 200 cultural coins and no building connected ? My cultural settlement is just dead ?
From the announcement ehm well Inno you must be confused. We as players are not
annoyed by this strategy but because of bad changes made with not much thought about
the impact.
Further more I agreed with the general opinion that this change is rather destructive for
exciting settlements. For being it’s own part of the challenge in the Egyptian settlement it
might be fine.
I just really hope you will cancel this change and learn not to fix what is not broken
because this strategy (of deleting roads) is annoying to players
What makes you think they had ever given us TRUE reasons...?. You are great at making the wrong changes based on totally wrong conclusions.
From the announcement ehm well Inno you must be confused. We as players are not
annoyed by this strategy but because of bad changes made with not much thought about
the impact.
Further more I agreed with the general opinion that this change is rather destructive for
exciting settlements. For being it’s own part of the challenge in the Egyptian settlement it
might be fine.
I just really hope you will cancel this change and learn not to fix what is not broken
The vikings were broken from the very beginning. The necessity to demolish roads, build runestones, demolish runestones and rebuild roads was a pain in the ass, that's totally true. I cannot imagine how anybody could actually enjoy doing it with 20 road tiles and risking demolishing e.g. a shrine due to misclick, many times in one settlement. So, the IG is right about it.freely quoted from the announcement
whom of us players did you ask? or how else did you come to such a preposterous assumption?
The vikings were broken from the very beginning. The necessity to demolish roads, build runestones, demolish runestones and rebuild roads was a pain in the ass, that's totally true. I cannot imagine how anybody could actually enjoy doing it with 20 road tiles and risking demolishing e.g. a shrine due to misclick, many times in one settlement. So, the IG is right about it.
The problem is, they don't see the real issue, namely the settlements are not balanced, especially vikings. They didn't ask the most important question: why the players are doing such annoying things? The answer is: because they have to. If your settlement is running perfectly, but you lack over 100 diplo points to unlock a building, it menas the diplo requirement is too high (or the diplo buildings provide too little diplo points). If the only option to win the golden chest is to have a lucky layout of impediments and be lucky with quadruple productions, and you cannot compensate bad luck with your skills, you cannot call it challenging. It's just a gamble.
Translated:We have seen more and more players using a strategy that was never intended in the original design: Players would sell roads to temporarily place diplomacy buildings, to briefly be able to unlock the next advancement. Since this strategy goes against the intended balancing, but also because we feel that using this strategy is annoying to the player in the long run, we introduced costs to the roads. To compensate, the embassy will now produce some amount of cultural coins daily. So if you don't sell any roads and just build the required amount, you should not be at a disadvantage.