I can't take it easy, because no1 actually do what im doing. But because only im highend archer, so jorb nerfing only me. TT
I'll take B12 and will kill AD and shit next time. So probably latter B12 will be nerfed also
Seems Jorb don't know how to nerf me, he don't understand that even with bare hands i will kill everyfkingone
dafels wrote:I love maslow's salty posts, need more of them. His botted perception gone to waste.
xD I love how the guy botted all his stats, bots aiming and shooting and now he calls normal people "NEWBS" becouse jorb nerfed something that was too op.
epicbuds wrote:just got this game a bad review on my website and will post on every forum and game page i can think of to tell people to stay away from this site this game is a joke
viruseg wrote:Kill all new players for no reason. Polish scum came running and killed me with a crowd. Suck fuck fucks..
zebratul wrote:
Just want to point out that a «subject whose Hearths are within the Realm» and «a citizen» are different terms but they are used in this patch-note like they are interchangable.
Subjects simply have a hearthfire inside the realm - they might have been covered forcefully. A citizen, however, has been willingly and purposefully sworn into the realm.
It would make sense that only citizens (=sworn in realm members) give double authority, since that would encourage to not only force claim over subjects but to really integrate them.
But I think in this case it's referring to citizens as those with hearthfires on the realm claim rather than those sworn in. So being on the claim and also having a hearthfire = double authority and being sworn in or not is irrelevant. That's how interpreted it.
zebratul wrote:
Just want to point out that a «subject whose Hearths are within the Realm» and «a citizen» are different terms but they are used in this patch-note like they are interchangable.
Subjects simply have a hearthfire inside the realm - they might have been covered forcefully. A citizen, however, has been willingly and purposefully sworn into the realm.
It would make sense that only citizens (=sworn in realm members) give double authority, since that would encourage to not only force claim over subjects but to really integrate them.
But I think in this case it's referring to citizens as those with hearthfires on the realm claim rather than those sworn in. So being on the claim and also having a hearthfire = double authority and being sworn in or not is irrelevant. That's how interpreted it.
How you interpret it I think is correct, sworn in is no relevant right now. Granger think this should not be how it is and sworn in should be require for double bonus.
Kaios wrote:Spice Girls are integral to understanding Ysh's thought process when communicating, duly noted.
I have become victory of very nice Jordan Coles Contest! Enjoy my winning submit here if it pleasures you.
zebratul wrote:Yeah, that's how i understood the OP post too. Which is kinda wrong.
Well the way I see it the player being on the claim to feed the authority is how it should have been initially kept in the first place. When they changed it to hearthfire on the claim to feed the authority this only gave further incentive to Kingdom owners to extend in the tentacle fashion to the most active villages so I think without the hearthfire aspect to it the mechanics would likely be better for it.
But with that said, allowing the realm to be fed through players who can be oathed and not actually be on the claim in some sense is a worse option in my opinion.
zebratul wrote:Yeah, that's how i understood the OP post too. Which is kinda wrong.
Well the way I see it the player being on the claim to feed the authority is how it should have been initially kept in the first place. When they changed it to hearthfire on the claim to feed the authority this only gave further incentive to Kingdom owners to extend in the tentacle fashion to the most active villages so I think without the hearthfire aspect to it the mechanics would likely be better for it.
But with that said, allowing the realm to be fed through players who can be oathed and not actually be on the claim in some sense is a worse option in my opinion.
but thats cool why would you want to be king of wastelands and deserts, kingdoms should try to dominate areas of interest.
https://strawpoll.com/xh2d3zr2 if you give a fuck about mining vote on this. Make mining great again! Bring back old supports.
Mafious wrote:but thats cool why would you want to be king of wastelands and deserts, kingdoms should try to dominate areas of interest.
I agree and hotzones of activity should still be important but the way it worked previously gave zero benefit to claiming any area at all that has little to no hearthfires on it regardless of the amount of traffic through such an area which doesn't seem like the way it should work to me either.