Life is Feudal Official Forum

[XXswiftsteelXX]

Stop this stupidity and let Avalon remains a true PVP..For F***K SAKE

[Ghofmann2]

I think the previous system was fine. But it should have scaled depending on the loss. If you were a no-show it should have been max loss in tiles. If you fought and lost it would vary around 5-9 tiles.

This is a good solution

[Asri]

the issue was people were laying down 4 IBs in one night on one guild.

If they lost every one 40 tile loss is a little extreme

Last night Bobik said this kind of multiple IB was intended and by design. There was zero sympathy from him on the subject.



I think IB tile loss should be temporarily reduced until IBs are more stable. Every IB you have 20-30 players on each side crash while trying to get in, and if RNG rolls that you lose all of a particular unit, winning becomes a matter of luck no skill. Fix the disconnects, fix the totem loot crashing, then bring back the full penalty.

Did you even Tried 50 v 50 for example , its like Old YO without laggings or FPS drops , its pretty stable and i played around 3-4 till now since its out , the IB should mean something not only non meaningful fight

No, because we've been helping people defend against multiple 100v100 IBs every night. When you can connect to the IB, that is.

50v50 sounds like a lot of fun. I like the 100v100s... if only they worked right.

[T.g.r.thegamersreview]

Yes

[Tetsel]

So "Democracy" wins again...
If only devs could grow some balls and make the game they want, instead of listening to the vocal minority of their community.
Those changes haven't been even tested yet.
One day to revert that change... meeeeh
Listening to the community is fine, being its "hostage" is stupid.
Been there, done that.

[SharanaEU]

So "Democracy" wins again...

Those changes haven't been even tested yet.

So 500+ given online of 1000 most of the time is total minority...

About the test - we had no damage IBs for a long time, then higher damage for 1 week, it was enough test (lots of IBs) to see it's actually doing damage like they are supposed to. And high damage was promised once IBs are more stable ... and they are.

[Tetsel]

So "Democracy" wins again...

Those changes haven't been even tested yet.

So 500+ given online of 1000 most of the time is total minority...

About the test - we had no damage IBs for a long time, then higher damage for 1 week, it was enough test (lots of IBs) to see it's actually doing damage like they are supposed to. And high damage was promised once IBs are more stable ... and they are.

I don't care.
If devs keep handling game balancing like this this will be an endless complaint about everything, vote brigading, and no stable meta, shitload of useless skill grinding because, this or that is nerfed then un-nerfed.
Like I said, they should listen to the community to have feedback about the game they want to make, not being under the pressure of constant stupid votes.
Bitbox is making and shaping a game with our feedback, we are not making it.
And if you think democracy is the best system, you're wrong, a majority of ignorant or angry people doesn't make them right, but that's another topic.

[DeadMedic]

The problem is not the consequences but the timing of the IBs, we have had 2-3 battles a night for a week at midnight est. Most people have jobs so only 15% of our player base can participate, alot of people quit because they cant defend our land so whats the point

also to sign up for a battle people should signup at the totem or one of the guilds involved/allied, possibly a billboard structure could work for this.

[Mryuan]

it was not chinish invading , its deffending,

if there isnt some cunts stating to be rasictis, why should chinish revenge ???

[Claudiu_meszaros2000]

amen!