.....and i'm losing this argument.

just dont do it for ultra games...ultra games would BLOW if they took out the inactive castles i mean its like in those games at least if you join a level 1-100 pretty much EVERY castle is empty so is not like you can gain an advantage...unless you were quicker at getting the lots
then that would just mean you are faster

finally someone whos sopporting my argument, well sort of....

If everybody in the game knew about the inactive castle the advantage would not be as great. That castle would become battlegrounds for sure, I've seen it happen. Fighting for that castle would mean a great risk. First you'll have to spend gold on the war instead of building, and by the time you get the castle you'll probably be weakened some. And the other players know that if you're not dealt with soon, it's a great risk not to - you might become too strong when the time comes.

This could be acheaved by enhancing the news page, like in DoRW's suggestion. And why not add the "LastAction" that already can be found in "Find Player" or "My Friends"? I know that quite a few players already put their enemies in "My Friends" to keep track.

you know I never fought of that...
*Linkasy quickly adds all the people he doesn't like to his 'my freinds' list*

I think dby idea holds some "niceties" to it.

Why not simply display in the map the "empties" therefore if people know about them, they'll go to them.

But to add a twist, make them hard to takeover (like with the 2 castle upgrades), therefore a normal single comm stack will take a few turns to execute the takeover, thus requirying support troops, and well you get the picture.

Inactioves give the advantage of a conquered player minus the casualties.

The only question really is if resource buildings and the grey slab can be removed due to inactivity.

No reason to get rid of the resource buildings. The gray slab can stay too, as far as I'm concerned, why make the programming any tougher than necessary?

keep the resorce building there not as big an advantage as an empty castle.

Depends on the game. 12P maps have notoriously high resource costs and shortfalls, and so 300 (or even 450!) free ANYTHING per turn has GOT to be a major plus

Unlike Slow 17, where Stone is valued at 1.37 , and gems come in at 4.38
Only reason IT ain't lower, is I generally have the gold for what I want...

Yeah, I totally agree with Mog. Innactive castles add too much
Luck into the game which is bad.

Anybody still remember how the game used to work before the new multi-barracks per castle rules? I am not convinced that the current game plays better or more fair.

We used to be able to have 3 active barracks period if I remember correctly.

You could build, or conquer as many as you wanted...the barracks were cheaper to make and easier to destroy...but you had to choose which ones to upgrade and when to destroy them if you needed to fall back. Your choice was where to build your troops to facilitate your campaign...but everyone could build roughly the same.

If we were to go back to that system...the castle bases are just a source of some extra gold...they are still worth seeking and fighting over, but don't give a huge advantage in troop production early in the game. People would again have to use strategy instead of early brute force to gain the long-term advantage.

I really enjoyed it the old way although it was a bit slower. We could always bump up troop production by a few per turn for all types to make it faster, but more fair. What are your thoughts on this?

Cheers,
H.

Bump..cos its a good idea

Idea is generally good but, as DORW wrote we need something to prevent players from going innactive after heavy fights i play only few campaigns but i meet that 2 times, ppl fight with me for 20 turns, then going innactive.

If someone fights and then goes inactive the castle should stay active until a certain number of turns pass, then it goes dead. I believe that's how it works now, isn't it? Like, 5 turns or something?

In these beginners games half the fellas r inactive....im seeing how much of an advantage it can give u if u grab 2 more castles and allt the stuff early on

Im not saying that all inactives should b completly erased.castle or no castle as you please........
just the fellas who r inactive the first 5 turns

hmmm it would create a level playing field for everyone and i beleive it will help create a more dynamic game...(people will have 2 think a bit more rather that just being on a lucky spot on the map.....

In one of my campaigns there is 3 of us all down in the corner(me in the corner)

so i made friends with one fellla, and was chopping up Lady Mia good and proper....im allmost in her castle, its only about turn 25 or so..i get this message from Barnack saying oi get your hands off my woman

hes telling me hes got half the map allready!!!! and the next thing i know his mace r busy doing there thing in my toilet and his Coms were drinking some warm pi#@ i left for em in the wine barrel

I agree that all these open castles give a big advantage. In one game I went around collecting 4 castles while everyone else was fighting. This now gives me a lot of gold every turn.

Dear Requiem,
Until the new version comes out, can we please get rid of these free golden geese? As you can see, there is much grumbling in the kingdom about this iniquity. Peasants are said to be arming themselves with pickaxes and torches. Far away a ballista rumbles!

Sire, have pity on such as we.

Your humble and faithful servant,
Senor de Mog

the joker!! LOL JK

yes i know!! "Spam"