Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: "PVP" Colony Economics

  1. #1
    Settler
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    190
    World
    Zeus

    "PVP" Colony Economics

    I'm seriously considering purposely tanking my tier rating to get back into tier 2, down from tier 3. I just played one game in tier three earlier this week, and it's really thrown me off my rhythm. Sure I got four times the experience points, but it's taken me all week to get my troops back up to where they were, and in the mean time I've had two vacant colony slots. Whereas before, in tier 2, I could attack an island, and by the time one island's time is expiring, I've either replaced the troops I've lost, or even have a surplus to work with. Can somebody tell me if I'd be making a big mistake in trying to go back down? It just seems that for the size of my home island at the moment, tier 2 is just more manageable for me to play at.

  2. #2
    Veteran General
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    770
    World
    Ares
    No real wrong answer here, do what suits you since Expeditions are pretty much a dead part of the game, doubt there is even a handful that looked seriously at sustaining parts of their economy with it. Back then I stayed at Tier 1 as that's the only place where skill mattered and losses are recouped same day as well, might just be worth it at Tier 2 as well if you get that feeling you are having.

    T3 is neat for XP farming though to level up your Castle since that's worth something now, which is what I'd focus on nowadays and don't care if I even take over the colony or not.

  3. #3
    Settler kzar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    115
    World
    Ares
    Quote Originally Posted by Ceruhe View Post
    Expeditions are pretty much a dead part of the game
    I bet that if obsidian ore, star coins and crystals were part of expeditions economics, that would resuscitate the whole thing.
    Whence comest thou?

  4. #4
    Mayor Perwyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The Shire
    Posts
    1,559
    World
    Zeus
    I played tier 2 for most of the time that I played. Early on I kept stepping back from tier 2 into tier 1. Do whatever you are comfortable with and what works for your pop and resources.
    "Very little is needed to make a happy life; it is all within yourself, in your way of thinking." ~ Marcus Aurelius

  5. #5
    Veteran General
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    770
    World
    Ares
    I bet that if obsidian ore, star coins and crystals were part of expeditions economics, that would resuscitate the whole thing.
    Salt would even be a starter for me...unless that finally got implemented and I dunno about it lol

  6. #6
    Settler
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    190
    World
    Zeus
    Quote Originally Posted by Ceruhe View Post
    No real wrong answer here, do what suits you since Expeditions are pretty much a dead part of the game, doubt there is even a handful that looked seriously at sustaining parts of their economy with it. Back then I stayed at Tier 1 as that's the only place where skill mattered and losses are recouped same day as well, might just be worth it at Tier 2 as well if you get that feeling you are having.

    T3 is neat for XP farming though to level up your Castle since that's worth something now, which is what I'd focus on nowadays and don't care if I even take over the colony or not.
    Not sure why I used the word economics, since I didn't really mean sustaining the island's economy. I was thinking more of making the judgment calls between all of the above: gaining XP, spending troops and resources, and maintaining at least some regular flow of resources out of it all. And yes, seeing the potential housing offered by the castle is indeed the main motivator behind getting into it at all; it's basically like spending iron to create housing.

    I finally decided that as far as experience goes, it's all directly related to the number of troops you spend regardless of whether you spend those troops in tier 1, 2, or 3. So you're not really missing out on experience by playing at a lower level; you just don't have to spend as many of your troops in a single event. And it seems better to try and keep several islands producing consistently, rather than just one or two more intermittently, even if the islands you keep do produce slightly less. Maybe when I have a chance to upgrade the armory and academy, I'll find myself looking at this again. But they're a few places down the priority list at the moment.

    Thanks for giving me your thoughts.

  7. #7
    Settler
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    190
    World
    Zeus
    Quote Originally Posted by Perwyn View Post
    I played tier 2 for most of the time that I played. Early on I kept stepping back from tier 2 into tier 1. Do whatever you are comfortable with and what works for your pop and resources.
    Thanks. I went ahead and just downgraded a bit to stay at level two. It just kind of seems to work better at that level.

  8. #8
    Settler
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    190
    World
    Zeus
    Quote Originally Posted by kzar View Post
    I bet that if obsidian ore, star coins and crystals were part of expeditions economics, that would resuscitate the whole thing.
    I think as it stands now, the colonies are still a benefit to mid-level players who would otherwise have to rely on market availability or rng bingo from explorers and adventures to get a lot of these resources.

  9. #9
    Veteran General
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    770
    World
    Ares
    I finally decided that as far as experience goes, it's all directly related to the number of troops you spend regardless of whether you spend those troops in tier 1, 2, or 3. So you're not really missing out on experience by playing at a lower level; you just don't have to spend as many of your troops in a single event.
    Higher Tiers are by default more efficient due to the potential of having multiple paths and allowing for reverse clearing, aka investing 60 troops to kill a sector leader and gain the shadow XP for the remaining sector. That option is very limited in T1 and just somewhat in T2 (from what I recall at least). Not sure where the breakdown is anymore, but the troops:XP ratio was quite in favor of T3, not sure if it was mostly because of dogs and/or Rangers or whatever they were.
    If you want resources, T1/T2 will do I suppose, granted you don't lose them shortly after again already, though even then you will have spent less initial upfront cost with units thanT3 alright.
    If you want XP mostly due to wanting to level up the Castle and the cost is "irrelevant", I'd go for T3 hands down.

Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts