ENY change

[Ghosth]

Change it so that ENY is not Dependant on how many people a side has. But rather is tied to fields. Let the people come & go, but if a side is milk running let them pay the price for it. That way short fluctuations of numbers are not going to have a serious long lasting effect.

Last night the Mongrels logged into the Midwar arena for our squad night.
As usual both the Bish & the Rooks had been stealing fields from the knights.
Yet as soon as most of the squad had arrived, our ENY was up to 22- 25.
The arena had 13 Bish with 27 fields. 28 Knights with 8 fields, and 19 rooks with 34 fields.

Now I realize that we out numbered them for an hour or so. But how much did we really effect their flying? At the end of almost 2 hours we had taken 2 airfields and a V field from the rooks. At this point the mongrels started calling it a night and the numbers were back to pretty even.

[BaldEagl]

I've thought about this in the past too.  Sometimes I've logged on to find that we are down to say 4 fields, have an ENY of 20 and thought to myself "whats wrong with this picture"?

I've never brought it up anywhere before though because I'm not sure that tying it to fields is appropriate.  After all, if you have the numbers theoretically you should be able to get the fields back and there's still plenty of good rides in the 20+ and even 30+ ENY range.

In my mind it might work something like this:

High # players/low # fields = less restrictive or no ENY
High # players/high # fields = very restrictive ENY.  

On the other hand this is a likey outcome as well:

Low # players/high # fields = some ENY restriction.  

My other thought here is that this would only slow the progress toward map re-sets and we all know how boring it was the past few weeks when the maps were'nt re-setting.

I'm afraid this would become one of those "be careful what you wish for things" which is why I've left the topic alone.

It would at least have to be very well thought through, experimented with and tweaked over time.

[Krusty]

There's a problem with that.

What about resets? Naturally when one team is actively resetting the map, the other sides are going to lose fields. The one team that's taking fields will be penalized and penalized the more they take.

It's slapping your wrist for actually doing anything.

You implement this and you're setting up a system that stabilizes only when all 3 countries have exactly the same number of fields, and that's not conducive to gameplay.