Death rate in Eco info; tech cost in mil info

For alliance leaders, we should be able to see the natural death rate of every member, and the total for the alliance.

This should replace AE as there is none in RA.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alliance leaders should also be able to see the total amount of kuwal each player in the alliance has spent on each of their techs(Att, def, cov, assassin, UP.)

There should also be a total kuwal spent on those techs per member + the total kuwal an alliance has spent overall.

what do you mean by "natural death rate"?

are UU dying on their own or what?

r1maru wrote:what do you mean by "natural death rate"?

are UU dying on their own or what?

yes they are, I do not play, but I do know that much...

this is weird... why do they die?

where is more info about this?

in sgw it is a note like this

(note: if you total population size is greater than 515,753,425 disease will surely strike your lands. Above 386,815,068 and raiding is no longer possible. Above 257,876,712 and trading/buying units no longer possible. Pergatory is not accessible above 51,575,342)

is something like this in aw?

it's a RA feature only

something like 0.5 or 1% of your army size is counted as negative up (or units dying) depending if you built hospital or not

the death rate is harsh... mine cuts my raw UP almost by half making investment into UP less and less effective... im reaching a population plateau very quickly and my population is only around half a million... perhaps the death rate should be adjusted or UP made cheaper for the next round?

i see

i thought AE means administrative efficiency and RA means realm alert

my bad

Steveanaya wrote:This should replace AE as there is none in RA.

In Red Apocalypse units die because they are not immortal.

1 day is equal to 1 year.
Without a hospital average life expectancy of a unit is 50 years. Which means that 2% die each day.

If you build a hospital, then the life expectancy doubles to 100 years and only 1% die each day.

Natural death rate is something similar to AE, made to prevent big players grow much faster than new players.

What natural death rate does is slow down your unit production the more population you have. This gives more incentive to use your troops in battles and not simply hoard them.

PS: AE is also in RA, but starts at a population of 1 million.

But it's a bit excesive, isn't it? Let's say a player has 500,000 total population and a raw of 10,000 with an hospital builded. Then from that 10,000 there are a 1% dying, so the player is loosing 5,000 units, the half of his raw, and the cost of increasing his up is at least 1,000,000,000 kuwal or more.

as long as it is equal for all what does it matter?

of course with only 3 months of play I think the entire idea is foolish, its an update geared to a non resetable, not one that will reset as it makes no sense.

I thought that RA was a non-reset game? Or at least I thought it was going to be.

I'll let you ask the admins, I get different answers each time I ask .

My conculsion is that the true and final path has not been decided. If its to be a non reset, if its to be a reset, if its to be 1 game, or if its to be multiple games,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I have no idea anymore, and no long even intend to try to find out anymore.

hmmm, 1 day = 1 Year and life expectancy = 50 years.

By this there should be no deaths until day 51. I cannot see how any percentage comes into this calculation. Only units that reach this age should die.

I can't see how using a percentage can be classed as fair because increasing the number of units is going to increase the number of losses. If someone has 1 million units then purchases 1 million the losses will immediately increase while the reality is that none of the 1 million units purchased should die for at least 50 days.

false logic manleva

he has you manleva, no one starts out with 50K 1 day old people, you basicly come into creation with a full circle of people, some young and some ready to die as soon as your account is born.

Kenzu wrote:

Nomad wrote:I'll let you ask the admins, I get different answers each time I ask .

My conculsion is that the true and final path has not been decided. If its to be a non reset, if its to be a reset, if its to be 1 game, or if its to be multiple games,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I have no idea anymore, and no long even intend to try to find out anymore.

Long time ago it has been already decided that there will be X rounds where the game resets and then followed by a non reset game.
At the same time I would like two have 2 RA games, practically identical to each other (RA game mechanics), where one will reset and one will not.

if it was decided so long ago, then why the x? why can you not just say how many and be done? why did you say on multiple occations different times for different things? What was the first round? the actual first round, it was to be a day, or just a few days or something? then you call round 2 round 1 when its the second round.

As for the 2 games, has it been decided? what are the chances it will actually happen? and if so how will it effect the other games such as the reset/evolutions server that was put on hold because of AW2?

First Round started on the 7th of November 2010.
Before that there were no rounds, only a test phase.

I can't give you more details on the other questions.

whats the difference in a round and a test phase?

just courious.

In a test phase you play to find as many bugs as possible, and to fine tune the gameplay.

In a round everyone should play for personal enjoyment, most likely it will coincide with the goal to become the best.

Considering round 1 offers big bonuses for people who reach top ranks, it's obvious most people will try hard to reach top ranks.

Kenzu wrote:In a test phase you play to find as many bugs as possible, and to fine tune the gameplay.

In a round everyone should play for personal enjoyment, most likely it will coincide with the goal to become the best.

Considering round 1 offers big bonuses for people who reach top ranks, it's obvious most people will try hard to reach top ranks.

Guess that depends on what size bonus you call big.

And maybe one day you can understand personal enjoyment is not stat building or rank for alot of people, but thank you for the clear explination of the differences. It is a good one.