Posted by Snick on July 31, 2000 at 17:01:32:

In Reply to: Current Imbalance between cabals (text) posted by Cabal Equalizer on July 31, 2000 at 16:21:07:

Well, the idea of Empire is "we're better than all of you, we're going to conquer all of you." Thus the name Empire. It's the major part of the role. Balanced or not, that's how it is going to be.

> Here is a little something I noticed

> Empires enemies: Dawn, Sylvan, Battle, Entropy

> Battles enemies: Masters and Empire

> Masters enemies: Sylvan and Ragers

> Arbiters enemies: All at one time or another except Masters and Empire, and all those battles against the other cabals arent taken out on Arbiter really when someone is wanted.

> Entropy: Arbiters and Imperials

> Dawn: Empire

>
> Yes yes, I know that there is fighting between ragers and sylvan mages for example.

> but those battles dont incite cabal wars.

> It seems to me that Empire gets the shaft when it comes to enemies.

> If game balance worked like it was supposed to, and Empire had overwhelming numbers then yes it would be balanced.

> But from what I have noticed Empire never seems to have more members on at any given time than ragers.

> This is worded poorly but I think you all understand.

> Can anyone give me some input?

Follow Ups:

• Then perhaps in empire it should be easier to be inducted w/o the sect leader or emperor, so that empire can get the numbers it needs n/t Balancer 23:26:05 7/31/2000 (4)
  • How do you get easier than everyone being able to induct others into becoming citizens? (NT) {btw. This is a retorical question} The Return of Someone 16:21:55 8/1/2000 (3)
    • Don't know where you got the idea that any citizen can induct but you are wrong. N/T Pendragon_Surtr 18:50:18 8/1/2000 (2)
      • Perhaps I phrased it wrong, or perhaps you misunderstood. Someone, A New Hope. 19:26:32 8/1/2000 (1)
        • Not 2...3 (NT) Doh 19:41:33 8/1/2000 (0)

Post a Followup