Forgotten Tales

I would like to suggest that there be a penalty for having a base that just sits on a clan map with little to no activity

For example: if a base sees none of its members for one week then all of that bases structures either lose 50 levels or lose half of their hp.

EDIT: i revamped the above equation in a lower post on this thread

This would require a true clan team effort to maintain their base. Members would actually have to contribute to their clan base by building and upkeep.

I would like to see every member required to be there at their base to build and maintain it.

No more of this nonsense of having just 1 or 2 members doing all of the building Or no one building at all

Or like some clan bases that i see that are just decorations.

This would also deter clans from making alts and building on other maps as they would need to focus on taking care of their actual base and there wouldn't be time to tend to more than one base.

In the wake of the punishment of sharing accounts i believe that this is a great opportunity to revisit this.

BOO!

.

I disagree completely

DAVEmanda wrote: Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:02 pm I disagree completely

Would you like to explain why?

Yes I would post here a great list of reasons but I figure that only with say that people will loose his hard job on the game for real life issues might be sufficient.

When the change was made to only allow a clan to build on one map of course this was a step in the right direction and of course players found a way around it and exploited another method for their personal gain.

Enter: make a bunch of alts and build on other bases.

I believe this is why players are against a level requirement to use tools. They wouldn't just be able to build with a level 10 mage alt and be able to use +2 +3 and+4 tools and have many bases. Why do you think hobbs suggested there be a level requirement? Why did they change it to where a clan can only build on one map?

Think about it.

As far as real life issues go, that's really a moot point. That comes with the territory and we all have to deal with that. Why should a player that has real life issues get special treatment.

I believe if this were implemented than it would be a good thing.

Do players really just want to build to max and then that's it? No one wants to continue to change and grow and continue to have reasons to upkeep their base?

I love FT and love to see things constantly changing.

I believe many players have become WAY TOO COMFORTABLE.

I'm not against tweaking my idea on the level and hp loss but I do believe that Something needs to Change

+1 for clan upkeep

But "a clan" is a group of people by definition.

IMO, thanks to its being composed by several people, a clan can face periods of time when one or a few members have real life issues and cannot log in the game.

I would support a base upkeep system - well balanced of course - requiring certain actions being performed on buildings on daily or weekly scheduling (details to be thought)

If a clan has just a few members, and they have no time to keep the base up and running and face the upkeep system, and if they don't invite new members, then perhpas they should not have a base and should consider leaving space to active clans.

I am not in any clan. But i totally disagree with upkeep system.
Next u will ask players for upkeep for houses. If player is busy In real life and suppose couldn't play long time. Then u will start asking real money for his house upkeep..

If u have a problem with inactive clan buildings been occupied on clan maps then just go siege and destroy the clan buildings. If they are actually inactive then no one will be there to resist and u can destroy easy.

ardesia wrote: Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:46 pm But "a clan" is a group of people by definition.

IMO, thanks to its being composed by several people, a clan can face periods of time when one or a few members have real life issues and cannot log in the game.

I would support a base upkeep system - well balanced of course - requiring certain actions being performed on buildings on daily or weekly scheduling (details to be thought)

If a clan has just a few members, and they have no time to keep the base up and running and face the upkeep system, and if they don't invite new members, then perhpas they should not have a base and should consider leaving space to active clans.

I completely agree with you Ardesia. That's the point i have been trying to make all along.
HUGE+1