PDA

View Full Version : Max 10 officers



clarien
21st March 2005, 07:14 AM
hi,

we all know , Denny or Lord Striker will be first rank in this age like older ages.
i have not a problem with Denny , i want to Denny win... but i wonder if we can't be win the game or can't make a high rank why do we play this game.

i think every person should have max 10 officer , then every player would have a chance to win the game. But now , everyone knows who will be win...

and since the begining of this age , i am trying to make high spy rating , bu i see now , it's ****.. Because i can not even sab with 30 million spy rating to a person who has only 6 million sentry rating..

i am very bored.. KoC is really **** and if KoC Admins don't make any fix about game , i don't think play on next age , also i am thinking about leave now...

so i know Koc Admins will not interested on this matter.. so whatever , they have over 120k+ user.. why should they worry ?

try to use a better language next time, and moved to the throne room ~Zap

Zap
21st March 2005, 07:39 AM
well Lord striker have never won an age before, and denny have only won 2 ages and one of them was a beta age

but you should try to set your self some lower goals, instead of going for rank 1#

perisious
21st March 2005, 08:42 AM
Yeah, LS and Denny just have been getting officers since age 1, and they are reaping the benefits of it. If you start collecting officers now, you could get as good of them in a few ages, if you stay loyal to KoC.

EworTam
21st March 2005, 09:37 AM
Sigh. This idea has been posted far too many times. Almost always with the flawed reasoning that if there was a limitation on officer amounts anyone could win.

Let's get this into perspective.

-There will always be a few players who do better than the rest, and ultimately one who wins. Whatever you do to the rules someone will be 1st and someone 100,000th.

-The top rankers have worked their butts off to get where they are.

-All of Denny and LSs officers CHOOSE to be their officers. They WANT to. They WANT those people to do well. If they didnt want them to win they would leave. I dont have time to do the maths, but I would estimate that quite a large percentage of players have one of the top 50 their high commander. That large percentage of people want those players to succeed, hence they deserve to succeed.

eth
21st March 2005, 10:13 AM
I agree with clarien. These ppl just get lots of soldiers from the start of the age. They just have to relax at home and watch TV. While we have to struggle real hard just to get through the ranks in the 'thousands' ranks. And about zap, what do u mean set some lower goals? Does this mean that we who fight as indivisuals have no right to win this game in any way? I guess u dont know why we stay as indivisuals. We stay like this bacause all the alliances just fight each other and do nothing else. So is it better to have ur head ripped of by an alliance u have nothing to do with? What i mean to say is, that when u r in an alliance, u get beaten and thrashed just because u r in an alliance that has an enemity with some other stupid alliance, even though u wanted to join the alliance so that u could get a few more soldiers and some extra income and not because u wanted to attack somebody i the opposition? this does not make sense. The clan leaders also get too much soldiers. lordstriker has 2000+ officers, so he gets 1000 soldiers alongwith his daily production, from the start of the age without doing anything special.
They should dissolve all alliances at the start of each age so that every1 has to struggle somewhat until a specific period of time afterwhich the alliances can ask their former members i they want to rejoin them. Also, any player should have no more than 50 officers. (10 is too low)

tom_rowe
21st March 2005, 11:48 AM
These ppl just get lots of soldiers from the start of the age. They just have to relax at home and watch TV.

No. They have to bank their gold every couple hours or they lose upto 100million+ gold. Most of them spend nights banking, convincing officers to stay, helping running alliances, etc..

While we have to struggle real hard just to get through the ranks in the 'thousands' ranks.
Yes everyone struggles against eachother. It's called competition. Get over it.

And about zap, what do u mean set some lower goals? Does this mean that we who fight as indivisuals have no right to win this game in any way?
Pretty much. This game is about making alliances and bonds with others in order to be big. However an individual can still be big. Boriszma finished almost top 100 last age, and many others reach ranks of top 2000. But no you'll never win as an individual because that is the game. Many others are suited to an individual game play.

I guess u dont know why we stay as indivisuals. We stay like this bacause all the alliances just fight each other and do nothing else. So is it better to have ur head ripped of by an alliance u have nothing to do with? What i mean to say is, that when u r in an alliance, u get beaten and thrashed just because u r in an alliance that has an enemity with some other stupid alliance
Most alliances are reasonably peaceful. Or why not start your own alliance and make it a peaceful alliance. The fact is this game is as much about politics and diplomacy as much as fighting, especially as you get higher up the ranks. But anyway just because you dont want to join an alliance doesnt mean others shouldnt be allowed to.

even though u wanted to join the alliance so that u could get a few more soldiers and some extra income and not because u wanted to attack somebody i the opposition?
As far as I know all recruiters are open to individual players.

The clan leaders also get too much soldiers. lordstriker has 2000+ officers, so he gets 1000 soldiers alongwith his daily production, from the start of the age without doing anything special.
Well he created CR, and SC (the largest alliance in KoC), spent alot of effort and time over the ages into recruiting the likes of Dano, TBH and J-A-K and convincing all of his top officers to remain in SC.

They should dissolve all alliances at the start of each age so that every1 has to struggle somewhat until a specific period of time afterwhich the alliances can ask their former members i they want to rejoin them.
Yes I agree with you here, apart from not being able to rejoin an alliance straight away.

Also, any player should have no more than 50 officers. (10 is too low)
Much more reasonable, but still I say no.

AW_NiTeRiDeR
21st March 2005, 02:41 PM
I agree 50 officers Maximum! But I also do agree with many of the points made by tom_rowe

master_prince
21st March 2005, 03:05 PM
Well if you played the game in previous ages you'll know that these guys didn't get their officers by sitting around.. they worked for it by recruiting officers.. and you will never win the game I'm sure of that.. so you mite start by joining someone that can win "like me" ;) and help them to win. this game isn't about you winning it's now about helping your chain and alliance to win.. so 10 max my a5$

and I really do hope LS or any member of SC win this age...

Zap
21st March 2005, 03:06 PM
we who fight as indivisuals have no right to win this game in any way? I guess u dont know why we stay as indivisuals. We stay like this bacause all the alliances just fight each other and do nothing else. So is it better to have ur head ripped of by an alliance u have nothing to do with? What i mean to say is, that when u r in an alliance, u get beaten and thrashed just because u r in an alliance that has an enemity with some other stupid alliance, even though u wanted to join the alliance so that u could get a few more soldiers and some extra income and not because u wanted to attack somebody i the opposition? this does not make sense. The clan leaders also get too much soldiers. lordstriker has 2000+ officers, so he gets 1000 soldiers alongwith his daily production

its is very hard to reach spot 1# so therefore I suggest that you set your self some other goals which seems to be possible, and yes 1 man standing alone have the rights to win, I never said the opposite.



I guess u dont know why we stay as indivisuals.

yes I do, I have been one myself for some time ago. still miss it sometimes :)



We stay like this bacause all the alliances just fight each other and do nothing else.
try to join a peachful alliance then


So is it better to have ur head ripped of by an alliance u have nothing to do with? What i mean to say is, that when u r in an alliance, u get beaten and thrashed just because u r in an alliance that has an enemity with some other stupid alliance,

if you tried to find a good alliance and joined it, then you will find out that many alliance have a great atmosphere where you get to meet new people


even though u wanted to join the alliance so that u could get a few more soldiers and some extra income
you can join recruiter without having to be in an alliance, it was only in the old days where you could sign up on the alliance's clicklist :tongue:


u wanted to attack somebody i the opposition? this does not make sense.
don't get this part :slant:


The clan leaders also get too much soldiers. lordstriker has 2000+ officers, so he gets 1000 soldiers alongwith his daily production
yes but one way or another he worked hard for it, and you can reach it too if you also work hard enough :thumbsup:

Davie
21st March 2005, 03:28 PM
The top few ranks in KoC got there due to months if not years of work. To be number one in KoC there is so much more to it than having dozens of officers.

politics, alliances, wars, diplomacy and a lot of recruitement. Getting to trust people, moving into certain groups, moving up the rankings ladder in you alliance, getting respected on forums, clicking, helping people, time, dedication, intiative and a hell of a lot more are needed to get to that numero uno spot.

noirs
23rd March 2005, 12:24 AM
The commander gets 1 soldier for every 2 klicks an officer gets!
What about if an commander gets 1 soldier every 4 klicks an sub-officer gets??

with a max limit on officers it benefit the supreme-commander AND high ranked guys!
ex.

me #1---10 officers (around #1000)---all my 10 officers has 100 officers of their own|

This will make the players in the chain stronger and not only the leader.
This will also demand more tactics when your building a chain.

Bager
23rd March 2005, 10:20 AM
the best suggestion ive seen so far on this was the 1-9 officers u get 1 soldier for every 2 your officers gets, and then 10-20 every fourth soldier u get 1 and so on.. much better, and would have to make the game more tactical.. however the downside is that then other people would make fake accounts and put them under denny, ls kankardesligi, maurin,ss, and all thoose.. which would mean they could implent a thing which makes u say i want that him, him, him, him, him (every him here can be switched with her;))as officers none else, so other people couldnt join u..

*->Static<-*
23rd March 2005, 11:49 AM
10 officers? Very low amount...

I find this idea not necesary. It would be far for the people who came so high. Do you realise you much work comes with it to get so high and get so many followers behind you?

Like Ewortam sad, they are there because people want to stand under them, they are not forced (most cases) to go under for example Denny or LS or anyone who is on that first page.

die_i_no_the_rage
23rd March 2005, 07:15 PM
its an ok for a limit but lets say oh 500 is the limit

eth
23rd March 2005, 09:43 PM
500, i dont know, 250, its acceptable, if they REALLY did work hard to get so many officers under them. Due to the current unlimited officers system, there is no competition among officers. If a limit is created, there should be a competition mode created among the officers in which daily players or play-after-some-gap players, who constantly upgrade their stats can only exist and those who r slackers and create dummy accounts are automatically deleted from the commander's list and thus earn a lesson for being slackers or creating dummy accounts. Thisway, there shall be more active players in KoC than there are now (active strugglers) This way, proceeding among ranks shall be a little more difficult and the first pagers of an age wont be decided as of when the age starts, leaving a bit of a competition still running for the highest ranker. I also felt that an officer should also get some benefit by being under his commander. What i mean to say, is that a commander gets 1 soldier from every 2 clicks of the officer, so why not let the offier get 1 soldier for every 10 clicks of the commander?

OverlordStriker
24th March 2005, 10:45 AM
I think you are just jealous you can't build a chain that big. LS build the first decent recruiter in KOC from 0, he put his time into this game to get that big and you on the other hand joined yesterday and got everything free served for you and you are jealous you still can't get that big.

You can't just limit everything everyone wants.

eth
25th March 2005, 12:30 AM
Jealous? How can a person be jealous of a person in a stupid internet game? I mean, its just a game, what can you be possibly jealous of. I am not blaming lordy here for anything. Anyway, for free? I hjavent used a single clicker yet except for that provided by the game (the red link), alongwith unit prodution, call me crazy but this is the only way i know how to live. No officer, no commander, bear your burden yourself and not huddle under some strong guy like cowards.

Falc0St0rm
25th March 2005, 02:55 PM
Jealous? How can a person be jealous of a person in a stupid internet game?

if your not jealous then why are you trying to change the game to your favor? if your not jealous then why are ya complaining? go out and recruit i have sen people start with no officers no clan, all of a sudden they are in top 100, they do this not by complaining but by using the rules we have to there advantage, you want to play on there level then recruit. talk to anyone on the top 50 and they will al tell you. they started with nothing and worked there way up. if you dont want to put your effort into it then let it be and those that do will do well.

Falc0

Jalumper
25th March 2005, 04:03 PM
kings of chaos used to be a lot better when it first started. Denny didn't exist and lordstriker was #1. That was back when there was no hand of god, you could only go as high as citadel. And there was no sentrys! sentries suck. One of the best things about KoC was being able to sabotage. When someone stole a lot of gold from you, then if you were good enough you could get them back easily. KoC has taken a big dive and now it is really stupid. If you want a fun game instead of KoC then go check out Lordsoflegend.com it's fun unlike KoC

BigGator5
25th March 2005, 06:06 PM
I was all by myself last age and got a rank of "5,470". I had maybe one or two officers thoughtout the age. Even with SC and PR both pounding me, I was able to get a great rank.

Also, if there is going to be a limit to officers, we should be able to eject an officer you don't want.

H2SO4
25th March 2005, 07:52 PM
When i started in this game way back in age 1 i had no officers and had never heard of clans or alliances. The game took on a new dimension the day I joined my first alliance and got my first officer. Since then it has grown steadliy.

I've worked hard to recruit my officers and to help my clan. Perhaps if u actually put a bit of time into it and learnt to work in co-operation with others u might see things in a different light too. Playing as a lone players simply doesn't compare with playing with a clan or being part of a large chain.

Monsuco
27th March 2005, 01:53 PM
I think that there shouldn't be a limit on how many officers you have. It is a major game concept. The problem I have is that officers do too much. I would say that for every officer you have when you have less than 5 guys is two clicks gets you one. If more than 5 three clicks gets you one. This could add some ballance and make it so that alliences are not needed to play. KoC could also even say this effect of it taking an additional click for every five stops after say 100. Then it would be easier to play without an allience than it is now but alliences could have a significant edge. It kind of makes you wonder, would KoC be better off without alliences.
P.S. I have never joined an allience but maby I will join one for age 5 and see if it is better.

tossmysalad
29th March 2005, 09:17 PM
i agree with the limitation on officers too .

also i take in acount the hard work done by the big leaders but it gives them an unbeatable advantage right from the start, this makes the game boring to the new players.

if the big clans are realy that dedicated they will accept the limitations and conform to them still being a part of each other just limiting the power, from a few to the hole clan.

also the chains shouldnt be continued to the next age as a dedicated member of the clan i would understand the changes and wouldnt mind finding my friends and rejoining them, its realy not difficult if your dedicated , also the little bit of extra time will give the new guys a little (very little) chance to go ahead.

the top players have to bank there money WOW !
thats not the same as actualy having to fight for it or worrying about the other 200,000 players stealing it !

the only ones able to steal money from the top ten are maybe the top 200 they have no worrys about the rest of us little guys

after the 1st day they are way out of our league and thats ashame


ITS JUST GETTING BORING WITH THE TOP PLAYERS ALWAYS BEING THE SAME ONES BECAUSE OF HOW MANY OFFICERS THEY NOW HAVE , THEY HAVE HAD AGES TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT NO NEW PLAYERS CAN EVER BEAT.


if i started today and recruited 100 officers in this age theres would increase that plus without even trying because some players see a big group and ask to join where as i would have to go and ask them to join


maybe make the limitation on officers , dont carry over the clans make them find each other, and with this change maybe make the rounds longers for the little bit of inconvenience of those so dedicated to there clans

i like the part where you have to type in the code to buy weapons this stop autobuyers and also give you a chance to steal your money back if your on when attacked

eth
29th March 2005, 11:07 PM
The limitation should be a large number, like i said, 250 is good. So there shall be more people who are fighting for higher raks. Alliances can distribute newcomers to their alliances and advise the newbies whom to join. This way, alliances can also have more players in the top ranks. Now isnt this a good idea?:idea:

bloodpirate
30th March 2005, 10:51 AM
it was mentioned before that limiting officers would not work very well because someone could fill someones account with fake officers. how far would some of the top players be if they didn't have clicking officers but a bunch of unclicking noobs. it wouldn't be a bad idea though if you could get rid of officers you didn't want. then you could send them to sub officer accounts if needed or back into the general public

Aenima1
22nd April 2005, 07:03 PM
fast forward 2 ages clarien has thousands of officers and is leaving denny and lordstriker in the dust. then this little restriction is passed. goodbye soldiers

eth
22nd April 2005, 11:06 PM
fast forward 2 ages clarien has thousands of officers and is leaving denny and lordstriker in the dust. then this little restriction is passed. goodbye soldiers
What are you talking about? Next time, please dont bring up extinct threads. I used to be with clarien, but now I am not, I even had forgottenabout this. This has been discussed over. Bringing up threads that have been discussed over before is not a good idea, learn something from this ok? This is particularly a bad timing since this is no longer considered great and useful, at least not by me.

King_arthur1234
22nd April 2005, 11:37 PM
we need to definitely have a limitation on the number of officers, but i feel the number 10 is too small for max. officers. maybe you could have maximum 200 officers. 200 is quite a good number or it can be lowered. but i think that having 2500 officers is not good, the commander may not know even half of them, it just is silly to have so many officers. and of course there will be more competition in the high ranks. right now when i try to attack someone or the other, half of these people are from my alliance. they have loads of gold but i cant take it just because they are in my alliance. the number of officers that you can have really needs to be decreased.

Swordmaster
23rd April 2005, 01:58 AM
200 is a good number... but could it be something to do with ur rank that affects mac officers?