Tryfon,

So you are saying, please implement extra city defense for all coalitions that holds pantheons?

And all other coalitions without will have even more unballance?

Personaly i don't think your suggestion will get to round two. As it will create a unballance.

And sinds the introduction of the Capital, you are already able to invest in extra coalition defensebonus.

Honestly, this could result in making getting a pantheon more difficult for a coalition not having any yet.

However, some people's mentality can indeed be quite a pest, an fighting cowards hitting then hiding behind 5k drachmas shields everyday is quite uneasy.

As expected, this addition only benefitted unfair people. They're even able to attack some targets without losing their shield...

But I wouldn't want everybody get penalized just because a few people are unfair. It's the same way we get silly low speed limits on our roads penalizing everybody, while roadhogs still don't care and cause as many accidents anyway.

Opacus said:

personaly i don't see this gonna happen.

Neither do I, however it is worthwhile voicing all ideas and seeking to garner either support or opposition.In my opinion, the game is already unbalanced and the main culprit is the political attack option.

We both know many lower level players who seem to have invested serious money into buying political attacks, and they use them as a means to generate PvP as well as purely for harassing other players. The evolution of the Sparta-troll is an unfortunate reality.

ThatBloke said:

Honestly, this could result in making getting a pantheon more difficult for a coalition not having any yet.

However, some people's mentality can indeed be quite a pest, an fighting cowards hitting then hiding behind 5k drachmas shields everyday is quite uneasy.

The number of coalitions with access to sufficient resources to take and maintain a pantheon is continually evolving as long as the 'big' coalitions continue to dominate the pantheon map.  they take any new edge pantheons at will and have also instituted 'family' coalitions and trade pantheons to them for continued obedience and servitude.  If you want a comparison, they are more like Xerxes than Leonidas.  It is now more of a game of the Persian Empire rather than fighting for the freedom of Greece.  With regard to your other point, it is not the cowards who hide behind shields as much as the cowards who hide in alt accounts, and run low-level interference for their coalition with their political attacks and have no real armies who are more of a problem.

Yes, alt accounts are indeed a problem.

About territories enlarging towards the outer border, it's quite a natural move.

Please notice they now only extend straightforward, leaving room on the edges for new territories to be built and enlarged when new pantheons come.

It's just unwise to try and block their expansion, but everybody can settle on the edges, large coalitions won't care as long as their future expansion possibilities are not impaired.

It's just simple logic. You don't fight a bull nor a steam roller head to head, you dodge them and flank them instead... ;)

Everybody has a right to expand in order to keep up the competition for ranking, including those 2 years old coalitions, and they'll fight to keep the right to do so.