I think that it is time to impose a limit to these two cards.

Current Pros:
-It adds value to Charity Donation and Propaganda.

Current Cons:
-It makes it hard for all players to participate in the port control feature.
-It stops acting like a gold sinker after some time, that's not helping inflation. You mentioned this about Call Leviathan/Journey case so you will see that the case here is stronger.
-Charity Donation is way better than any rare card (save master craftmanship) as it is now. The only reason is does not command a high price at the market right now is because it has been used in mass by opponents and it is required to be used in mass to make it worthwhile.

Proposed Solution:
-You could make them like pouch of gold. Keep them proportional but add a hard limit. I believe 2 millions is more than enough.

Pros on the proposed solution:
-They will keep their card value. 2 millions limit is equal to 20millions gold coins. This is still greater than what the Expedition Journey can give.
-Inflation will stop.
-More people will be able to participate.
-Card value will be more in par to its rarity flag although I think that it will still count as a golden uncommon.

Cons on the proposed solution:
-I cannot see any.

Obviously, Conspiracy will need a hard limit too. I just have not added this in title to save space.

With the proportional fame drop, the current leaders will be eventually dropped to competitive values. Perhaps an increase to the daily fame drop should also be considered but I will keep this for another discussion, to keep things clean.

I tried my best to keep this simple with few words, making it easy to read for everyone. Please READ my whole suggestion. If you don't agree, then list your reasons?

IF you agree, post below. A simple I AGREE will be enough I hope for the devs to seriously consider it.


Read the bolded/colored parts if you don't want to read the whole message

agree... sorry about Airoa man.

Hear hear. I agree completely.

I agree

I AGREE! Charity donation cards are equivalent to having Billions of gold to spend EACH CARD. I was hoping port influence would continue to be about who has the cash to control a port (like it used to be). Instead it has become only about who has bought enough voodoo to control the port. Don't spend gold on a port- it's worthless for port influence!

I really like Jack Sparrow's idea but I'm sure 2 million limit is WAY too high!
An Expedition Journey is worth at least 3 million gold because it allows you to level a SotL (or MoW) from 9 to 10. Expedition Journey is a REALLY good card because it is directly equivalent to 3 million gold.
If Charity Donation is directly equivalent to 20 million gold then you have made a card worth at least 6 times more gold to a player who cares about port influence. Charity Donation is an uncommon card and should not be worth more than a rare card!

PLEASE put a limit of no higher than 500k influence from one Charity Donation! Propoganda should also have a limit but the limit should be higher than Charity Donation because controlling a port is supposed to be difficult. I think a limit of 750k influence drop max due to Propaganda is appropriate.

-Captain D

There that I am to say yes

Captain dungeness wrote:PLEASE put a limit of no higher than 500k influence from one Charity Donation! Propoganda should also have a limit but the limit should be higher than Charity Donation because controlling a port is supposed to be difficult. I think a limit of 750k influence drop max due to Propaganda is appropriate.

I heard that I'll have to be rich to gain rank and that these curses will be useful as I progress. I don't guess I'll ever care to claim a port but if I change my mind I don't want to fight for it with weaker curses than the current land owners were able to use. Maybe if there was a better way to take a port than influence or a better way to gain influence than buying it. But really, who benefits from weakening the curses now? In the long run it'll be the current land owners. That's why I'm against it. Tools should stay as close to the same as possible to keep from leaving things the way they are except where abuse is in question. I'd have to wonder about the intentions of those who support weakening these curse. And let's scrap the idea of making one less effective than the other. They're equal now and probably for a good reason.

How about more ideas that do not include a limit and fix the issue as BS located it. It could be a new card or a game action (like port blockade to affect influence that has been suggested on the other topic).

With the nation feature it has been proposed to that land battles be included. If a port is blockaded or a town is under siege then the players that have control of the port could lose influence by say 5% per day. If another country attacks a port and wins, then the players that contributed troops to the attack could gain an equal percentage of influence as the percentage of troops that they donated to the attacking force. ( If you donate 10% of the troops you get 10% of the influence gained.) The total influence gained by the country should be a percentage of the total influence of that port. ( for example the winning nation gains 20% of the total influence of the port). The members of the losing nation that have influence in the port that got sacked would each lose 20% of the influence that they personally have in the port. That way an attacking nation could gain a greater amount of influence in the port, since they are taking a percentage of the total influence. Also, individual players would not lose as much if they lose the port battle because they are only losing a percentage of their own influence. This, plus capping CD at 50,000 per card,could be a way to let many players of 1 nation defeat 1 player with a lot of influence who controls a port. I know this idea may need tweaks and all are welcome, other Ideas should also be put forth to chose from or blend with this suggestion.

Captain Jack wrote:How about more ideas that do not include a limit and fix the issue as BS located it. It could be a new card or a game action (like port blockade to affect influence that has been suggested on the other topic).

Captain Jack, I do not understand the reason to not add a limit to Charity Donation- the 1M gold limit on Pouch of Gold corrected the imbalance it had previously. This situation seems exactly the same as the Pouch of Gold problem.

Do you want gold to be used for gaining port influence? As it is now there is NO reason to pay gold for influence. Right now there are ONLY 3 ways to fight for port control: buy voodoo or put a limit on Charity Donation's effectiveness or try to make a new feature like blockade etc.

1) If you want players to consider using gold to raise influence then you could make gold stronger by making the exchange 1:1 rather than 10gold:1influence.

2) Also, to avoid a hard limit on Charity Donation you could instead lower the maximum number of influence possible at each port. Right now the cap is 2^31=2.147B... Why would it ever need to be that high? Why not make the max influence be 2^24=16.8M or something much lower? Then it might be possible to pay the 168M+ gold to compete for port control. Each day a player with max influence would lose 16.8M gold's-worth of influence so they would need to also use voodoo to stay up there.


-Captain D