Utopia Temple Forums

Utopia Temple Forums (https://forums.utopiatemple.com/index.php)
-   Utopia Discussions (https://forums.utopiatemple.com/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   Battle Field (https://forums.utopiatemple.com/showthread.php?t=23658)

Marduk III 11-Mar-2003 21:29

Battle Field
 
I started playing two ages ago. I began playing as Swirve suggested on wol. I've played many differnt strats and am comfortable with the game. The only thing frustrating about the game is the inactivity in almost every kingdom I've been in. I'm thinking about going to BF next age. Is it more active on BF, or is it about the same on both servers? Also what is the biggest differance between the two?

co0l 11-Mar-2003 21:32

Battlefield is supposedly harder with more wars? compared to the supposedly ghetto wars in WoL lolz... Expect a lot of gangbanging in battlefields though

Sesko 11-Mar-2003 21:32

the difference between battlefields and world of legends is very small nowadays. World of Legends existed first and then Battlefields was made for the more experienced and active players. However over time the difference has shrunk and so no battlefields really isn't that different to World of Legends although I guess overall there is a slightly higher level of experience.

Illuvatar 11-Mar-2003 21:46

id say the main difference is that if you go into a random kingdom, your chance of landing in an active one is slightly higher. however, there are gettos just like in WoL, and their just as bad. similarly, their some very good kingdoms in WoL, just as in BF

D4n1es 11-Mar-2003 22:00

Not really any difference.Just 'more experiance',thats all.Dont bother moving.

Russian Sputnik 11-Mar-2003 23:45

the chance you get at least 2-3 expirenced and active players in your kd is higher.

harlekein 11-Mar-2003 23:56

I thought on BF there would just be a lot more wars going on. Tell me if I'm wrong in this.

deathblooms 12-Mar-2003 01:28

battlefields is a bit more active and a bit more difficult because of that. it also seems like theres more wars, but i never played WoL. all i know is that its the more competive server, so you'd better have a nice strat or your gonna get GB'd

azalea 12-Mar-2003 01:52

well actually you will not necessarly be in a more active KD ... unfortunatly!!!

i guess that actives players are perhaps more active ... and the game itself is made more difficult because ( in general) you will fight against more experianced player .. so if u play attacker you ll be retailed 90% of the time ... andas a T/M u ll have to face people with better def .. IN GENARAL i insist !!!

finally the game is a bit harder : u get less money on the BF and things are going more quickly ... thoses are the major differences i noticed ( for having played in both servers ..)

but don t think that u ll necessary be in a "good" or very active ... like everywhere , in the BF you have KD that rocks and some other that .... ( would better be on the woL) but that s a personnal opinion !!

some people prefers to be in the top WoL than in the average player of BF

but for me it s more fun to play with more experianced people !! it just makes the war harder and more exiting !!:)

ChunkyMonkyMyth 12-Mar-2003 02:39

BF is definitely harder. On WoL, I used to semisuicide, leave like 25 dpa on 3500 acres and not get touched. On Bf, if you do that, prepare to lose over 1000 acres.

Nastrada 12-Mar-2003 13:47

ChunkyMonkyMyth ,
if u will on my kd , get ready to be razed to death ;]

BF is an smaller server , therefor less place for inactives
and more competition , Allainces , wars , retals w/e , more active and competetive , therefor u need to be more expirensed :]

anddylanrew 12-Mar-2003 14:33

BF is only like 10000 people smaller, and I'm sure WoL has alot more inactive people than BF. BF is alot harder than WoL fromw hat I've seen, A 5.5 million nw kingdom on WoL can expect to be around 3 million on BF. Also you can expect to be in probably twice the wars on BF. On WoL you can an age being in only 3 wars, BF you will be in at least 6, and that's if you don't ever declare.

wheelman 12-Mar-2003 15:23

having experianced both servers, i find that BF is just alot more fun to play in. theres definetly more challenge and you gotta think b4 you move. so yeah, theres more organizations, but that dosent mean theres no ghettoes. matter of fact, my kingdom is fighting one right now. actually its not really a fight. 2 days in and they're already about 1 million nw behind us :)

Sir Lohrtar 12-Mar-2003 15:40

Quote:

(Originally posted by ChunkyMonkyMyth)

BF is definitely harder. On WoL, I used to semisuicide, leave like 25 dpa on 3500 acres and not get touched. On Bf, if you do that, prepare to lose over 1000 acres.
You call that SEMI-suiciding?! Oh dear...

LordPerrier 12-Mar-2003 17:01

Quote:

(Originally posted by ChunkyMonkyMyth)

BF is definitely harder. On WoL, I used to semisuicide, leave like 25 dpa on 3500 acres and not get touched. On Bf, if you do that, prepare to lose over 1000 acres.
Guess what's worse than a ghetto?

Ans: Someone that doesn't know he's one.

yup, you will be raze to death by your own KDmate if you are in my BF KD.
BF is also full of newbies and inactives. i remember when i first join, i could not even create an account on BF but need to be promoted when my KD in WOL is doing well. now.... anyone can just make one.
no point jumping ship. just get a few close KDmates to form the core of your KD and play along. making a powerful KD is more fulfilling than joining one.

Piro 12-Mar-2003 17:55

My kingdom was 8 million on Worlds, and now here 3. Oh the pain.


All times are GMT+1. The time now is 22:30.

Powered by vBulletin (modified)
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.