Town hopping survey - post a quick reply

To overcome abuse of this kind of strategy, a solution could be to make the number of settlers/pelgrims for the next town not solely dependent on the size of the settled domain, but also on the number of towns.

For example, keep the parameters as they are, but add 5 or 10 x the number of towns to the number of cells needed for 1 settler/pelgrim as it is now. It can even become more difficult/expensive to hop, when the number of settlers/pelgrims increase with the number of towns. If 5 are added to domains with 1 town and that figure is double or tripled for every next town, unlimited use/abuse would be severy penaltied.

That way the hopping strategy is still an option, but it gets very expensive to persue as a strategy on it's own; leaving space for players, who join later.

Frodo, i think you need to play the game more.  This is already in place.

I have used it once. I find it to tedious and really think you can grow enough without it. Leeana what Frodo says is not in place already, I never need more than one settler to settle new town no matter how many towns I have but corruption does hurt.

3) never used it

I found someone that had 3 towns totally separated in a very large area and just could not figure out how it was done. They explained it to me. It just made me feel sad, that there is a way to take advantage of the game. I guess it is not wrong, but still it made me feel bad for the folks and myself that play the game the way it was intended.  If everyone played this way the map would be a total mess. Since previous posts have mentioned getting to a river or extra food source, then it might help if you had more global resources available to more areas. Plus not putting us so close together that we feel the need to take all the land and resources so others have no chance what so ever to get them.   

used it before, would use it again.

2) I am using it constantly (exclusively).

Because of pure luck those around me quit, leaving a huge area to use the hop to build my towns. I would like to point out the disadvantages to using this strategy though.

• It takes far far longer to actually build your next town because of the time spent building/destroying the hoppers. This results in a much slower advancement in science compared to building towns in the traditional way. This is most noticeable in the earlier era's obviously.
• Reinforcement times are drastically increased. To send rafts from one or my ports to another takes 1.5 HOURS. This leaves you feeling compelled to build taverns up to high levels so you can move around at a decent rate, taking away time and resources you could be spending on other things, and increasing your towns build time penalty.
• Similar to point number two, you really need to build roads between your towns. Tons of time/resources.
• Jealousy from players who don't think outside the box like you do.

The only reason people use this strategy is to reach global resources they otherwise wouldn't. You pay to reach those gobals. I estimate I would be knocking on the door of Ren era if I had not sacrificed to plant my towns where they are; instead I sit and drool at the troops/research that others have. Will it pay off in the long run? I don't know yet, it's tough to tell. There is NO clear advantage for me at this time for going through it. There is no need for a penalty to building hoppers as it is it's own penalty.

3) I have never used it.

There is NO clear advantage for me at this time for going through it. There is no need for a penalty to building hoppers as it is it's own penalty.

I think what people do not realize is that they really cannot use all the globals they strive to reach in this manner. Being limited to only three per town there is no need. If the neighbors have truly quit then fine to be a land grabber but when there are other active players in the area it is very disconcerting to watch your neighbor quickly take all the space in this manner.

I have used it once. I find it to tedious and really think you can grow enough without it. Leeana what Frodo says is not in place already, I never need more than one settler to settle new town no matter how many towns I have but corruption does hurt.

90% of the time, I never use more than one settler.  It's just a matter of strategic placement and, for me, deferred gratification, lol.

1) I Used it the first time by one of my heros to reach the sea. I'm not really a fan from it.

I have used it a lot. I do it more for curiosity and amusement. I set a goal just to see if I can do it. If I get there, okay. If I don't, okay. Sometimes I do it to get to a particular cell. 

Cuddle did it more than anybody else I think, didn't know it was an issue. Get ready for surveys about 20 men sage army + each cell farming combo then.

How do you get 20 sages?

there are some people who built and destroyed that many towns. Build a sage in each town, destroy town and do it again and you can have 20 sages

Really?  I think as soon as you build the new Enchanted Tower you'll find your surplus Sage takes up residence there, preventing you from building a new one.

I have never used the strategy as described, but I may.  I have built a disposable town solely to let my hero explore it and do an extra puzzle or two.

Really?  I think as soon as you build the new Enchanted Tower you'll find your surplus Sage takes up residence there, preventing you from building a new one.

You are right, should know better then to post that early in the morning.

2. I use it often, whenever I can. It is not an easy or quick strategy but very useful.

2. I use it often, whenever I can. It is not an easy or quick strategy but very useful.

3) Have never used it.

And probably won't. I have one domain where transit for traders on unpaved roads between two towns is nearly 5 minutes--and slower along the winding river! This layout was motivated by reaching for a second Horse pasture. I find it inconvenient enough to discourage my sparsely settling a larger domain.