Golden Gun - Which would satisfy you?

As much debate has ensued regarding the power of the golden gun, I've decided to create a poll - fun! Tick all of the solutions above you feel would be an acceptable resolution to the dilemma the golden gun has created. As this is not an official poll, ie the result will not guarantee that resolution, I will not be posting this into the interstitial (login alert); but please send this link to your towns and alliances so they too can voice their opinions!

The options:

No Action Necessary
Leave the golden guns' bonuses as is - I believe them to be perfectly fine and balanced.

Reduce Sector Bonus
Both the sector bonus and damage bonus will be scaled so they are less effective per capita in higher numbers. Similar to how the five skill bonuses are allocated, the bonuses will be less prone to exploitation through brute force in numbers. In essence:

• 3 bonus, +15 damage: 1 GG required
• 6 bonus, +30 damage: 6 GGs required
• 9 bonus, +45 damage: 16 GGs required
• 12 bonus, +60 damage: 32 GGs required

Non-Stack Sector Bonus
Neither the sector bonus or damage bonus can accumulate when multiple golden guns are located in one sector. When at least one gun is present, the bonus will be a constant 3 bonus, +15 damage.

Remove Sector Bonus
The sector bonus will be completely removed from the golden gun. Only the personal 2 bonus shall remain in addition to a personal + 15 damage shall remain, possibly increased to a 3 bonus depending on popular opinion.

Remove All Bonuses
The golden gun will retain only the highest average damage. Please be aware this would be highly unlikely to occur as some form of compensation would be in order to the present owners of golden weapons - defeating the point of just leaving a small additional bonus tagged to the weapon.

Non-Stack Sector Bonus
Neither the sector bonus or damage bonus can accumulate when multiple golden guns are located in one sector. When at least one gun is present, the bonus will be a constant 3 bonus, +15 damage.

^ that one looks fair to me.

As felicity said. Non-stackable bonus for me. The gun is better that way. ^^

Diggo11 said:

No Action Necessary Leave the golden guns' bonuses as is - I believe them to be perfectly fine and balanced

Click to expand...

Fine with me

Non-stack sector bonus

Lets Crush them BUGS!!

Leave them as they are

i vote for non stack sector bonus

For me leave them as they are!
Improve defense tactics!!

Reduce Sector Bonus looks better.

Diggo11 said:

Reduce Sector Bonus
Both the sector bonus and damage bonus will be scaled so they are less effective per capita in higher numbers. Similar to how the five skill bonuses are allocated, the bonuses will be less prone to exploitation through brute force in numbers. In essence:

• 3 bonus, +15 damage: 1 GG required
• 6 bonus, +30 damage: 6 GGs required
• 9 bonus, +45 damage: 16 GGs required
• 12 bonus, +60 damage: 32 GGs required

Non-Stack Sector Bonus
Neither the sector bonus or damage bonus can accumulate when multiple golden guns are located in one sector. When at least one gun is present, the bonus will be a constant 3 bonus, +15 damage.

Click to expand...

Either one is acceptable to me as both seem to be fair.

OutlawBK said:

Either one is acceptable to me as both seem to be fair.

Click to expand...

i dont think would be very satisfied with the reduced thingy imo obk because u cant load as many GG's in a tower as in a sector.... and the moaning and whining would simply start over...

Reduce Sector Bonus
Both the sector bonus and damage bonus will be scaled so they are less effective per capita in higher numbers. Similar to how the five skill bonuses are allocated, the bonuses will be less prone to exploitation through brute force in numbers. In essence:

• 3 bonus, +15 damage: 1 GG required
• 6 bonus, +30 damage: 6 GGs required
• 9 bonus, +45 damage: 16 GGs required
• 12 bonus, +60 damage: 32 GGs required

non stack bonus has my vote as this is what the gun shows to be in its own description

@blackfyre...maybe then put the reduced down to 9 in sector then so regardless of where the max amount of possible defenders match attackers?

@ Blackfyre,

It may lead to a few small complaints, but the difference between 9 GG's in a tower and 33 on the ground is only 30 more damage per hit. This is extremely manageable for defenders. It will also separate the GG from any "named" fort weapons that may be introduced.

This is also my way of compromising from what the GG currently offers vs. entirely eliminating the stack bonus as is.

I'm just really glad to see the community supported a change.

And your are right about complaints. Some players will think this change neuters their FF ability. Kind of funny how as the game matures it can mimic life. Players learn it isn't about how BIG your gun really is, but how you use your gun that counts.



lol, couldn't resist.

Blackfyre said:

i dont think would be very satisfied with the reduced thingy imo obk because u cant load as many GG's in a tower as in a sector.... and the moaning and whining would simply start over...

Click to expand...

Even thought it was said somewhat uncouthly, I agree as the problem or perceived problem wouldn't have been completely addressed with the reduction/scaling.

There is no reason to work this hard getting it brought to someone's attention in order to get a fix in the pipeline just to stumble haphazardly in the fix. We got the attention of the devs, lets make it count before they get the idea that we don't know what we want and ignore us altogether.

I want the sector stacking either eliminated or dropped so only a couple sectors bonuses will stack (maybe more similar to the soldiers leadership bonus where it only helps 4 people). Even if it's just 4 stacking, it still allows decent game play while eliminating the entire overwhelming-plowing through effect. Either way, it shouldn't be more then the smallest amount of spaces within a fort's defensive structure.

My vote goes to non-stack sector bonus.

How about this one - golden gun bonus would work as it is now but ONLY for people with regular weapons. This way you'd get less bonus with GG than with a normal weapon, but if more people switched back to precise winchesters and what not, the bonus would be reduced for everybody.

Lazy Lou said:

My vote goes to non-stack sector bonus.

How about this one - golden gun bonus would work as it is now but ONLY for people with regular weapons. This way you'd get less bonus with GG than with a normal weapon, but if more people switched back to precise winchesters and what not, the bonus would be reduced for everybody.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree with this. I miss quite often with my gg and only when I have another gg in my sector do I actually connect with the opponent currently. Yes Im respecing yet again to compensate for this oversight of my gg, but as I've found out that AIM has little to do with fort fighting as it is comparable to that of dodging has been in duels worthless.

But zapping the bonus completely really kills this weapon that I otherwise wouldn't have proceeded with getting and respecing 2 times once to get it and another to be a pure fort fighter.

I'd be ok with the 4 person surrounding bonus idea similar to the solider sector bonus. GOOD IDEA and nice way to give an additional solution that might be doable.

Good Feather said:

I have to disagree with this. I miss quite often with my gg and only when I have another gg in my sector do I actually connect with the opponent currently. Yes Im respecing yet again to compensate for this oversight of my gg, but as I've found out that AIM has little to do with fort fighting as it is comparable to that of dodging has been in duels worthless.

But zapping the bonus completely really kills this weapon that I otherwise wouldn't have proceeded with getting and respecing 2 times once to get it and another to be a pure fort fighter.

I'd be ok with the 4 person surrounding bonus idea similar to the solider sector bonus. GOOD IDEA and nice way to give an additional solution that might be doable.

Click to expand...

Indeed aim is the last skill you want to have. Just to be perfectly clear. What I meant is the owner of GG would get the current bonus from his GG, but won't get bonus from other GG's in sector.

I have to admit that implementing it now would be kick in the nuts for people who already got the gun.

No stacking bonus definitely any group worth anything wont need it for good battles.

Remove all sector bonus the GG gives imo seeing as most everyone will have one in the future anyway... also would reduce the need for tanks as an excuse..

Reducing it will still have the same effect and the attackers can stack 30 in a sector whereas defenders just 9 ... totally unbalanced still

Just like to see forts back to a challenge for all as they had been for a long time but if there has to be a choice of one or the other just get rid of the Stacking altogether..

Good Feather said:

I have to disagree with this. I miss quite often with my gg and only when I have another gg in my sector do I actually connect with the opponent currently. Yes Im respecing yet again to compensate for this oversight of my gg, but as I've found out that AIM has little to do with fort fighting as it is comparable to that of dodging has been in duels worthless.

But zapping the bonus completely really kills this weapon that I otherwise wouldn't have proceeded with getting and respecing 2 times once to get it and another to be a pure fort fighter.

I'd be ok with the 4 person surrounding bonus idea similar to the solider sector bonus. GOOD IDEA and nice way to give an additional solution that might be doable.

Click to expand...

Aim is not worthless in fort fighting (I can't speak to dodge and duels)

The problems you are noticing is that in fort fights, the chance to hit or dodge is a culminations of 3 out of 5 skills raised to a power or .4 (or .44, I don't care for this purpose) then added together. This skills are difference for attack and defense as well as shooting and dodging. Aim and leadership are skills used in calculating all chances to hit or dodge in attacking and defending a fort. But because it's raise to a power of a partial number, you get less of a return when you have more in it.

To illustrate this, Lets look some examples. In attacking, the chance to hit is
*leadership^.4 + stamina^.4 + aim^.4 This can also be as
*50^4 + 50^.4 + 200^.4 or
*4.7 + 4.7 + 8.3 = 17.7

Notice how the addition of leadership and stamina's contribution to the chance is more then aim entirely despite the two skill points combined being half as many skill points as aim? Let's explore this a bit further. 50 to the power of .4 is 4.7, 100 to the power of .4 is 6.3, and 200 to the power of .4 is 8.3. We started at 50 and doubled the points but the chance it contributed increased by less then half.

In that scenario, if 100 points was removed from aim, then divided equally between leadership and stamina, you would end up with 100 leadership, 100 stamina, 100 aim. This would work out to, 6.3+6.3+6.3 or 18.9.

So it's not useless, it's just dependent on 2 other values to be used properly, shows lower returns with the more put into it, and disproportionate distribution of skills will actually provide a significant disadvantage over any benefit.

BTW, you can input the numbers into the search bar for Google and it will calculate them for you.