DeletedUser
and im Will Wright
and im Will Wright
DeletedUser
Wow. I initially skipped your post due to its great length, and just read the following comments. They seemed too critical; surely a post that long and apparently well-written (from the general appearance of it) must have some sound basis, no?
After going back and reading the whole thing, I have to say that this is a very poor suggestion. Let me point out some problems which nobody has yet. My comments in bold and color:
I hope I've revealed the existence of enough other problems to induce you to rethink this. I agree with you about the problems you listed to begin with, but this way of addressing them creates its own problems. I especially dislike the idea of having a gang of thug towns descend on mine to destroy it, and the whole approach of trying to force people to do what you think they should.
After going back and reading the whole thing, I have to say that this is a very poor suggestion. Let me point out some problems which nobody has yet. My comments in bold and color:
Advantajes:
1. game becomes more dynamic and people interact more probably so
2. workers are no longer useless for a maxed out town true
3. towns will require all classes of players (workers for building, soldiers to defend, duelers to attack, adventurers to get money) true, but is that good? it reduces options
4. diplomacy and alliances will become very important. sending coordinated attacks from several towns will be a great tactic. this alone makes me oppose the idea; I don't want a horde of marauding punks knocking down my town for fun!
5. the mayor becomes more important (as it should) what if he's gone when someone decides to attack? what if the mayor doesn't desire this level of activity all the time? again, it reduces options
6. players in the same town will have to communicate more to coordinate their attacks and plan the defense yes, this forces people to do some things... very un-American
7. full grown towns will finally have a way to increase their rank by simply attacking other full grown towns to take their place OK, that I do like...but not enough to overcome the other problems
8. more fun debatable; depends on what you want from the game
Disadvantages:
1. probably the game will be a bit more complex than some people might want it to be
I hope I've revealed the existence of enough other problems to induce you to rethink this. I agree with you about the problems you listed to begin with, but this way of addressing them creates its own problems. I especially dislike the idea of having a gang of thug towns descend on mine to destroy it, and the whole approach of trying to force people to do what you think they should.
DeletedUser
The information we have so far is this...
It is pretty clear when they say "in the form of forts" that there has already been some significant discussion on the subject of ways to implement towns fighting with each other.
Even without knowing any of the details, I would choose forts rather than fighting which in any way destroys the town, for all the reasons which have been repeatedly mentioned in this thread. And I would imagine that when they chose forts, damage to towns was one of the things discussed and then discarded by the devs, as it has been discussed and discarded on these forums more than once.
We want options for town-level attacks, and we know the devs are working on that. We definitely do not want anything that limits the ways in which our towns can be run, or destroys what has already been earned.
And quite frankly, as someone who is both a town founder and a general citizen on various worlds, I don't want to see anything enacted which is entirely at the whim of a town founder. Citizens in The West are not toy soldiers. Most towns I know of, and towns that thrive, do not require the level of interventionist control suggested in this idea, so even if no forts were as yet being planned, and even if you removed the town damage from it, I would reject it on that basis as well.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
If I can't firebomb the church, then I'm not going to suport this suggestion!
DeletedUser
DiM if you're an admin for the Romanian forums then you should know that we don't have any Devs reading these forums - go post on the German forum if you want someone to read what you wrote and have it considered.
DeletedUser
And no offense but all the nonsense about one class doing specific jobs is ridiculous. All my builders are not Workers. If you want to prevent a Soldier from doing Construction then you look at the town's log and lay the smack down on anyone building who shouldn't be - problem solved.
The class of a person has almost zero to do with their ability to win or lose a duel. A person's skills/attributes in duel skills and their weapon's damage is what determines the winner or loser of a duel.
The best duelers on W-1 are Workers - I didn't say highest rank - rank has nothing to do with being a good dueler. High duel rank only says how much you farmed people worse then you ...
The class of a person has almost zero to do with their ability to win or lose a duel. A person's skills/attributes in duel skills and their weapon's damage is what determines the winner or loser of a duel.
The best duelers on W-1 are Workers - I didn't say highest rank - rank has nothing to do with being a good dueler. High duel rank only says how much you farmed people worse then you ...
DeletedUser
DeletedUser
Here's another reason this is a bad idea: it's highly abusable.
Say you and I are mayors and friends. Your town completes a shop level, but doesn't get a nice item. You and I set up a "war"; I put in only 1 fighter in my "army" and you put none in yours. We win and your shop gets taken down 100 points. You then re-finish the same level, rerolling the inventory for that level. Repeat until you are happy with the inventory you got.
Say you and I are mayors and friends. Your town completes a shop level, but doesn't get a nice item. You and I set up a "war"; I put in only 1 fighter in my "army" and you put none in yours. We win and your shop gets taken down 100 points. You then re-finish the same level, rerolling the inventory for that level. Repeat until you are happy with the inventory you got.
DeletedUser
Oh nice point Luap.
DeletedUser
What about the obvious problem of having 10 players of the same level available in each town? The top 10 players in one town I looked at had their top 10 members with a 20 Dueling level spread. Now what if my town has our top 10 members all the same dueling level? Right there 1/2 the fights would be massacres.
Another town I looked at had their highest player at level 73 and their 10 highest at level 40, that's a spread of 33 levels. Another town had a spread from level 98 to level 62, thats 36 level spread.
Another town I looked at had their highest player at level 73 and their 10 highest at level 40, that's a spread of 33 levels. Another town had a spread from level 98 to level 62, thats 36 level spread.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Someone burn down my Tailor shop ! PLEASE !!!!!!!!!!
DeletedUser
OMG, they like this idea in the romanian server. Of course no one has brought up the points we have here. I'll quit the game and take my nugget spending money elsewhere if this is implemented.
http://translate.google.com/transla...orum.the-west.ro/&sl=ro&tl=en&history_state0=
http://translate.google.com/transla...orum.the-west.ro/&sl=ro&tl=en&history_state0=
DeletedUser
Just a small, tiny, little question: are you suggesting anything about Romanian people? If you do, then come and say it in my face... Then we will have a nice talk about racism
Cheers.
DeletedUser
No. I simply stated that on the romanian server they liked the idea. I also pointed out no one mentioned any of the cons we had mentioned here. If you get racism out of that I would say you are way oversensitive.
DeletedUser
Just a small, tiny, little question: are you suggesting anything about Romanian people? If you do, then come and say it in my face... Then we will have a nice talk about racism
Cheers.
I don't think you need to play the racism card. Nothing bad was said about Romanian's.
DeletedUser
Well, this part pissed me off, I understood it something like: "Of course no one from Romania has enough brains to bring up the points we have here"...
If you had no such thought, I apologize.
DeletedUser
Well has anyone opposed the idea on the Romanian forum ?
Some of it is pretty ludicrous and not well thought out at all.
Some of it is pretty ludicrous and not well thought out at all.
DeletedUser
My vote is a definite NO. If our town has good items in the stores now, we stand a fair chance of "downgrading" our store after such a war (after re-building, with probably lower quality products) - definite no-no.
DeletedUser
There are one or two that have minor misgivings about it but otherwise support it. Anyways, I just thought it was interesting to see how players on another server were responding to it. I'm sure someone there will bring up some of the points that were brought up on this forum.
DeletedUser
god, finally you realise why i wanted more opinions on this matter.
for example Luap Nor raised a valid problem that i need to somehow fix. thanks for the input. however while the abuse it is possible, i already pointed that the damage will be random so it's not actually that easy to abuse. for example you might want to tear down 1 level of tailor but the damage goes to the general store and when you rebuild the general store you get worse items. are you willing to take the chance? you might end up destroyng your buildings lots of times before you actually get what you want and then somebody comes and demolishes again and you no longer have the items you so carefully planed abuse for.
Last edited by a moderator: