Fort Battle Class Adjustment

  • Thread starter DeletedUser23629
  • Start date

DeletedUser28620

again joxer, you know very well that duelers are the real overpowered class because only they get boxes, the soldiers dont get anything...
Why should all steel boxes go to duelers?
Why should lvl 10 duelers deal 1200 dmg with a single shot?
Why should a lvl 60 dueler deal more total dmg than a 120lvl of another class?
 

DeletedUser9470

now that soldiers have no duel bonus whatsoever, taking away the only bonus left (ie HP bonus) would leave them out to dry.
ofc though, if you havent got it already, joxer wants all classes that he doesnt play completely nerfed and made redundant, so that he can win something for a change.
what he forgets is that, as the ridiculous ideas get thrown around and instigated without any thought process, there wont be anyone left to play with him.
 

DeletedUser

What did you say? No? You don't want all classes to get health and leadership bonus? Now... Am I wrong to assume you're not playing dueler class and want to keep soldier as much overpowered as possible?
On w11 where I fort fight, I'm an advent, one of the highest health advents in w11 (and possibly over all worlds).

I would love health and leadership bonuses for all classes if it was for my own personal benefit, and for my own personal benefit I would hate to see everyone capable of dealing out critical hits.

However, this isn't about me, this is about what's best for the balance of the game, which is why I support Peter008's suggestion.

-- Pete.
 

DeletedUser23629

FilthyPete just drilled the nail on the head there.

Not everybody will like the new idea for their own personal benefit. The idea was developed for there to be equality and benefit the game-play for everyone as a whole. There shouldn't be a dominating class, and right now there is.
 

DeletedUser

again joxer, you know very well that duelers are the real overpowered class because only they get boxes, the soldiers dont get anything...
If you're not getting a box by playing as a soldier, then you're doing something wrong.
And I bet you didn't read my posts regarding boxes. Y'know those rare ones when Elmyr disagrees with me. :)
In any case the only class that can't get the steel box is not soldier. Nor dueler. So... Please spare me the whines. Soldier is overpowered. Dueler is not.

On w11 where I fort fight, I'm an advent, one of the highest health advents in w11 (and possibly over all worlds).
I'm not playing w11. I'm playing w12 and w13.
Like you, I'm playing the useless class.
And like you I have some decent HP on both worlds.
Now... What does that have to do with the thread beats me. How about getting ontopic here?

The idea in this thread is - please read carefully:
ADD MORE POWERS TO SOLDIER CLASS.

So you were saying about that idea... What exactly? That soldiers should have doublehealth, +50% leadership AND crits?
Prepare some big cash, REAL currency, if you want me to say yes on that. Yes, I have a price. Not a cheap one though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser563

i cant see how this will be implemented. As all soldiers will vote against it as well as all duelers and HP tanks. But maybe the discussion should just be take away the critical bonus. Or perhaps just as well take away all FF class bonuses swoomp problem solved. To be honest I dont really give a damn I have more important ideas to work on than improving this game or suggesting 100 good ideas that mostly remain just that ideas. I mean the nominated ideas forum has seen almost 0 traffic in the last year. or is this just a box were you throw in ideas and hope they pick yours in the raffle. Not implying anything just tired of this whole forum.
 

DeletedUser23629

The reason the game won't be balanced and redone to improve everyone's play style in fort battles is due to stubborn people who care more about themselves than anything else.

I too feel like this, and any other idea regarding this, will stay just an idea. It's players like Joxer who only focus on what they choose to focus on. Apparently this whole thread is based on the soldier class getting better. Even though nothing in any of the idea says the word soldier.

It's players that are so close-minded and selfish, that they will never promote something that doesn't give them something in return. Why not come up with an alternative and make this thread into something constructive? But no of course, it has to be turned personal and bashful to other players. God forbid we come up with something together and present it in a professional manner to inno games.

I feel like I've only wasted my time, players time, and mods time with this thread. I've given up on the idea. 3/4 of the players in here can't take 5 minutes to read an entire thread, weigh the options, then reply. They simply pick what they want to read, then reply by bashing it.

I'm done now with this topic, sorry for wasting time.
 

DeletedUser

Like you, I'm playing the useless class.
And like you I have some decent HP on both worlds.
Now... What does that have to do with the thread beats me. How about getting ontopic here?
Useless? Buhahaha! Advents are far from useless, if they know how to play...
How else could we have done this (watch from round 28 or so)

And your hp is kinda okay, but nothing really special.

And this has to do with you suggesting that only soldier classes should support this idea because the benefit SO much - which is quite the opposite situation, soldiers would be HURT by this idea, and also to explain that I'm not a fort fighting soldier...

-- Pete.
 

DeletedUser

Useless dear. Utterly useless. It's your opponents that suck. :)

But that aside... I'm still waiting to be bribed. Without that I don't see this stupidity of overpowering soldiers more, passing. I accept cheques too.
 

DeletedUser

Peter008 and everyone else, please don't get discouraged by JoxerTM, it seems s/he can only whine about soldiers being overpowered. Consider it a tribute to the idea (or any other idea) if s/he starts going against it. (I don't actually mean that, just saying that it is hard to weed out the constructive critique coming from Joxer, so it is easier to just consider all s/he says as something good))

Sorry if I'm blunt, but I'm tired of some ppl (incl. JoxerTM) just complaining and not adding any constructive critique, I guess it happens when communities get stale or something....

/Edlit
 

DeletedUser

Peter008, just wanted to say congrats. First time in a while an idea has gone this far w/o being randomly turned into a fight or having the thread closed.

Clearly, the community is active on this idea, and clearly there's a debate about the 'future' of fort battles.

CM's, w/o breaking any rules, can you weigh in with an answer to this question: Do the Dev's have any plans they are prepared to share on changes to fort battles in the next few software updates?
 

DeletedUser

OK guys/gals this has gotten a little bit off-topic with the back/forth. So back to the basic idea of trying to balance up fort battles a bit more, trying to deal with Duelers getting way more damage and boxes, and with pure HP Soldier fort fighters from being much harder to kill than pure Skill fort fighters of any other class.
How about these as a 'combined' approach to balance:
1) Introduce "Player Aim" for Duelers to target specific players in LOS, AND ALSO reduce chance of Criticals to 7.5% (percentage to be tested in Beta to get balance etc)
2) Change the way Criticals work so that they are "the greater of 10% total hp OR shot damage" So i a Dueler doing 300HP shots who hits a 10HP player with a crit gets 1K damage instead of 1.3K and hitting a sub-3K player would still do only 300 damage, AND ALSO change the fort skills calculation so that Skills are more balanced against HP potentially by increasing the ^0.4 figure to ^0.5 or ^0.6 etc (figure to be tested in Beta to get balance etc)
3) Introduce on Small and Medium forts (but NOT on Large forts) a "Maximum Total Health Per Side". This would mean that the Attackers and the Defenders would each have a maximum total amount of HP that all of their players could add up to and once it hit that level they couldn't have more players join their side even if they weren't full on numbers. So as a 'random' figure let's say 100K HP for a Small fort, so you couldn't have 50 players with 10K HP as that would be 500K HP, so you could choose to have only 10 players and pick 10 10K players or you could pick 6 10K players and have 40 1K players etc etc.

Why?
1) Reduced % of Crits would slightly reduce damage by Duelers to fix the issue with people saying they get the Boxes etc, but the Player Aim would mean they could target Higher HP players if they chose, and the lower % of Crits would mean they'd want to aim for Higher HP rather than waste one on lower HP so Higher HP would become less attractive as you'd be more of a target. - Promotes 'slightly' lower Dueler damage while making High HP a bullseye as thus less attractive
2) This would lower the highest damage but still keep Crits high, but would stop Low HP skill-based players from being ripped to shreds by Crits, and would make using actual Skills a bit more attractive than just going pure HP. - Promotes 'slightly' lower Dueler damage again, and again protects Lower HP more than Higher HP and also again makes Higher HP less attractive
3) This would make battles in general a lot more about tactics and teamwork and leadership, rather than just a "who has the biggest tanks" scenario. Also it would allow for some lower HP or lower Level players to fill in more spots in battles in the smaller sized forts, untouched Large forts would still allow for big old shoot-em-ups, and no cap on individual HP means people can still choose 100% HP and battle that way if they want but less per battle. - Promotes using lower HP players in battles, does NOT restrict player choice on their build etc, would balance out the HP on each side of a battle to make them more about tactics etc, would introduce much more tactics etc to picking who you let into a battle rather than just "High HP first" etc.

This incorporates a lot of Peter008's original suggestion, but with some extra to also help dissuade huge HP without capping it or just simply hitting it bigger/harder etc

Thoughts/comments/ideas? (constructive ones...!)
 

DeletedUser563

Well joxertm is atleast here giving his opinion. My point was not that players tank threads as the reason most threads goes nowhere is lack of participation. Its always the same people responding here. But then again +- 10 regulars can only respond so many times to a thread. So posts just goes dead because of low posting. For example my idea on dueling competitions was on the second page again. I then reposted(not to bring it to page 1) to bring it up again to page 1 next week it will be page 2 again. Even ideas where each and every poster supports it just goes page 2 ..page 3...page 4........dead. Well I am not going to throw stones I assume there must be a certain number of votes before it goes to the next stage . From observing this forum the process is dead there just isnt enough players here to bring good ideas to vote. Well my first post did concentrate on some elements that i felt would not work well. There was no direct post countering it so your still free to take a fair bash at it peter008. Maybe you will get lucky and by representing and countering every counter argument even though it doesnt get voted some developer fresh from his turtle ride may accidentally stumble upon it and it will get introduced internally. Also in dart games 301 there is the bar rule in some pubs that a player after playing will count the next game. Perhaps after posting an idea just stick around and give your opinion as to other ideas.
 

DeletedUser

nice post, firefly. I especially like #3 because of the potential for so much more strategy than what is currently available.
 

DeletedUser28620

I like Number 1, except aim should be given to everyone, not just duelers. If you give it just to them they will continue to get all boxes... So whats the point of this change? If you dont see how it raises their total damage, imagine that they will only aim high hp people and thus deal only 1000+ crits. Their chance will be lower but they will never shoot at low hp to make low crits so their total dmg will go even higher.

Number 2 is very good, more importance to the stats would definitely convince more people to lower their health in favor of other stats. Also that slight nerf for duelers could bring some balance in box distribution.

Number 3 is absurd Firefly, people with high hp wouldnt be accepted in battles anymore. "Why should we take u with 12k hp when we can take 4 duelers with 3k hp that will do much more dmg?"
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

night rider, 12k hp is great for sector blocking and flag rushing.
 

DeletedUser30307

A nice idea but it'll totally nerf the duelers.

If in fact this makes the high hp tank 'down' then what is the point of a dueler hitting the second player instead of the first as they all would 'eventually' have similar HP, the dueler might as well hit the first player in LOS long with others and get him done and over with, instead of going for another similar HP player in second LOS.

In my opinion just make the other fort battle skills 'much' more effective. Imagine a tank who gets shot every time and never lands a hit....he will definitely start reskilling out of HP. This'll also make the crit damage go down as duelers will have no HP to hit and would end up damaging to the tune of 600 or so.

It'll make ADVs the obvious choice due to their ghosting bonus. And even worse if they are of high HP. Crits would still be required for the ghosting tanks (so, no reduction in crit %).

Hence....make fort battle skills more effective (from their current ineffective state) and reduce the ghosting percentage. It ought to balance things out in my opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

I like Number 1, except aim should be given to everyone, not just duelers. If you give it just to them they will continue to get all boxes... So whats the point of this change? If you dont see how it raises their total damage, imagine that they will only aim high hp people and thus deal only 1000+ crits. Their chance will be lower but they will never shoot at low hp to make low crits so their total dmg will go even higher.
Reason it's not a good idea to give it to everyone is that then not only do you make High HP soldiers 'stronger' you also make it harder for 'all' lower HP players who will get hit with a lot more Crits. Also as for what you say about Duelers still getting the most damage if you notice I did say that the % chance for getting Crits should be tested for balance first, so if 7.5% still leaves super high Dueler damage then adjust it slightly more - it's the 'testing' of the balance before making changes that has often been missed as things come out half-completed in German in Beta and don't get tested, they should be fully 'live coding' released in Beta for a month or something first.
Number 2 is very good, more importance to the stats would definitely convince more people to lower their health in favor of other stats. Also that slight nerf for duelers could bring some balance in box distribution.
Glad you like, and bear in mind this is to go along with 1 and 3, not on it's own so all the slight changes put together should add up to better balance, one change alone would probably not be a good idea, or I don't think so
Number 3 is absurd Firefly, people with high hp wouldnt be accepted in battles anymore. "Why should we take u with 12k hp when we can take 4 duelers with 3k hp that will do much more dmg?"
Firstly as I've said the "Large" forts would NOT be touched by this, so they'd still be free for all high HP etc etc. Secondly the 'total allowed HP' figures would need to be tested for balance and realistic playability the 100K I said was literally a 'random' figure. But also that is kind of the point, not to completely remove high HP players being in battles of course not, but to limit it from being a race towards ALL high HP all the time, so a limit would mean less than 100% of players could be huge health, and that in itself would help to allow some lower level players into forts rather than getting excluded from a big part of the game all the time and then suddenly getting into larger battles and having no experience of what to do etc. Your example is good about 4*3 versus 1*12, but with a well balanced figure being used as the 'max health' limit then both types could get in but not ALL of the people being huge HP, and conversely not ALL being low HP Skillers, would encourage a balance between the two types, some of each.

Sorry it's long again, I can't seem to write short replies :huh:
 

DeletedUser563

mmm dont know firefly rather than bashing your idea and I am just referring to point 3. Let me just ask you one question. Wouldnt this mean that hp tanks will be prejudiced or that only big forts will be dig against. The reason I am asking is that a hp tank would equate to 3 - 5 normal players in hp . So lets say you could squeeze in 60 2000 hp players with 5 hp tanks you can now only squeeze in let say 40 - 45 fighters. As the tank do only 1 persons damage per round would he get in? This could be a massive headache for generals and they would rather just dig against big forts. Also if you could squeeze in 60 2000 hp player that would mean you could squeeze in 240 500 hp players.Then your favoring Ants again(small hp players).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

mmm dont know firefly rather than bashing your idea and I am just referring to point 3. Let me just ask you one question. Wouldnt this mean that hp tanks will be prejudiced or that only big forts will be dig against. The reason I am asking is that a hp tank would equate to 3 - 5 normal players in hp . So lets say you could squeeze in 60 2000 hp players with 5 hp tanks you can now only squeeze in let say 40 - 45 fighters. As the tank do only 1 persons damage per round would he get in? This could be a massive headache for generals and they would rather just dig against big forts. Also if you could squeeze in 60 2000 hp player that would mean you could squeeze in 240 500 hp players.Then your favoring Ants again(small hp players).

Ok, so firstly 'yes' there would be a certain amount of thinking/strategy for generals over who to allow in, but this would add to the whole 'good leadership and planning' element of battles.

Secondly, yes I do see your point. But if you take a "Small Fort" as an example then you can have a maximum of 50 attackers. So if we say as an example that 9K HP is an average of the HP you'd get for the largest Tanks then if you allowed in 50*9k then that would be a total HP for the attackers of 450K. Obviously that is the 'extreme' situation, you're not likely to have 50 with that much HP. So it comes down to deciding on a 'reasonable' maximum health level. Again just as a kind of 'random' figure if you were to give those attackers a maximum HP allowed of say 200K HP then you could still get 10 players with 9K HP and have 110K left giving you an average of 2750HP for each of the remaining 40 players to have a full attack.
So mainly it's about testing and settling on a "Maximum Health" level that isn't either too high or too low, so that you slightly restrict super high HP without making it silly.
 
Top