Limit On Fort Holdings

DeletedUser

Proposal
Limiting the number of forts an alliance can own to 20 forts or whatever a good number is.

Current Workaround
Nonexistent

Details
Most worlds are dominated by one or two mega-alliances and other alliances that don't have a large player base or started later or whatever are forced to either join a mega-alliance or be left out of owning a fort. Limiting the number of forts in a world allows those other alliances to have forts and would be more realistic since there is no one country that dominates the world IRL. This is also a better solution than a level cap on forts and would hopefully put a stop to multis with the heightened need for diplomacy between the parties concerned. Each owned fort is more valuable and less likely to be tossed around in the aforementioned multis.

Abuse Prevention
If you're going to abuse this system, shame on you! The West is so much more exciting with several gangs of bandits fighting each other with tooth and nail.

Visual Aids
Insert cleaner alliance map here. You can see anything if it's clogged up with 80 forts lol.

Summary
So basically, this will put an end to mega-alliances and the cowardice of groups banning together just for numbers, open up forts for everybody else, and make things more fun and unpredictable. And who knows? Maybe we'll all spend some more nuggets in the process :)

Administration
Does this idea meet the Ideas Guidelines & Criteria? Yes/No
Does this idea appear on any of the Previously Suggested Ideas List? Yes/No
 

DeletedUser

Wait... What happens when an alliance gets the max of 20 forts? They wait till someone attacks one of their forts or something else? Also does this mean 20 forts as total, or 20 of each kind so an alliance can get 20 smalls, 20 mids and 20 bigs?

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea, but you should give more details on it. ;)
 

DeletedUser

Hmm......maybe they can attack another fort that's in a more strategic position and drop one of their existing forts. I doubt anyone will get 20 forts tho, unless everybody is that interested in world peace.
and it'll just be just 20 total forts, be they big, medium, or small. also, im thinking this could be more like risk: 2 alliances attack another alliance simultaneously one day and the next day, something else could happen, blah blah blah
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

You're 100% correct about the problem, but I don't know if a hard cap on forts is the solution, even though I care more about the battle than the fort. I don't think it would be good for activity if an alliance is forced to stop attacking when they get to 20 forts. That wouldn't happen though, because there are at least a couple workarounds I can think of: alliances would either split into multiple alliances, or family towns outside of the alliance would be used to dig, win, and own the fort, while allies take up the other slots in the fort so the alliance still has full access.
 

Blodox

Member
what if the alliance could be formed only by towns from the same county and no more than 10 towns, but they would be able to own forts in other countys. as much of gettin to 20 and not being able to attack any more, i'm think of building the small forts in the usuall maner, but to upgrade the small one you will need only stuff that you can plunder from other fort. so and alliance owns 20 forts but they are only small. this way they will need to attack and plunder other forts so they can built their own. or something like that.
 

DeletedUser

Good thing I brought my cup of tea so that we can discuss how things might be, but I'm thinking it would be a good experiment to implement this in w15 to see what happens.
perhaps 30 or even 40 would be a better number.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser22493

Pointless really.
What will happen, is that the larger alliances will split up into smaller alliances and work together. Just like they always did, but with a little different way of doing it.

Example:
"All Stars 1", "All Stars 2", "All Stars 3".. and so on..

All together, the problem isn't that one strong alliances is dominating the server.
It is that everyone is joining them, instead of fighting them.

"..Some people say "If you can't beat them, join them". I say "If you can't beat them, beat them", because they will be expecting you to join them, so you will have the element of surprise..."
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Rebow said:
All together, the problem isn't that one strong alliances is dominating the server. It is that everyone is joining them, instead of fighting them.
Click to expand...

The real problem is that the more experienced, organized, and active players tend to join together. Most of the lesser alliances seem to think wishful thinking is enough to win a battle. They'll dig and have ten people show up if they're lucky. The only way they stand a chance is if it's a slow day and the other strong alliance shows up to help.

I just don't think there's any easy way to fix the problem. I recently went through every alliance on three old worlds looking for a third alliance that even had membership in any fort. I found one on one of those three worlds, and that alliance had two towns with a total of three members.

Rebow said:
"..Some people say "If you can't beat them, join them". I say "If you can't beat them, beat them", because they will be expecting you to join them, so you will have the element of surprise..."
Click to expand...

That sounds like a Dwight Schrute.
 

DeletedUser22575

No to this.

Capping forts effectively penalizes effective, organized alliances for being effective and organized and rewards those who are not as effective and organized for being ineffective and unorganized.

The solution lies in how other alliances work together against the larger alliances to take forts from them, smaller powers combined can equal larger powers.

If the smaller alliances can't work together to accomplish this that is their problem. But there is no need to either force alliances to artificially split into sub alliances or stop fort fighting because they have reached their "cap".
 

DeletedUser

so, we can either section off dozen forts for smaller alliances to play with or we can have 'fort quests'. fort quests would render having all the forts in the world meaningless and give rewards for completing objectives, say, where you have to take this fort, and hold it for a week. <.< bad example......
 

DeletedUser

tj tuttle, i beg to differ. the problem is the power gap. big alliances are largely disorganized but still win cuz of numbers regardless as well as being higher levels fom spamming fort fights everyday. the strong get stronger and those not strong enough are left with nothing.
 

DeletedUser22575

rice farmer said:
tj tuttle, i beg to differ. the problem is the power gap. big alliances are largely disorganized but still win cuz of numbers regardless as well as being higher levels fom spamming fort fights everyday. the strong get stronger and those not strong enough are left with nothing.
Click to expand...

You are partially right in this regards, however limiting the number of forts a larger powerful alliances may have and killing off that alliance through some artificial limit to forts instead of a power based limitation based on their alliances capabilities is not the answer.

Another thing to remember is issues like these going to the Devs are through a poll requiring 80 percent being in favor of it..and those larger alliances have the votes also making this extremely unlikely to be able to pass.
 

DeletedUser

I doubt raising the cap to 50 or 100 would satisfy those elitists so we're back to square one with the world not being a fair place........unless the devs throw us a bone......
 

DeletedUser22575

rice farmer said:
I doubt raising the cap to 50 or 100 would satisfy those elitists so we're back to square one with the world not being a fair place........unless the devs throw us a bone......
Click to expand...

Worlds are not designed to be fair place.

They are designed to be exactly what they are.

Top duelers win by beating those weaker/lower levels/ not as good as they are.

Top alliances take forts from those weaker/less powerful than they are.

If your looking for an equalizer to make everything "fair" your not going to find one I am afraid.
 

DeletedUser

IRL, there are regulatory institutions that prevent monopolies so there's no reason why it can't be done here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

this isn't real life. It's a game. In real life, it's also illegal to shoot someone for no reason.
 

DeletedUser

this thread is supposed to be about improving the game, not to be colored by individuals biased towards mega-alliances.
 

DeletedUser

rice farmer said:
this thread is supposed to be about improving the game, not to be colored by individuals biased towards mega-alliances.
Click to expand...

so, my opinion is less valid because I belong to a big alliance? It's supposed to be about improving the game for EVERYONE, not just members of small alliances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top