DeletedUser
I agree. Time based quests don't add to game experience and do annoy people with obligations.
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree. Time based quests don't add to game experience and do annoy people with obligations.
DeletedUser
ff
hay peps its me billy and i started to think about fort battles and started thinking bout ranks and it just came to me WE NEED MORE RANKS so im gonna list the ranks we already have then tell you the ranks we need ( if you would ask me ) so heres yalls ranks:
General
Captain
Private
Recruit
Reservist
Traitor
now i know yall think yall have enough but some people dont like me ( thats why im here ) but i anit gonna keep yall waiting so heres my ranks:
GRAND GENERAL- for the person who dug the fort
captain
private
Sergeant
volunteer- in place for the recruit
reservist
traitor
now that you see my rank i hope you take them in if yall update again
your friend,
billy the kid
hay peps its me billy and i started to think about fort battles and started thinking bout ranks and it just came to me WE NEED MORE RANKS so im gonna list the ranks we already have then tell you the ranks we need ( if you would ask me ) so heres yalls ranks:
General
Captain
Private
Recruit
Reservist
Traitor
now i know yall think yall have enough but some people dont like me ( thats why im here ) but i anit gonna keep yall waiting so heres my ranks:
GRAND GENERAL- for the person who dug the fort
captain
private
Sergeant
volunteer- in place for the recruit
reservist
traitor
now that you see my rank i hope you take them in if yall update again
your friend,
billy the kid
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser15699
If towns have limited number of members why dont alliances have the same?
DeletedUser15641
Are you saying limited town in an alliance?or members in an alliance?
DeletedUser
I agree to limiting the number of towns.There are(or were)alliances with tons of 1-man towns...Ex: Hells Alliance in w12...So 
DeletedUser
I hate one-man towns, but I don't see any reason why they shouldn't legally be allowed to join an alliance. Anyway, the point of the idea is to control alliance size, not to restrict membership for small towns.
DeletedUser24160
DeletedUser34729
if the counterfeit golden colt/saber have half the SP bonus, why doesn't the counterfeit GG follow the same path?
i dont think it would be OP, since they are rare, and the damage sucks too...
i dont think it would be OP, since they are rare, and the damage sucks too...
DeletedUser
The damage doesn't suck, it's just below a PW. I'm not sure about giving them fort battle bonuses. Do you think there should be a counterfeit golden set as well or just for the gun?
DeletedUser34729
just the AP bonus would be enough for me, i'm townless so i wouldn't care about FF bonuses, maybe other players could give some feedback on that.
DeletedUser
The sector bonus would be insignificant since pretty much every sector has a GG in it these days (and the collector's set sector bonuses don't stack, so I assume the counterfeit GG's wouldn't either). I suppose a +1 attack/defense bonus for the player wouldn't make much of a difference.
DeletedUser
Not sure if this has been mentioned already, but I think it would be nice to be able to use bonds and nuggets to buy an item. Say you had 100 bonds and 75 nuggets. Then you could buy a steel lined box instead of waiting for more of either.
DeletedUser
Hi I don't know if this idea has been posted before , but i thought it could solve the 1 man towns that are around and the one I'm in myself. So my idea would be to have the shop inventory sold at the normal price even if you are not a member of a town. Not only that but also have the ability to duel players that are not members of a town. So players that do not like to be surrounded by other players or do not have the time to build themselves a town can just wander alone and still be privileged to the same things as the players that are part of a town. Now the loners would be called "outlaws" because they're not civilised people like the rest. I think this would be pretty cool considering you are an outlaw with a bounty on your head with no restrictions whatsoever. Also I suggest that 1 man towns would have the requirement to have at least 3 members. That way when you start a town you have lets say a month to recruit 2 guys for the town to stay alive and not get disbanded. If you get disbanded then you have to wait another month to start another town. This would be quite simple programming.
Of course you might say what about hotels and people that don't like to get dueled at all. Well there is a solution to that as well. Hotel fees would be the same except the dormitory which would be free for outlaws. As for people that like to not get dueled and do nothing in the game well I would wish there would not be such an option, but there is so they should have the abilty to have a "guard mode" with which he would be licensed to not get dueled nor be able to duel, nor have the privilege to participate in fort fights, or construction work. Anyways that's all, hope I get some feedback. Thanks for reading.
Of course you might say what about hotels and people that don't like to get dueled at all. Well there is a solution to that as well. Hotel fees would be the same except the dormitory which would be free for outlaws. As for people that like to not get dueled and do nothing in the game well I would wish there would not be such an option, but there is so they should have the abilty to have a "guard mode" with which he would be licensed to not get dueled nor be able to duel, nor have the privilege to participate in fort fights, or construction work. Anyways that's all, hope I get some feedback. Thanks for reading.
DeletedUser27863
Advanced fort maps
I believe i am not the first who is talking about this topic, but that confirm that this is very welcome change:
Fort fights are becoming more and more dull and there are always the same strategies and all that stuff. Every single fight is the same..
That's why there should be created an advanced fort maps.
1. Natural obstacles:
For example: if east from fort is river then on left side of map should ran river and thus make left part umpassable. If there are mountains on north, on upper side of map there should be hills to make it umpassable. If there is forest on west side, then there should be trees (which may add a bit of defensive bonus due to hiding.)
2. Defences needed to build:
There can also be some extra defences that add no point in fort points but provide some bonuses for player who is holding it. They can be built up by workers and each level would require some products to gather.
PILLBOX:
Lvl1: space for 1 player only [req: 10 hammers, 10 saws, 50 woods, 25 nails, 10 iron rods]
Bonus: atk 10 def 15 elevation 1
Lvl2: space for 2 players [10 hammers, 10 saws, 100 woods, 50 nails, 20 iron rods]
Bonus atk 15 def 20 elevation 1
TRENCHES:
Lvl1: space for 5 players [req: 20 spades, 50 hay]
Bonus: def 15 elevation -1
Lvl2: space for 10 players [req: 20 spades, 100 hay, 50 wood]
Bonus: def 20 elevation -2
BARBED WIRE:
make certain parts impassable [req: 100 barbed wire]
3. Military ranks
They should be implemented.
For example:
-General [player who dig a battle, can rank others to that position]
-Captain [all black hat of attacking or defending town]
-Lieutenant [can set topic, give rank, all grey hat of attacking or defending town]
-Sergeant
-Private [anyone who join battle get that rank, allowed to talk in fort chat]
-Reservist
4. Fort class:
This one is more a novelty than improvement:
Make fort class beside character class..
a)Sniper
b)Frontiersman
c)Riflemen
d)cavalrymen
a) Sniper: get 5% more hits but weaker defence (for players with high aim but low dodge)
b) Frontiersman: dodge 5% more hits but hit less (for high dodge but low aim)
c)Riflemen: Balance between hit/dodge, get 5% more health in battles
d) Cavalrymen: Move two sectors per round instead of two, more effective from close range
If there are any questions i would like to answer to them
I believe i am not the first who is talking about this topic, but that confirm that this is very welcome change:
Fort fights are becoming more and more dull and there are always the same strategies and all that stuff. Every single fight is the same..
That's why there should be created an advanced fort maps.
1. Natural obstacles:
For example: if east from fort is river then on left side of map should ran river and thus make left part umpassable. If there are mountains on north, on upper side of map there should be hills to make it umpassable. If there is forest on west side, then there should be trees (which may add a bit of defensive bonus due to hiding.)
2. Defences needed to build:
There can also be some extra defences that add no point in fort points but provide some bonuses for player who is holding it. They can be built up by workers and each level would require some products to gather.
PILLBOX:
Lvl1: space for 1 player only [req: 10 hammers, 10 saws, 50 woods, 25 nails, 10 iron rods]
Bonus: atk 10 def 15 elevation 1
Lvl2: space for 2 players [10 hammers, 10 saws, 100 woods, 50 nails, 20 iron rods]
Bonus atk 15 def 20 elevation 1
TRENCHES:
Lvl1: space for 5 players [req: 20 spades, 50 hay]
Bonus: def 15 elevation -1
Lvl2: space for 10 players [req: 20 spades, 100 hay, 50 wood]
Bonus: def 20 elevation -2
BARBED WIRE:
make certain parts impassable [req: 100 barbed wire]
3. Military ranks
They should be implemented.
For example:
-General [player who dig a battle, can rank others to that position]
-Captain [all black hat of attacking or defending town]
-Lieutenant [can set topic, give rank, all grey hat of attacking or defending town]
-Sergeant
-Private [anyone who join battle get that rank, allowed to talk in fort chat]
-Reservist
4. Fort class:
This one is more a novelty than improvement:
Make fort class beside character class..
a)Sniper
b)Frontiersman
c)Riflemen
d)cavalrymen
a) Sniper: get 5% more hits but weaker defence (for players with high aim but low dodge)
b) Frontiersman: dodge 5% more hits but hit less (for high dodge but low aim)
c)Riflemen: Balance between hit/dodge, get 5% more health in battles
d) Cavalrymen: Move two sectors per round instead of two, more effective from close range
If there are any questions i would like to answer to them
DeletedUser
I think you've got enough there already to make each an idea. I don't have time to think about all of them atm, but the main problem I see with the first is that it seems like it would help the defenders more than the attackers and they don't need more help.
And a couple things on the ranking one: I don't see the need to change general at all. It doesn't feel right for defenders to have no generals and I don't really see a need to be able to promote someone to general. I think one more rank would suffice, either lieutenant or the sergeant that has been suggested a couple times.
And a couple things on the ranking one: I don't see the need to change general at all. It doesn't feel right for defenders to have no generals and I don't really see a need to be able to promote someone to general. I think one more rank would suffice, either lieutenant or the sergeant that has been suggested a couple times.
DeletedUser27863
of course some adjustements must be made. for example lower the tower and wall bonus, to balance it. just something to keep developing new strategies and thus keep game fun.
DeletedUser
Some variation in fort battles is greatly needed and long overdue. Unfortunately, the devs won't do this until the community steps up and demands it. 15kol I like your idea, but you should put it in proper form and post it as a new thread in the ideas and brainfarts forum section. Then we can discuss it more easily.
DeletedUser27863
yeah i'll do that
DeletedUser
Brainfarts is more for vague ideas that you aren't even sure should be suggested. Most ideas need some discussion and fine tuning, but it's easier to do that in their own thread.