Topics for discussion

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
These are the topics I have been using. Some aren't especially great for the current fort parameters, and other topics would be better but aren't on the list right now.

SPLIT Start | Tanks aim for North Wall | Advents aim for DT or AT
SPLIT start | East aim for AT and West aim for DT
SPLIT Start | Advents aim for North Wall | Tanks aim for DT or AT
SOUTH START, OFFLINE HP SET FOR INSIDE GATE SECTORS, DAMAGERS SET SOUTH WITH LOS ON ALL TOWERS
NORTH WEST/NORTH EAST SPLIT CORNER START, HP SET FOR NORTHWALL CENTRAL, DAMAGERS SET FOR SOUTH
Start South | Tanks aim outside the gate | Advents aim for ST or WT
Start South | Tanks aim outside the gate | Advents aim inside the gate
Start West | North aim for ST and South aim for AT
Start East | North aim for WT and South aim for DT


I would love to get feedback on which topics should be abandoned, which should be tweaked and what alternatives might be good to replace them with. I'd like to have at least 7 and at most 11 topics available.
 

szycopath

Well-Known Member
So Henry digs battles that have no leaders, sets up topic and then whoever steps up will have to adjust their tactics according to whatever the rng made Henry put up in the topic?
This is helping battles how exactly?
Disclaimer: not trying to be rude. Genuine interest
 

Caerdwyn

Well-Known Member
The format of the two that are all capitalized is better. It only uses FF roles, without the expectation that only one class can/will fill that role.

Similarly, the last two which only use Starting Tiles, is nearly as good. Those assume people will know where to Set from their Start or can intelligently conform to offlie moves.

What is the maximum number of characters you have available in a Topic?

Would it be possible for the very first person to sign up for a side be ranked as Captain and can then be allowed to make Sergeants and Privates?
 

Killer Bonnie

Well-Known Member
Split Start requires a lot of attendance If you are filling a large or medium Split start is great and even popular to do something different but with lower attendance it is not ideal You more want everyone between towers and focused

South start also is not that popular because of los from 3 or all 4 towers and you really want to have less los starting with between towers

East and West are fine. aiming DT and Wt and AT and ST respectively. This is most popular.
 

pero131

New Member
What about you force attackers to be more than defenders so you can actually use those tactics???

open registration for attack only and open defence later .
every single of those tactics is useles if attackers are 1/3 of defenders :)

if numbers aint close defenders can kill all attackers before round 30 :)

Btw i like all of the above except the ones you start south. too much los on 4 towers
SPLITS can be used if attackers have numbers as well so on the current battles are out for me
 

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
So Henry digs battles that have no leaders, sets up topic and then whoever steps up will have to adjust their tactics according to whatever the rng made Henry put up in the topic?
This is helping battles how exactly?
Disclaimer: not trying to be rude. Genuine interest
I figure it's better than NO topic... at least most people generally set to the topic so a leader who steps up has at least a sense of where most of the offies are going.

I would love to have John lead and give out ranks, but the fear of tickets complaining of bias is just too high for that so it remains forbidden.
 

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
The format of the two that are all capitalized is better. It only uses FF roles, without the expectation that only one class can/will fill that role.

Similarly, the last two which only use Starting Tiles, is nearly as good. Those assume people will know where to Set from their Start or can intelligently conform to offlie moves.

What is the maximum number of characters you have available in a Topic?

Would it be possible for the very first person to sign up for a side be ranked as Captain and can then be allowed to make Sergeants and Privates?

topics are limited 120 chars (including control chars)

I am only (unofficially) allowed to give a rank when its a "GM normal dig" (i.e. when a fort owner requests henry dig their fort)
 

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
What about you force attackers to be more than defenders so you can actually use those tactics???

open registration for attack only and open defence later .
every single of those tactics is useles if attackers are 1/3 of defenders :)

if numbers aint close defenders can kill all attackers before round 30 :)

Btw i like all of the above except the ones you start south. too much los on 4 towers
SPLITS can be used if attackers have numbers as well so on the current battles are out for me

I ran a test with using join restrictions (Which I considered rather successful) but then I ran a survey and few worlds were open to continue its use.

After the Independence even I may re-run the survey using the login survey tool to see if a more aggressive approach to seeking responses and/or experience of going back to the lopsided battles has changed opinions.

The Attacker/Defender bonus awards weren't especially effective relative to the effort of processing the rewards so I will only be using that approach sparingly.
 

Oddersfield

Well-Known Member
I am not really sure how to answer a perfectly good and sensible question! In fact I would suggest there really is no universally true answer to this - it all depends on circumstances.

I have been to some ffs and thought this Goober guy is crazy with these set instructions only to find out they worked spectacularly well: the same instructions were a disaster in another world shortly afterwards. Conversely, some set instructions strike me as eminently more sensible and turn out to be catastrophic. I do find it very difficult to isolate the real impact of a single factor in a ff when there are so many in play: number of fighters per side, HP distribution, damagers per side, how many actually set as directed, relative proportions active (rather than off-line or afk for the ff). The impact of these factors differs between attendances at ffs in my opinion.

For what it was worth, the best NPC ff I have been in was on Galveston when it was 9 v 9 (2 on-line defenders v 4 on-line attackers). It went to the last round and the last attacker got shot off the flag. Probably it was the anti-thesis of what a ff should really be, but very fluid and fought in good humor. Thankfully there were no offie tanks set to the flag and only one attacker set to the flag. People that play on Colorado would probably cringe at this given the slug-fests there. But darn, it was enjoyable - and that is what it should be about.
 

Caerdwyn

Well-Known Member
topics are limited 120 chars (including control chars)

I asked because some of the Topics under discussion seems so brief as to not cover all roles or classes (depending on which Topic is looked at). Using more of your available characters will make for a more helpful Topic.
 

NovaStar

Well-Known Member
Generally, when a topic is set... for the most part, advents are thought of mostly as tanks...so you are asking tanks to aim to point A, and advents (another subset of tanks) to set to point B...what about damagers:? They are being left out totally in most of the topics I've seen posted for these in the battles I've attended. Workers also have become so diversifed...some are tanks, some damagers. Just a suggestion (and someone please let me know if this doesn't make sense, it will help me...), but lately, I post only for offies, first of all (onliners can follow the lead to know what to do), so...offies, "hp to point A, and damagers to point B" this will include all classes that have HP and all classes that are skilled as damagers. So many are so diversified lately, that I find it confusing to point out specific classes anymore, but rather differentiate between HP and damagers (they know who they are, usually).

I just don't see how it makes sense to set a topic for tanks/advents only, leaving out the damagers and everyone else. I think they would be very confused, especially if they are offies.
 
Last edited:

Philopoimen

Member
I agree mostly with setting topic for HP and damagers. Advent HP is different because they ghost which makes them not ideal tanks, but they are great to block a sector or guard flag. So, setting topic for advents might be usefull sometimes, although I do that very rarely.

I agree with Oddersfield. Tactics is depending on many circumstances: total numbers, average level, age of world, available fort fighting sets, number of professional fort fighters, ratio of classes, etc. Because of that fort fights can be very different on every world. A tactic that works well on one world might lead to desaster in another.
 

Beefmeister

Well-Known Member
i appreciate the effort but there's no chance of winning any awesomia as long as they dont fix their stupid game, especially on split starts or setting north (actually this is debatable because advents independently have to set to block north and i've seen awesomias where they don't)

i usually specify where offline duelers should set so yeah should definitely mention that too

indeed a cap on defenders would probably make those battles better and they'd work without a leader. better than no battle
 

Alduin

Well-Known Member
These are the topics I have been using. Some aren't especially great for the current fort parameters, and other topics would be better but aren't on the list right now.

SPLIT Start | Tanks aim for North Wall | Advents aim for DT or AT
SPLIT start | East aim for AT and West aim for DT
SPLIT Start | Advents aim for North Wall | Tanks aim for DT or AT
SOUTH START, OFFLINE HP SET FOR INSIDE GATE SECTORS, DAMAGERS SET SOUTH WITH LOS ON ALL TOWERS
NORTH WEST/NORTH EAST SPLIT CORNER START, HP SET FOR NORTHWALL CENTRAL, DAMAGERS SET FOR SOUTH
Start South | Tanks aim outside the gate | Advents aim for ST or WT
Start South | Tanks aim outside the gate | Advents aim inside the gate
Start West | North aim for ST and South aim for AT
Start East | North aim for WT and South aim for DT


I would love to get feedback on which topics should be abandoned, which should be tweaked and what alternatives might be good to replace them with. I'd like to have at least 7 and at most 11 topics available.


appreciate your effort but last awesomia battle had 19 attackers vs 58 defenders. had to wake up early and move my toon for this battle. spent %25 hp buff to earn 45. on normal time it might be worth for bonds but 45 bonds isnt worth waking up early for such stupid and unbalanced battle.
 

szycopath

Well-Known Member
I figure it's better than NO topic... at least most people generally set to the topic so a leader who steps up has at least a sense of where most of the offies are going.

I would love to have John lead and give out ranks, but the fear of tickets complaining of bias is just too high for that so it remains forbidden.
What bias? Can give the same rank to everyone, battles are... awesomia. Not sure what bias it is you're saying
People are gonna open tickets and complain about literally anything. Or everything. I can go and open a ticket and complain why NPC digs are without lead and/or ranks. Might as well open a ticket and complain that I don't have a dodge challenger. Apparently opening tickets and complaining is all one needs to get what they want these days
 

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
i appreciate the effort but there's no chance of winning any awesomia as long as they dont fix their stupid game, especially on split starts or setting north (actually this is debatable because advents independently have to set to block north and i've seen awesomias where they don't)

i usually specify where offline duelers should set so yeah should definitely mention that too

indeed a cap on defenders would probably make those battles better and they'd work without a leader. better than no battle
yeah, when the full round the clock series is complete the next non-event series will explore some other interventions.

The problem with caps is people not getting in and missing out on the reward (and complaining about it...)
 

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
What bias? Can give the same rank to everyone, battles are... awesomia. Not sure what bias it is you're saying
People are gonna open tickets and complain about literally anything. Or everything. I can go and open a ticket and complain why NPC digs are without lead and/or ranks. Might as well open a ticket and complain that I don't have a dodge challenger. Apparently opening tickets and complaining is all one needs to get what they want these days

well, yeah, completely agree...

ultimately it's one of the objective measures about trying something new in a given market and as much good will as I've earned, It's not enough to get this one approved (yet? ... I'm still holding out hope I can get it approved at some point [along with some Foalys that join at the last minute on the weaker side on occasion)
 

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
proposed replacement:

17% -- Start South | Damagers to ST7/WT9; tanks to ST3/WT1 Advents set on gate
17% -- Start West | North aim for ST and South aim for AT, tanks to points, damagers to blinds
17% -- Start West | ALL aim for AT tanks to points, damagers to blinds
17% -- Start East | North aim for WT and South aim for DT, tanks to points, damagers to blinds
17% -- Start East | ALL aim for DT tanks to points, damagers to blinds
5% -- Start South | Damagers to south center medium rest set flag
5% -- Start West | Advents set on gate Damagers to south center medium rest set flag
5% -- Start East | Advents set on gate Damagers to south center medium rest set flag
 
Last edited:
Top