Wars attacks tactics and more

DeletedUser

sorry for the long title but i could not possibly figure a way to sum up my idea in a single word.
also sorry for the long post that's about to follow. however, if you like reading, then grab a cup of coffee and something to smoke (depending on age and legislation) and go on.

basic info:
at the moment the game has several gameplay problems that become more obvious as you advance. workers become useless for their town once they finished building it. town interaction is at an all time low. and high level grinding is boring everybody to death.

suggestion description:

to make things more dynamic i'm suggesting town attacks. yeah yeah, it's been suggested a million times. i know, but this one is different :D

each town will be able to create a team of 10 people carefully selected in a specific order (will detail later the reason why) from a menu available to the town mayor.
these 10 people can be sent to attack other towns and they can have 2 types of orders:
1. robbing - where they try to rob money from the town safe
2. arsoning - where they try to burn down buildings from the targeted town

the battle itself will take place between the teams of each town. basicaly 10 duels 1v1. the duels are carried automatically and the pairs are done based on the order decided by the mayors when they made the list (this is the explanation i promised earlier). so the first guy in the attackers list will battle the first one in the defenders list and so on.

each agressor will be able to steal 100$ or demolish 100 points depending on the type of attack selected. (so a total of 100$ and 1000 points in the best case scenario).
the buildings affected by the arsoning attack will be selected randomly but there will be some small limitations:
1. church, saloon and post office can't be attacked ( we do want people to pray receive telegrams and do missions)
2. mortician (to prevent bugs like having somebody order a duel and then lose his mortician. who knows what crap might happen)
3. bank can only be demolished to level 1 (preventing bugs)
4. residences can't be demolished at all (if more people reside in a town than the max allowed by the residences (ie 50 people with lvl 7 residences) then a weird bug happens where you can send unlimited invitations but nobody joins)

the total $ stolen and the total of buildings destroyed will be calculated depending on the results of the 10 individual duels. so basically if the attackers win 6 duels then they will get 600$ or destroy 600 points worth of buildings.

aside from deciding the attacking/defending list the mayor will be the only one that can send such attacks.
also the mayor will be the only one that will know when an attack will happen against his town. then he can quickly talk to the other town members and tell them to get equipped and decide who to put on the defending list based on who's better prepared (health points, weapon, clothes, etc)

if the list is not full (the mayor added only 7 people) or if some of the people on the list are currently dead for 48 hours then they will lose those duels. let's say that there are just 7 people on the list and 3 of those people are dead (and thus can't be dueled) then the open positions and the dead positions will lose (of course if the attacking list is valid)

also the attackers on the attacking list will have to be able to duel (not dead and have enough energy)

if for some strange reason the defending team will consist of players that a too damn weak to be attacked (low level compared to the attackers) then the attackers will be considered winners without the actual duels taking place (to avoid getting 10 greenhorns for your town and use them as defense)

to avoid abuse a limiting system (similar to the duel limits) will be imposed and you can't attack a town that's too big or too small and also a limit of 1 (or maybe more) attack(s) per day will have to be implemented.

optionally to further enhance the idea several class limitations can be implemented
1. only workers can construct/repair buildings (this will also prevent stupid soldiers wasting town money by building something)
2. only soldiers can be used for the defensive team
3. only duelers can be used for the attacking team

also special buildings could appear solely for such confrontations:
1. fortifications. defensive role. gives a bonus to dodging reflex and toughness - does not affect regular duels.
2. ammo depot. offensive role. extra damage for the attack team - does not affect regular duels.these 2 buildings could act as a prerequisite for engaging in town wars. in other words if you don't want to battle don't build them and you won't be able to attack or be attacked.


Advantajes:

1. game becomes more dynamic and people interact more
2. workers are no longer useless for a maxed out town
3. towns will require all classes of players (workers for building, soldiers to defend, duelers to attack, adventurers to get money)
4. diplomacy and alliances will become very important. sending coordinated attacks from several towns will be a great tactic.
5. the mayor becomes more important (as it should)
6. players in the same town will have to communicate more to coordinate their attacks and plan the defense
7. full grown towns will finally have a way to increase their rank by simply attacking other full grown towns to take their place
8. more fun

Disadvantages:
1. probably the game will be a bit more complex than some people might want it to be

Mini FAQ:

Q. Oh no, my little town will be destroyed by big town bullies!!!
A. actually there will be an attacking limit similar to the current duelling limit where no attack is possible if the difference is too big

Q. I'm in a peacefull town with many builders and we don't have any protection. i'm afraid the next time i log in my town will be destroyed
A. actually that's not possible. with a limit of 1 attack per day and a max of 1000 damage points it would take roughly one month to destroy a town (and you won't even destroy it completely). so unless you actually want your town destroyed and do not bother repairing anything for one whole month your town won't disappear

Q. Can't this be abused to destroy your last level of tailor if you don't like your randomly picked clothes?
A. In theory it can but in practice it is almost impossible. The damage is chosen randomly so let's say you want to get rid of your level 10 tailor and ask somebody to attack you, they might actually hit your lvl 10 general store and you lose those items that you had there. or it might actually hit your bank and leave you with a few thousand dollars just waiting to be robbed. also the ammount of possibilities and outcomes could lead to somewhere over 50-60 attacks before you might actually manage to get waht you want in all the stores and not only that means 2 months of constant attacks but it also means thousands of dollars spent on rebuilding and the best part is that after these 2 months you might get some random attacks that once again destroy your shops and you'll have to restart the process all over again.

PS: my first post here is a long one (so i probably bored to death a lot of folks) and i already advised people to drink and smoke (so i pissed off most of the remaining ones). hopefully at least some people will think nicely of me :p

PPS: sorry if my english might seem sluggish. it's not my native language and on top of that it's 4.33 am here so some of my brain cells have already gone to sleep while others have gone on strike because of overtime
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Premature. Let's wait and see what happens with forts and shootouts as far as wars between towns goes before we try to come up with different systems.
 

DeletedUser

Premature. Let's wait and see what happens with forts and shootouts as far as wars between towns goes before we try to come up with different systems.


forts and shootouts are still a looooooong way from being implemented and they could be mixed with this idea. (also they aren't even finalised yet so besides the actual implementing they need more work put into carefully thinking them out, so this suggestion might actually help those 2 you mentioned by adding new thoughts)

also let's please stick to this idea only and not involve any others to sidetrack the discussions.
 

DeletedUser

Well then I vote no. I want to see what the forts/shootouts do. If forts/shootouts are a long way from being implemented and its something they've been planning on doing for awhile I don't see how this idea will get implemented first. Plus you can't really say it can be mixed with those ideas when you don't know what those ideas are.

Edit - but if they weren't going to implement forts/shootouts I would want to consider this idea.
 

DeletedUser

Well then I vote no. I want to see what the forts/shootouts do. If forts/shootouts are a long way from being implemented and its something they've been planning on doing for awhile I don't see how this idea will get implemented first. Plus you can't really say it can be mixed with those ideas when you don't know what those ideas are.

Edit - but if they weren't going to implement forts/shootouts I would want to consider this idea.

this is harder than i thought. :mad:

look, forget about the forts and shootouts for a moment you guys don't know what they are and when and if they will ever be implemented. it's not a sure thing and it's not detailed yet. probably some of the people that are playing now will have quit this game before those get implemented.

i'm an admin for this game on the romanian server. there we are trying to get the game to become more dynamic by organizing a duel tournament with leagues and stuff.

i'm serious about dynamizing this game and i'm here to gather more opinions not to argue about shootouts and forts so please forget about that and focus on the suggestion presented above.
 

DeletedUser

If forts and shootouts are a long way off, what makes you think this would be quicker to implement?
 

DeletedUser

If forts and shootouts are a long way off, what makes you think this would be quicker to implement?

you truly aren't cooperating here :unsure:

fine, here's a list of reasons:
1. if this is worked out properly it could be better than forts and shootouts and replace it
2. this suggestion could nudge the devs into the right direction by giving them ideas for the forts and shootouts
3. it could also become a part of the forts and shootouts
4. it might be much more simple to implement.
5. it has different effects than the forts and shootouts by also addressing other issues (ie, the useless workers in maxed out towns)
6. it can be implemented with very little change (assuming we leave aside the optional buildings and class limitations)
 

DeletedUser

1. you have no idea what forts and shootouts will be like. they could be far superior to your suggestion
2. see #1
3. see #1
4. might be? see #1
5. see #1
6. so? see #1
 

DeletedUser

How will this solve the problem of all those maxed out towns with money in their treasuries that they can't spend? Forts address that.
 

DeletedUser

1. you have no idea what forts and shootouts will be like. they could be far superior to your suggestion
2. see #1
3. see #1
4. might be? see #1
5. see #1
6. so? see #1

i'm an admin for the west game on the romanian server so i do know some things.
aside from this you have no idea what forts and shootouts will be like and you're basically simply dismissing a detailed suggestion (mine) for one that you have no clue if it will ever be implemented and if it will you still have no clue what it will be like.

it's like saying we don't accept any more suggestions until the next update because we don't know what it will bring and for some strange reason we can't discuss anything until then. if that's your reasonig then i'm trully hoping you're a singular case because otherwise this whole area of the forum would be pointless. we would just wait and see what comes without suggesting anything.


How will this solve the problem of all those maxed out towns with money in their treasuries that they can't spend? Forts address that.

please read my suggestion carefully.

hint: workers need to repair buildings and that needs money. new buildings that i suggested will also require money



please at least be kind to read first before pointlessly pointing out useless stuff
 

DeletedUser

Well great. If you are an admin on the romanian server go suggest it there where you have some weight to throw around.

Pass on this idea. But you promote as much as you want. It's just pointless at this stage.
 

DeletedUser

Well great. If you are an admin on the romanian server go suggest it there where you have some weight to throw around.

Pass on this idea. But you promote as much as you want. It's just pointless at this stage.

already posted it there. but i'm trying to get as much constructive input as possible in order to improve it.

different communities means different views and definitely more opinions.
 

DeletedUser

es, I read it. Forts are money sinks. Damage to buildings in warfare is the equivalent of the always hated weapon wear and tear suggestions but it happens to the buildings of the towns themselves. I don't see that going over any better than weapon wear and tear. It just adds another annoyance factor that I really don't expect people to embrace. When they've maxed out their town, people want something else to do, not scramble to keep from losing what they've built.
 

DeletedUser

es, I read it. Forts are money sinks. Damage to buildings in warfare is the equivalent of the always hated weapon wear and tear suggestions but it happens to the buildings of the towns themselves. I don't see that going over any better than weapon wear and tear. It just adds another annoyance factor that I really don't expect people to embrace. When they've maxed out their town, people want something else to do, not scramble to keep from losing what they've built.

if i'm not mistaking the expression "money sinks" means "a way to waste money". pardon if i'm wrong, as i explained before english is not my main language.

but if i'm right i don't see how one is different than the other. both suggestion address the problem of spending money and giving people in maxed out towns something to do.

and please don't compare the weapon wear and tear suggestion to this one. they are totally different and affect a whole other type of players.
weapons wear and tear is a passive feature that basically takes your money without any influence from you and at all levels. so it affects both greenhorns and veterans. while my suggestion only affects moderately high players where money is actually abundant (not like the greenhorns) and most importantly it affects them only in an active manner they get to duel rob and arson they don't sit around while their buildings crumble to dust.

again, please read (or reread) my suggestion and post something accurate not pointless stuff just for the sake of arguing
 

DeletedUser

Well here is why I don't like it then. I can see a maxed out town that ends up having a beef with a town that isn't as strong as they are. So the maxed out town goes and pretty much demolishes the other town. One of those "join us or else' scenarios. Only good for empire building and bullying.

People will leave the game in droves if they see all their hard work being torn down by some 16 year old kid with a Napoleon complex. No thank you. I think the devs would like to keep the players they have, not drive them away.
 

DeletedUser

Well here is why I don't like it then. I can see a maxed out town that ends up having a beef with a town that isn't as strong as they are. So the maxed out town goes and pretty much demolishes the other town. One of those "join us or else' scenarios. Only good for empire building and bullying.

People will leave the game in droves if they see all their hard work being torn down by some 16 year old kid with a Napoleon complex. No thank you. I think the devs would like to keep the players they have, not drive them away.


look, i know it's a long text and you probably haven't read it completely but please do so before finding imaginary problems. here's a quote that solves the issue you posted:

to avoid abuse a limiting system (similar to the duel limits) will be imposed and you can't attack a town that's too big or too small and also a limit of 1 (or maybe more) attack(s) per day will have to be implemented.
 

DeletedUser

It still doesn't solve the bully problem. Lots of towns have one town where their fighters are and one for their builders and adventurers with just a few fighters. Nothing to stop a strong military town from destroying the weaker town. It happens, it will happen, and it shouldn't happen. People already complain about individual dueling and how unfair it is, you put it town wide to destroy what they have built you will see the game die.
 

DeletedUser

It still doesn't solve the bully problem. Lots of towns have one town where their fighters are and one for their builders and adventurers with just a few fighters. Nothing to stop a strong military town from destroying the weaker town. It happens, it will happen, and it shouldn't happen. People already complain about individual dueling and how unfair it is, you put it town wide to destroy what they have built you will see the game die.

well then they should probably put 10 soldiers in one town and 10 in the other instead of keeping their defenses gathered in one place.

also, assuming you lose the maximum possible (1000 points per day) you still won't get totally destroyed because if you do have a town full of builders and adventurers (as you said) then you can simply repair your buildings until the next attack.

so a total destruction would actually be possible if:
1. the members have no idea how to play and they lack the intelligence to send defenses in the attacked town
2. the members are complete morons and don't repair their buildings for a whole month of daily attacks (the amount of time it would take to destroy a town by attacking it daily and winning each and every duel)

also really total destruction would be impossible as i already explained how some buildings are protected.

again, pleas no more imaginary problems. find real flaws and possibly offer a way to correct them (if you find them of course).
what you're doing now is simply having a negative attitude and trying to reject my proposal without any solid arguments.

find something real and i shall appreciate it. honestly i do appreciate constructive criticism.... not pointless mindless criticism.
 

DeletedUser

These aren't imaginary problems. Some people don't want to interract with everyone in their town. Most people won't want to see their town demolished at all. Now you are telling towns how they have to distribute their membership. Some towns set up a town and then have a 'sheriffs town' where they keep their military. They like it that way. If one of the criteria for being able to protect your town effectively is being able to coordinate mass amounts of people then it will fail. The town the communicates the best wins? No thank you.

If you don't want anyone's opinions then keep your ideas to yourself. Obviously only the people that are going to give you a thumbs up are welcome. You have problems with your idea, your idea is irrelevant because you are talking about improving, adding onto, or replacing something that hasn't been implemented yet.

It's like a 16 year old girl going out and buying a bunch of pink baby clothes because some day she wants to have children. She doesn't know when its going to happen or even if it will be a girl...but hey, lets prepare anyways.
 

Diggo11

Well-Known Member
i'm an admin for the west game on the romanian server so i do know some things.
aside from this you have no idea what forts and shootouts will be like and you're basically simply dismissing a detailed suggestion (mine) for one that you have no clue if it will ever be implemented and if it will you still have no clue what it will be like.

it's like saying we don't accept any more suggestions until the next update because we don't know what it will bring and for some strange reason we can't discuss anything until then. if that's your reasonig then i'm trully hoping you're a singular case because otherwise this whole area of the forum would be pointless. we would just wait and see what comes without suggesting anything.
So you are assuming that what you know is the entire plan, how foolish! Besides if you are going to say "I'm an admin and know all this and you don't" then why bother telling us? We can't have a discussion about things you know as we are not mind readers. And about the last paragraph - there is a difference between an update to existing aspects and an entirely new element to the game!

please read my suggestion carefully... please at least be kind to read first before pointlessly pointing out useless stuff
The developers could say the same about you pointing out how you want everything to work before they announce their idea.
 
Top