Welcome to the Achaea Forums! Please be sure to read the Forum Rules.

City destruction changes

1356710

Comments

  • AnedhelAnedhel Member Posts: 2,367 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    You people (admins) are my heroes.

    I love you.
  • DecanDecan Member Posts: 112 ✭✭ - Stalwart
    So if raiders come to start a sanctioned raid, and no one shows up to defend, meaning no one dies in the allotted timeframe, does this mean there is no other way to start a sanctioned raid?

    What stops a city from refusing to participate in a raid with the intention of not supplying the body count needed to sanction?


    image
  • AchillesAchilles Los AngelesMember Posts: 2,516 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    I think they lose the one room they started.  The new system likely favors a few classes who can navigate around a city and assassinate a few key people but that's no difference than how it was before.
    image
  • MakariosMakarios Administrator Posts: 1,861 Achaean staff

    Few things, really.

    If you let them start a sanctioned raid then ignore them, they're guaranteed to get one room.

    If you don't let them sanction a raid, they'll probably do what Achaeans do and sit in your city being a nusense killing guards and smudging all your totems until you do. You technically can do a "we just won't defend", but it won't be practical for the same reasons it hasn't been in the past.

  • AnedhelAnedhel Member Posts: 2,367 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Also, if you don't defend yourself, you'll probably get called wimpy!
  • DecanDecan Member Posts: 112 ✭✭ - Stalwart
    edited November 2013
    Two things: 

    1. Hashan is already called wimpy

    2. Hashan would rather let you smudge totems then let you blow up buildings which could cost exponentially more.


    One other thing would be to consider the price of guards versus the price of them tanking your city. If the cost repair exceeds the cost of guards (totem cost is negligible) then why would you want to defend? So: IF (Loss of life + loss of exp + Price of repair) > cost of guards THEN "yell We arnt comming out to play" ELSE "Shoot meteor at target" END

    image
  • AnedhelAnedhel Member Posts: 2,367 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    No loss of experience once a sanction goes through, for one.

    Range changes make it nearly impossible to defend your City without moving, unless your attackers are dumb and attack from an inconvenient position.

    If everyone in your City'd rather bail than stick around to defend it, you should probably look at why you even have a City. If there's nothing worth protecting, what's the point of being part of it?
    VayneAlcinaeKyrraHalos
  • YiwenYiwen Member Posts: 73 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    Market areas bout to get blowed up
  • MizikMizik Member Posts: 2,096 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Holy shit, that's great.
    image
  • VayneVayne Rhode IslandMember Posts: 1,897 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Decan said:
    Two things: 

    1. Hashan is already called wimpy

    2. Hashan would rather let you smudge totems then let you blow up buildings which could cost exponentially more.


    One other thing would be to consider the price of guards versus the price of them tanking your city. If the cost repair exceeds the cost of guards (totem cost is negligible) then why would you want to defend? So: IF (Loss of life + loss of exp + Price of repair) > cost of guards THEN "yell We arnt comming out to play" ELSE "Shoot meteor at target" END

    Hashan better suck it up or get demolished.
    image
    ArditiAlcinaeHaldon
  • AnedhelAnedhel Member Posts: 2,367 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Just thought of something. It's too easy to defend by just not recruiting people. Your deaths don't count, and booting the enemies makes the timer go down.

    I propose non-soldier citizens DO lose exp inside City even during the sanction. Else it gets a little ridiculous. Want to defend? Enlist. Don't want to? Gtfo.
  • AlcinaeAlcinae AFKMember Posts: 627 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    Anedhel said:
    Just thought of something. It's too easy to defend by just not recruiting people. Your deaths don't count, and booting the enemies makes the timer go down.

    I propose non-soldier citizens DO lose exp inside City even during the sanction. Else it gets a little ridiculous. Want to defend? Enlist. Don't want to? Gtfo.
    Could work, although I wonder what will happen in times of war when every soldier is pretty much fair game. :\
    image
  • AnedhelAnedhel Member Posts: 2,367 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited November 2013
    Life's a bitch! :D

    ETA: It might put pressure on states not to go to war so quickly, and to end them more decisively/swiftly. That's a good thing.
  • KinilanKinilan Member, Seafaring Liason Posts: 1,255 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Anedhel said:
    Life's a bitch! :D

    ETA: It might put pressure on states not to go to war so quickly, and to end them more decisively/swiftly. That's a good thing.
    Because the war system gets used SOOOOOO much.
  • SilasSilas Member Posts: 2,544 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Never using the war system is a surefire way to ensure it doesn't get improved. I'm pretty sure the city leaders of the major aggressors understand that, thankfully.

    There's discussion already about penalising cities for not keeping an active standing military if that becomes a problem, so I wouldn't worry too much. Admins seem to be well on top of monitoring this system, so I'm looking forward to seeing how it pans out, and where it can be expanded.

    Rinzai
  • CooperCooper IowaMember Posts: 5,074 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Make it so if you aren't in the military you can't perform aggressive actions inside the city. Gg.

  • CooperCooper IowaMember Posts: 5,074 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    That log was obviously fabricated. I cite no timestamps and extreme amounts of endurance and willpower for the health and mana levels.

  • DecanDecan Member Posts: 112 ✭✭ - Stalwart
    Vayne said:
    Decan said:
    Two things: 

    1. Hashan is already called wimpy

    2. Hashan would rather let you smudge totems then let you blow up buildings which could cost exponentially more.


    One other thing would be to consider the price of guards versus the price of them tanking your city. If the cost repair exceeds the cost of guards (totem cost is negligible) then why would you want to defend? So: IF (Loss of life + loss of exp + Price of repair) > cost of guards THEN "yell We arnt comming out to play" ELSE "Shoot meteor at target" END

    Hashan better suck it up or get demolished.
    ... Actually I think its more like "Hashan better not try to defend, else it will get demolished"

    See before you had to defend else they would just demolish the city. Now, only by defending will they be able to demolish the city. Or you will expel them triumphantly. Ill leave you to guess which one Hashan is more likely to experience.

    image
  • AnedhelAnedhel Member Posts: 2,367 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Okay. So no one will raid Hashan, and Hashan won't defend itself. Just like now. No harm, no foul, right?
  • SilasSilas Member Posts: 2,544 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Anedhel said:
    Okay. So no one will raid Hashan, and Hashan won't defend itself. Just like now. No harm, no foul, right?
    ;))

    Decan
  • EnraiEnrai Member Posts: 52 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    So, the Decan solution to war is to just let the enemy come live in your home for as long as they want, whenever they want.

    Hashan is France then?
    ----------
    I play  -Enrai-  -Luhar-
    HaldonKaitaliJonathin
  • DecanDecan Member Posts: 112 ✭✭ - Stalwart
    edited November 2013
    Enrai said:
    So, the Decan solution to war is to just let the enemy come live in your home for as long as they want, whenever they want. Hashan is France then?
    No, my solution to war is to have it work almost exactly like devotion shrines did back in the 'good ole days'. While I do like the idea of city destruction, there is still no "winning point". Meaning: After said destruction is complete, what makes the Raiders leave if they decide boredom isnt an option? 

    I cant see why a group who just Level 3 tanked a city in LoS all around would leave after that, unless they were being nice (@Mhaldor, @Ashtan). I'd speculate after that sort of damage, its time to clean up and start implanting your faction's totems, and killing off guards, renaming the city, etc.

    I also cant see why defenders would give the Raiders a chance to have a tank at all unless they were so ignorant to the system that the minions (defenders) fed the Raiders (AchaeaLoL). But lets say it does happen. So either the defenders defend so hard they help blow up their own city and lose exp in the process. Or they win.

    Examine the two options: Defend and help blow up city. Or win.

    Examine the rewards/penalties of either option: No rewards, city exploded, exp lost, possible guards/totems loss. OR Moderate exp gain.

    At minimum, if the defenders decided not to participate, the only penalty is possible guards/totem loss. If the defending party does not stand a fighting chance or do not have the numbers to compete then defending only will lead to a blown up city. At this point its obvious I think that needs to be changed because it gives the underdog no chance to win, and no reason to try.
    Post edited by Decan on
    image
  • HasarHasar Member Posts: 795 @ - Epic Achaean
    Who is @Decan.

    DecanHalos
  • EnraiEnrai Member Posts: 52 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    How long does it take for defenders to deactivate the tank? Presumably a few minutes - long enough for raiders to come back and defend their tank?

    If the defenders, who won't be losing xp for long, have few enough soldiers that they can't reliably confront the attackers, the diminishing effects of their death on the power of the tank should stop it from going crazy huge, unless there's Carmain level suicide rushing.

    Regarding why a force would withdraw after a successful attack, the defenders' font being empowered should generally encourage departure. Plus, I like to think most people aren't trying to be dicks.
    ----------
    I play  -Enrai-  -Luhar-
  • DecanDecan Member Posts: 112 ✭✭ - Stalwart
    edited November 2013
    Enrai said:
    How long does it take for defenders to deactivate the tank? Presumably a few minutes - long enough for raiders to come back and defend their tank?

    Presumably, yes. However, raiders are not likely to leave their tank unless they have been expelled already and the threat is over.

    If the defenders, who won't be losing xp for long, have few enough soldiers that they can't reliably confront the attackers, the diminishing effects of their death on the power of the tank should stop it from going crazy huge, unless there's Carmain level suicide rushing.

    True, but then no one will get L3 tank at all making it pointless. Most defense leaders realize if they have fed the thing enough to get to L2, trying again will probably help it to 3 so its not worth it.

     Regarding why a force would withdraw after a successful attack, the defenders' font being empowered should generally encourage departure. Plus, I like to think most people aren't trying to be dicks.

    I like to think that too. But actually being able to declare a 'winning objective' outside of 'do the most damage' is better. Sadly, though wars in RL result in annexation or extermination, neither of which is viable in Achaea. Territory is more so, and can be done individually as well as communally. Which is why I again bring up the old devotion shrine war as an example. the shrine (or flag in this case?) is placed and given certain benefits to its allies in x ammount of rooms, if each side could plant and uproot flags, defence lines can be made and the war can actually be waged outside of cities. Segregating non-comms and combatants. Heck, if the flag territory is pushed back to the city entrances then they can be tanked, and then it can be done so you could get a L3 because of the loss of the 'front lines'. Just a thought.
    image
  • MilenkaMilenka EuropeMember Posts: 28 ✭✭ - Stalwart
    Did anyone try the font out yet?

       - DECAY  : Influence the very fabric of time, reducing the life of any persistent room effects such as devotional rites, crystalline vibrations, necromantic hands of the grave, and a bard's harmonics. -> Does this only affect the attackers' room effects or all?

  • ExelethrilExelethril Member Posts: 3,351 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Rinzai brought this idea up, since Arena tells are barely/rarely used and the current syntax is "AT <message>" - would "AT <message>" be better utilized for Army tells instead?

    Just for the sake of convenience, since "ArmyTell <message>" seems awfully long for a channel that might have a lot more use in the future. Or, have their roles reversed instead - "AT <message>" for Army tells and "ArenaTell <message>" for Arena tells.

    [ SnB PvP Guide | Link ]

    [ Runewarden Sparring Videos | Link ]
    AradorIsaiahDecan
  • SilasSilas Member Posts: 2,544 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    It's ART now.

    Exelethril
  • MelodieMelodie Port Saint Lucie, FloridaMember Posts: 5,038 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    The Scarlattans will be giggling for the next decade or so.

    So are most of the Cyrenians, really.
               My wing tips waltz across naive
                     Wood floors they creak
                  Innocently down the stairs

                          Drag melody
    My percussive feet serve cobweb headaches as a
              Matching set of marching clocks
                The slumbering apparitions
              That they've come to wake up
    NimShirszaeArianis
Sign In to Comment.