Topic: give some bonus to the defender?

teppo wrote:

hessenfarmer wrote:

I can't but defenders have shorter way home to their buildings and this should make for a slight advantage

Defenders on field do not go home to heal, after losing many HPs.

I think you mix up something, because this is not correct...

Attackers do.

hessenfarmer wrote:

First I would start to heal all soldiers in a building simultaneous, because that should be the easiest to implement

At which healing rate? Castles could become to hard to defeat then. I'm against it. At least players should chose if they want to play this new system or the normal system.

teppo wrote:

I propose letting soldiers heal inside their borders even when outside military buildings. THe major problem for defender is that most soldiers will rush out to face an attack, and will not heal while they are there. So by attacking with one soldier at a time it is possible to stop a player from healing most of its soldiers. If those soldiers could heal at a slow rate even while outside a military building, that would help compensate this disadvantage.

I think that the building under attack should not send out any soldiers.

I'm against that. It can also be an advantage. For example, look at a single building full of heroes which gets attacked by a giant number of much weaker soldiers. Then it's very useful that the heroes swarm out. If not, the only defender at the doorstep will be swarmed and often hold back when he tries to retreat, so he might die.

There is already a way to achieve that defenders stay in the building: Building directly at the border.

So it might be better if it would be optional if defenders always stay in the building.

In addition, the algorithm that picks the soldier that chooses the next defender could be more intelligent, and could have a knowledge of the attacking soldier, and tune the decision based on that.

+1

king_of_nowhere wrote:

I have refined my idea.

I was considering how clunky it is that military buildings only heal one soldier at a time, but i would usggest all soldiers are healed simultaneously outside of them.

Why is that clunky? One could say that every building has just one healer, who can only work inside the building.

kaputtnik wrote:

From my point of view it is very strange that a fully promoted soldier will win a fight against an none promoted soldier with a few hits.

Why? Isn't that rather realistic?

king_of_nowhere wrote:

In order to reach a stable equilibrium, it must be easier to defend than to attack. otherwise, as soon as contact is made, the two players are going to rush each other and the game ends immediately, and I think most people don't want that kind of game.

I disagree. For example, if both players have exactly one supersoldier (and if they are thinking that), they might not risk to lose him by attacking, so it's rather a stalemate situation.

And even if two players are rushing each other, the game doesn't end immediately. For example it can happen that both lose almost all soldiers, so they have to build up an economy.

And yet the defender has very little benefits in this game. the situation is made worst by the new trunk, where the attacker can handpick the attacking soldiers - meaning he can choose to let woounded soldiers stay to heal, while the defender won't be able to do that. with that change, I think attacker has full advantage, and there simply is no sound strategic reason for at least one player to not attack as soon as possible.

Even not the one which I mentioned above?

So I think, to promote stability we should give some help to the defender. Not really sure about what, though.

The defenders already heal in their buildings, this might be enough.

One possible way is to give a slight power bonus to soldiers ffighting in their borders. I don't really like that much, though.

I propose letting soldiers heal inside their borders even when outside military buildings. THe major problem for defender is that most soldiers will rush out to face an attack, and will not heal while they are there.

One could make this rushing optional. Currently it is useful if one wants that an attacking supersoldier gets surrounded.

So by attacking with one soldier at a time it is possible to stop a player from healing most of its soldiers. If those soldiers could heal at a slow rate even while outside a military building, that would help compensate this disadvantage.

The defending soldiers could be always showed in their building, and one could create an option like "tell defender to return into the building now".

Another problem related to defence is that you have no control over the soldiers that come out. Sometimes the rookies go out, leaving your hero inside to gather dust. Sometimes your heroes come out leaving the rookie behind, and you lose a castle to the lone enemy soldier that manage to walk to it. To fix that, we could give the player the chance to select which soldier will always stay inside until the enemy knocks at the door. it could be selected for any military building.

This might be a good change

regardless of what you think of those proposals, I think we need to find some small advantage to give the defender so that the game will revolve in an economical challlenge instead of a rush.

On bigger maps, it is an economical challenge, on small maps one can play rushes. Good system, would be a pity to lose the possibility to rush at small maps...

Wanted to save the world, then I got widetracked

Top

Quote

In Settlers2 there was an option-window where one could set the parameters of the algorithm that selects the defenders. It contained some slider bars for - I guess - number of soldiers sent out by attacked building, number of soldiers sent out by other buildings, strength of selected defenders. Another parameter could be the distance, that has to be undercut by an attacking soldier before a building sends out defenders. With those decisions given to the player, the algorithm itself would not need to be very intelligent.

Other idea: WorldSavior mentioned a healer in his argumentation. Maybe the soldiers could regenerate simultaneously inside the military building at a very slow rate (they help each other or just sleep a bit) and one soldier is healed by the healer (faster). The player might have the option to send the healer out, so he/she heals one defender near this military building (maybe use some medicine or healing herbs for that)

Top

Quote

We must be careful, not fully strengthen the defensive player, cause this might lead to neverending games!

Maybe we should make one building you cannot attack till 1 hour / till you build Lager / or the best way i think: make recruiting in the first steps much cheaper and faster and the latest steps much more expensive

Top

Quote

Why would one have to set parameters like those for each building individual? I guess one global setting would succeed, because if there is fighting going on, the player focuses on that and can control his/her defense by those slider bars. This would not affect other buildings within the peaceful part of the territory. Settings for individual buildings would not make much sense because they would cause even more work for the player than releasing the defending soldiers manually at all.

The possibility to release a healer was my idea to implement king_of_nowhere's idea of healing all soldiers within friendly territory or within a specific range of a military building. I think it would not necessarily be too overpowered, because as long as the healer is outside, he/she cannot heal soldiers inside the building. A player who releases a healer would lose a lot of potentially regenerated hitpoints just to have one soldier being healed outside. Of course the healer would have to go back inside after each healed soldier. Disinfect equipment, paperwork, powernapping...

Top

Quote

This would be similar in effect to a territory bonus.

How about we start with leaving the soldiers inside the attacked building and get this into trunk, then see from playing experience if more needs to be done?

Busy indexing nil values

Top

Quote