Topic: give some bonus to the defender?
hessenfarmer |
Posted at: 2019-07-09, 18:23
I don't think so, cause not the territory is the input for the bonus but the soldiers stationed in the territory. So if there are no soldiers (or maybe Military Buildings) in a radius of perhaps 17 no bonus is given.
This is not always desirable as pointed out by Worldsavior Top Quote |
hessenfarmer |
Posted at: 2019-07-09, 21:44
did some calcualtions. Defence value can't be used as results are to tribe specific. But evade could be used (5% evade bonus reduces chance for the attacker by around 10%) Edited: 2019-07-09, 21:44
Top Quote |
king_of_nowhere Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2019-07-09, 22:57
Isn't evade also specific to the training level? give 5% more evade to a barbarian rookie, he'll be hit 7% less times (chances to hit drop from 75% to 70%). Give that to an atlantean hero, going from 36% chance to be hit to 31% is a 14% net reduction in chance to be hit. Unless the defender bonus was calculated separately Top Quote |
WorldSavior |
Posted at: 2019-07-09, 23:54
Yes, but why? One could also change "attacker hits first" into "defender hits first" - but is this really necessary? (If two attackers intercept each other the first hit could be randomly chosen.) Defenders already have the advantage that they are healed in the buildings, and attackers often have to walk long distances until they can be healed again. Furthermore the attackers usually don't exactly know who they will be facing, so players should often think twice or more if they really should attack.
No matter how good the soldiers already evade? No matter how many hits they survive? I don't think so. By the way 10% seem to be too much... 10% substracted?
Well... Why shouldn't attackers have the same effect if it's based on comradship? I think that we don't need this system.
Me neither
Exactly, sounds just like a big boost for the-x's favorite strategy
But maybe better than having no choice
That would be a good button
-1
Oh yes
Possibly... But there are similar problems. Defenders go in the beginning out of their building, no matter how wounded they are. And if not their building is attacked but the neighbour building, they also do the same. And if they retread then because of injury, they will very quickly go back to battle. Conclusion: A good bonus for defenders would be the possibility to tell soldiers individually if they should stay or not. Or if one could control defenders even better it could also be an improvement for the game.
Well, I don't know the odds. How high are they, where can I see it?
Don't know it exactly
Yes. It sounds harsh, but often the weakest soldier has to sacrifice himself for the heroes. Currently this already happens if the heroes are very wounded.
Sounds clever to me
This should not always happen in my opinion. For example: All defenders very wounded, hero goes out, dies instead of rookies. So if all defenders are very wounded, we need a better solution. Or even if they are half wounded and so forth.
Sounds clever, but how to assure that they succeed in wounding the hero? Wanted to save the world, then I got widetracked Top Quote |
king_of_nowhere Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2019-07-10, 02:00
that's kinda situational. the attacker can choose to launch the attack and can pick all the soldiers that will go calmly, but the defender will be called on a moment's notice. I agree that having controls in every military building to tell individual soldiers to go out intercepting attackers or staying inside to heal would actually be the boost defence needs, but it is dependent upon the defender's skill at micromanaging fast. And I don't like to make speed an important factor.
there is never any certainty, but the attacker has higher odds of making it work. if the attacker sends out rookie soldiiers first to wound a bit the enemy hero, send out a soldier at a time to keep enemies from retreating to heal, and then sends his hero to attack at the right moment, then the attacker has better than 50% chances, starting from parity. this in turn means the defender will have more than 50% chance if he attacks, and less if he lets himself be attacked. so it makes for a system where attacking first is always the best move. of course there's still luck on individual fight to matter. Top Quote |
the-x |
Posted at: 2019-07-10, 02:15
I tryd it with many savegames from the last games I played on different maps The best solution would be a techtree, I think which should be not much harder to implememt than the other changes. Tell soldiers individually makes many boring / technical stuff. You can chose military +10% strengh per soldier / economy / a third, etc see in tech tree, important is that the offensive strengh gets stronger the longer the games goes. Top Quote |
king_of_nowhere Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2019-07-10, 02:44
soldiers fight with the same stats in attack when attacking or defending, so this would really do nothing. except perhaps discourage players from developing expanded economies by making them even more expensive to start, and so encourage rushing even more. Given that all your suggestions had that as a likely result, I'm thinking you are doing it intentionallly Top Quote |
Nordfriese |
Posted at: 2019-07-10, 12:56
Defining that the soldier of the player who initiated the attack always strikes second might be an easy way to give the defender a modest bonus Top Quote |
BoeseKaiser |
Posted at: 2019-07-10, 13:10
might be a big deal for supersoldiers though, no? the less hits -> the more impact this change has Top Quote |
king_of_nowhere Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2019-07-10, 13:58
we accounted for this when we made the calculations. if i remember correctly, the chances of victory are greater by about 5%. but someone should check. i think einstein keeps the updated stats. Top Quote |