Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - How to PvP
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedHow to PvP

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
Author
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6814
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2012 at 06:17
Originally posted by dunnoob dunnoob wrote:

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

7)  "Sieges" would be required to travel a maximum of 10 squares per hour (no sieges using swiftsteeds, lol).  This is faster than sieges would travel in practice, but in my mind would increase the fun quotient a bit by increasing the pace without making it overly difficult to reinforce other players.

The slowest units for dwarves are halbardier (6+50%=9.5) and yeoman (7+50%=10.5), the latter is already too fast.  Dwarves will need a halbardier in a participating army, if their commanders have forced march at 100%.  

Now where in the wiki does it show me how this works for other races?  Ermm 

Pretty much all races will have to put in one or more units to "slow down" their siege armies, but if 10 squares were too much of a burden for dwarves it could be 12 squares or whatever; this limitation would only apply to armies doing actual "sieges" and not to reinforcing armies, raiding armies or whatever.
Back to Top
Rasak View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith


Joined: 26 Nov 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 140
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2012 at 06:21
Originally posted by dunnoob dunnoob wrote:

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

7)  "Sieges" would be required to travel a maximum of 10 squares per hour (no sieges using swiftsteeds, lol).  This is faster than sieges would travel in practice, but in my mind would increase the fun quotient a bit by increasing the pace without making it overly difficult to reinforce other players.

The slowest units for dwarves are halbardier (6+50%=9.5) and yeoman (7+50%=10.5), the latter is already too fast.  Dwarves will need a halbardier in a participating army, if their commanders have forced march at 100%.  

Now where in the wiki does it show me how this works for other races?  Ermm 

What if instead we made it so that you have to have at least 1 non cav unit in your army instead of limiting it to 10 sq per hour. We get roughly the same results but it allows everyone to use armies and commanders already on hand.

Edit: Lol. Rill beat me to it.


Edited by Rasak - 14 May 2012 at 06:28
Back to Top
dunnoob View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Location: Elijal
Status: Offline
Points: 800
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2012 at 07:39
Originally posted by Rasak Rasak wrote:

What if instead we made it so that you have to have at least 1 non cav unit in your army instead of limiting it to 10 sq per hour.
Yeah, "not only cav" for a mock siege army could be a simpler rule.Thumbs Up 


Back to Top
Garth View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 2012
Location: Somewhere, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 248
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2012 at 08:52
This sounds pretty cool. It also sounds fairly involved. It also precludes a player needing to be in an Alliance (is that MicroMe I hear complaining?). That being said, it's a great idea!

What's been kicking around my head lately, though, is a simpler, easier to setup and less involved activity. One that could be done between any two players any time they want. Real direct PvP, and more than just "I attack you, who wins?" Something like this:

Player A puts 100 troops on a square
Player B attacks (intention to occupy) with 75 troops
A counters with 75
... going back and forth a couple of rounds
A finishes with 50 troops, trying to take back the square

The odd numbers at beginning and end are meant to even out the general advantage troops have on offense. Other balancing factors might include rules about troop variety, such as: total troop deployment must consist of a minimum of 20% of each troop type. This would put a lot more skill and suspense into the endeavor. The whole question of Commanders is another matter, and would require some deliberation.
This sort of game would be eminently scalable; ie, small players could do troop amounts of 25 and 50, large players could do 5k and 10k (though I doubt anyone would risk that many troops at a single time just for a little sport). There are also a practically unlimited number of "stipulations" the players could agree to (no cav; cap on commander level; troops from one city only...) and multi-player teams could be set up as well.

Using Tourney squares would be great for this, as the normal NAP and Confed rules don't apply there. The only thing that might get in the way would be matches overlapping and voiding each other. Perhaps we could form a sign up sheet of sorts, or even get our wonderful Devs to set something up...

Back to Top
Cerex Flikex View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 11 Apr 2012
Location: BC
Status: Offline
Points: 211
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2012 at 09:14
Garth, I'm not sure which one you are referring to. I assume you mean Rill's?
Back to Top
Garth View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 2012
Location: Somewhere, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 248
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2012 at 09:41
Oh, right, Cerex. Eh, I'm a little foggy right now, just got in from a 400 mile drive. I was indeed referring to Rill's idea, it's a big contrast to what I've been envisioning.
What do you think? What specifics have you been toying around yourself?
Back to Top
Rorgash View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 894
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2012 at 15:05
Originally posted by Magnificence Magnificence wrote:

Caution leads to death by boredom. Just start a war and quit with all the he said she said palava.

It really is great fun.

"You cant spend your whole life wrapped in cotton wool little rabbit"

I wuv you guys *snuggles*

kthxbye

Mag. 

Smile


Listen to this guy he knows what he's talking about


Edited by Rorgash - 14 May 2012 at 15:05
Back to Top
GnuTri View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 25 Sep 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 25
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2012 at 18:49
There is a still a big emphasis on military in these ideas - can we throw a little more diplo action into the mix?

For example, points awarded for each type of resource stolen over a fixed period of time. This is the only thing I can think of right now as my brain is a little fried but there must be better ideas.
Back to Top
abstractdream View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1843
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2012 at 20:42
Assassins, Scouts and Spies can be used with no real lasting damage (the cost of resurrecting?) and a point system could be set up for that as well. Thieves and Sabs are probably best kept out of it.
Bonfyr Verboo
Back to Top
Cerex Flikex View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 11 Apr 2012
Location: BC
Status: Offline
Points: 211
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2012 at 21:26
Originally posted by Garth Garth wrote:

Oh, right, Cerex. Eh, I'm a little foggy right now, just got in from a 400 mile drive. I was indeed referring to Rill's idea, it's a big contrast to what I've been envisioning.
What do you think? What specifics have you been toying around yourself?

All good, no worries. Sounds like a very long drive.
Rill's idea is AvA. And I had been trying to go with PvP. Two different approaches.

Now Rill's tournament suggestion is very nice.
And I do look forward to seeing it happen.

I was hoping for some more feedback for a more PvP style tournament. I'll be working up more details of my own on it, hopefully I can post it. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.