16MAY24 Bugfixes: Siege, Blockade, Occupy |
Post Reply 
|
Page <1234 8> |
| Author | |||||
Okkudo 
Greenhorn 
Joined: 23 Dec 2018 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 88 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Posted: 19 May 2024 at 05:20 |
||||
I read your post fine. We differ in how we define cheating. The exploits in this case, the building glitch,  the digging around in chrome dev mode you taught me. .
Abusing exploits is cheating to me. Not a sign of skill. Not to be recognized as in-depth knowledge. |
|||||
 |
|||||
|
Snagglepuss
Greenhorn
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 Location: Serengeti, Afri Status: Offline Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(3)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 May 2024 at 13:01 |
||||
|
You don't defend against cavalry by setting sieges on plains?
You defend against cavalry by getting the enemy to attack you, on bad terrain, with better odds to your defensive troops, depleting their ability to attack your sieges, when you do put them on plains. Its the Ta2in way As far as plains sieges being impossible...Thirion, a "Non PvP player" just razed two of Orcasms cities, using plains sieges,in the middle of their cluster, because their responding cav was too far away, their closer in cav having been used in taking Eagles city, on a large hill. The game is what it is, it is what you make of it. Shout out to the devs for their continued commitment despite having to deal with us
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
eowan the short
Postmaster General 
Joined: 03 Jan 2016 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 2736 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 May 2024 at 20:51 |
||||
EXTRA! EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT! SNAGGLE DISCOVERS WAY TO OVERCOME PLAINS META- SIMPLY BE 4X THE SIZE OF YOUR OPPONENT.
Edited by eowan the short - 19 May 2024 at 20:51 |
|||||
|
This is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friend. Some person started it, not knowing what it was, and we'll continue posting on it forever just because...
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Sif
Forum Warrior 
Joined: 10 Apr 2021 Location: Athens Status: Offline Points: 423 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 May 2024 at 12:03 |
||||
|
Cav is fine imo, and this is goes off topic, town sieges is fine too as you use something the enemy could if know how to,
Unfortunately by what SMA did Iron and RE lost very a usifull weapon In the ongoing war. I believe that SMA did was a cheat and they did it because they false think that we did, which we did not that's why I ask for the Devs to punish not permaban the SMA and also gift Iron and RE for losing that advanced knowledge... I value high this knowledge cause at the previous war even if I knew it was possible to use towns as walls, I did not use it cause I though iron did not know about it and I did not test it and use it to deny from my ex emeny such powerful weapon. Iron obvious was expert on these but know with all this situation it has turned to common knowledge which is unfair IMO
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Thirion
Postmaster 
Joined: 10 Apr 2018 Status: Offline Points: 680 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 May 2024 at 10:32 |
||||
|
In the last few weeks i had the ingame experience to both fight against a siege in a city and also raze 2 cities surrounded by desert plains. The sieges on plains I do not know the details about the attackers setup. My defense setup was quite bad and could be improved by a lot. The core of my defense was my 3 month old account who didn't have any commanders with experience. I killed NPCs to get to level 10 forced march buts that it. The point of the operation was to get experience on my commanders and also to see how they would react and change my approach according to that in the future. I did not expect to get razes. The point i am trying to make: My setup was bad and could have easily improved by quite a bit. But lets look at the numbers i got: 1) Worst case: 13200 Knights in an 4 elite setup killed 49855 Sentinels and 48165 kobolds. -> 52800 upkeep killed 147875 upkeep -> 2.8 ratio (Reason: Bad Sents/Kobolds ratio) 2) Normal case: 15000 Death Packs killed 22718 Sents and 62119 kobolds -> 60000 upkeep killed 107555 upkeep -> 1.79 ratio With a better (and normal) setup on my side ratios around 1.5-1.7 would be more reasonable. Reducing the advantage for sieges on plains There are quite a few ways to reduce the advantage a defender has.
It requires a good plan and a good execution to pull off - but you also get quite a bit of benefit from it. Sieges in a city Unfortunately i did not get many attacks on the siege in the city. Most troops had been recalled already. A big and relatively easy example: 43000 attack sents killed 52971 kobolds and 11751 Clan Guardsman. No elite setup on the attacker side while the defender was using ~15 elite divisions. So total 86000 upkeep killed 76473 -> 0.89 ratio The city was on plains - so advantage for my Sents here. In addition to that my Sents hard-counter spears - thus i should have a huge advantage there. I have done the Sent attackers vs kobolds defenders a lot. Even in unfavourable terrain (forest) you get at least 2:1 ratios. Without the city i would have at least gotten a 2.0-2.5 ratio. A single Sentinel has 20 attack value against a defense value of 6 (Kobold) and 11 (Clan). I can do more math in case people are interested here. I am relatively certain that Iron/RE did not use gear in that case. But they could have. Decent, mass-producable gear (that you do not lose - because of the city) would have quite likely halfed my ratio again. Comparison Illyriad is designed to favor the defender in sieges. That is in my opinion a core design of the game to protect less active and more casual players. In a normal scenario the siege player loses around double the upkeep compared to the defender. Putting a siege into a city is bug-abuse and obviously not intended by the devs (Quote GM Jejune). You get an advantage of at least double the combat value of your troops. With really good preparation you can make that tripple or maybe even quadruple combat value of your troops. Or a closer look at the math: There are ways to improve the combat value of your troops. For example a 10% Prestige bonus, 10-15% commander skill or 20% college bonus on certain terrains. With the siege in a city approach you get 115% with just the wall and another potential 120% bonus with gear that you are not losing. In addition to that there is not really a counter-play after the "siege in a city" landed. You force the enemy to either attack the city (where you have a huge advantage) or setup a normal siege (where you have a huge advantage). Because of the "siege in a city" the attacker now has the advantage instead of as intended an disadvantage! Summary and Conclusion As shown above by my "real world examples" the "siege in a city" gives a huge advantage that is way out of line what is achievable with conventional game mechanics. It also turns around a core design goal of Illyriad: Instead of the defender having the advantage now the attacker has the advantage. "Siege in a city" is bugs abuse, not intended by the developers and gives an unreasonable and gamebreaking advantage. Thus it should not be allowed. Good and smart gameplay should be rewarded. I agree. But abusing a bug to get a gamebreaking advantage should not! That said i do think units in Illyriad need a slight rebalancing/tweaking. Best regards, Thirion (aka Ellania/TrollHunter)
Edited by Thirion - 25 May 2024 at 10:33 |
|||||
|
|||||
|
Sif
Forum Warrior
Joined: 10 Apr 2021 Location: Athens Status: Offline Points: 423 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 May 2024 at 11:34 |
||||
|
I agree at the rest exept the siege town . That's why I am against any reduction of the cav attack the siege party has very bad ratio but it has the element of surprise which is crucial and it is similar and to the real life warfare .
Regarding the town siege fighting against numerous at the size opponents is the fact that push to getting this knowlege siege town so it sould be rewarding ... also it's a weapon of the small alliance s o protect their areas from huge inveidors. Note that it require no sov around the town
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Thirion
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Apr 2018 Status: Offline Points: 680 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 May 2024 at 12:09 |
||||
Sorry, but i do not understand what the second sentence has to do with the first one. Can you explain that again please?
Game knowledge should be rewarding. I agree. But knowledge about bug abusing should not be rewarded. Also knowledge about any mechanics that are not intended by the devs should not be rewarding. Otherwise in my opinion the game changes from a "gameplay focus" to a "find the most gamebreaking, legal bug that you are allowed to use to break the game". This might be fun for some - but i am sure it is not for the big majority. Why put work/time into the game to come up with good strategies, good gameplay and good teamwork when you can just get it a lot easier by abusing a legal, gamebreaking bug? Why buy Prestige when you can just get power by abusing a legal, gamebreaking bug?
What big invadors? In this specific case YOU declared on us and YOU started the conflict. In my opinion you heavily misjuged the situation - thats on you and not us.
Which makes it mostly only useable against War Wagons. In my opinion in the current state of the game War Wagons are THE most important tool to allow long distance warfare. And thus Wars. They require planning and a lot of skill to pull off (because you need to be prepared for things that might happen multiple days later) War wagons are already difficult as it is. As an example: Against Ripper he killed all my commanders in the city and also got the city to 0 population. Should an important tool like this (that essentially enables real wars) be even more difficult to pull off?
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Sif
Forum Warrior
Joined: 10 Apr 2021 Location: Athens Status: Offline Points: 423 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 May 2024 at 12:41 |
||||
|
I see no bad distance to be a big factor at a strategy game for me it would be fine even if distance was an absolute factor as and at the medevial real life warfare, you would not send a wagon if you had not 20times more troops than Riper . I see your point there about war wagons but in my opinion the small sould be benefited from finding ways to overcome the digs size advantge ,
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
King Sigerius
Forum Warrior
Joined: 11 Nov 2017 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 May 2024 at 15:18 |
||||
|
36 accounts vs 400+ is game breaking.
|
|||||
|
KS
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Thirion
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Apr 2018 Status: Offline Points: 680 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 May 2024 at 17:35 |
||||
First: We do not have 400+ active accounts in the war. At the moment i think at most 40-50 accounts are participating in any form in the war. That said, i would agree if what you call the 400+ started the aggression against the 36 accounts. But that is not what happened. The 36 accounts declared and were the aggressors. Thus in my opinion it is on them. Lets look at a real life example: When the US declares war on a small country without any aggression from that small countries side then that is a huge problem. But when the small country decides to attack the US and/or NATO then that is on them. Iron/RE expected SMA to either back down and not fight or not do as well in the war. You took the risk and it backfired. In my opinion you went "all in" with a bad hand. I expected Iron/RE to do a lot better and SMA to have a harder time - especially in the beginning. But we did in my opinion amazing (considering the circumstances) and we are just getting started!
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1234 8> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
eowan the short wrote: