| Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
SirTwitchy
Greenhorn
Joined: 14 Sep 2010
Location: usa
Status: Offline
Points: 44
|
Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 23:33 |
the delay should cost everyone equally, to have an army at the ready only costs gold now, mebbe if camp time is allowed than this could cost food and gold for the duration of the camp. This could be double or triple of the cost to stay in the castle and launch without camp time , due to the fact that costs outside of the city would be more. A simple solution without giving it away.
As for the time length it , should be a minimum of 24 hours to chose, up to 48 hours for maybe Prestige users. We all have different lifestyles, some people dont have 24/7 access to a PC. This would allow everyone to coordinate and communicate better. And I doubt this Automation would take from the game, I think it would enhance it.
|
|
please disregard the twitch, the meds haven't kicked in yet...
|
 |
Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Forum Warrior
Joined: 01 Jan 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 416
|
Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 23:25 |
Why restrict it at all? In the real world we have what are called consequences. If I delay my army for any time, and then the enemy becomes a friend and pays you off in beer and gold, but I'm offline and miss that part, we get consequences. Let the game unfold as it will and we will send ambassadors to a secret meeting later to straighten it all out. I get to pick the time of launch, and the army is set aside the same as caravens in the marketplace. They will not defend while waiting, they are subject to diplomatic attacks while waiting. Prestige could be used to bonus things everyone already gets, like it is now. Thank you carrot much.
|
|
I am a Machine.
|
 |
Mandarins31
Forum Warrior
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 418
|
Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 21:24 |
|
restricting the restrictions? :p
im agree with you 1 hour wouldn't be enough.
actually the delay time will be 48h max for the prestige users. but we could imagine a 8 or 9 h possible delay time for the free accounts, with the said restrictions.
|
 |
Zeus
New Poster
Joined: 16 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 38
|
Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 20:31 |
|
It wouldnt work with the 1 to 0.5 hr advance thing with non-prestige acounts. I cant pay because Im a kid. I go to school and cant log on. with a 1 to 0.5 hr advance I wouldnt be able to do much. Like today.At 19:00 I missed sending for a major assult because I was at school but the advance wouldnt have helped me. I think restricting the restrictions would be a good idea.
|
 |
Mandarins31
Forum Warrior
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 418
|
Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 18:53 |
Createure wrote:
(for prestige maybe you could say free acounts can only set up 1 army
with "waiting time" per city with max. 6 hours wait, upgraded accounts
can set up more than 1 army with max. 8 hours waiting time.) |
i agree with the idea that non-prestige accounts could use the advantages of the delay, with restricted conditions.
Createure wrote:
Also one other thing, for people saying "we should be able to set an "arrival time" for armies I think probably there's a problem.
Imagine an alliance of 50 people each sending 10 armies to one location at exactly the same time to the second...? I imagine you're gonna be getting some problems with how the server is going to handle that, and also a problem with what order the armies arrive in, and also a problem with the "game sense" of the situation, because the armies will all attack seperately even though they are actually generating a battle report at exactly the same time.
|
in fact that's not really a problem if 100 armies, allied or ennemies, arrive at a location at the exact same hour. and you dont need to make them fight in alphabetic order of what. we are here talking about avoiding a grouped attacked (as if all the armies where one). but in fact, what is the difference between 1 big army and the same army devided in various armies? if my memory is good, the only difference is the overpower. that's why 10 000 knights are better than 2 armies of 5 000 knights. then, you just have to pull of the overpower bonus that would be given by the addition of all the armies. you just keep the overpower of each army individually. then, various army can attack at the same time, but it would be as if they attacked individually. and you have no organization problems for knowing who will attack first... and lose his army.... while the last to attack may not lose their army. attacking together without added overpower has the benefit to make every army lose the same %age of soldiers. that's why personnally, i would really like to see the arrival day and hour. and more, say your army to attack at that hour, and it would delay it automatically if the delay is not bigger than your autorised delay. (to allow to be prescise in the organisation of the battles) even if this is not a big automated thing, that would be an automated feature anyway. so, well, i agree that calculate your arrival time by yourself is also a good thing... so i dont have an ended opinion about this, even if i would prefer to see the arrival time and dealy my army automatically.
Edited by Mandarins31 - 19 Jan 2011 at 19:02
|
 |
Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Forum Warrior
Joined: 01 Jan 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 416
|
Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 18:06 |
|
I have been following this thread so long I forgot what the original idea was. Today I went back and read it over and agree that an added button with delayed launch time would be the simplest idea. The player is still responsible for the math to figure out when the delayed time should be. I believe also that anyone who really loves Illy will be logging in even if just to read alliance mail. A player who is prone to not log in is probably not going to be interested in the aspects of the game which are discussed in the forum. I am interested in reading where this discussuion leads, as I'm sure we, the residents of Illy, are actively creating the future of Illy through these discussions. Thank you carrot much.
|
|
I am a Machine.
|
 |
bartimeus
Forum Warrior
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Location: Right behind U
Status: Offline
Points: 222
|
Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 17:43 |
Createure wrote:
Imagine an alliance of 50 people each sending 10 armies to one location at exactly the same time to the second...? I imagine you're gonna be getting some problems with how the server is going to handle that, and also a problem with what order the armies arrive in, and also a problem with the "game sense" of the situation, because the armies will all attack seperately even though they are actually generating a battle report at exactly the same time.
|
that wouldn't be a problem if the dev enable HM's suggestion of non instantaneous battles... otherwise we can just make it arrive in alphabetical order...
|
|
Bartimeus, your very best friend.
|
 |
Createure
Postmaster General
Joined: 07 Apr 2010
Location: uk
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
|
Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 14:20 |
|
Also one other thing, for people saying "we should be able to set an "arrival time" for armies I think probably there's a problem.
Imagine an alliance of 50 people each sending 10 armies to one location at exactly the same time to the second...? I imagine you're gonna be getting some problems with how the server is going to handle that, and also a problem with what order the armies arrive in, and also a problem with the "game sense" of the situation, because the armies will all attack seperately even though they are actually generating a battle report at exactly the same time.
edit: interesting thread though Babbens, nice one. Hopefully will be lots of nice ideas for the dev team to think about when they come round to thinking about designing some kind of system like this. ^^
Edited by Createure - 19 Jan 2011 at 14:37
|
 |
Createure
Postmaster General
Joined: 07 Apr 2010
Location: uk
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
|
Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 14:17 |
Babbens wrote:
In the Military Mission tab, it would be useful to be able to set a time at which your army would automatically start for its destination, be you logged in or not.
That would take care of the distance/time zones issue, when sometimes you want the attack to land at a precise moment, and have to burn the midnight oil to launch it.
Again, just an idea.  |
A game I used to play with a kind-of-similar idea to this had a system where you could launcharmies with a MAXIMUM 8 hour delay... this meant that people with launch times at 6am could set their launch up at 10pm before going to bed. Or at 4pm when they're at work they can set a launch up at 8am before they leave.
lokifeyson wrote:
hey lets add 4 more build and research ques while we
are at it, lol, then I wouldn't have to log in for weeks.......
|
The_Dude wrote:
I think they designed Illy to encourage log-ins and not
automated accounts. The human element would be greatly diminished with
the automated launches and expanded queues. Illy would lose a lot of
its social charateristics if we all automated our cities and had no
reason to log-in on a regular basis. |
I totally agree with the above 2 quotes... but I think if there is a solid cap on the amount of 'waiting time' an army is allowed to have it makes things more convenient for people without making the game completely automated. i.e. you still need to log in almost as many times to set up your launches, but just at least inconvenient times of day. (for prestige maybe you could say free acounts can only set up 1 army with "waiting time" per city with max. 6 hours wait, upgraded accounts can set up more than 1 army with max. 8 hours waiting time.) Sure we have account sitting already, so you can get someone else to launch your army for you in a different time zone... it isn't always easy to find trusted sitters for the right time though. So yeh I pretty much agree with both of you. And I think a waiting time with a maximum cap on it is the solution. It wouldn't even have to be 8 hours... maybe even just 1 or 2 hours. Also if you do that it gives people a few chances to get their launch time correct or to re-set their launch if they miss their time.
Zeus wrote:
I like this plus Lokifeyson's idea with more ques. I hate
that there are only two. It takes so much time plus you have to log on
every few hours if you want to do mass building. |
He was being
sarcastic man... there's a cap of 1 qued research/building deliberately
so people don't get to just ques tons of stuff and then hardly ever log
in. Basically it means people that are more active get rewarded.
Edited by Createure - 19 Jan 2011 at 14:32
|
 |
bartimeus
Forum Warrior
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Location: Right behind U
Status: Offline
Points: 222
|
Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 07:22 |
How about non prestige can plan attack one 1 or 0.5 hr in advance, while prestige user can plan the launch of their army a couple of days in advance? That way, both Prestige and non prestige user could stage their attack with the same precision. That's because alliance with only prestige player don't exist (as far as I know) so planning an aliance campaign will still need to take into account the 5 minutes of human errors
|
|
Bartimeus, your very best friend.
|
 |