Delayed attacks
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: Miscellaneous
Forum Name: Suggestions & Game Enhancements
Forum Description: Got a great idea? A feature you'd like to see? Share it here!
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=1464
Printed Date: 20 Apr 2024 at 00:02
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Delayed attacks
Posted By: Babbens
Subject: Delayed attacks
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 10:20
|
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.  |
Replies:
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 13:44
|
+1 |
Posted By: lokifeyson
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 13:56
|
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.......
-------------  |
Posted By: King EAM
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 14:40
|
I think this would be a good add-on. Just set a time when you want your army to be launched and even if you are not on at that time it still sends. ------------- "It's hard to know until you're a Crow" |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 15:08
|
or you could say at which hour you want your army to arrive to the destination, and it would launch it immediatly but slowing down the army to arrive at the said hour. that's the same in fact but the fact that u have an army at home waiting to go... it depends if you can recall them as they are at home or not. but the problem with the delaying time to occupy/attack somewhere is that that's a HUGE modification for battle strategies and for battle system generally. Because if you attack somewhere at the same time with an ally, you are doing a grouped attack i guess. so im for this idea, but actually grouped attack thing must be something impossible to do. if not that would bring too many changes on the actual battle machinery and advantage further more the most powerful alliances. |
Posted By: G0DsDestroyer
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 15:11
|
Don't forget diplomatic missions!!! Those should be delayed as well, them scout reports don't make themselves you know! ------------- http://live.xbox.com/en-US/MyXbox/Profile?gamertag=G0DsDestroyer" rel="nofollow - Tia mi aven Moridin isainde vadin |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 15:30
|
yeah you'r right, if we could delay the military units, we should be able to do the same with diplos units  . could also bring some new strategies, like a grouped steal against 1 player. but it's needed to discuss if this would be a too big change for diplos actions as well. |
Posted By: Zeus
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 16:31
| 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. |
Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 16:37
| 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. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 17:03
|
yeah if you are talking about adding new building or research queue, not a good idea; would need to log less often... and would reduce the fairness of the game, because if you use prestige to complete all your buildings instantly, you could complete more building at a time, for half the actual price... but be able to put a delay is more a strategical action. not really an automated action that reduces the social networking of the game. EDIT: i think we must precise in which case we would need to delay an army, because personnally i didnt already had to wake up in the night to lauch an army for it to arive at a precise time. i think that's would be only used during wars if you want to attack the same player at the same time, not to let him the chance to receive reinforcements between attacks... so that's would be useful to do quick attacks. as this would be a strategy improvement, even if u dont have to wake up and log to lunch ur army, you are not making the game lose its humanity |
Posted By: bartimeus
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 17:31
|
Please do take in consideration that this would almost nullify the advantages of having a well managed / well organized Alliance war campaign... And the dev's would likely make it a prestige option... ------------- Bartimeus, your very best friend. |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 17:54
|
What if? An alliance member sends a commander to your city, takes control of 1 of your armies, then that commander could be ordered from his city taking your army with it. This situation should be expensive, and require a special research and level of commander, but would take care of the problem. Like sitting, this would be a 'take it and be quiet' type of action. (I don't claim to have all the answers, just the right ones.) ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 18:17
|
Bartimus: yeah you're totally right. Feral: if you can steal the army of your mates without their agreement, that's not a good thing. if really somone wants you to launch his army while he can't be connected, he appoints you as a sitter. |
Posted By: Babbens
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 18:20
|
I am not suggesting to add more research and building queues, nor to be
able to delay arrival, but simply to be able to set a given time for
sending troops. Put a limit, like 1-2 times a month, maybe with prestige, ok. This idea came out while playing this last tournament: I am almost always logged in, but I had to stay up until 2am to send my army in some coordinate way. Of course, I could have gone to bed and not cared, and in fact I probably will next time. I just thought that in a case like this it would have been very handy feature to have. |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 18:23
|
Not meant as stealing, it would need to be arranged. The U.N. does this as we speak. Why would we ask the devs to allow someone to steal our army? ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 18:56
Not wanting to add fuel to the fire... But we did announce precisely this feature on http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/the-newness-18aug10_topic929_post6545.html#6545 - the dev plan back in August...
We haven't begun any coding on it yet; so there's still time to get your tuppence, thruppence and/or half-shilling's-worth of brainsplurge into this thread. SC |
bartimeus wrote:Posted By: Babbens
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 19:09
|
Must read News & Announcements with the attention it deserves. Thanks! |
Posted By: bartimeus
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 20:27
So that's why I had the notion it would be prestige only... Well No matter... The thing is, in my opinion prestige should only give advantages that you should be able to get otherwise, either by logging on more often or by calculating yourself some stuff. So people with money but without time can be competitive with people with time but no money. That's why in my mind, things like longer buildings queue, "build as much cow as I can with my current resources" button or automatic caravan and troop sending is fine, since non prestige user can log on, learn some maths and do it themselves. But judging from the already existing prestige bonus, this is obviously not the way you think... ------------- Bartimeus, your very best friend. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 21:22
|
im agree with what you are saying Bartimeus but... in the case of being able to delay armies movement, that's exactly something you can do if you have the time and if you do some maths. that's not something that would be only avaible for the one who spend prestige... as Babbens said, just need to be log at the right moment to launch your army. as far as it's impossible to do grouped attacks (i mean to merge multi allied armies to attack at the same time... and have the outnumber bonus), this improvement is not something that only the prestige users could do. the real improvement it would bring during an organised assault it to coordinate the action at the minute, and do quick actions. for exemple if you wanna take a tile then defend it, without doing any mistake, that would be possible. so it would be possible to organise an attack like this: 16h00: Dr. dre attacks with his attacking army in the case he fails, Dr. doolittle's army will arrive at 16h01 to finish the rest. then Dr. snoopy dog's army arrives at 16h02 to defend the tile, followed by anybody else who was asked to defend. fast, precise, no mistakes (if def army arrives before attacking one, that is a mistake). while if you can't delay you hava to calculate, to send at the right moment, to let more time between attacks to be sure to do it in order... hard to do yes, but actually can do that without prestige. |
Posted By: Zeus
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 02:05
Yes it would be easier to do without all the math and stuff plus I have school so for pretty much the entire day I am not at home. So I cant log on. I missed a major attack on the tornament. I thnk Im going to miss another one because I will be at school at the time to launch my troops so they get there in time. So they wont be launched. This would be helpful.
|
Posted By: SirTwitchy
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 02:11
|
what I would like to see would be a time OF arrival and the ability to add in "Camp" time, where by if said army take 13 hrs to arrive , I can have them "camp" for a specific time, now this might cost extra gold or food to supply the camp, but so be it, But then I could dispatch them up to 24 hrs in advance and know the time at which they will arrive. My sodden brain can barely remember the day of the week, doin math gives me a headache and makes me Twitch bad...... ------------- please disregard the twitch, the meds haven't kicked in yet... |
Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 02:52
|
Limited ability to set scheduled launches/arrivals is ok with me, largely because it's only requiring an active prestige account AND only provides a very limited grace period (i.e. can't in one sitting set up 20 launches across the next 3 days). Simply maintaining an active prestige account costs roughly $10 per year (haven't actually calculated, but it's around that order of magnitude). I don't think that's asking a lot, and if you can't even do that, then you'll just have to set your alarm clock or sneak a quick session on your smartphone while the teacher/boss isn't looking (don't tell them it was my idea, I'll deny it). As for alliance wars, I agree that this removes the only space in which non-leaders get to personally influence the outcome of an operation for better or worse according to their skill and activity. Maybe that's ok, but there should be new skill-based opportunities added in its place for regular alliance members to personally influence battlefield outcome. It shouldn't be all about generals dictating/predicting the better strategy and planning operations. Training and unit (player) tactics ought to play a big part as well. |
Posted By: kicking5251
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 05:40
|
this would have to be a add on when they introduce shipping and "you might have a bit of trouble putting a ship out at midnight unless you have built a light house" this is a great idea
 |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 13:18
|
1) reply to HM for what you say, HM, about the regular members on an alliance that wont use prestige and wont be able to delay their attacks/movements, we could imagine a new option in the members rights, or a new research called leading army. that would be the capacity for a player using prestige to delay his attacks, to lead 1 or 2 other player's army. that would be a restricted ability. for exemple, in each alliance, the leader could apoint a max of 3 of his members as genenrals or whatever. the important is that he would give them tho right to lead armies. these generals must already have done the expensive research/quest (!) to be able to lead other's armies. then we can imagine that a general will ask 2 players in his alliance to be under his leadership, and then each player will put 1 army of his choice in the waiting of the general's orders. this must be done in advance enough for these armies to go automatically at the right time to follow the general's one (when he launchs it) and to arrive/attack just after him. we can imagine that this abilyty would be possible to use once every day and for 1 army only. that could be a mean for the regular players to have a significant action, according with the leader's strategies. 2) an other idea resulting of the delay time ability mmm... and as im lauched to give some ideas... if we have the ability to delay the army movements, then we can add new features to the game... for exemple we can add a night and day notion. then depending or your race or whatever you would have an attack bonus if you attack the day or the night, and a defence bonus if your are defending the day or the night. as there are 4 races we could cut the days in 4 to add specific bonus to each race. then we have: the Dawn: 3h - 9h the Day: 9h - 15h the Dusk: 15h - 21h the Night: 21h - 3h we could also imagine that these hours would change depending on the seasons, because for exemple nights are longer during winter and days are shorter. then some each race will have his proper shining season. as we know in the history, we often talk about the attacks of some european cities during the night (Constantinople as an exemple). these were surprising attacks because everyone was sleeping :p. then maybe each race, traditionnally or for physiologigal reason... uh... go to the bed at different hour. so they would be more vulnerable when they are asleep but ready to the fight during the opposite part of the day, when they are fully awaked and full of energy. so for exemple: Humans sleep during the Night Dwarves during the Dawn (as they did party all night :p) Orcs during the Day (because they dont need the sun as they live in the caves or such things) Elves during the Dusk (because they like to be awake to see the first rays of the sun) then, humans would the stongest during the day, elves during the dawn, etc... and so, each race will have his natural ennemy. Orcs would be the natural ennemies of humans as their cycle is the opposite (when humans are the strongest, orcs are the weakest, and vice versa), and dwarves would be the natural ennemies of the elven community for the same reason enough brain-storming for the moment :p |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 15:45
|
But the player behind the keyboard is human. Too many rules would take away from the seemingly endless opportunities ingame. Day and Night is a great idea though, maybe the NPC's would be more aggressive at night? ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 18:08
|
to Feral i dont think that does too many rules if the night and day feature was added. there will be also many things to assimilate when ships and factions comes. i think this kind of idea is in the line of our GMs vision of this game, because that could make more sens for the existance of the races and the seasons (yes dont forget the game already counts the seasons and the moon - even if that's a minor factor). and my suggestion also gives a way to improve the battle strategies. If the Devs created the game with terrain bonus, that's not to add more painful rules, but for us to take pleasure using a bit more our brain than in others games of this kind. night and day, and the bonus it brings, is a way to use your strategy/leadership/protection/diplomacy skills to a higher level :). with the exemples i gave, if you are a human using knights to attack an orc on a high montain defending with spearmen, during the night... you didnt get it. link with the subject well, not to seem to be out of the subject anymore, i must precise again that this could be a new feature ONLY when the delay of the armies will be updated. because you will be able to say when your army will arrive. but, the dark face of this idea, is that it will disadvantage further more the ones who doesnt use prestige, even if, like HM said, that wont cost that much to use prestige account to be able to delay your armies. that's why personnally im not for this feature to need prestige account. that's why i talked about the leading army, which was my first proposition. it would allow a prestige user to share his delay benefit with someone, in his alliance, who doest use prestige... but with some restrictions as i already said. |
Posted By: Zeus
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 20:56
|
I like the ideas of night and day and stuff but dont you think you guys are getting too complicated? And can someone please tell me if any of this ideas will get into the game like my total strength(which even though you can use a tool to do the same thing would be nice |
)? We are just talking about it. And I only need one response not a lot.Posted By: CranK
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 21:10
|
The GM's are reading this forum also. But they are far to busy with making the dealine for the major UIv2 release. If they see a interesting idea posting by someone. They might add it on their ''to do'' list. But about your calculation tool. I've seen talks about GM's wanting to keep this game as human as posible. So adding ALOT of auto-tools in the game might not happen anytime soon. And to be honest, I like it the way it is now. Having too much auto-tools in the game will just distroy the social gameplay and people can ''robot'' themselfs through the game without actual brain storming. :) |
Posted By: Strategos
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 21:26
|
Just to clarify, we do read these forums and whenever we begin designing a new feature, we go through the relevant threads/replies looking at all your ideas for inspiration and ideas. However, given that we are *very* busy keeping up what can only be described as a completely insane coding schedule, we don't have time to reply to all the ideas. Rest assured though, that currently every single reply on the forum gets read by multiple developers at some point. And frequently re-read when we're working on something relevant to them. ------------- Postatem obscuri lateris nescitis |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 23:21
|
here is the kind of message that can encourage me to do more brain stromings :p to Zeus Zeus, as Strategos and Crank said, the discussions we have in your post, this one, or any serious post in this part of the forum is never useless. here we can help our greatful Devs to have some new inspiration... but also that's in this kind of posts that we can point the consequences of the said ideas. point what would be a problem, what could be cool to add etc... So your inspiration will never be lost, but you must be cool with the fact that these topics are just dicussions and these ideas, even if they are interesting, wont be add in a short time. the actual dev list is just very Big. And some upgrades have the right of way on other ones. ------------ well, to speak about the subject, i wanna say i really enjoy to give some ideas about armies and battle system. as we see delay an attack could bring new features with it, with more detailled strategies. i guess this feature was put on the dev list because that's a way to launch your army at a moment you cant because you are sleeping or working. but personnally i see it can bring many new interesting possibility with it. ------------- (To make a parenthesis, i played very active strategic war game that could give some inspiration about battles. it's called BattleDawn. very exciting game where u must use your coordinating and diplomacy skills as well. it works turn per turn of 10min-2h, which allows to coordinate impressive grouped attacks. you can conquer other players to produce more/turn. you have various camps like watchtowers, gates to go faster, lunch dragons :p from some camps, train units from some camps... u can move your armies from camp to camp and attack from them. and you are never sure to win an area, even if you are in a good alliance, because there are treacherous everywhere XD. for the Devs to find some inspiration for new features about battles, or for anybody else who want to experiment intense strategy/battles i advise you to try BattleDawn |on Kongregate by preference]. the only thing that made me leave this game is that it asks too many playing time if you want to be well ranked) i promise that's my last too long and boring post for a moment  |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2011 at 23:53
|
Another way to delay an attack may be to have the option of speed. If a commander has a speed of x, then you could choose how much of x to use at each launch of an army. Then the problem is broken down to a simple calculation and even I could do it! ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: SirTwitchy
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 00:26
|
huh? we need a way that people all around the world can send an attack within a 2 day span, I would like to be able to mass mail my alliance to say hit a city or flag at 12:25pm on 1.20.11 and they wold be able to give the orders when they got on, not when it was deemed necessary due to game mechanics. With alliance mates in 3 different areas of the World and the conflicting time zones/lifestyles, the only way to do a large successful coordinated attack is thru the use of well planned sitters, multis or password sharing. ------------- please disregard the twitch, the meds haven't kicked in yet... |
Posted By: Zeus
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 00:28
|
To crank
It wouldnt destroy the brainstorming it would help it. It would help understand what combinations of units are better and help people's armys last longer and help people make choices like who should I attack and should I attack at all and even what units should be in my army. And how would it destroy the human prospect? With this feature the game would still be very human. Answer this in total strength thread.
|
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 00:57
|
Zeus, please continue this discussion on your topic. to Feral im not sure you are actually able to calculate easily the time it would take chosing the speed of your army, and counting the speed bonus of your commander. that would be long to calculate it each time. i think that Sir Twichy is right. the more simple to use, the better. that's a thing to make the game more complex about strategies or possibilities of roads to take... but that's an other thing to make actions too complicate to do. |
Posted By: SirTwitchy
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 01:04
|
Just like any large world power, there are armies spread all over, they can plan D-day and move people in place to all coordinate at once. A simple drop down of either "Camp" time (let my set 0-40 hours, like occupy time) or a Day/Month/Year arrival choice would make life in Illyriad so much better ------------- please disregard the twitch, the meds haven't kicked in yet... |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 01:36
|
so, or the armies are waiting the good time to go from home to be coordinated... or they go immediatly to group up somewhere before attacking from this place... or they go immediatly and adapte theire speed to the arrival time. seems to be the same, but no. -if they wait at home before going, can they be recalled? -if they go now but group somewhere to wait... we are talking about many things in the same time. because then u must chose a square to be a "camp". that mean new strategies (chose well this camp). and we are talking about an army that occupy somwhere and then takes a new order i guess. -if they adapt the speed , they can be seen early if someone is verifying if you are not launching an army. for me the best of these 3 choices would be to wait home and go at the right moment. and maybe being able to recall them as they are at home. (would be stange if you have soldiers at home but u cant talk to them). |
Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 01:46
Very much planned (via tides) for Naval movement. Not planned for player racial combat bonuses, but definitely planned for Lycanthrope and Undead units (both Faction units and Summoned units). But, again, don't want to look too far down the path ahead! SC |
Posted By: kicking5251
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 01:48
|
[/QUOTE] Very much planned (via tides) for Naval movement. Not planned for player racial combat bonuses, but definitely planned for Lycanthrope and Undead units (both Faction units and Summoned units). But, again, don't want to look too far down the path ahead! SC [/QUOTE] yeah if we look to far down the line we will drool ourselves to death
 |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 02:02
|
oh ok, thanks for updating me these are good things to know. im just launching some ideas. but i know that if this is added, that will be after the actual important dev list. That's true, i may be looking a bit too far, but i hope one day my brain storming may help :p |
Posted By: col0005
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 02:28
| Any objections I see to this idea seem to be that players are opposed to automating the game. If the "general" idea is taken further then perhaps we could have an option so that we could make our armies arive at the same time as one player. however each player can only lead one other player (no chains). This would mean that half the alliance would need to be co-ordinated for an entire alliance to attack. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 02:49
|
for the option to make our armies arrive at the same time, i think that's a bit complicated to apply, unless you have a bright idea to make it simple. may be easier just to say to attack somewhere at that day/hour, and then each member delays his army to arrive at the said hour. for the leading player thing, i report you to "2)reply to HM" on page 3. you must consider that some people use prestige, and other doesnt. then that must be a restricted action to lead someone else's army. Edit: because this delay feature is already planned by the GMs, and you would need to have an active account to delay your army |
Posted By: Mr Damage
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 05:04
| Camp time is the simplest solution, it is however like anything else, vulnerable to manipulation and people finding detrimental ways to use it, but that is the way of the world and we have our illustrious leaders to moderate these capabilities and/or dis-allow them. I like this game, I find that it is not as time consuming as most so I dont see any reason to make sweeping changes. The social aspect is the major reason for playing and I admit I dont spend money. I would eventually give it away if the advantages become too great for those who spend. I understand that if nobody spent money on these games, they wouldn't be possible, but they wouldn't have the amount of players either if you had to pay to play, there is a balance. As a simple vote Yes or No for Camp Time, I would vote yes. |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 06:03
|
I set the alarm and wake up in the middle of the night. ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: bartimeus
Date 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. |
Posted By: Createure
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 14:17
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.
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.
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. |
Posted By: Createure
Date 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. ^^ |
Posted By: bartimeus
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 17:43
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. |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date 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. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2011 at 18:53
i agree with the idea that non-prestige accounts could use the advantages of the delay, with restricted conditions.
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. |
Posted By: Zeus
Date 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. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date 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. |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date 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. |
Posted By: SirTwitchy
Date 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... |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 01:24
|
Feral, i think that if you delayed your army to go somewhere, but you are underattacked while it is still waiting at home, this army should be able to defend the city. and for the realism... a game like this need to do a compromise between realism and playabiliy... and cash revenue to keep the game running. Twitchy: im not sure that would be that good to pay something more to be able to delay. if you have a great army to launch and have a delay of 48h... if it costs 75 000 gold/hour instead of 25 000 gold/hour, you could quikly run out of gold and lose your sov levels. aubout the prestige, we musnt forget that, at the begining, the delay has been put in the dev list because it will be helpful for people who has money but not the time. that's how actually works the prestige options: pay something to have less to wait (wait for buildings to complete, production, caravans...). then basicaly, only prestige users would be able to use delay. but as we already saw, the delay could be seen as well as a strategic move, and more, it coud also bring new features in link with this add. that's why personnally i would be agree to say this should not be a prestige option. but have a basic delay time allowed for everyone (maybe with a restricted utilisation), and being able to increase this delay time and pull of the uses restrictions with prestige is fine for me. after, maybe 24 delay hours allowed to everyone seem a bit too much for me. becaus, then, use prestige to have 48 hours delay wont be really useful. i said 8-9 hours because generally a day is divided in 3. 8 hours to sleep, 8 hours to work, 8 free hours (generally i said). then most of the people can log in quiqly to launch an attack in the 8 hours interval in which they needed to launch it. and then if you cant, you buy some prestige to delay occasionnally. |
Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 01:32
|
Hi all, Just answering a few points raised here, but would still very much encourage an active debate on these issues!
We don't want to "automate" the game by any means; however we are sensitive to what we described as the "clickfest" back in the August "Newness" announcement. We're all in favour of making repetitive actions 'without general purpose' easier, and less micro-managementy (unless a player wishes them to be so). So, for example, we're quite in favour of (eg) allowing building queues to allow players to queue 2 buildings OR up to 24 hrs worth of building time. This means that a player who has just settled their 3rd/4th city might not be required to sit online for many dozens of 5m-35m builds of basic resource buildings whilst building up the next city. For another example, we don't think a player should have to click on every production building in his town one-by-one to find out what his town is currently producing and whether new things need to be queued up (and UI v2 goes some way to addressing this).
HM's suggestion of battle longevity is intriguing, but not one we're actively pursuing at the moment. The systemic/gameplay changes required would be vast, and we also need to balance the questions of "player expectation" in there. We have, of course, already introduced some longer-term battles in the form of Sieges, and so we're not averse to the concept. The issue on general combat is that most players aren't 24/7 in Illyria, and their expectation is that the outcome of an event they sent out to occur at a specific time is that the event actually occurs at that time (be it a success or a failure). If we introduced the concept of 'combat over time' (beyond siege, which is a special case - and rightly so) then we're effectively alienating the casual players and making (through escalation) 24/7 participation a requirement of even the slightest military engagement; which we're very much against. Also, worry not about the server's ability to cope with such multi-participant engagements - everything we do has performance in mind at some level - and it's our job to worry about the capacity ramifications rather than anyone else's!
We have actively discussed ideas around upkeep and logistics supply chains. The key thing, as always, is that whatever we do is transparent to the players through the User Interface, and also passes the "fun test". The transparency issue is that when numbers change on your screen you need to quickly and easily know why (even when they changed because they were as a result of your orders, eg an army encampment has arrived and this now costs more). The "fun test" is more complicated. It's like the idea of having multiple caravan types with different capacities/speeds/etc. Whilst we like the idea of different caravan types - because it gives us new unit types, new technologies, new specialisations for players and many other extensions to the existing systems - it does by necessity mean that loading up a caravan and sending goods out means more steps (selecting which caravans and/or combinations of caravans to send that can carry the goods). Thus far we've rejected the "multiple caravan types" idea as "failing the fun test", and for the same reason will also reject changing upkeep/logistics requirements depending on army activities in the future. Best, SC |
Posted By: SirTwitchy
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 01:35
|
I think either it should be open to all, with a cost to be incurred or keep it as is. To have it only be available to Prestige holders would be unfair IMHO. It is a powerful tool, yes. So a Prestige enhancement to it might be best. Where as everyone get a base of 8-24 hrs, and then Prestige holders can extend that further. The cost to field a large army is currently only in gold, and I honestly believe that to march and or camp an army should cost more anyways. In a real world situation To have any army sitting at home base idle or defending will inherently cost less than to send an army to war in a foreign land and hopefully this will be added to the game. ------------- please disregard the twitch, the meds haven't kicked in yet... |
Posted By: some random guy
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 01:42
|
Another interesting point is that armies currently automatically get payed no matter how far away they are. Caravans should be necessary to get pay and resources to an abroad army. This would create a better use for the "blockade" stratagem, and it would have an interesting strategical twist when there are unlimited caravans and "pathfinding." ------------- Soon, very soon, my name will become synonymous with chicken alfredo.... mmm.... chicken alfredo.... |
Posted By: SirTwitchy
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 01:48
|
the armies money would go into their bank account, no sense in sending out gold that could be stolen to them. ------------- please disregard the twitch, the meds haven't kicked in yet... |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 02:07
in fact, if i remember, Stormcrow already explained (long time ago) why armies movements didnt cost anything else, and also why we can run out of food without losing our population/soldiers. I forgot his exact words, but that was about the fact that the food you produce is only the castle's food (or something like that). your soldiers and you citizens have the means to buy theire own food with theire revenue. and soldiers take theire own provisions, and find theire food during theire travels. that was something like that. (that's a part of the realism of the game :p) no need to have more costs for armies actions as Stormcrow just precised in the post above.
Sure that would be cool to add these kind of features! but precisely for this one i would have replied as Twichy. if i remember, with the next upgrades we will be able to escort our caravans. then with pthfinding and factions upgrades, that may mean we would be able to attack some caravans when they leave a hub or something like that. im sure there are many ideas to develop about this. |
Posted By: Zeus
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 02:23
|
From Stormcrow
For another example, we don't think a player should have to click on every production building in his town one-by-one to find out what his town is currently producing and whether new things need to be queued up (and UI v2 goes some way to addressing this).
You can already do this. Go to the twon summary and it will tell you the level of all the buildings, What they produce(if they are natural buildings like quarry etc.), and the amount of food they consume. Okay so they could add what the other buildings produce. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 02:34
|
i dont think that's the good moment to give new ideas about UI v2, as it will be upgraded in 8 days :p and i would like to pecise we are tending to be out of the subject :p |
Posted By: Createure
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 17:50
| Yep I agree with Mandarins... UIv2 is out so soon I feel kinda guilty suggesting new things right now... if the next release matches up to expectation then I reckon the devs prolly deserve a week or 2 off ^^ |
Posted By: Createure
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 17:56
Personally If I send my crack army of 10,000 advanced cavalry to ravage a plains occupation I don't want it being combined with my alliance-mate's army of poorly lead mixed defensive unit force and messing up my kill ratio. ;) re: what bartimus said about HMs idea: I haven't read HMs idea but it sounds like a kind of "tick" system... for example every army that arrives at a location will wait until the first minute of each hour before attacking so the combat reports are generated on the hour every hour, and all armies that arrive before each hour will combine into 1 force... like SC said though I think somethink like that would require a complete reworking of the combat system. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 20:13
as i said, if your super army + your mates's weak armies (:p) attacked at the same time (then a grouped attack), and if we pulled off the overpower bonus of this addition (to do as if your 2 armies were attacking separately), then that's true taht you would have less experience but also you would have less loses, as i explained just after. and if really the ones who attack with you are weak, you can still have 99% of the kills/experience. that would work as during a siege or a sailly forth. the xp is distributed between the commanders, in fonction of the strength and the efficiency of theire army. Edit: the advantage of a grouped attack for the attackers, is that the defenders cant reinforce while the attack began. and also all armies will lose the same % of loses. then the first to attack is not disavantaged compared to the last to attack (if the armies attacking at the exact same time had to attack 1 by one 1). and for the defender, if the additionnal overpower is pulled off, that makes no difference. they would lose the same units if the attackers did a grouped attack or attacked 1 by 1.
if i remember well, HM's idea was more to make the battles have a duration in fonction of the strengh of both armies... and as it would have a duration you could reinforce the defender or join the attacker while the fight has already began. but your idea about the ticks seems very nice to me. moreover that is obvious that to do grouped attacks we need to have a tick system. As in BattleDawn (i already talked about this game in a previous post) that works tick per tick and allows to do grouped attacks. maybe that ticks of 1 hour are a bit too long, but that's a nice idea. that could also work with 1 tick per minute, as if we are able to see our arrival time and delay automatically, we could say to attack at 16h18 and all the players that delayed to attack at 16h18 will attack together as said above. |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 21:02
|
I fell asleep twice reading this. ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: CranK
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 21:23
| What woke you up? |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 21:24
|
lol, rah i didnt hold my promise not to do write long posts:p for the ones who fall asleep before reading the end... was talking about to put a "ticks" system to allow to launch grouped attacks. |
Posted By: Zeus
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 21:54
Feral I thought you agreed to stop making stupid remarks on the threads.
Personally I dont like the tick system. One game I use to play used that. I tick took half and hour and most things took three to six ticks. I would leave And come back and my city would be in ruins. Because the ticks took so long and I had to wait so long I forgot about the game. Then I would remember in the worst times like school then forget again(because of school not bad memory) then remember and by then my account would be gone. The game sucked.
|
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 22:52
|
no no, in fact the ticks would be just to help the battle system. all your other action like production, building... wouldn't use a tick system. and as i said, dont need to have long ticks for the battles. that's enough if the army movements worked minute per minute. that's just to allow combined attack. instead of arriving at 18h16min and 24seconds, your army would arrive at the next minute, so 18h17 precisely. that would just be to improve battles possibilities, nothing to see with your city developpement. |
Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 22:53
|
An important distinction of my proposal from a "ticks" based combining of troops was that timing was still crucially important--battles still always began immediately. If, for example, a bunch of small armies tried to hit a heavily fortified tile, then whichever army arrived first would be sustaining high casualties (comparable to the way it would be overpowered in the current system) until more allies arrived. Thus, the closer together armies arrived, the safer individual participants were from getting singled out and decimated alone. Also, because larger battles took longer to resolve (and sustained casualties over time), players would have opportunity in the big operations to influence the outcome of a battle after it has already begun and partial/to-date outcomes are being reported. The whole proposal was largely focused on making battle more engaging and empowering reactionary decisions without compromising the payoff of a well-planned and executed operation. Ongoing attention to a situation was worthwhile and interesting but not necessary (even in the most intense conflicts, provided the right strategy is applied). |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 23:34
|
Zeus,
That comment may have been the most serious contribution I have attempted to the Forum. Go drink some tea. ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 20 Jan 2011 at 23:57
|
I do like your idea so much. could give us very epic battles with new tactics. and this idea would bring more realism to the battles. also it respects the time you spent to produce your army. actually it takes months to have a good army, and you can lose it all instantly during a battle. while if battles had a duration, you could have the time to have some reinforcements, and that joins the grouped attacks idea we are talking about also. the advantage of this idea on the idea to just have ticks for the arrival of the armies, is that the defender would have the time to ask reinforcements. while actually, and even more with delay ability, the attackers are able to do surpise attacks and the defender can lose his army instantly without asking reinforcements. SC said, it would also ask more playing time, and people cant be connected 24/7. but personnally i think this can be discussed. battles would have a duration and could take a long time (according to the number of troops and the difference of power i guess). to me this is similat to our actual tournament. we can see this as a long battle too. and that doesnt ask more playing time. just the time it take to organize your armies for the battle and launch it. for me, as far as you cant directly give orders to your army while the battle began, it wouldn't ask more playing time than actual battles. Edit:
if the ticks are short, and 1 minute would be the best for me, the battle will begin instantly. the ticks idea comes with the delay idea. if an army is only able to arrive somewhere minute per minute, your army will arrive at the begining of that minute and attack immediatly. it suppose that each mouvement will be automatically delayed by a few seconds for the army to arrive at the begining of the tick (minute). im not sure if im explaining my idea very clearly. |
Posted By: CranK
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 00:09
This is exactly, maybe not exactly, but somewhat the same as I meant with:
What HM suggested will give a entire new dimention to the game and will still keep the human aspect in the game. |
Posted By: Drejan
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 09:14
|
+1 for the delayed attacks or programmed attacks I just hate when a game FORCE you to log at a exact time to play, it's not a work. Just set the maximum delayed time to 24-48 hour. Make it a premium feature if you want, but do it pls :)
|
Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 10:51
|
Yeah, I didn't really mean to derail the topic, especially with one I've covered far better http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/noninstantaneous-battles_topic1066_page1.html - elsewhere . But my idea and limited ability to schedule delayed launches are fully distinct and compatible ideas. Obviously I'm in favor of my own idea. I've not had much to add to this discussion directly, but I do also favor the idea of allowing players to schedule launches around 8-9 hours in advance and I don't mind if an active prestige account is required. Having to spend prestige for each scheduled launch, however, would likely be pushing for too much--it would be perceived by those who don't use it as an unfair advantage, and for those who do as a tax on player activity. A thought on timing: Players who launch manually have to ensure on their own not only that they've calculated the correct launch time, but also that they actually launch right on that time. The more careful people (and especially alliances) are, the more satisfying and impressive the payoff (even if only in show of unity and talent). That's valuable player experience and participation, and should still be made worthwhile--especially if some people can't partake in the easy way. The fix is that scheduled launches should not be perfectly accurate. Instead, timing should end up being off by an unknown amount, the magnitude of which being based on a simple probability function (i.e. super-high chance of being off by 10 seconds, substantial chance of 2 minute error, marginal chance of being off by 15 minutes, tiny chance of being off by 3 hours). You set the schedule and it reports when it is supposed to launch, but you don't know when it really will until it does. This way, doing things the easy way comes with some small risk and thus encourages players who can do better to try if their personal schedules allow while consoling players who have no choice and are fighting enemies who do. |
Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 13:26
We're following this whole discussion carefully (and the more specific one about prolonged battles on HMs other thread).
Yes, very much our thinking. What will probably go to production is that *all* players get the ability to forward schedule troop movements, probably between 8 and 12hrs in advance, but those players with an active prestige account get an extension to this period, probably up to 48hrs. SC |
Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 15:07
|
Please consider, for example, that my attacks on the west flag in the tourney required 16 launches spread over a 16 hour time span (3 "groupings" each lasting between 1 hr and 1 1/2 hrs). So 8-12 hours advance timing is too short in my opinion. I suggest a min of 24 hours advance which would be a reasonable allowance for players with real lives. |
Posted By: Zeus
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 20:32
|
Posted By: Zeus
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 20:34
| Sorry acidently put my message with the qoute:|. |
Posted By: bartimeus
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 22:27
|
You can edit your message (post option (next to the yellow gear icon) / edit post) ------------- Bartimeus, your very best friend. |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 23:23
Of course there could have some drawbacks. but there mut be some ways to limit them. to begin, i think that chosing the good calculation to describe the speed of the loses is a priority. not to make battles too fast or too long. personnaly, if this feature is implemented, i think that the spped of the battle must be more fonction of the difference of power of the armies, than of the weight of the armies. for exemple, 75% of the speed would be dicted by the diference of power, and 25% would be dicted by the weight of the armies. then, if in 2 different battles the armies have the same % of power difference, but a different total weight, the 2 battles would have not a huge difference of duration. the difference of the duration would be given by the 25% of the speed dicted by the weight of the armies. would be to avoid endless battles in the case 100 000 soldiers fighted 100 000 other soldiers. personnally i think that epic battles could last days, maybe a week, as players keep reinforcing. but that would be like our actual tournaments. obviously, in the game you played, you were able to give directly new orders to you armies after or during a battle. but that's not the case in Illyriad actually. once you launched your army, you have nothing else to do. the only thing that could be possible would be eventually to send a messenger to ask your army to flee during a battle if you were outnumbered. and reinforce of course. so it doent ask more playing time i think (because you said this game was long when you were good). i think this game was long because you had too many things to regularily check, too many orders to give dayly etc... im i wrong? but for me that wont be like this if this feature was implemented |
Posted By: Mandarins31
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 23:43
|
The Dude, i agree that 8-12 hours could be too short in some occasions. but then you buy prestige to have more delay time. i think that's already a verry good thing if every player had 8-12h as availbe delay. that's better than if delay was reserved for prestige users, or if less time was allowed no? and as you said, if you have to lauch 1 group of armies each hour but yuo must go and wont have the time to launch it after... then you delay your first army by 1 hour, the following by 2 hours etc.. for 16 launches, you just have to launch half during your first connection... and you launch the other armies 8-12 hours after, when yuo ended your day. it would ask to be connected 5 minutes 2 times in the day. |
Posted By: Zeus
Date Posted: 22 Jan 2011 at 01:55
This is a good idea but it still would cause extra time play. You would have to do the same thing I did for the same reasons-to send reinforcements. In between these check upd the same thing that happened to me could happen to everybody else. Their army could be destroyed before the reinforcements got to the battle. But the length thing is good. It would still have drawbacks but then again everything has its drawbacks. And yes I did have to do a lot of things on this game daily but the thing is is that you controlled a country in europe during WWI. Almost always you are arent making enough resources to sustain your country so you invade another country. Everything earns points. I usually get to the top and stay there. After about two weeks to a month there arent a lot of players left. This is where it gets boring. You do the same things for a month and you get bored.
|