Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Siege Mechanics, change?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedSiege Mechanics, change?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 2 Votes, Average 1.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
sedahs View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2011
Location: MN
Status: Offline
Points: 1 		Direct Link To This Post Topic: Siege Mechanics, change?
    Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 01:03
I just finished reading this and maybe it would help others see/know your point if you posted a message from in game. Like a "combat report" or the "City name belonging to player ready to fall!" message, it should give before you can raze/capture.

It looks like you didn't get any messages at all. If that's true you should do a petition because it probably was an error.
If you had attacked and your support didn't attack with you I'd listen to HonoredMule on this one.
Back to Top
Rorgash View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 894 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Mar 2012 at 18:20
hmm, i just looked in the thread showing what has been implemented and saw it was 6 months old, i guess they just didnt move anything there
Back to Top
Ander View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Mar 2012 at 18:19
Originally posted by Calico_Jack Calico_Jack wrote:

its been 6 months since last anything was implemented that came from here... kinda makes all these topics useless for anything but voicing our complaints and more importantly our ideas for improving the game which all go ignored

That is not true. Exodus and food penalty changes came out after a lot of discussion with the community. Even for the current tournament, lot of feedback was taken from the players - GM Stormcrow said in GC that they were planning the alliance tournament after a lot of requests from players. Even a few days back, the combat algorithm was modified within days after a petition regarding the same. They are doing the hardwork and we are enjoying the game, it is good to show some thanks.Smile
Back to Top
Rorgash View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 894 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Mar 2012 at 18:17
should have added the part back again saying i wont post to anything but concrete posts from people who have read what i have said and keep to the subject at hand from now on, ofcourse the posts can be for or against or just questions or ideas, but if they hold no meaning i dont post again
Back to Top
Ander View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Mar 2012 at 18:08
Originally posted by Calico_Jack Calico_Jack wrote:

 
Now for anyone who has tried to take a 20k city from a active player in an active and somewhatbig alliance would know is that taking a city by raze or by capture is HARD, REALLY HARD unless ..
I recommend you lay siege on Rill. Her towns are much smaller than 20K, she knows nothing about siege and she's in a training alliance since ever, apparently without any hope of graduation. Your 80,000 troops can get some light exercise.

Just dont forget to come back and tell us what happened!
Back to Top
Rorgash View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 894 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Mar 2012 at 11:59
  Since the mod decided it was a good idea to remove my whole post and by doing so the WHOLE explanation of why i got angry and what my point here is after everyone keeps not understanding after all my attempts... ****** ha! LOL



part of old post:

thought i made this "Siege camp and supporting camps on the same Square should attack at the same time when the raze button is pressed, NOT JUST THE SIEGE CAMP ITSELF." clear a page ago



forgot to add the thanks again to Babbens about starting the other topic


---Just notices, its been 6 months since last anything was implemented that came from here... kinda makes all these topics useless for anything but voicing our complaints and more importantly our ideas for improving the game which all go ignored Tongue unless you swear then they delete the post and your idea ----


Edited by Calico_Jack - 20 Mar 2012 at 15:20
Back to Top
Babbens View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith


Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 165 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Mar 2012 at 11:15
Originally posted by Calico_Jack Calico_Jack wrote:

Another and on a entirely different subject, adding both so not to make extra topics.


as the hype is on the first subject, and rightly so, but as I like your second idea as well, allow me to make that extra topic:
Trade special building

Thank you
Back to Top
JimJams View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2011
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 496 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Mar 2012 at 11:03
Originally posted by Calico_Jack Calico_Jack wrote:

the spell range in this game makes ALL offensive spells useless, so i dont know about the spell, but ita another way which im all for, what you put forward is a logical way and realistic way of taking a city and as such would be a good addition to the current choices, BUT should not exclude others

Now for anyone who has tried to take a 20k city from a active player in an active and somewhat big alliance would know is that taking a city by raze or by capture is HARD, REALLY HARD unless very well coordinated and backed by ALOT of your alliance members.

and once again Geofrey, the months or years of time lost when you lose a town, as i have said before more then once you still lose all that time, the raze does nothing more then potentionaly destroy the last 10% of your town, the other 90% has already been destroyed by the camp already.

a 20k pop town cant be razed until the pop is down to 4k, which with help of another town can be gained in less then a day

Oooh!! So taking a 20K city from an ACTIVE player, with a BIG alliance, and without a lot of your alliance mates helping, is hard ? Eeeeeh...

Why shouldn't be hard ? One man against a big player with a big alliance should be able to easily take a city ? No way, sorry.

And no, if you take my 20K city to zero pop and you go away, I have lost a lot, but way way way less than having it razed. Just only the research is valuable a lot more than 20K pop (which I can easily restore with a few prestige and some help).
Back to Top
Rorgash View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 894 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Mar 2012 at 10:04
the spell range in this game makes ALL offensive spells useless, so i dont know about the spell, but ita another way which im all for, what you put forward is a logical way and realistic way of taking a city and as such would be a good addition to the current choices, BUT should not exclude others

Now for anyone who has tried to take a 20k city from a active player in an active and somewhat big alliance would know is that taking a city by raze or by capture is HARD, REALLY HARD unless very well coordinated and backed by ALOT of your alliance members.

and once again Geofrey, the months or years of time lost when you lose a town, as i have said before more then once you still lose all that time, the raze does nothing more then potentionaly destroy the last 10% of your town, the other 90% has already been destroyed by the camp already.

a 20k pop town cant be razed until the pop is down to 4k, which with help of another town can be gained in less then a day


Edited by Calico_Jack - 20 Mar 2012 at 10:08
Back to Top
geofrey View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 31 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1013 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Mar 2012 at 22:39
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

I don't agree, I think it should be more difficult to capture a city than to just stack up a whole bunch of troops.  Given the severity of losing a city, it should be a difficult thing to raze or capture one.

I agree. 

As is; sieging and capturing or razing a city is drastic and destroys months to years of building that a player built into his town. As a result it should be VERY difficult to siege a city. I would say the difficulty to successfully siege a city should be increased, or the penalties for being sieged (percent lost) should be decreased. 

Alternatively there could be another method of capturing a city. A diplomatic approach to capturing the city would act as a good middle ground between the offensive attacking and the. It would be difficult, but would allow you to capture a city without destroying any buildings. 
Conditions could be like: 
- You have a barricade around the target town
- The target town has less than 10% of it's total food capacity. 
- Target town has no sov. land
- A new spell must be active on the city, lowering the morale of the city making it susceptible to your new rule
-You can at any time send a diplomatic capture party to capture the city (these are lost afterwords)
-- Consist of 200,000 food via caravans
-- 100 times the population in gold 
-- 10 messengers
-- appropriate amount of settlers

Diplomatic capture party fails if all of the first 4 conditions are not met. This way it comes down to coordination, timing, spying (food count), sabotaging (preventing building /demolishing for food), and magical power (capturing blight) to capture a town peacefully. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.