Rare resources and inner/outer territories

[blake378]

it would be better to initiate the siege and then a 24 hour countdown timer starts when the siege starts, that way you have plenty of time to prepare.

But setting what period you can be sieged doesn't sound good to me.

even in eve the alliance have the option to"Set" reinforcement timers on stations pos and ihubs what is the difference here?

[Dubanka]

it would be better to initiate the siege and then a 24 hour countdown timer starts when the siege starts, that way you have plenty of time to prepare.

But setting what period you can be sieged doesn't sound good to me.

honestly the sb system was outstanding at doing this.
attacker drops a bane (lays seige to the city)
Defender accepts the bane (and selects a start time for the attack)
bane goes 'live'...assets become vulnerable...continues until either the bane is destroyed or the town was captured or destroyed.

if the countdown just starts, without any ability for the defender to determine the defense window, it really just sets the system to be a grief fest. how many times are you going to get up at 4am to defend your tribe? how many sick days will you call into work to defend your tribe at 2 in the afternoon on a wed?

the defender should have the advantage. the defender needs to be able to choose the time that they can maximize the defense of their asset.

[joexxxz]

Great idea. five starts +++++

Also having the defender pick their times of play is an intresting idea.
For example: Let say i play solo. And my usual time of play is mornings. So by setting the time of play, this is when the automatic defense drops to 0 for my tribe land. But when im offline, the automatic defense jumps to 95% for defense. For example: let say to distroy a wall made from bricks it takes 30 mins for one person, 21 mins for 2, 15 min for 3, and so on. when the automatic defense is off. But when automatic defense is on, now everything is * by 50.

Now it takes to distroy a wall for one person about 1500 mins. which is 25 hours. Because if the player is offline, he/she should not be penalized for that. But once the player comes online, the automatic defense is shutdown.

[Andius]

it would be better to initiate the siege and then a 24 hour countdown timer starts when the siege starts, that way you have plenty of time to prepare.

But setting what period you can be sieged doesn't sound good to me.

We'll the point of it is this. In this game people are going to be putting a lot of work into their towns, and storage bins contain everything their towns need or have gathered since the last supply convoy into the inner territories IF they even have an inner territory town they can ship goods to. Allowing a clan from one country to declare an attack so that it falls when all their players are online, and most of the players from the other clan are in bed, would be ridiculous. Everything they worked for, and they are given a chance of waking up late at night, when their reflexes are slow and their wives are not going to be very happy, or letting it be burned and looted... that isn't much fun.

It may be realistic that the attacker gets to choose when to attack, but in reality "I was offline" is not an excuse. These tribal villages would likely be filled with sleeping people and a town guard or two who could raise an alarm at the first hint of trouble, raising everyone from their beds to help defend their village.

The system of you get too choose when you may be attacked is the best system in my opinion because you can't just say. "Nope! Nobody can ever attack me!" You can choose a time when you will be able to field the most members on your average day, ensuring that unless your whole tribe goes on vacation at the same time, there will probably always be defenders in the event of a siege. An attacker should really have to work at taking a town. A lot of work goes into the towns so it doesn't make sense that a lot of work wouldn't go into taking over a town, or destroying, or picking clean a town as well.

While this, and your fortifications should give the attacker a disadvantage clever tactics, strong fighters, numbers, or mercenaries could all help overcome this. Taking a fort would be a big deal, but it would by no means be impossible.

[kaskas]

I have to say i love the idea.
Imo they would have to make sure the time the tribes can choose to be attacked arnt too restrictive, ie i'd make em at least 8 hour intervals, it would mean not all players are available to defend but at least the attackers dont have to be restricted to a small interval, so lets say 00:00->08:00 08:00->16:00 16:00->00:00 or something of the like... if one tribe has a lot of members who work or go to school, the first 2 intervals would probably not be any good for them however, these time intervals would still give players in different time zones eg west coast usa vs east europe +/- 6 hour difference, theres still 2 hours where people who play in the same relative time of day can attack one another (prolly not explaining myself too well) the larger the time zone difference the harder this may become, which is why i mention the siege times one can choose to be attacked shouldnt be too restrictive for the attackers, but restrictive enough for the tribe to actually be able to defend themselves.

[MrDDT]

I have to say i love the idea.
Imo they would have to make sure the time the tribes can choose to be attacked arnt too restrictive, ie i'd make em at least 8 hour intervals, it would mean not all players are available to defend but at least the attackers dont have to be restricted to a small interval, so lets say 00:00->08:00 08:00->16:00 16:00->00:00 or something of the like... if one tribe has a lot of members who work or go to school, the first 2 intervals would probably not be any good for them however, these time intervals would still give players in different time zones eg west coast usa vs east europe +/- 6 hour difference, theres still 2 hours where people who play in the same relative time of day can attack one another (prolly not explaining myself too well) the larger the time zone difference the harder this may become, which is why i mention the siege times one can choose to be attacked shouldnt be too restrictive for the attackers, but restrictive enough for the tribe to actually be able to defend themselves.

I dont want to get into it here, but I dont like this system. Its been said like this before and people will set their times to whatever times the least amount of people are online. Even USA ones, and pretty much what ti does is forces people to have these HUGE events and crappy times.

I can go into a system that works, but I dont really want to derail anything. Just expressing my distaste for that system.

[kaskas]

I had considered that it could turn out to be somewhat like raiding times in wow... making ppl get stuck to the monitor for 4-6 hours straight (been there done that..) and i dont like that concept. However, waking up to find your work destroyed without having had the chance to defend it seems even worse.
So yea it does have its flaws and ofc the numbers i mentioned were just an example, theyd have to study the concept and reach their own conclusion as to what fits best, but i feel selecting a time frame in which to be attacked is a lesser evil to waking up to your work destroyed, i wouldnt want it to turn into some sort of wow raiding time tho, thats why i mentioned lengthy intervals.