[Strategus] Spoils for early defender victory?

[Jarlek]

Deserters just attacked my village (Ilvia). The battle started with them doing a massive tactical mistake and we managed to take their spawn almost immediatly, then decimating the ones that tried to retake it, meaning we won after just a measly 6 minutes.

This gave me that fat loot of absolute nothing.

This doesn't seem right. Defenders that manage to quickly beat an attacker like this should be rewarded. We would be way better off just leaving one flag up and spawnraping them until they retreated/lost all tickets. That isn't much fun, and any smart commander would just immediately retreat, thus getting minimal losses.

Here's some suggestion to what can happen:

• The defending army that manages to take the attackers spawn (supply camp, whatever) should get a good chunk of their equipment and/or gold.
• The defeated attackers, instead of being teleported, should be moved slightly away from the battle and unable to move for X hours (my suggestion, 24) so that they can't attack/run away, but defenders or others can sally out and attack them. Make them sitting ducks since they got their camp/supplies/base raided.

Here is the battle result, btw:

(click to show/hide)

Deserter_Fanatico_the_Bro vs Ilvia - Hide Details
 - Battle time: 09.09., 20:01
 - Battle duration: 06m10s
 - Army size: 599 vs 1070
 - Battle result: 552 vs 934
 - Winner: Defender

[Miwiw]

Agreed. After all it was the attacker's fault, so don't punish the defenders...

[Latvian]

next time dont take flags at start of the battle   

[Taser]

Nice brag. 

I do agree with you though.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

Agreed. After all it was the attacker's fault, so don't punish the defenders...

Biased nordmen is biased.

[Jarlek]

next time dont take flags at start of the battle   

So since you guys were stupid enough to leave your spawn totally open, we shouldn't take it?

Why should taking the enemy spawn only be a viable option for the attacker?

[Latvian]

So since you guys were stupid enough to leave your spawn totally open, we shouldn't take it?

Why should taking the enemy spawn only be a viable option for the attacker?

you at least could spawnkill us, i think everyone came to battle in hope to get good fight and some xp.And now you are upset because you got tiny loot because you captured our spawn.

[dodnet]

Spawnraping is stupid and lame, don't make it mandatory.

[Jarlek]

you at least could spawnkill us, i think everyone came to battle in hope to get good fight and some xp.And now you are upset because you got tiny loot because you captured our spawn.

Well, you see...

(click to show/hide)

Spawnraping is stupid and lame, don't make it mandatory.

Couldn't have said it better.

Who wants to stand at one spot and overhead for 10 minutes? This is exactly why spawn capturing was imnplemented. Also, if we started spawnraping you; why would you not retreat? Only an idiot would stay there and lose all his stuff when he could just retreat and get minimal losses.

And if "everyone came to battle in hope to get good fight and some xp", then why did you suddenly attack us unannounced, not making any posts in the mercenary board, etc.? You just wanted to take some villages. Besides, if you are stupid enough to leave your spawn open, why shouldn't we take it?

The problem here is that taking the attacker spawns as defenders is not a valid tactic. It would only benefit the defenders if they were losing (and that's when it's least probable that they can take the spawn), while it's the best strategy for attackers. Do you really think defenders shouldn't get anything for roflstomping the attackers?

[Franke]

I agree about the proposition to take loot from the attacker's camp, but I don't think the (losing) attackers should be completely immobilized. Maybe you could just move them slightly away and reduce their speed for some time ("falling back in disorder")?

[Jarlek]

I agree about the proposition to take loot from the attacker's camp, but I don't think the (losing) attackers should be completely immobilized. Maybe you could just move them slightly away and reduce their speed for some time ("falling back in disorder")?

Yeah, something like that. I just said move away and can't move, since otherwise they could move that short distance to the fief/player and attack again. As long as they have to wait X hours before they can reattack the fief/player (unless the guy attacks them) is what I really care about. That, and the defenders with the tactic victory getting some spoils.

[Ptolemy]

Okay, I know nothing about strat... so... what would the attacker get if the same battle was won in the same time in the same way, by them? Defence should get the same as what the attacker would get, in my uneducated opinion until someone explains otherwise to me.

[Jarlek]

Okay, I know nothing about strat... so... what would the attacker get if the same battle was won in the same time in the same way, by them? Defence should get the same as what the attacker would get, in my uneducated opinion until someone explains otherwise to me.

If an attacker manages to take the defender spawn really quickly, they basicly get all the defenders equipment, the defender loses everything, and they might even get some of their troops (deserters).

You see now how it is imbalanced?

[Ptolemy]

Yes, I see. In that case I stand by my previous statement:

Defence should get the same as what the attacker would get.