battle time limit/garrison size solution

[Tomas]

First change the merc/roster system so that:
1) You have unlimited mercs but only 50 can be spawned at any one time.
2) You can make changes even during the battle to add new players (preferably in game using a kick function and an apply/accept function)

Then make it so the re-spawn timers are based on:
1) Your deaths
2) The average number of deaths in the battle
So if you have 50% less deaths than the average your re-spawn timer will be 50% of the default time.  If you have twice the average deaths you will have a re-spawn time equal to 200% of the default time.  Default should probably be 10 seconds. 

Once your re-spawn timer has hit 0 you will be presented with an invitation to join the spawn queue which you must click to accept.  If you accept you will join the queue and finally spawn when it is your turn.

Finally battle times will need to be directly proportional to the size of the smallest army in the battle or similar


The above changes combined will mean
1) All battles will be an appropriate length according to the size of the armies involved meaning attacking large garrisons is possible. Whilst a 5 hour battle may sound pretty hardcore for commanders it is no more hardcore than 4 battles in 4 straight days imo.
2) Players can take breaks in battles, arrive late or leave early making them overall more casual for the average player.
3) Commanders have more flexibility in their rosters meaning that it will be easier to maintain a full roster and kick unwanted players
4) Huge garrisons are no longer such a big issue, you just need a big army and a free evening (proper server primetimes will probably be needed to keep huge battles involving more than X  troops within reasonable time frames).
5) With enough mercs teams will always have players ready to spawn meaning more tickets can be used in less time, involving more players more frequently for more fun. 
6) #5 inadvertently means spawn capping is only really going to be an option in battles where one team performs significantly better than their opponents.  Personally I think this is good though because it will leave more room for tactics within field battles instead of the usual charge spawn repeatedly until the defenders can't spawn quick enough to protect it.  There will still be an overall time limit to make sure the attackers do attack.
7) It could cause a hell of a lot of drama if mid battle an entire clan switches sides and applies for the enemy.  Just imagine the rage
8) good players that die less will rejoin the spawn queue quicker than bad players****
9) Afk players won't be there to accept their queue invitation and so won't join it until they return.

****EDIT - this can be enhanced by splitting rosters into melee and ranged so players accepted as ranged will only be compared against the other ranged players in the battle for their re-spawn timer.  Since ranged often die less this will prob be needed. 

[Haboe]

You want this or you did this?

Also, the timer to 10 seconds, and faster with good deathrate, that will make a spawncap so much harder (its already hard to do with 30+ seconds to spawn, even worse if they spawn each 10 seconds on average.

Why battle timer based on the smallest army? Its based on the biggest atm iirc. That makes it a big disadvantage to attack a smaller army with a big army. Having 1700 tickets to attack a 1000 army, will set you at big risk of running out of time, since you won't every be able to use all tickets. (defenders have a advantage on this, a good castle can easily hold 1500 vs 1000)

[Tomas]

You want this or you did this?

I have no power so its only a suggestion

Also, the timer to 10 seconds, and faster with good deathrate, that will make a spawncap so much harder (its already hard to do with 30+ seconds to spawn, even worse if they spawn each 10 seconds on average.

That was covered in point 6   But i think that's good.  Most field battles these days are just waves of charging followed by continuous charges to finally cap the flags.  Its dull and very hard to win as a defender.  The time limit will still force attackers to attack but instead of simply charging there will be more incentive for attackers to try and come up with a tactic that kills the enemy most efficiently.

Why battle timer based on the smallest army? Its based on the biggest atm iirc. That makes it a big disadvantage to attack a smaller army with a big army. Having 1700 tickets to attack a 1000 army, will set you at big risk of running out of time, since you won't every be able to use all tickets. (defenders have a advantage on this, a good castle can easily hold 1500 vs 1000)

Its the smaller army because that's the number of tickets that have to die for the battle to end.  The actual ratio of time to tickets will determine how much pressure is on attackers but there shouldn't a problem as you describe.  If in an hour 1500 tickets die on average per team, then it doesn't matter if the battle is 3000vs1500 or 1500vs3000- either way one side will have lost all its tickets after an hour and allowing time for another 1500 tickets to be used will be pointless.

[William_Marshal]

+1

[Keshian]

That was covered in point 6   But i think that's good.  Most field battles these days are just waves of charging followed by continuous charges to finally cap the flags.  Its dull and very hard to win as a defender.  The time limit will still force attackers to attack but instead of simply charging there will be more incentive for attackers to try and come up with a tactic that kills the enemy most efficiently.

No.  Its actually really easy to win as defender.  Dont allow flags to be capped and you win just with time now and its pretty easy to stop flag caps if equal armor on both s ides which is common.

[jtobiasm]

First change the merc/roster system so that:
1) You have unlimited mercs but only 50 can be spawned at any one time.
2) You can make changes even during the battle to add new players (preferably in game using a kick function and an apply/accept function)

But wouldn't this cause a lot of hassle during and before battles? Leaders would constantly be getting asked "is there a spot" or they'd be checking to see if people are going off line or just having a break.
For example, someone disconnects then they get took off the roster. Someone who has been waiting for 20-30 minutes or even longer then gets accepted. That person who got took off gets his internet back and he then has to wait or disturb the leaders to get someone else taken off. Even though it's not even his fault it still would cause arguments.

Of course the current way of having 50 mercs wouldn't work if we had 5 hour battles.

[Tomas]

No.  Its actually really easy to win as defender.  Dont allow flags to be capped and you win just with time now and its pretty easy to stop flag caps if equal armor on both s ides which is common.

Only with a substantially better roster, favorable terrain or better equip.  In an even fight I'd back the attackers especially if they know how to use forward spawns properly.

(click to show/hide)

But wouldn't this cause a lot of hassle during and before battles? Leaders would constantly be getting asked "is there a spot" or they'd be checking to see if people are going off line or just having a break.
For example, someone disconnects then they get took off the roster. Someone who has been waiting for 20-30 minutes or even longer then gets accepted. That person who got took off gets his internet back and he then has to wait or disturb the leaders to get someone else taken off. Even though it's not even his fault it still would cause arguments.

There's no need to take anybody off the roster whether they disconnected, went afk temporarily or quit completely.  They just won't ever join the re-spawn queue again unless they came back. You'd only take people off the roster if they were disobeying orders or hurting your team somehow.  There's also no need to make anybody wait 20 mins either as the whole point is that you have unlimited merc places and the limit is instead on the number of mercs that can be spawned simultaneously.

[Haboe]

But wouldn't this cause a lot of hassle during and before battles? Leaders would constantly be getting asked "is there a spot" or they'd be checking to see if people are going off line or just having a break.
For example, someone disconnects then they get took off the roster. Someone who has been waiting for 20-30 minutes or even longer then gets accepted. That person who got took off gets his internet back and he then has to wait or disturb the leaders to get someone else taken off. Even though it's not even his fault it still would cause arguments.

Of course the current way of having 50 mercs wouldn't work if we had 5 hour battles.

You misunderstood.

Normal rostercall as always, only he can accept 70 or 80 or 100 players.

There can only be 50 alive, so the rest goes into the "waiting que" to spawn.

Will make it impossible to cap flags though...

[jtobiasm]

Oh, I guess I didn't understand it. Thanks for explaining it more haboe.
+1 then.

[Vermilion]

Personally I think it would be better to keep it the way it is but once the timer runs out...

1. Remaining troops and gear enter a new battle the next day same start time new roster
or
2. Remaining troops and gear enter a new battle the next day same start time new roster and the possibility to reinforce but only for 2 hours
or
3. Both sides keep what they have and claim 25% each of the killed loot. Then as they are on top of each other on strat map one can attack the other or they can both run away.

Though I do like the idea of more than 50 on a roster but only 50 alive.. this will allow the 'rage quitters' to leave and not fuck over the team.
However, the idea of a 5 hour + battle will just be too much and I personally at least will stop enjoying the battle, also I'm sure this will lead to more rage quitters.

And most importantly a 5 hour battle time is going to fuck over all other battles.. if you attack at 7 and two 5000+ armies attack others at 6:30 you'll battle time is going to end up 10 hours later where it is most likely going to get fucked again by night time settings.

[Penguin]

I like the idea of huge battles, but the spawn queue thing could make it next to impossible to cap flags as an attacker. Let's say you manage to get a full roster AND 15 extra players. Wouldn't that make a pretty steady stream of spawning defenders to replace a spot instantly upon death?

[Vermilion]

I like the idea of huge battles, but the spawn queue thing could make it next to impossible to cap flags as an attacker. Let's say you manage to get a full roster AND 15 extra players. Wouldn't that make a pretty steady stream of spawning defenders to replace a spot instantly upon death?

Yea you would have to do it so you join the queue.. then when you're next in line your respawn timer starts once there is an available place

That way when someone dies it could be anywhere between 5 and 45 seconds till the next person spawns

[Penguin]

Yea you would have to do it so you join the queue.. then when you're next in line your respawn timer starts once there is an available place

That way when someone dies it could be anywhere between 5 and 45 seconds till the next person spawns

Once your re-spawn timer has hit 0 you will be presented with an invitation to join the spawn queue which you must click to accept.  If you accept you will join the queue and finally spawn when it is your turn.

From this it sounds like your respawn timer starts before the queue, not after.

Or are you saying that the timer SHOULD start after the queue in order to work?

[Vermilion]

I don't know what OP meant by this.. I was just agreeing with your point that an instant spawn after each death would make it too easy to defend flags

[FRANK_THE_TANK]

To hell with the timer!

They should just remove it from sieges. I don't see chadz the magnificent (wait I mean lazy) getting off his fat Austrian arse or on to it to code up some fancy fandangled solution. I do like your idea Tom but I think removing the timer for sieges has much the same effect.

With an infinte time dieing is going to become a shit load more important because the sooner or later one side is going to be out spawning the other side by a big margin and they are going to seriously be put at risk.

An attacking side could wind up in a position that a well timed sally forth could completely turn the battle and thus they will have to be ready to QMR like mother fuckers.