battle time limit/garrison size solution

[Tomas]

Some replies

@Penguin and Vermillion - perhaps re-spawn timer was the wrong name for it.  The timer is a countdown until you get placed in the queue (as Penguin correctly understood). The time at which you then spawn then depends on how many people are waiting in front of you and how quickly people are dieing.

@vermillion - 5 hour battles are probably going to be extremely rare. 
- Firstly people can still choose to go in waves and i'm sure some will, especially since you can do different sized waves.
- Secondly since Town's will be easier to assault then I would hope that the huge troop numbers we are seeing would be far less likely in the first place
- And third, without the ever increasing re-spawn times we have now, then more tickets will be useable in the same time frame and so battles will be naturally shorter anyway.  I'd estimate that instead of around 1500 tickets being useable in an hour, it will be around 2500 tickets useable in an hour.

@Haboe - a possible solution to keep flag capping (although it will reduce tickets used per hour)
- A team re-spawn timer instead of personal ones meaning as soon as you die you rejoin the queue (after clicking) but the person at the front of the queue will have to wait until the team re-spawn timer has hit 0 before they actually spawn.  I would still link it to average overall deaths though to mean you have to be out killing your opponents to have a real chance at their flags.

[Vovka]

(click to show/hide)

First change the merc/roster system so that:
1) You have unlimited mercs but only 50 can be spawned at any one time.
To me a roster is fine as it is currently.
100 merc team it means insta spawn for every dead troop in def, insta spawn for attack side aswell but they need time to move. Also what about xp? heaven for leachers? or hell for good players who will get nothing while sitting in a queue after death on ladders?
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)
Its pain in ass make 50 man roster for 1 battle, for 3 battles in row its fucking hell and now u suggesting to commanders an even worse fate - roster manage for whole 1-5h battle 
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. 
Also add to that time "Time is a player who plays alive" its mean what u will be spawned in random time all the time. Also in a team with roster of 100 people you have to play at times less than on the team with 50 (in 1h battle 30 min u loosing for waiting). Also big roster will push top players down by list in querry so instead of spawn in 10 sec after death he will spawn (10sec + "Time is a player who plays alive"*(maxmers-50)"
also in siege ranged have much better k/d than meele and vice versa in a field.


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.
100 man roster, iam die, wait "for timer has hit 0" and hurray iam 50 in querry so what next? i can wait from 1 sec to 10 min i go to "slide on the Internet" and will be slaugther while afk
Its hard stay in battle for 1h how long can you sit at a computer most of the time wait their turn?
Finally battle times will need to be directly proportional to the size of the smallest army in the battle or similar
wish u luck to u take castle or town with 100 man in garrison for 10 min"

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
oh really? castle attack... i have 50 archers and 50 meele players guest whom i will have in my army after death on ladder this 50 meele guys? right! 50 archers. 
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.
its too difficult and will work only if commander be able to select number of slots for archers, easy exploiteble by adding in that list top 2h players     

[Vermilion]

5 hour battles are probably going to be extremely rare. 
- Firstly people can still choose to go in waves and i'm sure some will, especially since you can do different sized waves.

But the current issue is fiefs have too many troops meaning you have to attack with over 3000 troops
So it would ever be 3-4 waves of 3000 or one wave of 10k-12k

- Secondly since Town's will be easier to assault then I would hope that the huge troop numbers we are seeing would be far less likely in the first place

Yes but after 30min-1 hour every siege is just going to turn into a battle.. every wall of the castle will be broken. Currently it's the timer which stops this as you want as many mercs fighting as possible you dont want 2-10 people using catapults the whole time.

- And third, without the ever increasing re-spawn times we have now, then more tickets will be useable in the same time frame and so battles will be naturally shorter anyway.  I'd estimate that instead of around 1500 tickets being useable in an hour, it will be around 2500 tickets useable in an hour.

This is just going to make capping flags impossible, just listen in to a battle where one side is closing in on flags.. It already takes multiple attempts with a constant "just kill as many as you can and increase their spawn times so we can take their flags next wave".

I think this is going to increase the desire to troop stack. People will know in order for someone to attack you they are going to need to prepare for a very very long battle. Also you can defend down to the last man so theirs not as much risk of loss.

[Butan]

I would like this idea to be tested in the next strategus battles

[Sparvico]

I think that a complete overall of the strat-battle system is needed. Options like an actual retreat, and an actual surrender are needed. I also think that there are very good ideas in this thread about rosters and respawn timers. A possible way to negate the risk of 5 hour long battles and sieges require 10k troops would be to redo the troop system a bit.

My idea (or i may have inadvertently stolen it from someone and since forgotten I had the conversation with them)

Field armies are capped at x  troops (maybe 1500)
Garrisons are capped at x troops (maybe 3000) (or possibly some variation for different fief types)
Population is changed to a naturally recovering number capped at 10k (or w/e) that suffers a 20% (or w/e) penalty when a fief is captured. It cannot be converted to troops, but instead factors into prosperity (as is realistic goddammit).
Reserves Since garrisions would have a troop cap, and since people would not want to pay field upkeep for troops over that limit, introduce a fief reserve into which an unlimited number of troops can be put at 50% less upkeep then field armies (or w/e). When a fief is besieged the reserve is locked down with everything else, but in the minute or so before the attack goes through troops can be pulled out to fill up the garrison, just as gear is pulled out. When a fief is captured the reserve suffers a 25% or 50% or w/e desertion toll and the rest remains for the conquers to use as troops/reserves.

This system would:
1. Eliminate huge garrison build ups, thereby making 5 hour battles impossible.
2. Allow for factions to still stockpile troops in key cities and silmutanisoly allow for defenders to bleed them out with out wasting 500 troops per battle because they could not attack with a reasonable amount given the time limit.
3. Give some goddamn purpose to population.
4. And frankly my friends, it just makes sense.

[Vovka]

(click to show/hide)

I think that a complete overall of the strat-battle system is needed. Options like an actual retreat, and an actual surrender are needed. I also think that there are very good ideas in this thread about rosters and respawn timers. A possible way to negate the risk of 5 hour long battles and sieges require 10k troops would be to redo the troop system a bit.

My idea (or i may have inadvertently stolen it from someone and since forgotten I had the conversation with them)

Field armies are capped at x  troops (maybe 1500)
Garrisons are capped at x troops (maybe 3000) (or possibly some variation for different fief types)
Population is changed to a naturally recovering number capped at 10k (or w/e) that suffers a 20% (or w/e) penalty when a fief is captured. It cannot be converted to troops, but instead factors into prosperity (as is realistic goddammit).
Reserves Since garrisions would have a troop cap, and since people would not want to pay field upkeep for troops over that limit, introduce a fief reserve into which an unlimited number of troops can be put at 50% less upkeep then field armies (or w/e). When a fief is besieged the reserve is locked down with everything else, but in the minute or so before the attack goes through troops can be pulled out to fill up the garrison, just as gear is pulled out. When a fief is captured the reserve suffers a 25% or 50% or w/e desertion toll and the rest remains for the conquers to use as troops/reserves.

This system would:
1. Eliminate huge garrison build ups, thereby making 5 hour battles impossible.
2. Allow for factions to still stockpile troops in key cities and silmutanisoly allow for defenders to bleed them out with out wasting 500 troops per battle because they could not attack with a reasonable amount given the time limit.
3. Give some goddamn purpose to population.
4. And frankly my friends, it just makes sense.

I think devs dont have time for a big changes in strat
all what you described (except prosperity goddamnit) can be achieved by changing the rule "1/3" to "1/3 but not more than 1800" (ie, with the army in 1800 I can attack any army), in that case store large garrisons will be dangerous because whole garrison can go to the enemy if enemy capture the flag. This should have been done a year ago, then strat would have been quite different

[Casimir]

I think the issue with garrisons is better solved on the strat map than in battles. Add a besieging mechanic that causes attraction proportionate to the number of tickets kept in the fief. Reduce a 10k garrison down to a 2k garrison without even attacking. Would encourage a more aggressive use of forces and discourage stacking garrisons in one simple move.

[Tomas]

I think devs dont have time for a big changes in strat
all what you described (except prosperity goddamnit) can be achieved by changing the rule "1/3" to "1/3 but not more than 1800" (ie, with the army in 1800 I can attack any army), in that case store large garrisons will be dangerous because whole garrison can go to the enemy if enemy capture the flag. This should have been done a year ago, then strat would have been quite different

That change alone won't help as players can be adding new troops to fiefs on a daily basis.

Based on an estimate of 1k defenders killed per battle and 10 troop grinders in a fief, it would take 15 battles over 19ish days to kill off a 10k garrison plus the extra troops created in between battles.  Its just too much and considering the number of grinders some clans have it is pretty easy to make unconquerable fiefs.

@Sparvico - caps won't work as players can just gradually feed new troops into their fiefs as the old ones are killed. 

@Casimir - A besieging mechanism would work but I don't favour the significant loss of troops due to things other than battles.  This is a combat sim afterall.   The way I have suggested besieging in the past is as a way of freezing a fief so that it cannot be reinforced in between battles

How it would work is that
1) The besieging army must still be 1/3 the size of the fief's pop+garrison but instead of creating a siege battle it creates a "siege".  This will happen for all fiefs.
2) The attacker can then launch assaults from their siege camp which happen 24 hours later (depending on nighttime).  These attacks must be at least either 1/3 of the garrison in size OR at least 1.5k troops.
3) During the battle all gear is accessible for each side.
4) After a successful attack (flag cap or all defenders dead) the siege ends and the attackers get the fief and its contents.
5) After an unsuccessful attack (time out, defender flag cap, retreat or all attackers dead) then each side's used gear is returned to them (minus two levels). Any remaining attacker tickets are still lost.
6) If after an attack the attackers numbers drop below 1/3 of the defenders numbers then the "siege" is broken.
7) At any time the defenders can choose to sally out (same rules on numbers as in #2) with the battle happening 24 hours later (depending on nighttime).  A siege camp map might be nice for this.
8) At any time a 3rd relieving army can choose to assault the besieging army (same rules on numbers as in #2) with the battle happening 24 hours later (depending on nighttime). Again a siege camp map would be good here.
9) During a siege the fief is completely locked (no transfers in or out, no buying or selling goods/equip).  This starts 5 hours after the siege is initiated.
10) Siege camps can be reinforced though at any time (although the troops won't get added to any upcoming assault) and so can relieving armies (but only within 3 hours like a normal battle).

This however is probably a bit more complicated to code.

[Casimir]

Adding a mechanic like this would actually lead to more battles and more tickets spent fighting. But would be a deterrent against stacking troops in fiefs and would encourage people to use their armies more aggressively.

No solution is perfect but the current system is pretty screwed.

[Butan]

Also item bombing a fief without meaning to (attacking straight after the last wave) can completely fuck up a fief after one or two waves.
So stacking grinders of troops in a fief wont help; also if you attack multiple fiefs like that, except if you have hundreds of grinders, you cant just move them to grind everywhere efficiently.

Thus stacking troops in defense would still be very very dangerous.



I really think all we have to do is modify this 1/3 rule so that after a plateau you can attack what you want, human brain will do the rest.

[Lumetta]

I don't thinks it's a good idea to have the smallest armies time. Say its a castle your attacking and you have about 2000 men attacking it. The defenders only have 100 defending it... but they are all good players. All they'd have to do is hold out for a couple minutes then they would of killed 1900 troops (that werent even there to fight).
    Strat would turn into who could recruit the most heros, not just try to get People on your roster.

[Tomas]

Also item bombing a fief without meaning to (attacking straight after the last wave) can completely fuck up a fief after one or two waves.
So stacking grinders of troops in a fief wont help; also if you attack multiple fiefs like that, except if you have hundreds of grinders, you cant just move them to grind everywhere efficiently.

Fief owners always have enough time to remove everything from a fief before they get re-attacked.  Item bombing is only an issue when the owner is afk either from the fief or from their computer.  You can't exactly plan that as the attacker though.  Therefore stacking grinders does help.

As for attacking multiple fiefs to spread grinders out, yes that might help but given that just 10 grinders alone nearly double the time to cap a fief it would still be too much effort.  Instead of 1 battle per day for 15 out of 19 days you are looking at 2 or even 3 battles per day for probably an even longer period.  I doubt any faction can maintain that number of failed assaults without risking some serious burnout and this is speaking as a leader of the only Strat faction who has even come close to that at Uxkhal.  We had severe burnout after 10 assaults in 13 days.  We probably could have limped through to 15 assaults but 30 assaults from 2 battles per day would have killed us.

[Butan]

Fief owners always have enough time to remove everything from a fief before they get re-attacked.  Item bombing is only an issue when the owner is afk either from the fief or from their computer.  You can't exactly plan that as the attacker though.  Therefore stacking grinders does help.

Cant you attack a fief the second the battle is over and dont give time to the lord to remove shit ?

[Casimir]

There's always a moment between battle ending and an attack being initiated. Also eventually attackers will have to skip an assault because of time constraints / night time settings.

[Butan]

Defense truely OP