Fortress Defenses

[Borb]

Fortress was in initial stages, but once players hits about +- 85 level units, a big problem arises - especially when player is not spending enormous amounts of mushrooms. Every level of unit upgrades is + 10 levels, thus if someone has units of lvl 85 and strongest fortifications, lvl 95 soldiers will easily defeat him. That´s too bad for people who dont spend mushrooms, but that´s not to worst thing.
Worst thing happened me today - i have lvl 105 units and strongest fortifications, yet i was easily defeated player with lvl 105 soldiers - which simply leaves me with No means of defending myself, thus making me unable to progress with fortress because of lack of resources due to constant raids.
I think its a problem if oponent can simply defeat anyone with sheer numbers - oponent sent 39 soldiers and such high amount of soldiers will defeat any kind of defense.
What to do then ? Is it that its simply impossible to progress in fortress at certain point because of this ? ( lvl 13 fortress)

[bobo baggins]

this is kinda funny your other post complain about the honor system being used for attacking then you complain about the defense system.

lets look at both and how the player HoF and arena is/was

Ok so the computer picks a players fortress to attack and a bar to show how successful you will be with x amount of troops. so you can decide to attack or wait till cooldown or use a shroom to see next player you can attack. all this based on honor sounds good to me since those players near you in honor will usually be close to you with upgrades making fights tougher and more fair.

On the defensive side of the coin since most players that can attack you will be about the same fortress and other building upgrades it should make it tougher for them to attack and win not impossible since different ppl upgrade different things in different orders.

as for arena the old way it gave you someone close to your honor and you could decide to attack or not. new you get 3 choices but with same way of choosing. only difference between arena and fortress is for arena you can go to hall of fame and choose any player you want to attack but if you attack someone with to low of honor you get nothing unless they have items in scrapbook you need.

so all that being said from I read from your 2 posts basicly you want no one who can beat you or that is too close to your upgrades to attack you but you want easy attacks so you can take others resources. Cant have it both ways all I can say is system setup is good as it is don't change it. you either need to pay to be the best so no one can beat you deal with it as it is or let your ranking go down enough so those that can beat you never see you as someone they can attack.

[Borb]

First of all,Arena is something Entirely different than Fortress.Arena means nothing in terms of usefulness.

Second, my point is that player has no means of defending himself.Even when his units and fortifications are maxed out, he will still lose - that´s first major issue.

Third, if finding oponents in fortress is based purely on honor, it means that the game Punishes player for Attacking other players - it encourages player Not to Attack anyone, because attacking gives you honor, thus high ranked people will attack you.But if you wont attack anyone, nobody from high ranks will attack you and you will gain way more resources than from attacking = that´s another major problem.

[bobo baggins]

So the gold from arena wins is useless hmmm that's a first. I have gained millions of gold a day when trying to get my lvl 12 arena wins medals that gold helped me and my guilds out a lot. As for fortress what does the archers, mages and fighters do for your toon in dungeons, quests guild dungeon raids and guild wars nothing so basicly all the fortress is really good for outside of the academy and gem mine is another way for ppl to have bragging rights which is fine but to say the system is broke is wrong. Now top players can beat up each other and leave those of us alone who don't care to attack or be attack and stay at a lower honor level.

All I can say is I have lvl 12 fortresses and I am left alone by the top ppl cause my honor is low and I like it like that. don't fix what isn't broken

[Borb]

Originally Posted by bobo baggins

All I can say is I have lvl 12 fortresses and I am left alone by the top ppl cause my honor is low and I like it like that. don't fix what isn't broken

So basicly you are enjoying how broken system is because its to your advantage.That´s fine, but please - focus on serious input for this problem, rather than on your gain. I am only trying to make this game more fair.
Some people like to enjoy fortress rather than only focusing on main game - and this topic is considered for them, to make the fortress as good as possible.

[bobo baggins]

As I said in your other thread in arena if you get yourself ranked to high other will knock you back down it happens part of the game. Fortress uses same system as it should. why should someone with say lvl 11 fortress be in say top 25 with everyone else having say lvl 16 fortress. with current system it cant happen for the most part but with the way you want it heck a lvl 5 fortress can get in top 5 because those with more upgrades cant touch him.

Is either way perfect no but current system is the best.

a side note upgrades are a portion of how players are picked for attacking but it ia mainly honor based now.

[Borb]

Originally Posted by bobo baggins

As I said in your other thread in arena if you get yourself ranked to high other will knock you back down it happens part of the game. Fortress uses same system as it should. why should someone with say lvl 11 fortress be in say top 25 with everyone else having say lvl 16 fortress. with current system it cant happen for the most part but with the way you want it heck a lvl 5 fortress can get in top 5 because those with more upgrades cant touch him.

Is either way perfect no but current system is the best.

a side note upgrades are a portion of how players are picked for attacking but it ia mainly honor based now.

Why should it be honor based though ? It doesnt make any sense. It makes the game unfair for people who are Active in attacking - shouldnt they be rewarded for being active players ? Instead, with just 0 attacks and only focusing on main upgrades , player doesnt even have to build proper defenses because of his low rank.He can just have Fortress lvl 15 and defenses of level 10, but nobody will attack him because he is super low ranked - is this ok ? Isnt this abusing the system ?

The way it is A) It´s fairly easy to get into top 50 with just attacks, even if that person has low level fotress - all that person needs to do is attack people that have only fortifications ( people who were raided) and they will quickly gain honor.
B) Attacking will result in gaining resouces, which is good, but it will result in gaining honor, which will result in gaining higher rank, thus higher ranked ( usually mushroomers ) will attack you, and thus you will lose more resources than if u didnt attack. THAT IS THE MAIN POINT Simply - the way it is, Attacking other fortress is Bad - and i dont think that should be the aim of fortress.
C) Not attacking is best, as person will most likely stay at low ranks, but he will have high fortress.He wont get any resources from attacks,but since he wont lose any resources ( since nobody will attack him), its just better for him.He will also spare lot of time because he has no need to upgrade his units and fortification every level - he can just make mines and be cool.

Conclusion : Attacking is currently very bad and its simply better to Never Do That.

Solution: Honor shouldnt matter during attacks - only level of fortress should, otherwise people would abuse the system with not attacking, gaining huge advantage over active people.

That´s all, I dont think that there is anything else that needs to be said about this.

[bobo baggins]

Originally Posted by Borb

Why should it be honor based though ? It doesnt make any sense. It makes the game unfair for people who are Active in attacking - shouldnt they be rewarded for being active players ? Instead, with just 0 attacks and only focusing on main upgrades , player doesnt even have to build proper defenses because of his low rank.He can just have Fortress lvl 15 and defenses of level 10, but nobody will attack him because he is super low ranked - is this ok ? Isnt this abusing the system ?

The way it is A) It´s fairly easy to get into top 50 with just attacks, even if that person has low level fotress - all that person needs to do is attack people that have only fortifications ( people who were raided) and they will quickly gain honor.
B) Attacking will result in gaining resouces, which is good, but it will result in gaining honor, which will result in gaining higher rank, thus higher ranked ( usually mushroomers ) will attack you, and thus you will lose more resources than if u didnt attack. THAT IS THE MAIN POINT Simply - the way it is, Attacking other fortress is Bad - and i dont think that should be the aim of fortress.
C) Not attacking is best, as person will most likely stay at low ranks, but he will have high fortress.He wont get any resources from attacks,but since he wont lose any resources ( since nobody will attack him), its just better for him.He will also spare lot of time because he has no need to upgrade his units and fortification every level - he can just make mines and be cool.

Conclusion : Attacking is currently very bad and its simply better to Never Do That.

Solution: Honor shouldnt matter during attacks - only level of fortress should, otherwise people would abuse the system with not attacking, gaining huge advantage over active people.

That´s all, I dont think that there is anything else that needs to be said about this.

why should it not be honor based arena is and those that don't want to be attacked there don't attack thus those players having a lower rank.

Why should fortress be honor based answer is because that is how fortress is ranked not by upgrades if it was ranked by upgrades then I would say yes attacks should be determined by upgrades.

you say that upgrades should only matter for attacks I say hog wash to that why should someone who is not attacking others have to deal with those that are you all can fight amongst yourselves and leave us peaceful players alone. you play your way which is attacking others that attack others and those that don't will play their way.

it works in arena and works in fortress. yes in ways they r different but also the same in that you either attack or don't for honor and resources.

[Borb]

A) Arena is Totally different. You get barely any penalty from losing ( if you lost 10% gold, it would be fine) and barely any benefits from winning. If you would like to compare fortress to arena, then fine - but upon losing in fortress, the loser should lose 0.01% of resources.Then it would be fair. Otherwise, do not compare it.
B) Fortress is called Fortress, not Arena. Just the name implicates that if someone has weak fortress, he will be raided by others - its not wheter he participates in fights or not, that would be irrational.
Your logic is that if you were in medieval ages and you had very very rich and prosperous city, but no defenses, that everybody would leave you alone, only because you do not attack anyone. That´s not how it works, you would get raided immediately. And that´s how it should be like, otherwise it´s not really a fortress.

To make fortress Fair, enemies you can attack should be based on level of Fortress, so that player wont abuse the system.

PS: Please, do not respond, unless you have objective critique towards game mechanics.

[yerawen]

Originally Posted by Borb

PS: Please, do not respond, unless you have objective critique towards game mechanics.

Now, that is just not nice. None of us is objective, but we are discussing different views and we are all exposing arguments to defend our position. Nobody said anything like "you are wrong, that's it!". Those who disagreed with you, did so in a rational and respectful way. Taking that into account, your comment gives the impression that nobody who disagrees with you should respond.

Regarding the discussion itself: I agree with you in that the rank-only based system is not the best (http://forum-int.sfgame.net/showthread.php?t=4936); maybe a combination would be. In any case, I believe it is a bit too soon to judge it fairly, given that the sudden switch messed up the pre-existing "balance". I believe we should give it a chance for some time, and then revisit our opinion. If we keep requesting changes immediately after every update, updates become useless because we don't get to experience them fully.