Forwarded: (New Game Feature) PvP neighbourhood map

[Agent327]

I followed the instructions in https://forum.en.forgeofempires.com/index.php?threads/guide-to-the-ideas-section.32401/

There is another one

https://forum.en.forgeofempires.com/index.php?threads/formats-for-ideas.26585/

Thank you for your feedback, I shall clarify the point so as to make sure everybody can understand it.

You fail to mention who actually did not read here.

As I am sure you must be aware, you score points in the weekly tournament with any type of fighting, be it GE, GvG, PvP, or Continent Map. Ergo, if you attacked a house in the PvP neighbourhood map, you would score points in exactly the same way as people currently score points by attacking a neighbour's city.

So your PvP neighbourhood system does not replace the current system, but only replaces the possibillity to attack your neighbours. You should really start to read what you wrote, cause you are clueless on your own writings![/QUOTE]

 

[DeletedUser105078]

you are clueless on your own writings!

There is no nead to be offensive. I would simply like to find a PVP system that is acceptable to the few plunderers in FOE and that improves the game for the vast majority of players who do not like the plunder feature. I would be grateful for any constructive suggestions you may have.

 

[Agent327]

There is no nead to be offensive. I would simply like to find a PVP system that is acceptable to the few plunderers in FOE and that improves the game for the vast majority of players who do not like the plunder feature. I would be grateful for any constructive suggestions you may have.

I find it to offensive that you accuse me of not reading your idea where in fact I have read it better than you have.

No change in the system is acceptable to the plunderers. They want to plunder!

 

[DeletedUser105078]

I think my idea would improve the game for PVP players. I have added the following paragraph to the original proposal:

PVP players would be assured of a reward (from the house chests), while in the current system they may put a lot of effort into PVP for little reward if they miss collecting plunder before the other player collects, or if the other player disconnects roads, or is not producing (there is no way for a plunderer to know if certain building are "asleep"). And often, if the other player has only two spears, there aren't even any points to be won for the tournament.

 

[DeletedUser109036]

I think this is a great idea, I enjoyed GvG but with expedition it seems to have fallen to the wayside, and I hate the plundering with the current PvP. If I'm opting in and I lose then I can accept that.

 

[DeletedUser107476]

You would not be sharing the map with your guild, only with your neighbours. I don't see how you'd be able to make arrangements to keep others out?

It already happens. I have seen teams of players who work together, not from same guilds. One attacks, lets other know defence so easier battles and they also inform each other of when plunder is available.

 

[DeletedUser110150]

+1 I'd be interested to see this and see plundering go from the game. Well done for putting this much thought into it

 

[DeletedUser108804]

+1
I like this idea for the mere reason that those players that love to battle, but rest of Guild are not into it, have a means to test their skills/strategies/abilities against others. GvG is nice, but if you do not have a Guild that wants to battle, then it tends to become mute and just a browse-type feature of the game. GE is great because all players have a chance to get rewards, whether they battle or negotiate, but the players are doing this against NPCs. PvP with a GvG-like platform sounds interesting. Like in GvG, the player must conquer/set up their "home" sector. Since each neighborhood is made up of similar Era players, having a map set up for the neighborhood should be simple. Once a player has their Sector and their Defense Army in place, then the battles can begin. I think an add-on to your proposal would be that the map only has 50% Sectors (say the neighborhood has 50 players, the map would only have 25 Sectors). Perhaps based on points of Player would determine reward for overtaking their house. If the player retrieved their house back, then perhaps the reward would double. Also as an add-on, since the game does track "battles", and since neighborhoods are only set for a particular time-frame, then maybe before the neighborhood changes, the top 5 players who maintained their "house" the longest, gets special reward.
I agree that a PvP feature like GvG would be more satisfying for those players who do not battle and get a "sour taste" for the game when they are always getting plundered. Also, since each Era has their Battle Rewards, this would count towards that too.
Great Idea - Lots of ways to make this feature extremely enjoyable for all players who want to battle and get rewarded for their skills on the battlefield, and those players who just want to do the quests and build up their Town.
To make this truly PvP - perhaps there would be a way to time battles with each other - set up a time to battle for a house and have true PvP real-time (I know that is highly unlikely, but maybe InnoGames' Techies can think about real-time battles for their games).
Hope this gets implemented

 

[Agent327]

PVP players would be assured of a reward (from the house chests), while in the current system they may put a lot of effort into PVP for little reward if they miss collecting plunder before the other player collects, or if the other player disconnects roads, or is not producing (there is no way for a plunderer to know if certain building are "asleep"). And often, if the other player has only two spears, there aren't even any points to be won for the tournament.

Don't you think they welcome the effort it takes to plunder? I rather plunder a Maharaja's palace then I get something from a chest.

It already happens. I have seen teams of players who work together, not from same guilds. One attacks, lets other know defence so easier battles and they also inform each other of when plunder is available.

Exactly!

Perhaps based on points of Player would determine reward for overtaking their house. If the player retrieved their house back, then perhaps the reward would double.

Smart thinking. Now all I need is to find someone in my neighbourhood to pass that house along with, so we will both get the double rewards. Hey, if I can find more than one neighbour I will have a great setup here!

 

[DeletedUser112193]

Great idea, in my opinion.
I think plundering is the worst feature of this game, and this proposal is trying to address that issue.
Additionally, I would welcome an alternative to the GvG map, since I mostly play on mobile and therefore I cannot participate in GvG.
You've got my vote.

 

[Dead-Eye]

I rather plunder a Maharaja's palace then I get something from a chest.

Word!

 

[Dead-Eye]

I think plundering is the worst feature of this game.

You are entitled to your opinion but some of us like it. A lot. I have ditched most of my goods buildings as I can just take from others and I get a good 50 FP a week as well. And medals at the end of the week. Best part of the game IMHO. If being plundered is an issue for you or anyone else just build a defence. Easy peasy!

 

[DeletedUser]

You are entitled to your opinion but some of us like it. A lot. I have ditched most of my goods buildings as I can just take from others and I get a good 50 FP a week as well. And medals at the end of the week. Best part of the game IMHO. If being plundered is an issue for you or anyone else just build a defence. Easy peasy!

Except that it isn't "easy peasy." If you could build a decent defence, plundering would be much less of an issue. But the rogue exploit, the incompetent AI, and the imbalance between aggressive and defensive buildings make it really hard for the defender to keep a dedicated plunderer away.

Also, let me ask you a question. You like plundering, alright. How would you like it if you could fight the same battles and get the same spoils, but from a PvP map instead of stealing it from someone? Would that really derail your game experience? If so, why and how?

 

[DeletedUser110195]

The only change to attacking players I could get behind would be one where the AI's behavior can be altered by us....target priority, aggressive(the DA will charge straight for the attacker without regard to damage taken...like it is now) or defensive(the DA keeps back, stays to terrain where it gets defense boosts, anything to minimize damage taken)....since taking direct control of the DA would cause issues if someone attacks you while you're fighting someone else. These could also be applied to attacking and using autobattle .

 

[Agent327]

Except that it isn't "easy peasy." If you could build a decent defence, plundering would be much less of an issue. But the rogue exploit, the incompetent AI, and the imbalance between aggressive and defensive buildings make it really hard for the defender to keep a dedicated plunderer away.

It actually is if you are willing to make an effort. Just look around you. Every player is boosting the attack GB's like crazy and does nothing about the defence GB's. If you turn that around., I can tell you that there is no way you will be plundered till you hit Oxceanic. It's all about making choices. Besides that, if you plan collecting from your buildings plundering you will also be very hard.

Also, let me ask you a question. You like plundering, alright. How would you like it if you could fight the same battles and get the same spoils, but from a PvP map instead of stealing it from someone? Would that really derail your game experience? If so, why and how?

Yes it would. It's much more fun and excitement to steal it from anyone than just get it for free. Besides that, this game is competitive. It has a ranking and when you look at that ranking you are an opponent. Plundering from you benefits in two ways.

 

[DeletedUser105078]

Every player is boosting the attack GB's like crazy and does nothing about the defence GB's.

The 3 attack GBs occupy 55 squares and the 2 city defence GBs occupy 74 squares. At level 10, the 3 attack GBs give you 1.6% attack bonus per square, while the defence GBs give you 0.8% attack bonus per square. So you get twice as much attack bonus for the same space compared with defence bonus. Besides that, the CdM produces FPs, which are always valuable. The defence bonus GBs produce nothing of any value: coins are plentiful in the game, and the amount of medals produced by the Deal is peanuts.

this game is competitive.

I like competition too, when it's between equals. But I don't enjoy walking all over somebody who doesn't fight back. That's why I think the PvP neighbourhood map would be much more fun. You would be pitted against players who have the time and interest in fighting. There is no competition when you put a heavy-weight pugilist in the ring with a feather-weight.

 

[DeletedUser110195]

The 3 attack GBs occupy 55 squares and the 2 city defence GBs occupy 74 squares. At level 10, the 3 attack GBs give you 1.6% attack bonus per square, while the defence GBs give you 0.8% attack bonus per square. So you get twice as much attack bonus for the same space compared with defence bonus.

The defense bonus of those two isn't what counts...you can get defense bonus for your DA from tons of other things and have it go to ungodly heights. What you want from Deal and St. Basil's is the attack bonus they give your DA, so they not only take hits better, they also kill faster.

 

[DeletedUser105078]

The defense bonus of those two isn't what counts...you can get defense bonus for your DA from tons of other things and have it go to ungodly heights. What you want from Deal and St. Basil's is the attack bonus they give your DA, so they not only take hits better, they also kill faster.

Very true! And I did say "the defence GBs give you 0.8% attack bonus per square."

But I also should have said:
"So you get twice as much attack bonus for the same space on the attack GBs compared with attack bonus on the defence GBs."

 

[Agent327]

The 3 attack GBs occupy 55 squares and the 2 city defence GBs occupy 74 squares. At level 10, the 3 attack GBs give you 1.6% attack bonus per square, while the defence GBs give you 0.8% attack bonus per square. So you get twice as much attack bonus for the same space compared with defence bonus. Besides that, the CdM produces FPs, which are always valuable. The defence bonus GBs produce nothing of any value: coins are plentiful in the game, and the amount of medals produced by the Deal is peanuts.

Exactly what does that have to do with not getting plundered?

I like competition too, when it's between equals. But I don't enjoy walking all over somebody who doesn't fight back. That's why I think the PvP neighbourhood map would be much more fun. You would be pitted against players who have the time and interest in fighting. There is no competition when you put a heavy-weight pugilist in the ring with a feather-weight.

We are all equals. We all have the same chances. If someone makes the choice not to fight back it does not make him less equal. It only makes it easier to plunder.

You keep going on how much 'fun" your map will be, but up till now you have not been able to answer the arguments against it. All you do is keep repeating it will be "fun". Saying there is no competition when you put a heavy-weight pugilist in the ring with a feather-weight is a rather stupid argument. Due to the neighbourhoodsystem we are all in the same weightclass. Some just lie down flat on their back immediately at the start of the fight. That is their problem, not of those that want to fight.

 

[DeletedUser]

It actually is if you are willing to make an effort. Just look around you. Every player is boosting the attack GB's like crazy and does nothing about the defence GB's. If you turn that around., I can tell you that there is no way you will be plundered till you hit Oxceanic. It's all about making choices. Besides that, if you plan collecting from your buildings plundering you will also be very hard.

Have you ever, perhaps, wondered by people put much more effort into boosting offensive GBs than defensive GBs?

Yes it would. It's much more fun and excitement to steal it from anyone than just get it for free. Besides that, this game is competitive. It has a ranking and when you look at that ranking you are an opponent. Plundering from you benefits in two ways.

Meh. I see your point, but I find it a rather petty argument. The ranking hardly means anything at all, it's just a number. If you play the game to get high in the ranking, then maybe pushing others down has a value. Otherwise, I hardly think that's the case.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but basically your argument boils down to: I don't want an alternative PvP system, because I want to steal from other players. That's really no better at all than I want an alternative PvP system, because I don't like stealing from other players. It's just a matter of preference.

Exactly what does that have to do with not getting plundered?

This: Putting up defensive GBs costs twice as much space as putting up offensive GBs (relative space, that is). Space is already a very limited resource. That makes offensive GBs better than defensive GBs and, therefore, turns the tides on the aggressor.

We are all equals. We all have the same chances. If someone makes the choice not to fight back it does not make him less equal. It only makes it easier to plunder.

You're talking about equality of opportunity, she's talking about equality of prowess. That's why you're completely missing her point. Her point is that she does not like to compete against people who do not want/do not know how/have no time to compete. Whether they've got the opportunity or not is irrelevant. She wants to compete against people who are up for the fight.