(Battle) Remove own city shield when attacking neighbors

[DeletedUser96901]

Proposal: Remove own city shield when attacking neighbors

Have you checked the forums for the same or similar idea: yes

Reason: in my opinion the city shield is for non-fighters to protect themselves not for cowards hiding behind it


Details: when a player attacks one of his neighbors his own city shield will be deactivated and can't be activated for the next 24 hours.


Visual Aids: none

Balance/Abuse Prevention: the time limit of 24 hours after the last neighborhood battle where the city shield CAN'T be activated prevents that a player attacks everybody in his hood and then turn it on and be protected for the next almost 24h.

 

[Agent327]

Why should you be a coward when you hide behind your cityshield and attack? You can also consider it to be smart strategy. Everyone has an equal chance with this, so there is no reason at all to change it.

 

[DeletedUser96901]

You can also consider it to be smart strategy.

forcing other to adapt to new game changes is also a smart strategy

 

[Agent327]

forcing other to adapt to new game changes is also a smart strategy

Or a sign that you can not adapt yourself.

Players can be plundered, so they have the right to defend themselves. Defending and attacking are two different things. One should not exclude the other.

 

[DeletedUser96901]

Defending and attacking are two different things.

actually attacking and being attacks are only two sides of the same coin

One should not exclude the other.

but you can't have a coin with only one side

Players can be plundered, so they have the right to defend themselves.

Players can be plundered. Why don't they have the right to plunder back ?

Or a sign that you can not adapt yourself.

adapting needs time
I am finished with adapting when his level 70 cape is one FP away from leveling

 

[DeletedUser111866]

Why don't they have the right to plunder back ?

Why should a player be deprived of right not allowing plunderers in? And yes, they don't automatically get the right to plunder back. It's because they already have it, just they can't get past city shield. They however have the right to raise a city shield of their own. Also remember, raising city shield removes your ability to use tavern buffs unless you pay 50 diamonds per boost, so it's an adequate cost for having your city impenetrable. This includes GE negotiation boost, BTW.

 

[DeletedUser110179]

Why should you be a coward when you hide behind your cityshield and attack? You can also consider it to be smart strategy.

Smart strategy ... no honour.

 

[Agent327]

actually attacking and being attacks are only two sides of the same coin


but you can't have a coin with only one side


Players can be plundered. Why don't they have the right to plunder back ?


adapting needs time
I am finished with adapting when his level 70 cape is one FP away from leveling

So you have an idea and your way to promote it is with meaningless answers and smileys. I am sure that will catch on. Now everybody will support you.

Smart strategy ... no honour.

If it works, who cares. History is full of examples. In the end it is the result that counts.

 

[DeletedUser96901]

So you have an idea and your way to promote it is with meaningless answers and smileys

yes

Now everybody will support you.

I don't need everybody. only a majority to get this idea send to the developers

and then they will decide if they change it or not

 

[DeletedUser110179]

I don't need everybody. only a majority to get this idea send to the developers
and then they will decide if they change it or not

You can't force honour ... it comes from high breeding.
It has to be voluntary (from within).

 

[Agent327]

and then they will decide if they change it or not

Only if it ever gets that far

In particular, please do not suggest the following ideas, as they will not be implemented:
Ideas to make yourself richer.. or make the game easier. The game is meant to be played over time and is meant to have a lot of strategy to it.

and

Reason:
Explain why you think this is either a necessary or enhancing addition to the game. You should consider the existing game mechanics here and show how this idea improves upon them. Tables comparing costs, times, unit values etc are a helpful addition.

You lack a lot on both points.

To say it in your words

 

[DeletedUser111848]

guys put -1 one so it cant get to the devs
so if someone attacks you but they have a shield they want you not to attack so then you might never plunder or attack so
-1
also

 

[Kwisatz Haderach]

+1 iff you have a city shield and players can not attack you, then neither you can attack them its a simple logic and strategy yes.

If you activate it, then you can not attack but only in PvP, because only the other players in your hood can attack you, not GvG, GE and on continent map.

 

[DeletedUser107476]

+1 I would even take it further so that if you attack in your hood you must have a full City DA. By having just 2 spearmen you manipulate the PvP towers.

 

[TheKingOfKool]

lol
Round & Round & Round we go - Where we stop who could know!
To plunder or not to plunder - to attack a hoodie or not to attack a hoodie - to siege with spearmen or not to siege with spearmen.

I'm dizzy already - lol.

-1 BTW

 

[DeletedUser653]

lol
Round & Round & Round we go - Where we stop who could know!
To plunder or not to plunder - to attack a hoodie or not to attack a hoodie - to siege with spearmen or not to siege with spearmen.

I'm dizzy already - lol.

-1 BTW

Ditto -1

 

[Agent327]

+1 iff you have a city shield and players can not attack you, then neither you can attack them its a simple logic and strategy yes.

It is no logic and absolutely no strategy. Through the ages, attacks have always been based on a stronge defense.

 

[DeletedUser107476]

It is no logic and absolutely no strategy. Through the ages, attacks have always been based on a stronge defense.

Wondering where the logic is in that comment. Yes attacks are stopped by a strong defence, though yet to meet the country with a force field around it that stops all attacks. Attack is met by counter attack that is history, by putting up a city shield and attacking you are manipulating the PvP towers. as your city is not available to be attacked.

 

[Agent327]

Wondering where the logic is in that comment. Yes attacks are stopped by a strong defence, though yet to meet the country with a force field around it that stops all attacks. Attack is met by counter attack that is history, by putting up a city shield and attacking you are manipulating the PvP towers. as your city is not available to be attacked.

Vikings used a shieldwall. Romans a tortoise formation. They attacked from behind a strong defense.

Saying you are manipulating PvP by putting up a city shield is no argument, since everyone can do it. Besides that PvP is heavilly manipulated with GvG and GE. That shield will not make any difference.

 

[DeletedUser107476]

Vikings used a shieldwall. Romans a tortoise formation. They attacked from behind a strong defense.

Saying you are manipulating PvP by putting up a city shield is no argument, since everyone can do it. Besides that PvP is heavilly manipulated with GvG and GE. That shield will not make any difference.

To the first part of your statement, yes they used troops to defend. City Shield is not a strong defence it is invincibility.

To the second part of your statement. I would agree about GvG manipulation and this is something I would like to see further addressed. The releasing and retaking of sectors with easy win DA's is something that should not be allowed. Not sure where you get the concept of GE manipulation of towers as there are a maximum 64 fights for everyone.