• Dear forum reader,
    To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account you need a forum account. You can
    REGISTER HERE!
    Please ensure a translation in to English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
  • We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply
  • Forum Contests

    Don't forget to check out the current contests here.

Implemented: Defensive Great Buildings

falcon93

Proposal:
Change the bonus from defensive great buildings so that they boost both the attack and defense of the defending army. This does not apply to watchfires.

Have you checked the forums for the same or similar idea?
Yes, I've done some searches for "defense", "defensive boost", defensive great building" and "defending attack" but couldn't find anything.


Reason:
There's actually 2 reasons to why I think that should be done.

Firstly, the attacker already have a huge advantage becouse he/she is able to manually control the attacking army, while the defender must rely on the AI. As we all know, the AI tends to do some really dumb moves sometimes, for instance, putting a heavy unit in a forest.

Secondly, having a good defense but a poor attack wont really help much. Sure, the defensive boost helps the units to take more damage, but for what use is that if the defending army cant hit back hard? I'm an attacker myself, and I have enough experience to say that I know that defense is worth nothing if the unit can't hit back hard enough to do moderate damage.

Let's say that an attacker with 50% bonus attacks a defender with 50% bonus. The attackers attack will get compensated by the defenders defense, it will basicly result in 0. BUT, this isn't the end of the story. The attacker still holds 50% bonus to the defense. This means that the defender will make even less damage. And as this wouldn't be enough, the defender is already in a bad position becouse they are controlled by the AI.

And to be clear, I'm not saying that the defensive army should be controlled by the player as this would just result in even more problems. What I am saying is; Let defensive GBs boost both defense and attack.


Details:
All stats and all mechanics will work in the exact same way. The only difference would be that defensive great buildings should boost both the defense and attack.

Cathedral of St. Basil & Deal Castle
(The examples below do not show the values of coins and medals. Note that this means that they are unchanged. Please note that this change doesnt apply on watchfires).

LevelMilitary Boost (Attack & Defense) (when defending)
110%
220%
330%
440%
550%
660%
770%
880%
990%
10100%


Visual Aids:
None.


Balance/Abuse Prevention:
This cannot be abused as there's only 2 defensive great buildings currently in game and players will be able to reach a maximum of 200% boost from defensive great buildings which will be matched by the maximum of 150% from offensive great buildnings. Keeping in mind that the remaining 50% is matched by the players advantage over the AI, this will improve the balance.
 

Alberish

+1 for it

I think it's the only way the defense can do anything against the attacker,if not all time is a militar parade of the attacker, without damages.(Actually I have the 2 defensive GB's and the 3 attack GB's).
 

DeletedUser2029

-1 for this. this is just overkill (the way it's suggested).
attacking bonuses increase by 5% per level, so if you want to even things out, then if St. Basil's should give both attack and defense bonus while defending, they should also increase by 5% per level.
 

falcon93

-1 for this. this is just overkill (the way it's suggested).
attacking bonuses increase by 5% per level, so if you want to even things out, then if St. Basil's should give both attack and defense bonus while defending, they should also increase by 5% per level.
No. And the reason why is becouse there are 3 offensive GBs and only 2 defensive GBs. The current maximum offensive boost is 150%, while the current maximum defensive boost is 200%. If you nerf the defensive GBs to just 5% per level, we will end up with 150% offensive boost and only 100% defensive boost. And then, we will end up in the exact same spot again, less defensive boost even though the attacking player has a base-advantage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser2029

No. And the reason why is becouse there are 3 offensive GBs and only 2 defensive GBs. The current maximum offensive boost is 150%, while the current maximum defensive boost is 200%. If you neft the defensive GBs to just 5% per level, we will end up with 150% offensive boost and only 100% defensive boost. And then, we will end up in the exact same spot again, less defensive boost even though the attacking player has a base-advantage.
you're right, you're wrong, who cares?

the best defense is no defense. when that changes we can talk.
sorry for wasting your time...
 

falcon93

Don't forget about the watchfires. That'll make it overkill ;)
falcon93 said:
Change the bonus from defensive great buildings so that they boost both the attack and defense of the defending army. This does not apply to watchfires.
Yep, it would be overkill if this was applied to watchfires aswell, but I've thought about that ;)
 

DeletedUser15372

-1 to this suggestion because 200% attack and defence would just make it more favourable to the defenders than it already is. AI might suck but sooner or later players will have the ability to control their defensive army and if they have the 200% defence and attack then they will just have a bigger advantage. Unless of course there is a suggestion to do this for now until the developers implement the feature many players are waiting, which is to control your defensive army. However doing it temporarily isn't worth the bother and neither for doing it so it applies when AI is in control.

By the way the defending army doesn't lose any units and having to replace them like the attackers would have to on losing any during battles. Another reason why the above suggestion isn't a good idea unless the suggestion comes with the feature of the defenders having to lose like the attackers do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

falcon93

-1 to this suggestion because 200% attack and defence would just make it more favourable to the defenders than it already is. AI might suck but sooner or later players will have the ability to control their defensive army and if they have the 200% defence and attack then they will just have a bigger advantage. Unless of course there is a suggestion to do this for now until the developers implement the feature many players are waiting, which is to control your defensive army. However doing it temporarily isn't worth the bother and neither for doing it so it applies when AI is in control.

By the way the defending army doesn't lose any units and having to replace them like the attackers would have to on losing any during battles. Another reason why the above suggestion isn't a good idea unless the suggestion comes with the feature of the defenders having to lose like the attackers do.
You seem really sure about what the developers will implement and not. The only thing I've seen in the forums is suggestion threads where some people want this feature, and at the same time people that don't want it becouse it will just cause even more problems. What I'm just trying to point out here is that you shouldn't be too sure that defense will be controlled by players in the exact way that you think. We havn't heard anything from any developers or moderators about this yet, and if I'm wrong, I'll welcome a correction from either a developer or moderator.

Personally I really, really hope that they don't implement a manually player controlled defense. There will be so many problems coming with that future, that attacking will no longer be an enjoying part of the game, it will just be a horrible part that must be done. Imagine the amount of time waiting and waiting each time you attack someone, first becouse the defender needs a timer to join, and secondly becouse both players needs time to think. Each battle will most likely be like a game of chess. No thanks.

However, I do not mean that the defense can't be controlled by players in a more "preselected" way. For instance, a whole window where the defender can set strategies and behaviur for the AI.

And for your record: "would just make it more favourable to the defenders" = Hahaha :D
Spend some time on the battlefield and you'll realise that if you have 150% in attack bonus and battle an opponent with units from the same age as you do, there's no defense in the world to hold of that player, it's just a matter of losses. And me beeing an attacker, I know that the losses are the smallest problem as units are so cheap anyway.
 

DeletedUser4906

The sooner the age dealing with Nuclear Bombs is brought in the better!

Then i'll make ye world a barren place......:p
 

DeletedUser3157

The current system is somewhat interesting. It creates little different strategies in regards to defending, favouring non-ranged units over common offenses which usually favour ranged units. Top defense player in my hood has 308% defense bonus atm(2 lvl9 GBs and 32 WFs) and fights with him take very long as both sides deal rather low damage blows. It is much different fighting and strategy than doing map fights where AI has both offense and defense bonuses. If they would some day add manual defense options, I think that would mix things up even more in terms of variety. Attacker still has natural advatages due to math reasons, but playing as defender would be much different to normal attacking and have it's charms.

They could introduce new GB next age that gives 5% offense and defense to defense though, I'm sure many players would be interested in that one for a change. But 10% on both would be just overkill and you could make yourself just unbreakeble with that.
 

DeletedUser7719

Or, change the statue of Zues to where it gives 5% attack to both armies...
 

DeletedUser6328

I just need to know what a good vanilla defense that is good against attacks from a good offensive army. One that while not perfect will cause at least losses on the offensive side to be competitive, and cause the attackers to consider the losses. Right now I loose all to one maybe of theirs. Any help is appreciated.
 

Mordin

Proposal:
Change the bonus from defensive great buildings so that they boost both the attack and defense of the defending army. This does not apply to watchfires.
-1. It's my understanding that both offensive and defensive GB's were considered when the dev's balanced things out, thus improving only one side will brake that balance.
 

DeletedUser8793

For what u need more defence?

offense Bonus of 100%
my defence 200%

Neighbors need a chance to take your cities
 

DeletedUser7719

I don't see how I overlooked that one :p
Yea, things are a little more evened out now.