PvP update

[DeletedUser13082]

Proposal:
Units receive a score table which corresponds to enemy units which they have destroyed. These tables would offer small boosts for that specific unit and in effect the unit would "level up".

Have you checked the forums for the same or similar idea:
Yes, found none.

Reason:
PvP has become very boring for a lot of players and is now just simple point grinding. To add more features to PvP would make it a lot more exciting and enjoyable. Currently a lot of players simply auto battle in order to gain their points. We need something that will encourage players to want to battle manually and not just battle to gain rank points.

Details:
The idea was first suggested (as far as I know) by Pzkpfwv1d here:

i.e. if a unit survives say 30 battles without getting killed, it gets a bonus, 60 battles, a further bonus, 100 battles, 150 battles 200 battles 300 battles 400 battles 500 battles 750 battles and 1000 battles (this would be an elite unit)

I agree with this idea to an extent however I have changed it around a bit. To have a bonus for a unit for being in a winning battle would be too easy, a player could simply leave that unit at the back and defeat the defending army with other units. This is why I have changed the idea to being a bonus for the unit for destroying enemy units.

and resigning would reset it to 0

people would always resign when the defender could kill one of their elite units

As mentioned here, using the surrender option would cause any bonus for any unit in the attacking army to reset to 0.

Explanation:

• If a unit were to destroy another unit, the unit which it has destroyed would be added to it's "kills chart".

• When a unit destroys an enemy unit it would receive a very small attack/defence boost. By very small I mean that it would take hundreds, possibly thousands, of kills for that units attack/defence boost to be significant, otherwise players would all have ridiculously strong units that would be pretty much invincible which isn't the idea, the idea is to give an incentive for players to battle and give them a goal to work toward. This would also add a lot more tactical play into the PvP aspect of the game.

• A specific unit destroying a specific unit would have it's own specific bonus. That's a lot of specifics haha. For example; If a tank destroyed 100 snipers and another tank destroyed 100 conscripts then the boost given to the tank that has destroyed 100 snipers would be far less, because snipers are much easier to destroy using and tank than conscripts are.

• To further the above point, if a colonial age unit were to destroy a progressive era unit then the bonus for the colonial age unit would be much higher than if a progressive era unit destroyed another progressive era unit. Simply put, destroying a unit of a higher age would have a higher bonus.

• If a unit had died and is then healed by using diamonds after the battle then the boost for that unit is still reset to 0 OR the amount of diamonds required to heal a specific unit would be based on the units current bonus

• Bonuses on units would not count in guild wars. Guild wars has it's own format of boosts and bonuses, this idea would apply only to PvP against neighbours or map battles.

This would be a complete turn around for PvP. PvP would no longer be just boring point grinding but would instead become a fun and addictive addition to the game in which players challenge themselves to creating better units. For instance, If this were part of the game, I personally would attempt to create the strongest bronze age spearmen I could, just because it's an added challenge for me... and it would be funny to see a spearmen stab a tank to death (which obviously would take years of kill collecting to get a spearmen to that stage).

Visual Aids:
Currently no visual aids but if anybody would like to put visual aids together then please feel free to do so and I will add them to the main post.

Ideas for discussion:

• bonuses for units work in defence as well as attack. Yes or No?

• Bonus cap size. Currently estimated as 25% boost. More or Less? why?

 

[DeletedUser15432]

Proposal:
Units receive a score table which corresponds to enemy units which they have destroyed. These tables would offer small boosts for that specific unit and in effect the unit would "level up".

Have you checked the forums for the same or similar idea:
Yes, found none.

Reason:
PvP has become very boring for a lot of players and is now just simple point grinding. To add more features to PvP would make it a lot more exciting and enjoyable. Currently a lot of players simply auto battle in order to gain their points. We need something that will encourage players to want to battle manually and not just battle to gain rank points.

Details:
The idea was first suggested (as far as I know) by Pzkpfwv1d here:

I agree with this idea to an extent however I have changed it around a bit. To have a bonus for a unit for being in a winning battle would be too easy, a player could simply leave that unit at the back and defeat the defending army with other units. This is why I have changed the idea to being a bonus for the unit for destroying enemy units.


As mentioned here, using the surrender option would cause any bonus for any unit in the attacking army to reset to 0.

Explanation:

• If a unit were to destroy another unit, the unit which it has destroyed would be added to it's "kills chart".

• When a unit destroys an enemy unit it would receive a very small attack/defence boost. By very small I mean that it would take hundreds, possibly thousands, of kills for that units attack/defence boost to be significant, otherwise players would all have ridiculously strong units that would be pretty much invincible which isn't the idea, the idea is to give an incentive for players to battle and give them a goal to work toward. This would also add a lot more tactical play into the PvP aspect of the game.

• A specific unit destroying a specific unit would have it's own specific bonus. That's a lot of specifics haha. For example; If a tank destroyed 100 snipers and another tank destroyed 100 conscripts then the boost given to the tank that has destroyed 100 snipers would be far less, because snipers are much easier to destroy using and tank than conscripts are.

• To further the above point, if a colonial age unit were to destroy a progressive era unit then the bonus for the colonial age unit would be much higher than if a progressive era unit destroyed another progressive era unit. Simply put, destroying a unit of a higher age would have a higher bonus.

• If a unit had died and is then healed by using diamonds after the battle then the boost for that unit is still reset to 0 OR the amount of diamonds required to heal a specific unit would be based on the units current bonus

• Bonuses on units would not count in guild wars. Guild wars has it's own format of boosts and bonuses, this idea would apply only to PvP against neighbours or map battles.

This would be a complete turn around for PvP. PvP would no longer be just boring point grinding but would instead become a fun and addictive addition to the game in which players challenge themselves to creating better units. For instance, If this were part of the game, I personally would attempt to create the strongest bronze age spearmen I could, just because it's an added challenge for me... and it would be funny to see a spearmen stab a tank to death (which obviously would take years of kill collecting to get a spearmen to that stage).

Visual Aids:
Currently no visual aids but if anybody would like to put visual aids together then please feel free to do so and I will add them to the main post.

I did not actually start the idea, but just added my thoughts to the existing thread, but can not find that thread now. However, from what you are suggesting some of my units would be at veteran status already. The increments would be as follows: -

Basic unit - Recruit
30 battles survived with out using diamonds to heal unit - combat trooper, 2% overall increase in stats
90 battles survived with out using diamonds to heal unit - skilled combat trooper, 5% overall increase in stats
180 battles survived with out using diamonds to heal unit - master combat trooper, 8% overall increase in stats
300 battles survived with out using diamonds to heal unit - veteran combat trooper, 11% overall increase in stats
450 battles survived with out using diamonds to heal unit - veteran combat instructor, 15% overall increase in stats
630 battles survived with out using diamonds to heal unit - veteran master combat instructor, 20% overall increase in stats
840 battles survived with out using diamonds to heal unit - Elite combat trooper (highest rank), 25% overall increase in stats
Unit would receive a number of stars to identify status from 1 to 7
Bonuses would only be awarded to units used to attack in PvP tournaments
Note, the maximum bonus is 25% and is only achievable after 2520 battles and only if no diamonds are used to heal the unit. If diamonds are used, the unit reverts to the previous level
However, there are also other items that can be added such as artillery bonuses (i.e. using a trebucket to kill grenadiers (2 ages difference) the trebucket would get a damage modifier for long range as being and artillery expert, or using great swords to kill riflemen or rangers, the great sword would get a close combat bonus
The actual time for a unit to achieve elite status would probably be closer to 100-200 days because based on my experience you do not use the same troops in every battle, they are rotated so you would probably have to fight between 10000 and 15000 battles before you had an elite unit

Otherwise very good D O +1 from me

 

[DeletedUser13082]

This is the reason why I would change it to different value decided by the type of unit which is destroyed by a specific unit. This would take longer and also the values would be much less. Working from the same basis as you are using here it would mean than, for example, if a tank destroyed 30 conscripts then it would gain a boost of 2%. Now this in my opinion would be far too high of a boost. A unit could receive far too much boost from this in a very short time. I would think more along the lines of kills added to the chart are adding around 0.01% - 0.05% increases and as you said, likely capped at 25% total to stop a "super unit" being created that would become invincible

 

[DeletedUser13805]

your idea is flawed as you seem to assume everyone is auto battling ?
what you need is a move to a hood were your facing harder troops, you couldnt auto battle then, i certainly couldnt auto battle my hood if i did i would lose far to many troops,
i face a mix of conscripts long range tanks and armoued cars so i can not simply go 8 of 1 unit as my hood are a crafty bunch they know if they can kill just 1 unit it all mounts up at the end of a battle run.
there defences are between 100% 300% and its hard to auto unless i face 8 tanks then its easy,
so for what your asking for in terms of making you not auto battle you dont really need anything other than a hood that will make you work hard for the points etc

i do like the idea of keeping a record of uniot kills and making them indivdualy progress that could aid in pvp but dont think they should have extra boosts as in time there would be an army that couldnt be beaten and thats not healthy for competion in my eyes

 

[DeletedUser15432]

your idea is flawed as you seem to assume everyone is auto battling ?
what you need is a move to a hood were your facing harder troops, you couldnt auto battle then, i certainly couldnt auto battle my hood if i did i would lose far to many troops,
i face a mix of conscripts long range tanks and armoued cars so i can not simply go 8 of 1 unit as my hood are a crafty bunch they know if they can kill just 1 unit it all mounts up at the end of a battle run.
there defences are between 100% 300% and its hard to auto unless i face 8 tanks then its easy,
so for what your asking for in terms of making you not auto battle you dont really need anything other than a hood that will make you work hard for the points etc

i do like the idea of keeping a record of uniot kills and making them indivdualy progress that could aid in pvp but dont think they should have extra boosts as in time there would be an army that couldnt be beaten and thats not healthy for competion in my eyes

I very rarely use the auto combat button and I would say the auto battle actually causes a greater percentage of casualties or unit damage than manual battles, and I specified battles to be fought rather than units to be killed as you if you manually fought a battle ensure that the same unit killed all the enemy units, this would make it too easy for the units to achieve status, as an alternative to the boosts what would you suggest then Desypete

 

[DeletedUser13805]

hmm thats a good question what would i suggest ? i think a ranking system from private up to generals and beyond would be ideal but i wouldnt know what type of bonus the troops could get ? is there a need for experience ? could an experience counter be used so if an experienced troop was up against a non experienced troop could that help count towards some sort of bonus ? and give a slight edge ?

 

[DeletedUser13082]

your idea is flawed as you seem to assume everyone is auto battling ?
what you need is a move to a hood were your facing harder troops, you couldnt auto battle then, i certainly couldnt auto battle my hood if i did i would lose far to many troops,
i face a mix of conscripts long range tanks and armoued cars so i can not simply go 8 of 1 unit as my hood are a crafty bunch they know if they can kill just 1 unit it all mounts up at the end of a battle run.
there defences are between 100% 300% and its hard to auto unless i face 8 tanks then its easy,
so for what your asking for in terms of making you not auto battle you dont really need anything other than a hood that will make you work hard for the points etc

i do like the idea of keeping a record of uniot kills and making them indivdualy progress that could aid in pvp but dont think they should have extra boosts as in time there would be an army that couldnt be beaten and thats not healthy for competion in my eyes

Seriously, I have no intention of playing into your ridiculous little complaint again. If you are planning on trying to voice your opinion concerning the way which I choose to play this game then I suggest you stop there as I will just report your posts again. Quite frankly it's tiresome and you're beginning to sound like a 2 year old child who has lost his toy.

Thank you for the small amount of input you gave concerning this idea. I can assure you that you can very easily use auto battle against the majority of your neighbours and take only minimal casualties. At the moment I have 2 neighbours who I choose to manually battle as their defence has recently changed and along with their defence bonus I tend to lose a couple of units. If you DO have any issues concerning PvP then, as I have said before, feel free to send me a private message and I'd be more than happy to offer any advice which I have. I choose to make things easier for myself in order to save time but I can assure you there is nothing about PvP in this game which I do not know. If there is a certain defence you struggle against, or whatever else you may have difficulty with, then send me a private message and I will do my best to help.

I very rarely use the auto combat button and I would say the auto battle actually causes a greater percentage of casualties or unit damage than manual battles, and I specified battles to be fought rather than units to be killed as you if you manually fought a battle ensure that the same unit killed all the enemy units, this would make it too easy for the units to achieve status, as an alternative to the boosts what would you suggest then Desypete

Sorry for the vague response earlier, I was in a rush lol. The issue I would have with it being done by battle wins is that I, and I know many others too, literally never lose a battle. Since I came back into the game a few months back and was part way through the industrial age I haven't lost a single battle nor have I needed to retreat (except when it was INA troops vs PE troops with a large defence boost obviously). The only time I have lost a battle is when I have accidentally clicked surrender instead of auto.

As for the manual/auto conversation, manual battle is clearly more effective than auto battle as the AI isn't very intelligent at all. If I were to send 8 tanks against 8 conscripts using auto I would likely lose 3-4 tanks, possibly even 5 depending on the terrain, however if I were to manually battle 8 tanks against 8 conscripts I could easily finish the battle without losing a single tank depending on the enemy defence bonus. I'd expect any defence bonus of 150%+ and I would likely lose a tank depending again on the terrain.

 

[DeletedUser7719]

1) I think this "score table" should only start in the IA or EMA.

2) Can we put these elite units into defense and they will give us an extra boost? And if we can, will they give us extra points for killing?

3) What would be the limit to this boost?

 

[DeletedUser13082]

1) I think this "score table" should only start in the IA or EMA.

2) Can we put these elite units into defense and they will give us an extra boost? And if we can, will they give us extra points for killing?

3) What would be the limit to this boost?

Points 2 and 3 I'm currently thinking about. As mentioned above I think there would need to be a cap on units of 25% boost, maybe less. I'm not sure about the unit boosts being used in defensive armies. I'm a bit on the fence about that at the minute and arguing back and forth with myself haha. I'm open to any opinions on that matter

Any reason why you think bronze age shouldn't be included in the idea?

 

[DeletedUser7719]

The Bronze Age is more of a tutorial, so I wouldn't start this more-advanced concept until the person has at least reached the Iron Age (kinda like Guild Wars )

 

[DeletedUser13082]

The Bronze Age is more of a tutorial, so I wouldn't start this more-advanced concept until the person has at least reached the Iron Age (kinda like Guild Wars )

But on the other hand, with the bronze age basically being a tutorial, if this were part of the game would it not need to be part of the tutorial to explain to the player how it works?

 

[DeletedUser7719]

2-laned roads, Immunity in forest, dugout bonuses, and last stand bonuses are part of the game, but they were not introduced until the EMA and above. I'm not saying that I would reject this idea if it were implemented from the start of the game, but I would prefer to keep things simple when you start out

 

[DeletedUser13082]

2-laned roads, Immunity in forest, dugout bonuses, and last stand bonuses are part of the game, but they were not introduced until the EMA and above. I'm not saying that I would reject this idea if it were implemented from the start of the game, but I would prefer to keep things simple when you start out

Touche lol. I'd be happy for anything to be introduced as an update for PvP in all fairness, I just want something extra to do with battling rather than grinding points haha

 

[DeletedUser15432]

1) I think this "score table" should only start in the IA or EMA.

2) Can we put these elite units into defense and they will give us an extra boost? And if we can, will they give us extra points for killing?

3) What would be the limit to this boost?

As mentioned in my detailed information earlier in this thread - units in defence do not gain experience, this is die solely to the fact that all defensive battles are governed by the AI and it might decide to have the unit killed off which would then regenerate and this would have the same effect as if the unit had been revived by the use of diamonds

But on the other hand, with the bronze age basically being a tutorial, if this were part of the game would it not need to be part of the tutorial to explain to the player how it works?

I also think this should be included from the beginning, however, bronze age units tend to get killed off quickly and are easy to replace

 

[DeletedUser13082]

@pzkp, If it were implemented into defence units then the kills that a defence unit generates wouldn't count nor would death of the unit reset it to 0. However, as stated in the spoilers thread a long time ago, it is a work in progress for players who are online at the time of an enemy attack to be able to fight that battle themselves rather than let the AI do it for them. If this were the case then I think that defence units should have the boosts too and also kills and deaths of units would work the same way

 

[DeletedUser13805]

Seriously, I have no intention of playing into your ridiculous little complaint again. If you are planning on trying to voice your opinion concerning the way which I choose to play this game then I suggest you stop there as I will just report your posts again. Quite frankly it's tiresome and you're beginning to sound like a 2 year old child who has lost his toy.

Thank you for the small amount of input you gave concerning this idea. I can assure you that you can very easily use auto battle against the majority of your neighbours and take only minimal casualties. At the moment I have 2 neighbours who I choose to manually battle as their defence has recently changed and along with their defence bonus I tend to lose a couple of units. If you DO have any issues concerning PvP then, as I have said before, feel free to send me a private message and I'd be more than happy to offer any advice which I have. I choose to make things easier for myself in order to save time but I can assure you there is nothing about PvP in this game which I do not know. If there is a certain defence you struggle against, or whatever else you may have difficulty with, then send me a private message and I will do my best to help.



Sorry for the vague response earlier, I was in a rush lol. The issue I would have with it being done by battle wins is that I, and I know many others too, literally never lose a battle. Since I came back into the game a few months back and was part way through the industrial age I haven't lost a single battle nor have I needed to retreat (except when it was INA troops vs PE troops with a large defence boost obviously). The only time I have lost a battle is when I have accidentally clicked surrender instead of auto.

As for the manual/auto conversation, manual battle is clearly more effective than auto battle as the AI isn't very intelligent at all. If I were to send 8 tanks against 8 conscripts using auto I would likely lose 3-4 tanks, possibly even 5 depending on the terrain, however if I were to manually battle 8 tanks against 8 conscripts I could easily finish the battle without losing a single tank depending on the enemy defence bonus. I'd expect any defence bonus of 150%+ and I would likely lose a tank depending again on the terrain.

i was merely stateing the obvious as all know of you is you battle agaisnt 8 tanks auto in most if not all your fights, as for you offer of help regarding my battle techniques i may point out that when you have done over 21,000 fights then i might start to take your knowledge seriously as i think you must be a bit of a noob who can only fight tanks.
if you want some real excitement in pvp then i would point out the ranking system that you so easily rubbished in you constant moans over my idea, you seem to want thing to go for you not thinking about other players there level in the game etc hence my idea of a ranking table for pvp player would of been a huge plus to putting some life into the game as you point out its boring when you get up a few levels and needs a kick

 

[DeletedUser15432]

@pzkp, If it were implemented into defence units then the kills that a defence unit generates wouldn't count nor would death of the unit reset it to 0. However, as stated in the spoilers thread a long time ago, it is a work in progress for players who are online at the time of an enemy attack to be able to fight that battle themselves rather than let the AI do it for them. If this were the case then I think that defence units should have the boosts too and also kills and deaths of units would work the same way

The experience should only be gained for units using manual battles. D O
If you think the it should be units killed instead of battles survived then the battles ratio just needs to multiplied by 8 (maximum number of possible kills by any unit in a battle) to arrive at the relevant number of units that must be killed to get the experience D O
Please do not use this thread to take pot shots at each other D O and D P, thank you

 

[DeletedUser13082]

i was merely stateing the obvious as all know of you is you battle agaisnt 8 tanks auto in most if not all your fights, as for you offer of help regarding my battle techniques i may point out that when you have done over 21,000 fights then i might start to take your knowledge seriously as i think you must be a bit of a noob who can only fight tanks.
if you want some real excitement in pvp then i would point out the ranking system that you so easily rubbished in you constant moans over my idea, you seem to want thing to go for you not thinking about other players there level in the game etc hence my idea of a ranking table for pvp player would of been a huge plus to putting some life into the game as you point out its boring when you get up a few levels and needs a kick

As I said before along with other players. Your idea of a ranking table was flawed and wouldn't work. Nothing more to be said on the matter.

I have offered you advice and you have chose to ignore that offer and instead attempt to insult me. Again I have no intention of entering into this conversation with you so let that be the end of the discussion as you have no further need to post in this thread UNLESS you decide to give some form of input concerning the threads topic. If you do insist on continuing your attempts to insult me I will simply report your post again.

The experience should only be gained for units using manual battles. D O
If you think the it should be units killed instead of battles survived then the battles ratio just needs to multiplied by 8 (maximum number of possible kills by any unit in a battle) to arrive at the relevant number of units that must be killed to get the experience D O
Please do not use this thread to take pot shots at each other D O and D P, thank you

I understand what you mean but where the kills are concerned, certain units killed would offer more or less boost than others. For example a tank killing a sniper is very easy so the boost would be lower than a tank killing conscript or a rapid fire cannon. Each unit would in effect have it's own ranking system against other units in which certain units killed would offer a better boost than others.

Also I have no intention of taking pot shots at anybody. I have reported multiple messages by the player already and if he continues to be insulting then, as said above, I will simply report the message again.

 

[DeletedUser13805]

i wasnt unsulting you belive me if i wanted to unsult you then i wouldnt hold back on my words.
your previous post to me was as always rude towards me or my ideas so if your going to be rude to someone and then report them for answering you back in your same tone then what on earth are you expecting ?

now about your idea i said it is flawed as it doesnt take into account new players or those who are way behind in pvp, and there are many hundreads of them compared to the few who are super strong and this idea only seems to be from your angle of what you would like to fill in your boredom, i have stated you wouldnt be bored if you had a real hood to fight in that would make you use the units you have and stop auto battling. that isnt a dig at you its just a common sence answer to your bordom problem
my problem is my hood takes me to long to complete but on the up side at least my hoodies keep me on my toes as each day they switch defences to make sure i dont simply run at them with 8 tanks, i could do but the cost would be to valuable in points and as my other hoodies are not that far behind me in scores i would be giving them free points so all in all my hood might take me ages to complete but its a fair hood and one that needs to be worked on.

the other point i do like is the idea of units having a battle history but not to give them a huge advantage in battle as if you look at my score of over 20k battles won my troops would be unstopable wouldnt they if your idea was in place my my troops got rewards for winning battles in terms of a def or att boost

 

[DeletedUser13082]

If you feel I was rude in my previous response then I apologise for that as it wasn't my intention.

I'm a little confused on what you mean when you say that the idea doesn't take into account the new players to the game? With this idea all players of all ages and "levels" in the game would have the same opportunity as any other player in which they could build the strength of their armies. It would also add a a new aspect to how people will fight their battles and what tactics they will use and this will be accountable across all ages of the game.

On the last part of your message, I have added at the bottom of the main post that units would obviously need to have a cap on the boost they could attain from their kill ratings. I feel that 25% would be a reasonable boost that could be attained, some people may think more and some may think less. With the addition of multiple new defence boosting capabilities such as watchfires I see a lot of players with extremely high defences now compared to before when the defence was boosted by great buildings only. I think a total of 175% attack boost would be more than fair in comparison to the possibility of 700%+ defence boost. (I've only ever seen on defence of 700%+ but it does show that it is possible to achieve a boost that high)