To Retreat or Not To Retreat

[DeletedUser276]

Proposal:

I have had tons of people go to attack my city and then retreat when they see the awesome site that is my army... then they come back the next day (I change my defending army unit formations daily) with a new setup built to take out my previous army but retreat again when they see a new unit formation. Now some dont even bother to stop by for tea and crumpets.

So I am suggesting a penalty to retreat from battle based on the age and type of units used in battle as a kind of administration and war fee.

Have you Checked the Ideas section for the same idea posted by someone else? Is this idea similar to one that has been previously suggested?

I have checked.... and no it hasnt been suggested

Reason:

Well this gives players an advantage to attack another player and fine tune their troops to take down the defenses easily against a stupid AI who cant fight.

Details:

When a player retreats from a battle it should be a last case decision to save its troops in what is certain to be a doomed campaign. So basically to save 20+ hours in retraining and rebuilding his/her troops. But this should be a decision thats sort of hard to make. Not oh well lets retreat and try again later.

So based off of the age and type of unit the retreat feature would cost varying degrees.

10% happiness loss for 12 hours per age of unit.

Bronze age would be the start since there are no troops for Stone Age.

Bronze age: 10% happiness loss from total + 10% troop cost of remaining troops in battle. So if a unit costs 25 gold and 25 supplies (spearfighter) then it will cost the player 2 gold and 2 supply to retreat 1 spearfighter from battle.

Colonial age: 60% happiness loss from total + 10% troop cost of remaining troops in battle.

So for a Grenadiers cost of 760 gold to produce for each grenadier retreating from battle it would cost 76 gold.

Visual Aids:

not much of a visual guy but having a popup of "are you sure you want to surrender for a cost of XXXX amount of gold XXXX amount of supplies and XXX amount of happiness?" would work.

Balance:

Puts forth more strategy and more visualization of people checking out another players city to see what they "could have" then working the troops to try and defeat them.

Abuse Prevention:

this actually would prevent casual retreat (surrender) actions done by players.

Summary:

In summary making players fight a little more and maybe plan out their attacks a little more than just saying... oh well I will retreat and lose out on that one person for 24 hours.

 

[DeletedUser]

Not really liking this idea, to be honest.
And not because I'm one of the players that retreats much, I usually fight till there's almost 1 unit left lol.

What about scouts? There is no real way to scout in the game, other than visiting someone's town, but that'd be more of a spy than a scout.
I'd brand those retreaters just scouts.

There are also players who have quite a lot of real life things on their mind and don't always remember everyone's name and just casually go down their neighbourhood without too much thoughts. These players would encounter a strong defense, go "oh crud", retreat and head to the next one, no harm done.

I can, on the other hand, understand the strategy aspect, which probably motivated you to propose this.. but in my opinion, giving penalties like this would be a PvP focus and sorta forces players to keep notes of who's towns not to attack, actually focus on their armies for PvP (instead of it being a casual complimentary feature), etc. It stops being a casual game.

Just my 2 cents.

- L

 

[DeletedUser276]

meh I just look at it as... having military is costly.... sending troops on a campaign (attack another player) a demoralizing and costly aspect of just showing up and saying OMG and surrendering and leaving. The key term is the use of the word surrender when leaving the battle.

 

[DeletedUser7719]

I mean the point of defending your army is mainly to protect your city from plundering; there's no point of another bonus

 

[DeletedUser]

A Onesided Deal...

PLEASE NOTE: I wrote most of this before anyone had replied, so I did not take their points into account. (Although you may find some of them here and there... )

The ingenious perspective behind Blacksmith's idea is most definitely one that can't be denied. Nevertheless I see this as only one piece of a larger complex.

In battle, retreating should be a last alternative. That is without question. However, it should also be possible for a player to view an opponents troops beforehand. This is currently possible, yet honestly speaking, not really the most reliable source of information if a player has various military buildings.

As of that, I cannot agree to the proposal in its current form entirely. So I'd like to suggest this contrary system to be added: Scouting

This can definitely be considered an idea for itself, yet I believe it is only fair to implement such along with a system penalizing “retreats”, like the one proposed above. The following depicts a complex, yet over-viewable and easy-to-use possibility of how such a “scouting system” could work.

Within the “Social Bar” there would be a new button underneath the message icon (next to a player's profile pic / avatar) that would open a pop-up asking you whether you'd like to scout out the respective player's town. Here you can choose how many scouts you would like to send out, with the higher the number, the higher the chance to succeed in receiving the information you require.

Information one can choose to receive could be:

Neighbourhood & Guild:
→ View the amount of happiness points a player currently needs to reach an enthusiastic population (if the player already has an enthusiastic population, you will receive a notification stating such)
→ Which supply building/s is/are set at the highest production rate (Not when they will be finished though and not at what rate exactly!)

Warfare: (only neighbours not within one's guild!)
→ How many units are currently stationed ( = built) within the city
→ How many troops are currently defending the city
→ What unit type makes up the majority of the currently defending army.

NOTE: these options do not allow the possibility to see the entire constellation of a player's defending army, nor the exact age of his/her troops. (This may be the case if the army only consists of one type of unit, but that's only obvious if a player has just one type of military building within his city anyways.)

→ What types of building/s has/have finished productions (Yet not the amount that could be plundered)

To send one or multiple scouts, one must hire them for a standard fee + the fee for each scout, which increases for every scout additionally sent at one time (Maximum of 8 scouts!). For the first scout a player receives a chance of 25% to successfully receive any of the information desired. Every further scout hired increases this chance by 5%. (That means the maximum chance can not exceed 60%)

An example with variables:

A Bronze Age player would pay a standard fee of 25 supplies + 10 gold for the 1st scout, for the 2nd 20 gold, for the 3rd 30 gold, […], and eventually 80 gold for the 8th scout. Sending the maximum number of scouts would cost him/her 25 supplies + 360 gold, with a success rate of 60%.

The player can then choose one action of the listed options for the scout/s to perform. However, each of these options would also be given a small “bonus” or “penalty” factor. This would determine whether the chance of success gets raised or lowered. Generally speaking, any Neighbourhood / Guild options will give a significant increase, making it possible to scout out a neighbour / guild member successfully with a lower number of scouts.

For neighbours, this “bonus factor” could be +50%, while it could be +75% for guild members. This enables a very simple and not very costly way to inform oneself about a neighbour / guild member in order to support them much more efficiently without having to contact them first. (The ease of this has its price though...)

As for warfare related scouting missions, the success rate is decreased slightly depending on how valuable and precise the information is. For one's scouts to determine the total amount of units stationed within a player's city, there is no “bonus / penalty factor”. To determine how many units are currently set as the player's defensive troops, a “penalty factor” of -15% is added to the success rate, decreasing it by 10%. If one is keen on learning which troops make up the majority of a player's defensive troops, then a “penalty factor” of -30% is added to the success rate, deducting it by 30%.

For one's scouts to decipher which of the different types of buildings have completed any productions yet (whether residential, production or goods buildings), a “penalty factor” of -40% is added to the success rate as this is some very extremely valuable information. One's scouts will need plenty of luck on this kind of mission, yet the reward can definitely be worth it if one chooses to invest wisely.

The age a player is currently in, determines the the costs for scouts, as well as the standard fee. So the 1st scout might only cost 10 gold in the BA, yet 200 in the CA.

The success / failure of a scouting mission should be done immediately, allowing a player to view any information retrieved directly after having sent out any scouts. To prevent any abuse, it takes 15 mins before one can send any further scouts on a mission to the same town.

This “scouting system” is rather complex, but I find it is simple to use and also gives players one more feature to help them play the game according to their style of play. Whether it's for strategic planning on how to breach enemy defenses, or just a quick and easy way to support friends, guild members or even neighbours in their journey to forge their empire.

Blacksmith's proposal to have some sort of “penalty” for retreating in the midst of battle, is something I see dire need of, should a “scouting system”, like the one I've depicted above, ever be implemented.

Regards,
Bloodwyn

 

[DeletedUser276]

well written blood. This idea of mine is indeed an idea but it is also a show on how ideas work.

I posted my idea... people found fault... though mostly they found fault because its a tactic they use from what I can see based on arguements... but you attempted to expand on the idea which is what idea posts are all about. I see people posting... that idea sucks on other idea threads but no attempt to fine tune it is given.

good job mate.

 

[DeletedUser]

I like the scouting idea. But, anything that helps the offense over an already dumb defense should be put on hold until they improve the defense. I just started a new thread," Control your own defense". They can enact both of these ideas at the same time. I like the game but a few changes would be great.

 

[DeletedUser2029]

I wrote this in an idea people ignored, so I'm just going to summarise the scouting portion as an answer to Bloodwyn
Scouting
- when you "Attack" a player, the system does not lead you to battle screen immediately, but to a military screen (similar to world map)
- on the left half you see your available troops
- on the top right quarter you see your attacking troops (or slots meant for those units)
- on the bottom right quarter you see 8 slots meant for opponents troops, but what you get is 8 question marks, and an "Infiltrate" button
- Infiltrate costs 100 coins, but it only shows you opponents army, it does not remove health (unlike world map)
- If you choose to Infiltrate, the 24h clock starts and the only options are to Attack, or postpone your attack (you can't change your mind and support that player)
- If you have chosen to attack after using the infiltrate option and you retreat, the defender gets your 100 coins
- loosing after infiltrate brings nothing to the opponent

 

[DeletedUser]

@ Bloodwyn: Great expansion to the idea and it would make me actually actively support Blacksmith's idea.

@ ProfirioDiaz: Though similar to Bloodwyn's suggestion, I have to admit I like this system better. Very nice.
The only thing I'd change is the cost for infiltrate, depending on the number of enemy units and their Age.
Not too sure what to think of the "defender gets your .. coins".
But apart from that, this is an excellent system, which Blacksmith's original idea would compliment very much.

Put these two together and you'll have a great idea, in my opinion. +1

- L

 

[DeletedUser2029]

Thanks Lodroth

1. I disagree because this could get abused. I always try to expand on the principles that are already in place, and this is not it.
e.g. (my way) you have to pay 100 coins to click "infiltrate" and results don't cost you anything (other than 24h)
(your way) to click "infiltrate" is free, but you would have to pay for results, and I just wonder how long will it take for someone to calculate the odds for winning based on the price of scouting (e.g. 1 spearfighter costs 10 coins, you scout LMA player and the price is 20 coins, you don't have to pay to know that he/she has no defence)
Devs placed 100 coins for scouting as a universal price on the world map, I'm sticking with that number

2. attacker infiltrates -> attacker attacks -> attacker retreats -> defender gets 100 coins
the reasoning behind this is that the defender caught the spy and took his money.
this is also the only scenario, in relation to this idea, where the defender gets a reward

Something to think about...
If player infiltrates and does not attack in 12 hours, scouted player gets a notification (no prize; scout was detected but it was not caught)

 

[DeletedUser]

Ah, I see your reasoning. Yeah, then a fixed price would be better.
Maybe 100 coins is a bit low though, if you consider some players switch defenses to be tactical or when controlled defenses get implemented.

But that's just a pricing detail.

- L

 

[DeletedUser7719]

It's kinda hard to calculate what you would want to infiltrate because think about infiltrating to find out there is only a 1 slinger-defence compared to a 8 cannon; I would want to have a low amount to find out about the slinger compared to the cannons. So in that case, I would have to agree with porfirio on this one: 100 is good enough

 

[DeletedUser]

I might leave a reply that's more lengthy and detailed later on, but for now I'm just going to keep it short.

So first of all, thanks for all the compliments and feedback everyone.

Regarding PorfirioDiaz's proposal, I like the fact that it is simple and also fairly easy to implement. Having said that, I believe the possibility to view an entire opponent's army beforehand is currently one of the most vital pieces of information that can be given price. Some lousy 100 coins don't make up for this to be "leaked", especially not by our current AI's primitive combat skills. This can be seen as just a "pricing detail", but in my opinion it's not enough to just pay a small fee of ressources to retrieve this kind of information.

It should be noted that the costs for scouting ( = attaining information about another player) can't be too high though either. If that were the case, it could happen that players rather set on paying out a penalty for retreating than actually scouting beforehand.

I'd prefer to combine PorfirioDiaz's and my own idea, taking Porfirio's simplicity and my options to attain information that doesn't have to be relevant for militaristic actions. I find that player's of a more peaceful nature should be able to use such a system as well for their very own needs. (Ex.: Supporting more efficiently, or maybe even some bonus/es for trades?)

Like I mentioned above, I might elaborate on how I envision this to work some other time.

Regards,
Bloodwyn

 

[DeletedUser2029]

since we've apparently stolen this thread from Blacksmith, allow me to expand a little bit on the "pricing detail";

could it be possible to tie the price of Infiltrate to daily town hall bonus (for the scouting idea and on the world map), to .... 10%, e.g. 50 coins for Bronze age (500 coins daily bonus), 200 coins for Iron age (2000 daily bonus),....?

 

[DeletedUser653]

I like this debate, one of the better more logic ones for ages (nice start BS).

May I add, any retreat should be at a cost and therefore I support (I will hate it, therefore its fair and good) the idea that any retreat costs the attacker coins/resources, but I strongly suggest these coins /resources should go to the defending player as a incentive for players to actually defend.

I currently can scout just by attacking and then retreat if I see strong defense, record player and troops and adjust for following day. Its pretty simple and works quite well for defender (24 hours protection) and attacker (no cost or loss of troops) but for the attacker its really great as with 80 players to attack, losing out due to 8 long range is no big deal, its just delaying the attack by 24 hours and costs me nothing, the next day 8 fast units take the player out.

But any proposal to allow a attacking player to scout the defending troops for a few coins/goods will increase the massive advantage especially to any advanced player, ie in Arvahall I have 1 million coins/goods and the cost of scouting will have no effect but will enable me to improve my plundering by 50% - making life for the experienced, advanced, maybe diamond player better and not helping the defender at all. So to balance this (remember the defending player loses no troops, but does get plundered) then all retreating forces should pay the scout costs to the defender. So as a colonial player scouting a EMA player I would pay a high coin/goods value and if a do retreat there is a big bonus to the defender, the Colonial player would get the same bonus but its less valable to him/her and so becomes fairer to the weaker player.

It would be good to amend the town hall bonus and link to it, alternatively lets just agree the figures, ie as a suggestion
Bronze - 10 coins per retreating figure
Iron - 20 coins per retreating figure
EMA - 40 coins per retreating figure
HMA - 60 coins per retreating figure
LMA - 80 coins per retreating figure
Colonial - 100 coins per retreating figure

coins are better to use as its too easy to plunder large qtys of goods. if player has no coins then i guess theres no charge.

 

[DeletedUser7719]

Whoa, idea just popped up: what if someone changed their defense after you infiltrate, but before you attack?

 

[DeletedUser653]

it would be a shock, but I think a fair one considering the time period.

 

[DeletedUser2029]

@HRC

that's a bit to harsh just for the type of scouting you're proposing. I suggested something similar in the "points for successful defence" debate, but for attackers killed units (defenders reward was the amount of coins and supplies needed to train those units), so no extra expense.
what you're suggesting may actually turn out as a turn-off for PvP.

 

[DeletedUser]

A "Scouting & Courier System" + "Retreat Costs" (Completely revised Version!)

A “Scouting & Courier System”

When we refer to scouts, we usually mean “soldiers who perform reconnaissance and other support duties.” Spies on the other hand are considered as “individual obtaining [secret or confidential information] without the permission of the holder of the information.” And lastly but not least, under a messenger or courier we understand “a person or thing that carries a message.” ¹

Based upon these three professions and their definitions, there should be scouts and/or spies, alongside messengers/couriers implemented within the game. Scouts/spies would fulfill missions for military purposes, like retrieving an opponents current defense strength ( = how many units are placed as defense). Messengers/couriers would accomplish tasks of the more diplomatic and neutral nature.

The main difference between these two types of professions is that diplomatic missions, carried out by messengers/couriers, are much less risky and thus much lower in cost and always successful. (Exception is the “A diplomatic treaty” option. [more info below]) Scouts/spies don't have it that easy though, they need to be trained and well equipped for them to have any success in their missions. This means higher costs and a much higher risk of the mission failing.

1. How this could be implemented in-game:

1.1 Accessing this feature & its options

First of all, this is to be kept as simple as possible. So to access the “Scouting & Messenger System” all one has to do is click on the image/avatar of a neighbour or guild member within the social bar at the bottom of one's screen. This would open a new window that could look something like this:



The messenger/courier options at the top of the left side are: “The Reign of Enthusiasm”, “The Greatest Workshop”, “A Merchant's List” and “A Diplomatic Treaty”.​

I. ”The Reign of Enthusiasm”
This notifies one about the number of happiness points a player needs to reach an enthusiastic population. If the player already has an enthusiastic population, one would be told for how long this lasts. (= When the first polish expires / If a player is in need of polishing at all.)

II. “The Greatest Workshop”
This notifies one about the type of supply building/s with the currently highest production set. ( = If a player has farms and a cooperage built and sets the farms at 1 hour productions and the cooperage at 8 hour productions, the cooperage would be shown as the type of building with the currently highest production set.)

III. “A Merchant's List”
This will send one a list that is viewable over the market screen within a separate tab called “Merchant Lists”, which depicts all the current offers/needs within the market of a certain player + the types of goods building/s he/she has built within their city.

IV. “A Diplomatic Treaty”
This is a very special option that allows a player to send out a messenger and ask for a truce between him/her and another player. This treaty would hinder any plundering between these two players with the option to offer and/or request a one-time, limited amount of goods / resources in return. after selecting this a new screen would ask which goods / resources one offers and/or requires. Once accepted by the other player, this truce cannot be broken for the next 3 days ( = 72 hours).​

The scout/spy options listed at the bottom of the left side are: “Whole Numbers” and “The Vital Secret”.​

I. “Whole Numbers”
Will depict the total number of units that are currently trained and battle ready. It will give one a heads up of what one might be p against as an attacker, as well as a defender.

II. “The Vital Secret”
This is one of the most important pieces of information any General can ever receive: What troops will he/she be facing. Therefore it is also the most costly and risky mission for any scout/spy.​

Clicking “Attack” would redirect one to the the “Army Management” screen so that one can view and change one's currently selected attacking army as well as view the opponent's army below (if one hasn't scouted the opponent's army, 8 blank unit icons are shown). Basically, it's the exact same screen that comes up when attacking within the campaign map:​

1.2 The price for such benefits:

The messenger/courier options would cost 10 gold in the BA, 20 gold in the IA, 30 gold in the EMA, etc. Only exception is the “A Diplomatic Treaty” option, which costs 100 gold in the BA, 200 gold in the IA, 300 gold in the EMA, etc.

Scouts/Spies would cost 20 gold in the BA, 40 gold in the IA, 60 gold in the EMA, etc. for the “Whole Numbers” option and have a success rate of 90%.

For the option “The Vital Secret”, the costs would stay the same as for “Whole Numbers”, however the success rate decreases to 60%.​

“Retreat Costs”

This is fairly simple. No matter how many units are sent, the penalty for retreating would always be 50 gold in the BA, 100 gold in the IA, 200 gold in the EMA, etc. (costs of supplies could be added as well)
This would prevent players from sending just one spear to “scout”, instead of using a scout/spy, as it's even cheaper to send out scouts/spies twice rather than sending one spear and paying out the retreat costs.​

This system uses the simplicity PorfirioDiaz had proposed before, integrating it into a system that is more than just viewing an opponents current defenses. It's something that gives the game potential to become that, what it intends to be: A casual game, for all styles of play.

Regards,
Bloodwyn

¹ From Wikipedia. :p

 

[DeletedUser2029]

Sorry Bloodwyn but this is just too complicated and as a whole I have to say no.
- You're giving way to many options to players and I'm not sure that some of them are even necessary (Enthusiasm).
- Merchants' list needs to be a separate idea (although this could be circumvented by adding a players filter to the market and expanding on the "friend" option that is waaay underutilised at the moment)
- Diplomatic treaty - yes but only as a passive option (i.e. as a bribe, other way around would be extortion), also a "friend" expansion
- Whole numbers - absolutely not, that's too valuable to be acquired just by scouting and to be implemented would require a separate military building that would produce spies (just to be fair) and a system for spy countermeasures.

It's not a bad idea, but you have stepped out of bounds on too many aspects of this game