This topic is closed

League Strike Change

17 Replies
djmoody
21 May, 2017, 1:11 PM UTC

I was asked to re-post this idea on another thread, so here it is:


The Suggestion

Relax the cap on the number of members in league strikes, raising it to 5 or even 10 players.

Bring into play a power limit cap for league strikes dependent on the number of members in the strike. As you add more members the total power of the strike becomes more limited (Suggested levels are added below).

This will allow good leagues who just don't have 3 uber coiners but do have lots of good members to create decent league strikes.


The Problem

Beacon mechanics at the start of the game made beacons hard to attack because:

- It's a whole leagues defence against 3 player from the attacker

- Seige mechanics are such that overwhelming defence kills offence very effectively for small losses

For many leagues that is still the case. Without spending it's difficult to create 3 very large players who have offences that can threaten beacons defended by whole leagues.

But uncontrolled uber spending has generated several hammers (sets of 3 players) that can attack and take any beacons. No leagues have enough defence to stop the uber hammers.

Simply by spending to stupid levels on 3 main accounts leagues have purchased an unrivaled advantage and been able to completely unbalance the game. The game thus became a game of 3 players with the other 147 largely irrelevant. 

We can narrow the gap and let smaller leagues (or even big leagues with no coiners) create decent league strikes by allowing them to add more members to their league strikes. It won't bring perfect balance back to the game but will bring the game but it make the game more of a league effort. We can bring a little more balance back to the game.

So we don't completely unbalance offence vs defence, we add a power cap that decreases the more members you add to the league strike. This creates a trade off between adding members and the size of the hammer you can send. We have to give the defences at beacons some kind of chance :)

Note this doesn't just mean leagues could create larger hammers. It also means those who want to take a beacon by force of the strength of their entire membership can also send larger softeners. Today, limited to 3 people those softeners are often simply rendered pointless by the siege mechanic.

In the end, we create an alternative to coining for beacon attacks, that enables active leagues with many moderate sized members to have more of an impact on the game.


Some Suggested Cap Numbers

No need to go with these, they are here as a draft to generate debate. Feel free to discuss and debate the caps the right levels.

Also I am going to put the caps in troop power rather than food for simplicity and clarity. If the caps are implemented under the current mechanic they would need to be translated to the food caps currently used.

3 Players - Unchanged (or you can fight Plarium to limit it to maybe 1bn if you want)

4 Player (+1 Players) - Power cap 750m

5 Players (+2 Players) - Power cap 500m

6 Players (+3 Players) - Power cap 300m

7 Players (+4 Players) - Power cap 200m

8 Players (+5 Players) - Power cap 100m

9 Players (+6 Players) - Power cap 75m

10 Players (+7 Players) - Power cap 50m

Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
3
Oracle
21 May, 2017, 2:11 PM UTC

These sound like a great idea, I heard CM say there are considering some league updates, maybe these might also be considered. 


But I don't see how it will affect the game. It will just make it worse.Why?


Every league with a hammer of 1 billion have up to 30 players with an army of up to 50 million. These players will just act as softeners during beacon take-down, teaming up together to make a 150 million hammer. 

It will just make Big leagues even more stronger and small league even more susceptible to players in big leagues. 

But I like tha fact that it might just allow small leagues to play the game, enable them to retaliate, its easy for 10 players in a small league to achieve 50 mill offense, Even if they can't then they will act as softeners, and maybe with 9 leagues teamed together they might manage to put some dent and damage. 


I like your suggestion, with capping, it might just make the defense aspect of the game playable again. 

Please remember to put it in suggestion.

Biohazard has killed the forum.
UTC +2:00
0
RandomDrop
21 May, 2017, 2:55 PM UTC

Oracle said:


These sound like a great idea, I heard CM say there are considering some league updates, maybe these might also be considered. 


But I don't see how it will affect the game. It will just make it worse.Why?


Every league with a hammer of 1 billion have up to 30 players with an army of up to 50 million. These players will just act as softeners during beacon take-down, teaming up together to make a 150 million hammer. 

It will just make Big leagues even more stronger and small league even more susceptible to players in big leagues. 

But I like tha fact that it might just allow small leagues to play the game, enable them to retaliate, its easy for 10 players in a small league to achieve 50 mill offense, Even if they can't then they will act as softeners, and maybe with 9 leagues teamed together they might manage to put some dent and damage. 


I like your suggestion, with capping, it might just make the defense aspect of the game playable again. 

Please remember to put it in suggestion.

Your Logic is flawed,


If you get hit by a huge hammer you get no points and the attacker takes no loss. If leagues had to soften a target then at least the points would be spread in a simi balanced way.

UTC +7:00
0
OCTAVIAN
21 May, 2017, 3:44 PM UTC

Oracle said:


These sound like a great idea, I heard CM say there are considering some league updates, maybe these might also be considered. 


But I don't see how it will affect the game. It will just make it worse.Why?


Every league with a hammer of 1 billion have up to 30 players with an army of up to 50 million. These players will just act as softeners during beacon take-down, teaming up together to make a 150 million hammer. 

It will just make Big leagues even more stronger and small league even more susceptible to players in big leagues. 

But I like tha fact that it might just allow small leagues to play the game, enable them to retaliate, its easy for 10 players in a small league to achieve 50 mill offense, Even if they can't then they will act as softeners, and maybe with 9 leagues teamed together they might manage to put some dent and damage. 


I like your suggestion, with capping, it might just make the defense aspect of the game playable again. 

Please remember to put it in suggestion.

You are wrong. DJ's ideea will not make things worst with nothing. Those players can teaming up anyway even now, so this changes will not bring them any other advantage, because of the caps decrease.  But will give an advantage for leagues with no uberhammers...


I totaly agree with DJ sugestion.Could be a good change in game. 
UTC +3:00
0
brunsonthomas
21 May, 2017, 6:37 PM UTC
djmoody said:

I was asked to re-post this idea on another thread, so here it is:


The Suggestion

Relax the cap on the number of members in league strikes, raising it to 5 or even 10 players.

Bring into play a power limit cap for league strikes dependent on the number of members in the strike. As you add more members the total power of the strike becomes more limited (Suggested levels are added below).

This will allow good leagues who just don't have 3 uber coiners but do have lots of good members to create decent league strikes.


The Problem

Beacon mechanics at the start of the game made beacons hard to attack because:

- It's a whole leagues defence against 3 player from the attacker

- Seige mechanics are such that overwhelming defence kills offence very effectively for small losses

For many leagues that is still the case. Without spending it's difficult to create 3 very large players who have offences that can threaten beacons defended by whole leagues.

But uncontrolled uber spending has generated several hammers (sets of 3 players) that can attack and take any beacons. No leagues have enough defence to stop the uber hammers.

Simply by spending to stupid levels on 3 main accounts leagues have purchased an unrivaled advantage and been able to completely unbalance the game. The game thus became a game of 3 players with the other 147 largely irrelevant. 

We can narrow the gap and let smaller leagues (or even big leagues with no coiners) create decent league strikes by allowing them to add more members to their league strikes. It won't bring perfect balance back to the game but will bring the game but it make the game more of a league effort. We can bring a little more balance back to the game.

So we don't completely unbalance offence vs defence, we add a power cap that decreases the more members you add to the league strike. This creates a trade off between adding members and the size of the hammer you can send. We have to give the defences at beacons some kind of chance :)

Note this doesn't just mean leagues could create larger hammers. It also means those who want to take a beacon by force of the strength of their entire membership can also send larger softeners. Today, limited to 3 people those softeners are often simply rendered pointless by the siege mechanic.

In the end, we create an alternative to coining for beacon attacks, that enables active leagues with many moderate sized members to have more of an impact on the game.


Some Suggested Cap Numbers

No need to go with these, they are here as a draft to generate debate. Feel free to discuss and debate the caps the right levels.

Also I am going to put the caps in troop power rather than food for simplicity and clarity. If the caps are implemented under the current mechanic they would need to be translated to the food caps currently used.

3 Players - Unchanged (or you can fight Plarium to limit it to maybe 1bn if you want)

4 Player (+1 Players) - Power cap 750m

5 Players (+2 Players) - Power cap 500m

6 Players (+3 Players) - Power cap 300m

7 Players (+4 Players) - Power cap 200m

8 Players (+5 Players) - Power cap 100m

9 Players (+6 Players) - Power cap 75m

10 Players (+7 Players) - Power cap 50m

I do not necessarily agree or disagree with your idea. I would say that it would be a good idea to put it in as a Suggestion and see if it could be passed on to the developers for implementation. It could change the way Beacons are attacked.
UTC +5:00
0
Jezebel
21 May, 2017, 7:44 PM UTC
Well if there is a "cap" enforced on the league strikes then I like the idea but if there is no cap on them then forget about it
UTC +0:00
1
djmoody
22 May, 2017, 1:39 AM UTC

Jezebel said:


Well if there is a "cap" enforced on the league strikes then I like the idea but if there is no cap on them then forget about it

A 1bn cap would work fine with me. What level do you think?

Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
1
Jezebel
22 May, 2017, 3:32 AM UTC

djmoody said:


Jezebel said:


Well if there is a "cap" enforced on the league strikes then I like the idea but if there is no cap on them then forget about it

A 1bn cap would work fine with me. What level do you think?

Thats reasonable I think 


The way things are right now I have a number in mind of how much before I will hold a beacon - I don't plan on being an easy target for the huge hammers that are flying around out there
UTC +0:00
0
BiohazarD
Moderator
22 May, 2017, 8:06 AM UTC
djmoody said:

Jezebel said:


Well if there is a "cap" enforced on the league strikes then I like the idea but if there is no cap on them then forget about it

A 1bn cap would work fine with me. What level do you think?

It would probably end up being a force limit and not a power limit (like the force limits that already exist on fortresses).  I think 1bn force would come out to be about a 400k force limit. 
Any opinions expressed by me are my own and do not necessarily represent the opinions of or constitute official statements by Plarium.
UTC +0:00
0
nobody
22 May, 2017, 4:50 PM UTC

why not have 1 bill power cap, and up to 10 links at the 1 bil power?  and make it so that non league players can use the same link advantage.

the advantage of buy 1 bil power instantly is the issue.  allow 10 players to have as much fun as 3.

get rid of the raid mechanic and get rid of pvp points manipulation. a troop should be worth x points on its designated offense/defense and 1/2 x on its non-designated offense/defense.

loss without value needs to stop.
UTC +0:00
0
Alina Bright
Community Manager
23 May, 2017, 12:37 PM UTC
Greetings, Lords and Ladies! Thank you for such a detailed description of this suggestion. I'll pass it to our devs for discussion. 
UTC +2:00
0
Stewart
23 May, 2017, 1:23 PM UTC

Many people who were happy to zip the mouth and happily use their larger hammers now say there should be a limit now that they no longer have the bigger armies.


That is how it looks from the outside.



Edit


And i like the more members in the league hit WITH a limit.
Noodle maker extreme
UTC +0:00
0
Jezebel
23 May, 2017, 11:02 PM UTC

Stewart_KT1 said:


Many people who were happy to zip the mouth and happily use their larger hammers now say there should be a limit now that they no longer have the bigger armies.


That is how it looks from the outside.



Edit


And i like the more members in the league hit WITH a limit.

Stewart the people who had the larger hammers before did not have over 1 billion :)


I also do not ever think I will have that big of an army where my third of a hammer strike would be 3.33333333333 hundred million.  I do not intend to ever spend that much money on this game - go ahead use them if you want but if you wipe all us small guys out you will be left with 3 or 4 leagues to fight among themselves


I will once again remind everyone that BEFORE the excessive spending became part of the game a big hammer was like 50 - 75 mil
UTC +0:00
0
Stewart
24 May, 2017, 7:58 AM UTC

Im sure that plarium wont set hit limits at off power, They will as always set the limit to troop limits - such as troops that eat 250k fph.


I spent years building my meat shield of fodder troops around my important troops to preserve my fighting ability in a prolonged war.


And if/when the limits come in i will be limited to about 1 third of my troops on any 1 beacon hit. Hitting beacons at all would be at an end for me.



Noodle maker extreme
UTC +0:00
0
Oracle
24 May, 2017, 11:54 AM UTC

Personally I like these Idea

''Trojan Horse

The Marshall and Captains of each league will have access to crafting a unique vehicle known as the

“Trojan Horse”. This sweet vehicle will allow all league members to send both unit types inside the 
vehicle. The objective of this vehicle is to be used against certain targets such as Fortress or Beacons. 
Similar mechanics when hitting a hamlet with both offense and defense. The offense determine the 
outcome of the fight if they win they control the hamlet and if they lose you fail to capture it. However, 
it leaves your defense units intact. The “Trojan Horse” should work in a similar fashion to allow 
members to join together to build one grand offense army to send against an enemy beacon. When 
successful, the offense units will return back home while leaving the defense units inside the newly 
captured beacon. Of course, you end up losing the “Trojan Horse” in the process which I recommend to 
make it some sort of a challenge to actually build one (please not only sapphires). To make it worth the 
effort for leagues to construct it, I advise to make individual hits on beacons to be low points while the 
“Trojan Horse” will earn players a better score in events to make it attractive. I leave it up to the game 
developers to decides on what controls to be in placed for controlling the structure and set limits on 
beacon hits by the “Trojan Horse”. 
Lets eliminate CTA (Call to Arms) which is quite annoying to lose so much friendly fire power and not to 
mention organizing the event itself plus server crushes. Also, events such league PvP would make more 
sense to work together to earn points for the whole league. This will encourage searching for more 

active players and support them in order for the league to grow. Alliances can actually set targets on

enemy beacons by assigning few leagues on one target and each takes a turn to hit. The enemy should 
get a notification for an incoming “Trojan Horse” attack to keep them on their toes and I hope plaruim 

make the vehicle running speed to reach its distance within 1-10 mins only. For me the “Trojan Horse” is

something that make sense for the game to develop into the next step. Individual castle hits on beacon

should not show an alert and should be a horrible ratio for them to earn anything. Why? Let’s face it, 

alone you are simply an insect poking at a beacon!!''



Biohazard has killed the forum.
UTC +2:00
0
Snowgoon
24 May, 2017, 5:22 PM UTC

djmoody said:


Note this doesn't just mean leagues could create larger hammers. It also means those who want to take a beacon by force of the strength of their entire membership can also send larger softeners. Today, limited to 3 people those softeners are often simply rendered pointless by the siege mechanic.

So change the siege mechanic

Give us a combat algorithm that works

Give us Unified Beacons with 30% defense bonus and add defense bonuses to fortresses too

Then give us a Force Limit on ALL beacons that prevents hammers from destroying 95% of beacon defense in one wave


Actually, I would be happier if League Strikes were removed completely. They are too powerful

Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way - Pink Floyd - http://prnt.sc/dv923b
UTC +0:00
0
BiohazarD
Moderator
24 May, 2017, 6:14 PM UTC
Snowgoon said:

djmoody said:


Note this doesn't just mean leagues could create larger hammers. It also means those who want to take a beacon by force of the strength of their entire membership can also send larger softeners. Today, limited to 3 people those softeners are often simply rendered pointless by the siege mechanic.

So change the siege mechanic

Give us a combat algorithm that works

Give us Unified Beacons with 30% defense bonus and add defense bonuses to fortresses too

Then give us a Force Limit on ALL beacons that prevents hammers from destroying 95% of beacon defense in one wave


Actually, I would be happier if League Strikes were removed completely. They are too powerful

I don't think just removing league strikes would help, it would just mean 3 big people would all share one account and put all their money into it instead of spending on 3 separate accounts.  Removing league strikes would mostly just prevent the small to mid size non coiners from being able to take beacons, it wouldn't stop the giant coined hammers. 
Any opinions expressed by me are my own and do not necessarily represent the opinions of or constitute official statements by Plarium.
UTC +0:00
0
Jezebel
25 May, 2017, 2:20 PM UTC
BiohazarD said:

Snowgoon said:

djmoody said:


Note this doesn't just mean leagues could create larger hammers. It also means those who want to take a beacon by force of the strength of their entire membership can also send larger softeners. Today, limited to 3 people those softeners are often simply rendered pointless by the siege mechanic.

So change the siege mechanic

Give us a combat algorithm that works

Give us Unified Beacons with 30% defense bonus and add defense bonuses to fortresses too

Then give us a Force Limit on ALL beacons that prevents hammers from destroying 95% of beacon defense in one wave


Actually, I would be happier if League Strikes were removed completely. They are too powerful

I don't think just removing league strikes would help, it would just mean 3 big people would all share one account and put all their money into it instead of spending on 3 separate accounts.  Removing league strikes would mostly just prevent the small to mid size non coiners from being able to take beacons, it wouldn't stop the giant coined hammers. 
yes have to agree with Bio - League strikes are the only thing that gives us any hope of competing at all
UTC +0:00
0
1781601 users registered; 48448 topics; 287547 posts; our newest member:alina24