This topic is closed

I Want to Conquer and Occupy New Castles

11 Replies
vtwinn511
24 May, 2017, 9:18 PM UTC

I really like this game.  I've been playing it on all the servers for over a year now.  But one thing I wish we could do....I wish we could actually DEFEAT an enemy and occupy his Castle and Grow across the Country.  Accumulate Conquered Castles.  You really don't get much satisfaction by just Raiding or Conquest.  It's like kissing your sister.  A "Tie".


Roy
Royboye
UTC +7:00
1
Gadheras
25 May, 2017, 3:21 AM UTC

vtwinn511 said:


I really like this game.  I've been playing it on all the servers for over a year now.  But one thing I wish we could do....I wish we could actually DEFEAT an enemy and occupy his Castle and Grow across the Country.  Accumulate Conquered Castles.  You really don't get much satisfaction by just Raiding or Conquest.  It's like kissing your sister.  A "Tie".


Roy

Since you posting this in the player gatherings forum, Do you suggest you find out where people live and occupie their homes or what? doh


UTC +2:00
0
Oracle
25 May, 2017, 4:22 PM UTC

Moved to game discussion. 


Please place your suggestion in the suggestion thread. I like the part about occupying and growing terrotory. 
Biohazard has killed the forum.
UTC +2:00
0
Skycooldude
25 May, 2017, 5:08 PM UTC

vtwinn511 said:


I really like this game.  I've been playing it on all the servers for over a year now.  But one thing I wish we could do....I wish we could actually DEFEAT an enemy and occupy his Castle and Grow across the Country.  Accumulate Conquered Castles.  You really don't get much satisfaction by just Raiding or Conquest.  It's like kissing your sister.  A "Tie".


Roy

Too many problems with this idea.. Lets say you "conquer" an enemy's city... what happens to the enemy? When they go to log in again do they start with a lvl 1 city again...


The objective in these games are Beacons/fortresses.... thus must people have D in their leagues fortress/beacons and thus this "conquer" option would cause beacons/fortress to become obsolete as you would HAVE to defend your castle as you could lose it.


its all an idea though.. and it won't ever get put into the game... "conquering" players causes unhappy customers.. and will greatly decrease revenue for plarium as 99% of the actives that get "conquered" will just quit.

UTC +0:00
0
BiohazarD
Moderator
26 May, 2017, 11:45 PM UTC
vtwinn511 said:

I really like this game.  I've been playing it on all the servers for over a year now.  But one thing I wish we could do....I wish we could actually DEFEAT an enemy and occupy his Castle and Grow across the Country.  Accumulate Conquered Castles.  You really don't get much satisfaction by just Raiding or Conquest.  It's like kissing your sister.  A "Tie".


Roy
I've played games where you could take over other players cities.  It usually means that you have to either be on the game 24/7 or get a bot to defend your cities for you when you're offline, otherwise someone can come along and take all your stuff while you're sleeping.  It makes the game a lot more stressful for players who want to play casually. 
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
BiohazarD
Moderator
26 May, 2017, 11:46 PM UTC
Skycooldude said:

vtwinn511 said:


I really like this game.  I've been playing it on all the servers for over a year now.  But one thing I wish we could do....I wish we could actually DEFEAT an enemy and occupy his Castle and Grow across the Country.  Accumulate Conquered Castles.  You really don't get much satisfaction by just Raiding or Conquest.  It's like kissing your sister.  A "Tie".


Roy

Too many problems with this idea.. Lets say you "conquer" an enemy's city... what happens to the enemy? When they go to log in again do they start with a lvl 1 city again...


The objective in these games are Beacons/fortresses.... thus must people have D in their leagues fortress/beacons and thus this "conquer" option would cause beacons/fortress to become obsolete as you would HAVE to defend your castle as you could lose it.


its all an idea though.. and it won't ever get put into the game... "conquering" players causes unhappy customers.. and will greatly decrease revenue for plarium as 99% of the actives that get "conquered" will just quit.

Yeah, I'm guessing people would be pretty unhappy if the castle they've spent 2 years and hundreds of dollars building up got taken away by another player while they were asleep one night :P
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
djmoody
27 May, 2017, 10:19 AM UTC

You would change the whole nature of the game and cause Plarium to lose loads of customers.

Stormfall and its brother and sister games are pretty casual as 24/7 RTS games go. If you put your troops in your cats and don't log on for 2 weeks then you know you will log in and have your castle and all your troops.

If you can lose your castle then you can lose everything. That changes the game requirements from casual to needing to be highly active everyday.

That would change Stormall massively. A lot of player will be here because they like the gameplay Stormfall offers. You would lose them overnight if you made this change.


If that is the kind of gameplay you want then I suggest you try Grepolis. One of the harshest PvP games, as you can build up an empire of many many cities (100+ is achievable) and then have them ALL taken from you and be eliminated from the game, having lost everything. To slightly compensate being at risk all the time it has a 12 hr mechanic where people basically have to take your city twice, the 2nd time being when they win it from you. This means you don't quite have to play 24/7 but it still means you have to be incredibly active (not easy to have a job and play)

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
Oracle
27 May, 2017, 11:08 AM UTC
djmoody said:

You would change the whole nature of the game and cause Plarium to lose loads of customers.

Stormfall and its brother and sister games are pretty casual as 24/7 RTS games go. If you put your troops in your cats and don't log on for 2 weeks then you know you will log in and have your castle and all your troops.

If you can lose your castle then you can lose everything. That changes the game requirements from casual to needing to be highly active everyday.

That would change Stormall massively. A lot of player will be here because they like the gameplay Stormfall offers. You would lose them overnight if you made this change.


If that is the kind of gameplay you want then I suggest you try Grepolis. One of the harshest PvP games, as you can build up an empire of many many cities (100+ is achievable) and then have them ALL taken from you and be eliminated from the game, having lost everything. To slightly compensate being at risk all the time it has a 12 hr mechanic where people basically have to take your city twice, the 2nd time being when they win it from you. This means you don't quite have to play 24/7 but it still means you have to be incredibly active (not easy to have a job and play)

Perhaps a feature can be added similar to fortress in game that allows players to have territory of their own and but these can be conquered like beacon. Allowing players to capture territory belonging to other players.
Biohazard has killed the forum.
UTC +2:00
0
Alina Bright
Community Manager
29 May, 2017, 1:04 PM UTC

Thank you for this suggestion and feedback, Lords.

Some of you said that siege itself is not a main objective of the game and it's true. So we don't plan to change the system of sieges or significantly improve it. 

UTC +2:00
0
BiohazarD
Moderator
29 May, 2017, 7:01 PM UTC
djmoody said:

You would change the whole nature of the game and cause Plarium to lose loads of customers.

Stormfall and its brother and sister games are pretty casual as 24/7 RTS games go. If you put your troops in your cats and don't log on for 2 weeks then you know you will log in and have your castle and all your troops.

If you can lose your castle then you can lose everything. That changes the game requirements from casual to needing to be highly active everyday.

That would change Stormall massively. A lot of player will be here because they like the gameplay Stormfall offers. You would lose them overnight if you made this change.


If that is the kind of gameplay you want then I suggest you try Grepolis. One of the harshest PvP games, as you can build up an empire of many many cities (100+ is achievable) and then have them ALL taken from you and be eliminated from the game, having lost everything. To slightly compensate being at risk all the time it has a 12 hr mechanic where people basically have to take your city twice, the 2nd time being when they win it from you. This means you don't quite have to play 24/7 but it still means you have to be incredibly active (not easy to have a job and play)

That's the problem with many RTS games, it becomes like a full time job just keeping people from taking your stuff.  One of the main things I like about plarium games is that you can just drop them if real life calls, and don't have to worry about having to start the game all over. 
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
exxxe
31 May, 2017, 12:44 PM UTC

but what if we just build a second castle 



no need to siege another player for example 

a lost art that each level allows us one extra castle to be built ( max lvl 4 or whatever )


another idea is resource areas or colonies 

you just occupy an area and build mines and townhouses and maybe more units buildings to train even more units without speeding the training time  ( yours permanently ) 
I'am me and that is what i care about :)
UTC +3:00
0
nobody
31 May, 2017, 4:48 PM UTC

i agree with oracle and exxxe:

oracle being pve instanced to the individual that will enable a certain amount of kingdom building.

exxxe being allowed to have more than one castle or "alts", i like to have one character per castle, as well as mixing the races of the characters.  5 to 10 legal "alts" or castles also enables a certain amount of kingdom building.  resource colonies that are won from balur and retained for a certain amount of time, 1 week or 1 month or some permanent, that is what instanced pve that is a resource gathering mechanism is.

i also agree with djmoody that players castles are not the way to build a kingdom, yet like the op, that is what i want.  "to build a kingdom"

the only 2 good mechanisms of this game IMO are that you can come back to your account after an extended period of time and that troops don't starve to death.

the op, oracle, and exxxe have stated what i stated many times.
UTC +0:00
0
1775514 users registered; 47761 topic; 285402 posts; our newest member:general narciso