Spooner Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 (edited) We should discuss this mechanic. Sheepy wanted wars to end faster. All of my opponents have been repeatedly fortifying to extend the war/not get beiged for 5 days. So, in effect, I'm just bombing infrastructure 4/5 days, same as before. Not that I mind, but Sheepy seemed interested in removing this mechanic. Additionally, it's now impossible to capture treasures. Not sure if that's an intended consequence of the changes, but it seems to remove the purpose of treasures. Edited December 30, 2016 by Spooner 1 Quote ☾☆ High Priest of Dio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sans Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 Maybe 6 MAP for fortify instead of 3? 1 Quote “ Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination. †–The First Ideal of the Windrunners, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Popular Post Alex Posted December 30, 2016 Administrators Popular Post Share Posted December 30, 2016 Maybe 6 MAP for fortify instead of 3? I think 4 would be a sufficient change. I think that for alliance wars, it is not particularly advantageous to keep fortifying forever. However, in situations with treasures, looting, etc. it is an issue. Another change would be that if you're already Fortified, fortifying only adds, say, 5 Resistance. 9 Quote Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sans Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 Another change would be that if you're already Fortified, fortifying only adds, say, 5 Resistance. This works too. 1 Quote “ Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination. †–The First Ideal of the Windrunners, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishmael Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 I'm finding the opposite is the problem - opponents who have been reduced to nothing due to being attacked by multiple nations cannot be beiged by those nations because of the very extensive rebuild time they would receive. Since all attacks reduce resistance, they cannot even be attacked to stop them rebuilding their army. Under the old system, this was not a problem because only ground attacks led to beiging and so air attacks could be used to prevent opponents from rebuilding armies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin Lannister Posted January 1, 2017 Share Posted January 1, 2017 Fortifying really becomes a moot concept if you take away the fact that it can help you avoid a beige. It's how it is. That's the only reason one will fortify mostly is so that it helps them stick with their resources and sacrifice infra instead. Otherwise, you lose resources later but save your infra comparatively. Fortifying if changed will just become a concept which is never used, because you will literally be gifting free damage to your attacker if you do so with no advantage whatsoever of fortifying. The 10% damage thing just isn't worth it either, much rather spend those MAPs productively. I think the whole choose resources vs infra is a good strategy provided by current fortifying and adding a really new sense of game-play. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooves Posted January 1, 2017 Share Posted January 1, 2017 I like fortify as it is. It gives the loser something to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spooner Posted January 1, 2017 Author Share Posted January 1, 2017 Those saying "if you can beige while fortify nobody will ever use it" are incorrect. There are two scenarios I'd use it in: 1. To get the buff on defense to maximize casualties overnight. 2. To briefly bump up my resistance to not get beiged -- how does this work if I can't attack? If somebody's attacking me on the sea (or air), let's say I have no ships, but I have allies who can bomb his ships. I can fortify to bring myself into safety temporarily, then rejoin the battle when the enemy's units have been reduced. Fortify should be a temporary response rather than a permanent choice, imo. Quote ☾☆ High Priest of Dio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seabasstion Posted January 1, 2017 Share Posted January 1, 2017 if alex is looking for ways to allow people to 'fight back' fortification isn't the answer. the looting limit needs to be raised from 100k to like 100k per city. or something like if they ground attack one of your 10 cities, they steal 10% of the cash on hand. 1 in 20 cities = 5% cash on hand. attackers would still get incentive to fight from the now increased looting at the end (which is why looting was originally increased if i recall correctly) and defenders now have more cash they can spend to try and mount a comeback when those aggressors come to take their birthday cake (which is what fortification was originally intended for...i think...still im not really sure) in the end, that extra cash being held on wouldn't matter if the nation loses as it would get largely taken out when they are beiged. you retain the incentive to fight, you retain the ability to fight back, and you regain the ability to actually have a decisive war. im one of the ones fortifying perpetually. its a crummy system. i would rather be beiged like i deserve to be than take advantage of the only mechanic i have right now. the only thing stopping me is my ego not wanting to see 'defeat' on my war screen when anyone that looks at the metrics would clearly see i am. the 100k limit may have worked at 5 cities. it doesn't work at 15+ there was plenty of times i could have done a double buy and potentially gotten back into fighting shape with my ships. but because i never really eclipsed 1M in cash (2 turns for me) without getting a ground attack i could never buy more than 20 at a time. 20 that would have just been destroyed right away. if each city is making money and one city is attacked...why does every city get looted? i guess thats where im going with it. this fortification thing is borderline nonsense. all it does is serve to prevent active people from being beiged. it doesn't give a realistic ounce of a comeback. now instead i have wars im getting crushed in for 5 days, no beige time to rebuild (admittedly my choice - but more so because of economics), and 3 more will instantly swoop in to continue attacking me for 5 days. repeat until they get bored i guess lol. so if you want to make wars more fun and less of a dogpile type thing - yeah remove this fortification so wars have to be decided (or at least make it worth 1 point where you get boosted damage from the next attack but it DOESN'T add resistance), and actually allow nations working capital to finance a comeback. i feel like most of the math in this game was designed with 5-7 cities in mind. it doesn't really hold up when scaled up to the top 250 of the game 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin Lannister Posted January 1, 2017 Share Posted January 1, 2017 Those saying "if you can beige while fortify nobody will ever use it" are incorrect. There are two scenarios I'd use it in: 1. To get the buff on defense to maximize casualties overnight. 2. To briefly bump up my resistance to not get beiged -- how does this work if I can't attack? If somebody's attacking me on the sea (or air), let's say I have no ships, but I have allies who can bomb his ships. I can fortify to bring myself into safety temporarily, then rejoin the battle when the enemy's units have been reduced. Fortify should be a temporary response rather than a permanent choice, imo. 1. The problem here is it is an inefficient use of MAPs. Best to save the MAPs instead of spending them here and using them productively the next day. The defense buff just isn't worth it. 2. Yes, this is the only thing that can happen. However, this will only happen towards the 2nd to 3rd day of war. This will just be a temporary relief in case of counters. I think having the whole concept of fortification just for a temporary relief at 3rd to 4th day isn't wise. I think fortify as it is works in a way, perhaps Sheepy didn't properly intend, but actually makes the game interesting for the losing side. Originally it was just go inactive for 5 days or whenever for the war period. This time there has been things to do and come back online for it. I think this should stay. If someone wants to sacrifice their infra instead of resources, let them! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mageofpie Posted January 1, 2017 Share Posted January 1, 2017 I think the 10% infra lost at the end of a war needs to be removed. For any large player, say 3K infrastructure with 15+ cities, letting themselves lose the war is WAY too costly. in 5 days you can launch 15 airstrikes dealing however much damage, but if the opponent wins the war you're going to receive that much AND lose loot on top of it. Letting yourself lose a war simply isn't in the question for a lot of people and I think that's why fortify is/will be abused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I had pointed this out earlier, and it is working "just as intended." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Endlessly fortifying in a war (so beyond simply a raid) for 5 days is worse than useless. Congratulations, you avoided beiging by acting as a punching bag for 5 days to 3 guys. Your reward is to get your slots reopen immediately while you're at 0 and act as a punching bag for another 5 days to 3 more guys. In short its not a concern in regards to alliance wars. 2. To briefly bump up my resistance to not get beiged -- how does this work if I can't attack? If somebody's attacking me on the sea (or air), let's say I have no ships, but I have allies who can bomb his ships. I can fortify to bring myself into safety temporarily, then rejoin the battle when the enemy's units have been reduced. Don't even require an ally for it. I was able to use a fortify to avoid being beiged and to then beige my opponent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Endlessly fortifying in a war (so beyond simply a raid) for 5 days is worse than useless. Congratulations, you avoided beiging by acting as a punching bag for 5 days to 3 guys. Your reward is to get your slots reopen immediately while you're at 0 and act as a punching bag for another 5 days to 3 more guys. In short its not a concern in regards to alliance wars. Don't even require an ally for it. I was able to use a fortify to avoid being beiged and to then beige my opponent. You can fight as usual and start fortifying only when close to the beige threshold. Thanks for the strawman though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Yknow what. For the first time I'm still enjoying war whilst losing. You can plan, take actions and potentially still win wars (won 2/6 with 0 military because I planned, played the war system better than them and was still active). I say leave it how it is, it's doing what Sheepy intended fun wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Alex Posted January 2, 2017 Administrators Share Posted January 2, 2017 Yknow what. For the first time I'm still enjoying war whilst losing. You can plan, take actions and potentially still win wars (won 2/6 with 0 military because I planned, played the war system better than them and was still active). I say leave it how it is, it's doing what Sheepy intended fun wise. I'm glad you're enjoying the war system Quote Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 (edited) You can fight as usual and start fortifying only when close to the beige threshold. Thanks for the strawman though. Strawman? Come now. Only thing I can see beyond you just being jumpy and not knowing when to use terms is that you think my post was in response to the 10% loss at the war which it wasn't quite no. Edit: In regards to fortifying only at the end you're still letting your opponent get free hits in and if losing that translates to you then having less units for the next guys. If winning then you could do it yeah and I could see an issue there but... I don't think that issue is what you're advancing. You'd have to be clear. Edited January 2, 2017 by Rozalia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Strawman? Come now. Only thing I can see beyond you just being jumpy and not knowing when to use terms is that you think my post was in response to the 10% loss at the war which it wasn't quite no. Edit: In regards to fortifying only at the end you're still letting your opponent get free hits in and if losing that translates to you then having less units for the next guys. If winning then you could do it yeah and I could see an issue there but... I don't think that issue is what you're advancing. You'd have to be clear. You are not making any sense. You used "endless fortifying in a war is useless" argument, which is a strawman, because you don't need to. If you don't want to be beiged, you just do what you usually do, and at the stage when your military is completely annihilated, you press fortify and lose out on nothing except lobbing a missile or a nuke. By doing so you save your war chest. In my case, it is saving 40m per battle from going to the other side's hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 (edited) You are not making any sense. You used "endless fortifying in a war is useless" argument, which is a strawman, because you don't need to. If you don't want to be beiged, you just do what you usually do, and at the stage when your military is completely annihilated, you press fortify and lose out on nothing except lobbing a missile or a nuke. By doing so you save your war chest. In my case, it is saving 40m per battle from going to the other side's hands. Calm down lad, we're in Game Suggestions. You may not get beiged and lose some value, but you wipe out your usefulness for the next round which in an alliance war is a big no no. Edited January 2, 2017 by Rozalia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Calm down lad, we're in Game Suggestions. You may not get beiged and lose some value, but you wipe out your usefulness for the next round which in an alliance war is a big no no. I am calm. Your argument is debunked. Ta-ta Roz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I am calm. Your argument is debunked. Ta-ta Roz. Bloody hell, I've really got all of you still triggered don't I. Oh boy. You've yet to actually to respond to what I said in just what you gain by doing as you are saying so I'll take it this is your usual tactics. Why you use them in game suggestions of all places I don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Bloody hell, I've really got all of you still triggered don't I. Oh boy. You've yet to actually to respond to what I said in just what you gain by doing as you are saying so I'll take it this is your usual tactics. Why you use them in game suggestions of all places I don't know. I don't get what you don't understand. I can fight as usual, and start fortifying at the very end if I am losing. Thus one can prevent getting beiged with no cost. Do you have any other argument? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I don't get what you don't understand. I can fight as usual, and start fortifying at the very end if I am losing. Thus one can prevent getting beiged with no cost. Do you have any other argument? Why would I need another when that one sufficed? You are not making any sense. You used "endless fortifying in a war is useless" argument, which is a strawman, because you don't need to. If you don't want to be beiged, you just do what you usually do, and at the stage when your military is completely annihilated, you press fortify and lose out on nothing except lobbing a missile or a nuke. By doing so you save your war chest. In my case, it is saving 40m per battle from going to the other side's hands. If they do as you say it is true indeed (never said otherwise) that they would avoid the looting to happen. At the same time they are now at 0 military with 3 open slots which will quickly get refilled. That in an alliance war scenerio is worse than simply being beiged and coming out of beige ready and armed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 (edited) Why would I need another when that one sufficed? If they do as you say it is true indeed (never said otherwise) that they would avoid the looting to happen. At the same time they are now at 0 military with 3 open slots which will quickly get refilled. That in an alliance war scenerio is worse than simply being beiged and coming out of beige ready and armed. False. This is an option a defender has at their disposal to use at will. The defender will fortify at the end when it is beneficial and not fortify when it is not beneficial. When would it be beneficial? If you have a significant amount of resources on your account that you cannot move away due to a blockade. What would be significant? As I said, I would lose 40m worth of stuff to a single attacker right now if I was beiged. 3 attackers x 40m = 120m. They win what I lose, so the net damage is multiplied by two to 240m. That's not a small amount. If I was also losing 5 offensive wars at the same time 8 x 40m x 2 = 640m. That's more than half a billion. So there are quite plausible scenarios when it is useful to use fortify to avoid getting beiged in an alliance war. Namely if you have a large war chest trapped on your account. Another scenario is defending a treasure as you like as has already been mentioned somewhere. Basically it makes treasures unlootable. Edited January 2, 2017 by Kemal Ergenekon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 False. This is an option a defender has at their disposal to use at will. The defender will fortify at the end when it is beneficial and not fortify when it is not beneficial. When would it be beneficial? If you have a significant amount of resources on your account that you cannot move away due to a blockade. What would be significant? As I said, I would lose 40m worth of stuff to a single attacker right now if I was beiged. 3 attackers x 40m = 120m. They win what I lose, so the net damage is multiplied by two to 240m. That's not a small amount. If I was also losing 5 offensive wars at the same time 8 x 40m x 2 = 640m. That's more than half a billion. So there are quite plausible scenarios when it is useful to use fortify to avoid getting beiged in an alliance war. Namely if you have a large war chest trapped on your account. Another scenario is defending a treasure as you like as has already been mentioned somewhere. Basically it makes treasures unlootable. False what exactly? If it helps just pretend I'm someone else please, stop with these combative responses please. Yes yes and no one has said differently to that. You avoid your stuff being looted and trade that of for being useless for the next round and being no real help to your allies. That may or may not be fine for you and your alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.