Koth/Capture Points/Territory

[KingGhost]

 

Basic Info

So I'm bringing this idea from another game.

Basically I'll call them territories in the thread but it can be any of the preferred names either in the title or whatever you like. Ill call them territories for consistency sake

Basically You would have certain places on the map where you can capture to make them your territory. This would be very few as in maybe 3? Not sure put down what you think would be an appropriate number of Territories to have.

You could choose to begin capturing one of the territories and there would be like a certain number of available slots

Such as this very crude but i think it gets the point across excel graph

 

Basically each second you're on the wall it would "tick" a point. You would need an xxx amount of points to capture the territory which could be whatever is deemed balanced. I used 100,000 just as an example

Now one big thing that could deter pixel huggers and nations with common sense alike is the cost vs gain

Basically infra lost.

I'm proposing

• Infrastructure lost is reduced by 75% While on the slots
• Infrastructure lost is reduced by 25% in wars VS Nations on the slots
• Improvement lost is reduced by 25% For both sides if at least on side is on the capture
• Loot taken is reduced by 50% for both sides if at least on side is on the capture
• Alliance banks looting is 0% As in you cannot get anything from alliance banks if at least one side is on the wall (IF YOU ARE FOUND USING THIS TO PREVENT AN ALLIANCE BANK FROM BEING RAIDED, Meaning you joined the wall after being declared on to take advantage, similar to VMING a bank. there would be punishment)
• % Are subject to change based on if its balanced

Monopolies

One of the concerns might be. "Well the top alliances will just hog all the territories"

Well theres an easy solution. Each alliance may only have 1 territory. this bonus is given to only them and no one else (Like procterates mdps etc)

Another concern would be "Well won't they just sit on their one territory and farm it???"

Solutions

• Make it so territories are automatically "Neutralized" Every ??? days/months. I'm thinking towards 4 months an alliance has had it
• Or Make it so territory bonuses are changed every ??? days/months to encourage them to move to a bonus they want more of
• Or Make it so after ??? Days/months They have a combat disadvantage to encourage them to "Throw away" the territory as in there would be an option to abandon

Also a rule must be in place. Alliances can not intentionally give up a territory to another alliance to prevent trying to create a monopoly of territories. they must have a valid reason to abandon (Which could be bonus change) 

If they have given that as their reason they are not to attack the alliance trying to capture to help their allied alliances as they have already declared disinterest

 

Attack Ranges

Now you might be thinking

Wouldn't this mean Alliances could just hire very low score nations to abuse the -25%/+75% Attacking range?

Well there would be some solutions to that

1. Would be tiers to prevent low/high score campers

• Tier 1 - Top 25 Nation OR Consists of 8000+ score
• Tier 2 - From The 26th nation to 5000 score OR Consists of 5000-8000 score
• Tier 3 - Consists of 3500-5000 Score nations
• Tier 4 -  Consists of 3500-2000 Nations
• Tier 5 - Consists of 2000-1000 Nations
• Tier 6 - Consists of Everything below 1000
• NOTE: Your recruitment of all military besides spies, missiles , and nukes are reduced by 50% while on a capture slot (To prevent people from Decom sitting on the wall and waiting lower tiers to declare then buying)

PROS 

• Would make it so nations of all score can play their part and contribute
• Solves the cant hit nations cause of score problem 100%
• Still makes it so nations way above can't abuse the weak
• Decoming then double buying isn't worth it
• Nations are encouraged to be at max military when they join the capture
• Nations are disadvantaged due to the 50% Recruitment rate which prevents a powerhouse from camping

CONS

• Would make it so nations at lets say 2000 could hit 1000 score nations IF The 1000 score nation goes on the Slot
• If your blitzed by 3 Max nations and you aren't near the top score range in your tier it can be very detrimental
• ETC I don't know more please put them down in posts and i'll add in any pros/cons

You would also always be able to declare on nations 1 tier higher than you.

Now keep in mind this does not mean that the alliances fighting for the territory would be applied these tiers.

ONLY The nations on the wall would have these tiers applied to counter having Either super large nations not being able to be touched or super low nations not being able to be touched

2. Another Solution would be to INCREASE The Attacking Range From 25/75 To 75%/100% if your declaring on a nation on the wall. I think this solution is very flawed and bad but perhaps there might actually be a way to make this work. I don't know how but i might as well put this out.

PROS 

• Prevents low/high score camps to a point. 
• Increases ranges so all nations can participate

CONS

• Would allow high score nations to declare on very small nations
• Not guaranteed to prevent low score campers
• Nation bullying from high scores

IF you have anything to add to no.2 just pm or post

 

Now one confusing part. The point system

The basis of territory wars is basically you gain points until you get the required amount to capture, however how will that work with multiple alliances?

1.  Make it so all point gain is permanent meaning the points you gain are put into the total and cannot be removed
2. Make it so if your on the wall your points accumulated is worth 100%. However once you get knocked off 50% will go into total (Which means if your on the capture to the end your 100% efficient!)
3. Make it so all points gained are permanent but getting knocked off will deduct points from your total SUCH AS 

Tier 1 - Loses 5000 pts when beiged

Tier 2- Loses 3000 pts when beiged

Tier 3 - Loses 2000 pts when beiged

Tier 4 - loses 1000 Pts when beiged

Tier 5 - Loses 500 pts when beiged

Tier 6 Loses 300 Pts when beiged

If you have anymore post!

thank you for @Akuryo for pointing out the tier problem, for some reason I remembered the top nation being 5k when it was actually 10k score

Changelog

-Added more tiers.

The sweet sweet rewards!

Now with all this effort you might be thinking what would be the rewards??

I'll list out some bonuses for factions which i think would be Balanced yet enticing enough for alliances to go for.

• 15% Bonus to commerce Generation
• 15% Bonus to RAW Generation
• 15% Bonus to MANU Generation

— Changed Generation 5>15% More worth?

Perk : Combat Training

• 10% Ground COMBAT Strength
• 10% Airforce COMBAT Strength
• 10% Naval COMBAT Strength
• ^^^ NOTE: The combat strength will have to be tuned to a point where its not broken. I'm using 10% On each as a starting point.

—- Perhaps make it so you would get a flat 10% boost to all combat instead of indivdual?

• 5% Recruitment Rate (Like a PB)

— Seems fine, up to debate?

• 5 Extra spies.

— Starting with 5 extra spies. Underpowered or Op?

• Recruit 1 Extra spy per day

Op? It’s like an IA without the increased spy capacity, however it might make it worthwhile

• 30% Population Bonus (Technically it would affect both millitary recruitment and commerce so perhaps?)

— Set POP % to 30%

• Perk: Rapid expansion

- Cities are 10% Cheaper

-Infra cost is 15% Cheaper

- Land cost is 20% Cheaper

(2nd “Bundle” Type perk. I would appreciate if experienced players could tell me if this is underwhelming or OP)

• ETC IF you have more suggestions for rewards post

Changes to rewards

— Deleted 5% Defensive combat bonus (Reason being Combat strength in my mind is working like defensive combat bonus but on offensive also. Sorry if that wasn’t clear)

- Deleted Increased power Gen

- Changed 10% Combat perks to all be in one Perk

- Added Perk: Rapid Expansion

Keep in mind all these % aren't set in stone. they are just numbers i thought MIGHT be balanced enough yet good enough to war over

Also obviously but i feel like i have to say it. You would only get 1 of these buffs from the territory.

Also all territories would get a randomized buff every xxx amount of days to make it so you cant just sit and farm.

But wait! What if another alliance just declares right after i capture it?!?!?

There would be a grace period of i'm thinking 1-3 months where that territory cannot be captured to give time for all alliances to rebuild and enjoy their respective reward!

 

NOTE: THIS IS ONLY A ROUGH OUTLINE THAT I HAVE SPENT TO MUCH TIME ON

Its only an idea. if the community doesn't like it. so be it, scrapped. however i think this would be a very good addition to the game albeit needs a lot of work

 

 

 

Edited December 27, 2018 by KingGhost

[Zei-Sakura Alsainn]

Let's assume there exists a reality wherein Alex is able to even consider trying to implement this if people wanted it. Let's then assume we're in said reality.

Okay. So your most immediate issue is that the only bonuses anyone will care about are combat and down. 5% raw and manu production? I get these are just examples, but you don't have to the make example nonsensically crap, know what i'm sayin? 5% manu production for me is another 87 aluminum per day. Sure, it's nice i guess, but not so nice i or any other alliance would spend up to billions fighting over it.

The power thing is just... i don't know why it's there? Sure i guess its more convenient if you have 2500 infra, but it'd never be convenient enough to fight over.

The combat bonuses even as are (and im not convinced theyre OP) are worth fighting over. Extra spies definitely would be. Recruitment absolutely. Defensive bonus, less so, but more than manu and raw. Pop bonus would be coveted by alliances like GoB and Guardian, namely their ancient whales.

 

More importantly, you'd need more tiers. I can get up to 4200 score fully milled, but i stand approximately zero chance against a 10k score 36 city nation, which according to the rules here would be able to hit me.

 

[Ivan Ivanov]

I’m not a fan of your idea, I only upvoted because it looked like it took awhile to type.

[KingGhost]

1 hour ago, Akuryo said:

Let's assume there exists a reality wherein Alex is able to even consider trying to implement this if people wanted it. Let's then assume we're in said reality.

Okay. So your most immediate issue is that the only bonuses anyone will care about are combat and down. 5% raw and manu production? I get these are just examples, but you don't have to the make example nonsensically crap, know what i'm sayin? 5% manu production for me is another 87 aluminum per day. Sure, it's nice i guess, but not so nice i or any other alliance would spend up to billions fighting over it.

The power thing is just... i don't know why it's there? Sure i guess its more convenient if you have 2500 infra, but it'd never be convenient enough to fight over.

The combat bonuses even as are (and im not convinced theyre OP) are worth fighting over. Extra spies definitely would be. Recruitment absolutely. Defensive bonus, less so, but more than manu and raw. Pop bonus would be coveted by alliances like GoB and Guardian, namely their ancient whales.

 

More importantly, you'd need more tiers. I can get up to 4200 score fully milled, but i stand approximately zero chance against a 10k score 36 city nation, which according to the rules here would be able to hit me.

 

I agree I messed up with the tiers.

ive also buffed % of commerce, Raws and manu production, it might need more tuneing.

also I saw in war stats that it seems infra lost is the most costly so I put in the 75% Reduced infra lost for the defender on a slot and 25% for the attacker.

perhaps that needs to be upped to 80%/50%?

 

[Ripper]

@KingGhost congrats for your enthusiasm. I hope you don't lose it too early because of "harsh" feedback.

As a general comment, mechanics updates are not that radical, thus don't expect such changes as the ones you suggested to be implemented or even considered.

Maybe you could try and break down your idea in smaller ones or work on something completely different.

In any case, thanks again for the time you spent to introduce this idea.

[KingGhost]

17 hours ago, Ripper said:

@KingGhost congrats for your enthusiasm. I hope you don't lose it too early because of "harsh" feedback.

As a general comment, mechanics updates are not that radical, thus don't expect such changes as the ones you suggested to be implemented or even considered.

Maybe you could try and break down your idea in smaller ones or work on something completely different.

In any case, thanks again for the time you spent to introduce this idea.

Do you think a idea like this would even be good?

After reviewing it i can see why this mode might be way to early for this game as it  would require a lot of tuning with the points system.

Do you think maybe if you scrap all the points and just make it so an alliance can claim a Capture territory and the transfers of territories would just be a condition in peace terms that Alliance A Has to give Alliance B? 

I feel like alliances don't have a lot of incentive to war besides grudges, role play, and just to have fun.