Raising defences affecting sacks/captures

[Firetooth]

I think it would be a good feature to implement, and not just because I am currently being targeted using sacks, the idea isn't even mine, Sharp mentioned it to me in a conversation.

[Twilight Shadow]

Well if this takes affect that mean murders/steals/poisons would have to be affected so that leaders are not too overpowered with protecting their net...

[Shadow]

sack and capture are not very strong except when you are storing a crap ton of resources. If we implemented this, we should make the base stronger so that sack and capture were as strong as they are currently with defenses up, and stronger otherwise.

[Firetooth]

Well if this takes affect that mean murders/steals/poisons would have to be affected so that leaders are not too overpowered with protecting their net...

Doesn't just affect leaderers. What about ferret/magpie Leader+indy can both wreck them.

sack and capture are not very strong except when you are storing a crap ton of resources. If we implemented this, we should make the base stronger so that sack and capture were as strong as they are currently with defenses up, and stronger otherwise.

I agree.

[Shadow]

Pretty sure sack is less effective against people with low defense ratio, so it shouldn't do as much to ferret or magpie as it does to leader. Ferret and magpie are also both not hording strategies, so they will typically not be sitting on a lot of resources anyway.

[Firetooth]

If they're not hoarding strategies, how do they work? Are you saying they're just another race with no real solo potential?

[Shadow]

Lol. Charming. Thanks.

Ferret and Magpie were designed to be more like indy, but from a different route - buying troops and taking advantage of low upkeep during the runs, as well as being able to attack a lot via their healing spells to get an edge on the competition.

The long term potential is something that is in the process of being sorted out for all non-leader strategies. For now, you can think of ferret and magpie as a different approach to indy.

You CAN horde with them if you want. They just have rather poor leader defense so it is not going to be particularly safe.

[Firetooth]

Sorry, that wasn't meant to be confrontational, I was generally curious. The wording was poor, but atm the only really viable solo races (at least in my view) are the leader ones.

I suppose the strat makes sense, but as you said they don't have much defense so they're still more of a team race.

[Twilight Shadow]

Sacks should affect ferrets or magpie unless the have a large amount of leaders compared to their attacker. Since sack is based off the number if leaders you have compared to you attacker...this may be the area you would want to change if you are thinking about it

[Shadow]

Yea, we will have to take another look at how sack behaves once more of the balances come through.

[Firetooth]

I was thinking raising defences should mean you can't lose more then 500mil per sack. If you added a % decrease at higher amounts it would bug because if they [insert cash number high enough for 501mil per sack] you'd actually gain less per sack then [insert number high enough for 499mil per sack].

[Shadow]

I don't like putting arbitrary constant cutoffs in the code. It is not at all flexible with changing themes. High net themes 500m might be nothing. Low net themes and nobody even notices.

I really don't think sack is overpowered. Resource massing was overpowered, and now it is (starting) to balance out. Not there yet, but better.

[Firetooth]

The fact TS can sign up then sack away 80bil cash is overpowered. Generally, sack is good, but when low net warlords can easily damage high net warlords something is wrong.

[Shadow]

we could perhaps factor the difference in net into the equation, yes. But no hard cutoffs.

[Firetooth]

Sounds good. I'm not too bothered how it actually works, just that it works haha.