Food Networth

[Shadow]

it would makeit so leader suicides worked again

[lonewolf1817]

? u have to vers me what does stoping production of troops have to do with leader attacks being eficent.

[wolf bite]

- Leaders can decrease losses by up to 33%
- Leaders can increase OP by up to 12% or decrease it by up to about 34%
- Border Patrol increases Group 1 Defense by up to 50%
- Border Patrol increases Group 2 Defense by up to 25%
- Border Patrol increases Group 3 Defense by up to 10%
- Police can increase losses up to 20%
- Police can decrease sacked food by up to 80%
- Guards can increase effectiveness of towers by up to 300


Right now, leader players by putting 100% on leaders in troop training; it is harder for other leader fighters to break them.

However, if we only reduce the power of there being leader troop training, then the leader fighters will put 100% on to their police, which will keep them from being sacked from non leader players. This will again add to the already superior strategy.

If we remove the complete training option, then we have removed the whole reason it was made which is to keep leader fighters from not only stealing money from non-leader players, but so they can't also sack them.  This will take away from the already under powered strategy of non leaders.

Maybe the only way to work this would be that anyone with a 80% ratio of leaders to land will have nothing effected by their "troop training."  But this could be a lot of coding and may cause other problems.

I don't know how many examples people need to see to understand that what seems to be a simple change effects many other things.


(Points at priority list so that we can gain members)


Wolf Bite
Edit: we are talking about the setting for extra power to different abilities in the manage army section, not how many armies you make with your barracks.

[Peace Alliance]

Of increase the power of sack. As it is sacking isn't worth it for an indy player, as you don't get enough land.

[Shadow]

If we remove the complete training option, then we have removed the whole reason it was made which is to keep leader fighters from not only stealing money from non-leader players, but so they can't also sack them.  This will take away from the already under powered strategy of non leaders.

It was intended to reduce the power of leader strats, but it had the exact opposite effect. Sure, leader fighters can sack nonleader fighters, but why do that when there are other leaderers with far more resources to sack? With leader training, a non leader fighters has 0 chance to take down a leaderer, since they dont have the leaders to suicide with and police make sack ineffectual. With the training gone, at least sack goes both ways, so the non leaderer has a way to retaliate.

Perhaps the effectiveness of sack should be based on ratio--if you have high ratio, sack works better on you. This gives leader fighters the choice between leader defense and non leader defense, while giving indy and other races a decent protection over their resources and a way to do real damage to massers. 

Please don't take one look at my ideas and dismiss them because of priorities. There is no rush on these changes, I am just making my voice heard. Tutorials and such are first, I agree, but that does not mean we cannot brainstorm solutions to other problems at the same time. Let's argue each issue as though it was the only one, and we can work out priorities after we arrive at a reasonable solution to each problem. I'm sure you are able to find flaws in my idea that I have overlooked--point them out so we can advance the idea, rather than dismissing it out of hand just because it is not at the top of the list at the moment.

[wolf bite]

Shadow, I agree that something needs to be used that is negative based on ratio, I was saying that ahead. I also have no problem (once it gets closer to being done) to work on your idea.

The thing is, unknown to you, priorities have been pushed aside for thinking of changes for over a year, after all, what does it hurt to think. Then when we have coder time, those ideas that have been worked on are pushed to be coded over the priorities because the are reclassified.

Not one of the list of priorities have been done yet (not counting some very obvious debugging). How many changes, and changes to those changes have we had?


Wolf Bite

[lonewolf1817]

im still not realy all clear about training ... can someone provide a demo with a explaination behind it.

[Shadow]

im still not realy all clear about training ... can someone provide a demo with a explaination behind it.

Read "effective leadering" except substitute 2.67% losses instead of 5%

Not one of the list of priorities have been done yet (not counting some very obvious debugging). How many changes, and changes to those changes have we had?

How can I help? A lot of the necessary work is probably just writiing, which I am decent at. As long as there is no coding I should be fine.

[Peace Alliance]

Shadow, I agree that something needs to be used that is negative based on ratio, I was saying that ahead. I also have no problem (once it gets closer to being done) to work on your idea.

The thing is, unknown to you, priorities have been pushed aside for thinking of changes for over a year, after all, what does it hurt to think. Then when we have coder time, those ideas that have been worked on are pushed to be coded over the priorities because the are reclassified.

Not one of the list of priorities have been done yet (not counting some very obvious debugging). How many changes, and changes to those changes have we had?


Wolf Bite

Could you please pipe down and let these kids brainstorm? Seriously, all you do is stop in to tell us all to stop thinking about the game. These guys are excited about RWL, and want to have a part in it's future.

If you would like to make a nice long detailed slander of me, you ought to just make your own topic for it.

[Shadow]

Feel free to refer new players to me if they ask. I was a noob myself not too long ago and I can easily point them down the same path my development took. Chances are that if they don't ask, they wouldn't even read a tutorial in the first place. I think developing the mentor program to the point where we volunteer out services to new players instead of waiting for them to ask would go a lot farther than writing out endless guides.

For sack: Use ratio as a percentage. If ratio is 100, sack works normally. If ratio is 180, sack works at 180% efficiency, if ratio is 50, sack works half as well. This will eliminate the need for such careful timing of the takedown, since a leaderer with lower land will actually be far more vulnerable to sack even if his leader defence is impenetrable. It will also make indiers pretty much invulnerable to sack while leaving them open for stealing. This also takes away the need for troop training.

Peace: That sounded a little bit condescending. I think I am as old as you, or close, and we are the only two brainstorming here ^_^ But thank you for the support there, I was really surprised to be shut down even when I had a good idea.

[Peace Alliance]

heh, sorry i know you're not a kid, and found out just last night that lonewolf's older then me. It just sounded better saying he shut down children.


Anyway, i actually think you've got the solution right there. It would mean that anyone with a really high ratio couldn't really afford using the leader training bonus because of sacks. We'd have to have a minimum at like 40% though, since sacking should be at least a /little/ effective against indiers.

[wolf bite]

Peace,

I was watching a debate once where one guy yelled at the other:
"You are really wearing a wig!"

This was an attempt to discredit the other side with something that had nothing to do with the issue.  It takes away the attention from the issue.

Let me make this clear for the 20th time:
I am not against change.
I have spent a lot of time going over and testing your new changes.
I have a lot of game changes I would like to see.
I like seeing our people working on change.
I have not said anything negative about you.
I am not bringing up some old fight form 4 years ago.

Please stop discrediting my opinions by attacking my motives.

This is simple. Since we took over we have not got to the priorities yet.


-Fix bugs that are lingering around.
-Get the help files up.
-Make changes to simplify and de-clutter the game (remove things we don't use, minimize advanced operations).
-Update to the Wolf Bite's Journal 2.0, which is now only one and a half year out of date.
-Implement the tutorial.
-Put the tips back in.
-Make adjustments to the default setting.

I asked for help on the tutorial, only one member stepped up, the end result he had to post on his own server because we did not use it.

I have taken the new tip list that has been waiting for the staff to go over for 5 months and brought it to the strategies forum both so new people can see it and people can help work on it, only had 3 views.

We have been telling people that there is a help wiki, no one stepped up. We could at least put the out of date help up, we don't.

I need to keep sending people aid because we have not spent the 4 minutes to change the default settings agreed to.

I sit around and need to answer questions constantly from new and even not so new people because none of this information is done.

In short, a LOT of my time is taken up because people are being directed to spend their limited time thinking of new fun things, when the game is not playable right now.

When your house is on fire, you don't sit around and plan where to put the new garage.


Wolf Bite

[Peace Alliance]

Wolf Bite! My ONLY criticism was that you keep derailing these development talks, and in response you give your 2 page bit about our direction again? If a player kept showing up and wrecking every conversation we had about game features, I would be threatening a gag!

[wolf bite]

I believe I have been talking about what effect those changes would have on other aspects of the game. Thus on topic.

My post above this was in direct response to you slandering me by wrongfully accusing me of slander. thus on topic.

If a player kept accusing me in personal attacks, such as you have been doing, I would be gagging them.  Please stop the personal attacks. Just because I disagree with you is no reason to attack me.

Shadow. I had not seen your latest post when I posted in my own defense.  The problem with teaching new people is that they tend to not want to wait around for the help and are not too sure about being assigned a big bro. TJ, I believe it was him, had a great idea.  We make a server and put the teachers as clan leaders, new people are assigned a clan. the Clan leader has the power to check the stats on their clan. and can be on IM as they watch the player playing. Valhall already has this programed.


Wolf Bite

[pippin the mighty]

So, what your saying is, that when someone joins the game, they will be assigned to a clan? And the leader can watch what they are doing?