MatthewAce
Captain
Reged: 06/25/04
Posts: 774
Loc: Neveron
|
Surrender by loss of Land Area
#161103 - 04/03/11 10:34 PM (220.255.2.88)
|
|
|
Just throwing up a random idea to counter tent cities...
Unlike BV/Pop loss where it follows the % loss of Total Pop+BV, this idea focuses on a set integer-based formula. The Land Mass you are allowed to lose prior to surrender increases for every level up till Level 7, where the limit is then not in play. At the same time, I have put in (what I felt) is a rather high figure, so as not to give tent cities a total shaft and then we can work from there.
As to CF, I am not too sure whether they should come into play.
Let's say we use "10+10(Level)", Empire < Level 7.
Level 0: 10
Level 1: 20
Level 2: 30
Level 3: 40
Level 4: 50
Level 5: 60
Level 6: 70
Now I am not too sure how potent or how abusable this is, and there's where the other players' view would come in.
Other rough ideas to throw out (I expect that these ideas will really come under fire though)
1) Any loss of land through HD hits like losing +1 additional zone (can't really think of logic or reason to put it up in place other than for balance.)
--------------------
Urbies are good.
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Surrender by loss of Land Area
[Re: MatthewAce]
#161106 - 04/04/11 05:55 AM (173.171.168.13)
|
|
|
well back in 72 we used to get rep for taking zones. and even now non-pop zones will show up on the city list. these are research, com etc zones. so why not give us a % added to the war losses for taking non-pop build zones? tbh matt your idea is decent but id rather have the option to have this work or not? say as a poss option? and higher lvl empires have huge amounts of empty zones. maybe making this a raid option? l8rs DABOSS
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
MatthewAce
Captain
Reged: 06/25/04
Posts: 774
Loc: Neveron
|
Re: Surrender by loss of Land Area
[Re: cbtgod]
#161107 - 04/04/11 11:21 AM (220.255.2.81)
|
|
|
I had that as 1 of my idea before. Maybe one of these days I will throw it up again.
--------------------
Urbies are good.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Surrender by loss of Land Area
[Re: MatthewAce]
#161119 - 04/06/11 11:08 AM (70.170.53.45)
|
|
|
well in some ways, i like this idea. It will force people to actually put up defensive units instead of having just about all attack bv. This would help balance the game some. It will also force empires to try and keep zones together so they can defend them without having to disperse their forces over lots of terrain.
A few downside notes.. That would also mean you didnt have to engage the enemy at all for the win, which is good and bad. It also means, surrounding empires cities and winning by taking all the empty zones would devastate those empires, especially if they cannt get any back to avoid alot of money for automob, but that also goes to defending zones properly.
It has potential, and could work if things get tweaked some.
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Surrender by loss of Land Area
[Re: ghostrider]
#161122 - 04/07/11 01:10 AM (173.171.168.13)
|
|
|
they prob put up towers than everyone would **** about that? downside is for the empire 9+ with tons of zones? although i think the idea is good id like they option to use or not. l8rs DABOSS
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Surrender by loss of Land Area
[Re: cbtgod]
#161135 - 04/07/11 12:32 PM (70.170.53.45)
|
|
|
could be on a sliding scale that the higher the level, the less taking empty zones affects the empire.
Biggest reason tents work is because they dont need to defend the zones because the cost to actually take them is outrageous.
|
MatthewAce
Captain
Reged: 06/25/04
Posts: 774
Loc: Neveron
|
Re: Surrender by loss of Land Area
[Re: ghostrider]
#161140 - 04/07/11 01:46 PM (220.255.2.25)
|
|
|
DABOSS: In my starting post, I mentioned that my idea will affect only Level 6 and below. So highlighting that, how is it going to affect what you mentioned (Level 9+)?
Also (if I'm reading right), if you make it a choice as to whether you want this to play in, then it defeats the purpose of the whole thing as tent-pires can just opt out.
--------------------
Urbies are good.
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Surrender by loss of Land Area
[Re: MatthewAce]
#161142 - 04/07/11 02:11 PM (173.171.168.13)
|
|
|
lmao im sorry about that i must have had beer google eyes my bad. l8rs DABOSS
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Surrender by loss of Land Area
[Re: cbtgod]
#161325 - 05/09/11 02:32 PM (125.239.226.35)
|
|
|
I dont like most rules that effect some levels and not others.
If this were the case, I'd just build a lvl 3 (say) and claim a crap load of zones. Then if someone wanted to kill me im not losing any pop or bv and can just re-claim zones again. Very abusable
Dont like this idea.
Having other infra count in surrender rates has more merit.
|
MatthewAce
Captain
Reged: 06/25/04
Posts: 774
Loc: Neveron
|
Re: Surrender by loss of Land Area
[Re: buc]
#161330 - 05/10/11 04:49 AM (220.255.1.158)
|
|
|
I definitely agree that having other infra counting in surrender rate have plenty of merit.
However it would be nice to have some clarification to what you said about the abusable nature of this - I don't quite understand as players will still have alternate means of surrendering their opponent via traditional means.
--------------------
Urbies are good.
|
wonko
Sergeant Major
Reged: 03/08/06
Posts: 273
Loc: park city UT
|
Re: Surrender by loss of Land Area
[Re: MatthewAce]
#162166 - 09/30/11 05:58 AM (76.23.60.40)
|
|
|
how about just adding it as another percentge like bv and pop? say 10 empty zones count as one percent toward surender or something like that?
--------------------
Democrats are the root of all evil
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
