Battle System - Player Feedback

    Alright, so I've done quite a few battles both against NPCs and other Players. I must say that having a mixed unit force feels much more powerful than stacking one type of unit, and it's definitely noticeable. I'm able to beat forces that I wouldn't have normally been able to beat with mixed units now (Like Lv.4/5 Barbarians) and the Simulator does a very great job for what it was designed to do.


    Simulator especially, I cannot explain just how much I am in love with this feature, great work M0H0, Gaviotta & Lionmoon team.
    I can spy on an enemies' fortifications and use that data to simulate how the battle would go before I actually send my troops, so that way I know for sure if I'm sending them to certain death. This mechanic adds a lot of strategic value to the game, and I'm thankful for it.


    Cheers, and I'd love to see more updates like this come our way!

    "Intelligence without ambition, is like a bird without wings" ~Salvador Dali

    I second that!


    I am confident that this update combined with the other features that we have been told are in the 'works' will help this game get popularity.


    It's real point of difference to me is the fact that the weaker player can get back on their feet even after getting attacked.

    I definitely agree, Tane - on the weaker player getting back up aspect.


    This is why I enjoy not being able to take a player's city and hold it hostage, because that rules out players in the game to a dominating force, and can often lower playerbase.


    I think that there should be a 'Siege' mechanic though, but should only work for say... players with <100,000 Points.

    "Intelligence without ambition, is like a bird without wings" ~Salvador Dali

    Quote from Furry

    I definitely agree, Tane - on the weaker player getting back up aspect.


    This is why I enjoy not being able to take a player's city and hold it hostage, because that rules out players in the game to a dominating force, and can often lower playerbase.


    I think that there should be a 'Siege' mechanic though, but should only work for say... players with <100,000 Points.


    I have nor issue with a seige mechanism. I think you or Krymac or one of the others mentioned this previously.


    Maybe it would be good to flesh out how it would work.


    A bit of a cost benefit analysis if you like.


    In many other games similar to this the player under seige has very little opportunity to wriggle out of the seige really unless fellow Alliance members help out. That does not always happen as other players in the Alliance are building up themselves or if under attack themselves are busy defending themselves by fortifyng their Cities and building more troops. Also the player under seige generally is unable to build up as the player who is doing the seige is able to plunder resources. There has to be some benefit to the person doing the seige so I do think plunder needs to be allowed.


    Anyway it would be good to get players to brainstorm this and come up with ideas from other angles.


    This board could do with more input from other players to make this game moe fun for those that play. It is upto us to be a bit creative and elp the DEVS to make the game grow in player base and in functionality.

    Happy to hear it's going well! Don't hesitate to share critical feedback too :)


    Siege mechanisms are definitively delicate, I think we will eventually explore that, but it won't be an overnight change. TaneMahuta makes some good points, I'd be interested to hear more opinions on that.

    Hm based on some feedback in our tribal chat and checking out some of the battle reports on the board as of today I question if the new Battle Mechanic is working quite the way you explained it. Can you plese comment M0H0. Having taken a 2nd look at the batle reports the attacker's superiority in warriors seems the key here as in the cases listed the defenders really had an inferior army.