Assault missions

Assuming new weapon system will get released along with the combat strategies for attack and defense during assault missions....

There's one last thing that needs to get adressed.
Due to the attacker not needing to repair anymore, there's nothing that should prevent a defense to go down in literally 5 secs when someone just clicks 30 times that assault button (also by definition making the combat strategies for attacker and defender near obsolete).

I would like to propose something that would avoid that issue.
I have no problem having a def massed in a minute or two, but everyone should understand that massing in 5 secs IS actually possible now.

My suggestion is:
Each user is limited to one OUTGOING assault mission every 15 secs
[I would very much appreciate if everyone takes notice of the BOLD and UNDERLIGNED and ITALIC part of that sentence before passing any hasty judgment]

However everyone is welcome to scrap my idea and present a simple yet effective suggestion of their own.
(Anything that takes more than 2 lines to explain the limitations, is judged too complicated, as you can see my suggestion only needed one line)

*supports*

So how would crit affect the 15 secs?
Would it affect 1 person hitting or anyone hitting that account?

seaborgium wrote:So how would crit affect the 15 secs?
Would it affect 1 person hitting or anyone hitting that account?

You may notice the lack of mentioning anything about realm alert affecting these 15 secs.
So you would therefore make the correct assumption that it has no effect whatsoever.

Admin in stead of massing being quicker it will take longer because the attacker must retrain / rebuild his losses. So massing has become slower rather than faster. That is one of my main concerns.
because weapons don't break, the defence does not go down as quickly as it used to. It took me 30 attacks to get the defender from 100M to 40M, whereas I went from 150M to 40M.
Rebuilding my strike to be able to do further damage took a long time and I ran out of CT long before he was crippled.
I don't think assault as implemented in test is too strong or too quick. The 15 second delay is unnecessary.

Jiro wrote:Admin in stead of massing being quicker it will take longer because the attacker must retrain / rebuild his losses.

Retrain what?
First attacker does 5 attacks, second attacker does 5 attacks, first attacker does 5 attacks, etc.
Swap 3-4 times like that and the def is down to 10% of original power, maybe 15%.
Total time taken, 20 seconds maybe 25 depending on msn connection?

Assuming this is not a well organized mass by a group of people but a simple 1v1, which would not be the case in most massings.
Wanna bet that I can mass your def solo in 10-20 secs (depending on my internet connection at that moment, so I reserve myself the right for a re-try), and even tilt the odds strongly in your favor (even though, again, it would not reflect reality) by having only equal attack tech and weapons equivalent to your defense tech and weapons?

Dont misunderstand me, by "massing" i'm not saying reduce def to 0, since that is not important anymore in wiping accounts. I mean reduce def to a fraction of it's former size, giving the defender 0 chance to actually do anything with their def

so if you delay it by 15 secs whats the point of cirt..
You didn't answer my other questiond directly, but you did indirectly.

the 15 secs affects the account being hit, so nomatter who makes the hits everyone is delayed.

I said outgoing, not incoming. This is exactly the reason why i made it bold underligned and italics.

Outgoing means you can only do 1 assault mission on anyone once every 15 secs.
Incoming would mean that any account can get hit by only 1 assault mission in total every 15 sec

I wouldn't make it so you can only do 1 attack every 15 sec on anyone, only if you are hitting the same target. that 15 secs is a large diff in getting kuwal or not

seaborgium wrote:I wouldn't make it so you can only do 1 attack every 15 sec on anyone, only if you are hitting the same target. that 15 secs is a large diff in getting kuwal or not

What do kuwal attacks have to do with assault missions?

Reserve troops.

Along with the 15 seconds,
Would it be posible or logical to have trained reserve troops to be able to call urgently at any time when needed? You can't have more reserve troops than a "certain" % of the total of your main troops.


As it is, you can only train troops every 30 minutes and there is absolutely no way to stop a massing than by going on PPT if you are online.

This helps both attacker and defender.

That's why I dropped training cost of normal soldiers to 1.5k per unit. Fast training and it costs 15k, a viable alternative

That works too... interesting, but the weapons will still be hard to get (and forgot to mention it the first time).

So with this in mind, if you are online, you have to go on PPT, unless... the enemy is stupid and doesn't have a balanced account so that you could use sabotage or assassination or other strategy if you have a much much bigger attack than his defense and attack. hehehe


In the current system, if you are online and have enough money, you can repair weapons and save a PPT. In the next system, you can't save anything if the enemy is into massing you. Either use the 4 hours PPT, either use PPT, either go on vacation mode (if possible), either delete. lol
So, do you want have any ideea how to help the defender in this situation?


EDiT:

I have thought a second or two and came up with these:

1. reserve troops and weaponry than can be trained instantly (maximum a certain percent of main troops with weapons)
2. live training/building: divide the capacity of your training facilities and weapon factories per 30 minutes and instead build "every minute"(?).
3. black market for weapons: limited to something and of lower quality let's say, 1-2 levels lower than current weapons level.

1. looks interesting
2. every minute might be overkill however every 5 mins might be worth a consideration, but I'm still undecided
3. besides the fact that it would be a considerable effort to think of how to make the system work (cos by black market I assume instant trade of weapons between players? or something else?) and not be too abusable


Anyways, coming back onto the topic of normal soldiers trained for 1.5k.
Funny I didn't remember this sooner cos it was a main reason for lowering the cost.
Defender AND Attacker can build excess weapons in advance. During battle simply training the extra units as normal soldiers to increase def/strike.
During battle you lose weapons on a per unit basis, not as a % of your stock. So if you have 10k weapons and 1 unit, that unit gets killed and you lose 1 weapon and you end up with 0 defense action and 9999 weapons (only touchable by sabotage, however considering you're left with 0 def it's questionable how long you'd want to keep it that low )

on farming runs if you farm like i do then you can hit 5 people in them 15 secs.

Admin wrote:Retrain what?
First attacker does 5 attacks, second attacker does 5 attacks, first attacker does 5 attacks, etc.
Swap 3-4 times like that and the def is down to 10% of original power, maybe 15%.
Total time taken, 20 seconds maybe 25 depending on msn connection?

In the current state, you would repair your weapons instantly in order to keep the difference between your strike and the defender's defence as large as possible as your strike tends to go down quicker (in %) than the defender's defence (as long as the defender does not repair his weapons.)
That is no longer possible. Instead you have to train extra supers either in advance or during the attack (eg. with Kuwal you hit the defender for.)
Also the defender loses the possibility to repair his weapons, thus setting the attackers back considerably in their planning, as a mass used to depend on the defender's weapons taking damage.
And Admin, I'll try a one-on-one to see what the options of a defender are when being attack as the surprise weapons repair is out of the question (barring insane amounts of weapons factories and training facilities.)
I think weapons tech, bonus and level have become more important with this update.
--
Just read your comment on weapons being lost by the same amount as the units wielding them not only if the amount of weapons is equal to the amount of units. This makes buying soldiers instantly an option.

My point still stand, atm I can wipe out a def within 10 secs without you even noticing what happened.

hence the 15 sec limit

seaborgium wrote:on farming runs if you farm like i do then you can hit 5 people in them 15 secs.

This update only effects Assualt missions, not Attack, Raid etc missions, you can still do those as quick as you like.

-Alex

coming from someone who got massed on the test server with the new changes ALL that matters now is techs and wep levels.

Sorry admin but there is still nothing you can really do if your online while being massed. If the person assaults you with a lower number of attack supers than your def supers that can beat your defence your pretty much screwed whatever happens. Yeah sure you can play around with defence types in the armoury but a "normal" attack removes any advantages from that.

What i dislike is this - My def was 4bil at about 300k def supers at wep lvl 11. My attacker had all personal points in attack as well as a very high basic techs in attack plus wep lvl 12. He was able to mass me using abot 170k attack supers. Now EVERY single one of his assaults killed more of my troops than he lost.

The point im making is that when i massed him back ( his def roughly at 4bil and my attack at 5bil ) i lost more on every assault due to not having as high techs despite having same strike to def ratio.

Now you can quote me realism and other stuff but the way i see it if i build a strike bigger than someones defence i expect to be able to take that defence down without 0ing my own strike in the process. I mean if i have more firepower i should be able to kill the ENTIRE enemy defence, with the current system the defence eventually wins EVEN if it started at a lower power due to the attackers losses eventually putting his strike below the defence of his opponent. Now i dont know how you intended it to be but i see the attack and defence power values as absolute - so that is a person with 101 power should be able to wipe out someone with 100 power ( ignoring the random fluctuations in power you've inbuilt which i actually like ) otherwise it just doesn't make sense to me.

I support the 15 second delay for outgoing Assault attacks.

Admin wrote:1. looks interesting
2. every minute might be overkill however every 5 mins might be worth a consideration, but I'm still undecided
3. besides the fact that it would be a considerable effort to think of how to make the system work (cos by black market I assume instant trade of weapons between players? or something else?) and not be too abusable


Anyways, coming back onto the topic of normal soldiers trained for 1.5k.
Funny I didn't remember this sooner cos it was a main reason for lowering the cost.
Defender AND Attacker can build excess weapons in advance. During battle simply training the extra units as normal soldiers to increase def/strike.
During battle you lose weapons on a per unit basis, not as a % of your stock. So if you have 10k weapons and 1 unit, that unit gets killed and you lose 1 weapon and you end up with 0 defense action and 9999 weapons (only touchable by sabotage, however considering you're left with 0 def it's questionable how long you'd want to keep it that low )

True and true. But this is an even more disadvantage to the defender. He may use this tactic of extra weapons or a piramid of weapons on levels, to save himself while being massed when online, but if he is offline he will loose a lot more in resourse value than the attacker (ie: the extra weapons and the extra spies for the extra weapons).

I think that the problem still remains; you have 2 choices:
- risk more weapons if you are online a lot
- risk nothing and build only the defense you need, but if you happen to be online while massed (and cannot use any protection) you can only watch how you get schooled.


------
On point no 3. i meant an in-game market. When someone has a new set of weapons, what does he do?... Sells the old ones. But where are those weapons going?... ofc... on the black market. Those weapons can be bought instantly from the illegal weapon dealers. There is no need for a transfer system between players for weapons.

PS. I can agree with hai-shuluds fealings about the new system, but i'll give an real world example:
- in gulf war 1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War)

Coalition forces______|Iraq

StrengthCasualties and losses

959,600[4] 1,820 Fighter aircraft and attack aircraft (1,376 American, 175 Saudi, 69 British, 42 French, 24 Canadian, 8 Italian) 3,318 tanks (mainly M1 Abrams(U.S.),Challenger 1(UK), M60(U.S.)) 8 aircraft carriers 2 battleships 20 cruisers 20 destroyers 5 submarines[5]	545,000 (100,000 in Kuwait)+ 649 fighters 4,500 tanks (Chinese Type-59s, Type-69s, & self produced T-55 T-62, about 500 Soviet Union T-72) [5]
379 killed 776 wounded[6]	20,000-35,000 casualties[6]

Iraques lost more, due to the lower quality of weapons used, despite the larger numbers of troops.

Nigatsu_aka wrote:PS. I can agree with hai-shuluds fealings about the new system, but i'll give an real world example:
- in gulf war 1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War)

Actually I would say that in the real word example, the strike power of the coalition forces was much greater than the defence power of Iraq.
Taking your example, what Hal-Shalud is saying is that the outcome would have been the same for the coalition forces regardless of the amount of troupes they sent: they would have won since they have a higher tech level. So they would have won if they had just sent 500 tanks aginast all the forces of Iraq because the power per unit for the coalition forces is higher and thus the % losses per attack is lower. Because losses are a percentage of troups, there will be a point where the force with less power per unit will become smaller than the one with a higher power per unit. If I understand him correctly. That's what his example suggests.
Also, regardless of coalition force power, they will never fully conquer Iraq militarily, because there will always be regular forces left.

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:True and true. But this is an even more disadvantage to the defender. He may use this tactic of extra weapons or a piramid of weapons on levels, to save himself while being massed when online, but if he is offline he will loose a lot more in resourse value than the attacker (ie: the extra weapons and the extra spies for the extra weapons).

I think that the problem still remains; you have 2 choices:
- risk more weapons if you are online a lot
- risk nothing and build only the defense you need, but if you happen to be online while massed (and cannot use any protection) you can only watch how you get schooled.

Actually not as much. Attacker losses are 5% base value. Defender has only 4%.
If the defender has only supers, and the attacker decides to refill with normal soldiers, who only give half the power...

So basically the attacker has "an advantage" when using a stash of ready weapons, at a cost.
But the defender, should they come online, can toggle their defense strategy in order to cause more losses to the attacker, however the attacker can then notice they are suffering higher losses and readjust their attack strategy.

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:On point no 3. i meant an in-game market. When someone has a new set of weapons, what does he do?... Sells the old ones. But where are those weapons going?... ofc... on the black market. Those weapons can be bought instantly from the illegal weapon dealers. There is no need for a transfer system between players for weapons.

Kenzu had an idea like that before, users can put up their weapons for sale and others can buy them.
In the style of a private market (you dont see the seller, only can buy best offer, time delays), so that actual controlled direct player to player transfer is minimized.
Any chance you would want to suggest how the illegal weapon dealers will price their goods?
(When you sell weapons you only get 60% of the cost back immediately, normal instant build on test server is 10x cost)

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:PS. I can agree with hai-shuluds fealings about the new system, but i'll give an real world example:
- in gulf war 1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War)

Look I get that argument too however here there is not just an advantage in numbers but also technological advantage.
You can get a technological advantage here too by getting higher techs and weapons and then you'll achieve similar improvements.
However I am forced to reduce the impact of these (through upscaling tech costs, high weapon costs, etc.) as it would give too much power to long term players vs newly started ones.

On weapons sales its going to be difficult without giving people back their original prices, unless you set some form of a "limit" on the total amount of black market weapons that can be bought and sold.

If you make it so the BMD(Black Market Dealers) pay more then just selling the weapons, then everyone will use the option. Then every weapon is sold to them because they pay more. If the BMD sell for less then no one will use the option because just normal scrapping of weapons pays more.

As for pricing their goods, who ever is cheaper will be used more. If the instant build is cheaper it will get used and if the BMD are cheaper they will be used. So I would assume BMD would sell for 5 to 7.5 X the normal cost? This puts them cheaper then insta building, but limited to selling ONLY what has been sold to them?

If BMD pays more, but not immediately, like in the galactic private market, some may sell immediately for 60%, rather than between 60% and 1000% using the BMD.
If you put your weapons at over 1000% cost, you will never get your Kuwal because it is cheaper to buy instantly.