| Author | Thread: Defenseless Workshops | Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
[ADMIN] ArkhamPosts: 902 Location: Mallow Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: AGOMC | Message #9295 Posted: Aug 3, 2008, 11:02 pm |
I've put in a small change to defenseless workshops:
If a workshop is defenseless -- that is, no golem outside and no clan golem guarding that would prevent an attacker from easily breaking down the door and looting/destroying -- the defender will now take a small XP and score penalty for each attacker that gets through without a fight.
This was put in specifically to discourage folks from leaving no guards out.
As always, I'm monitoring and will make tweaks as appropriate if this ends up being too harsh (or not harsh enough) of a change. :)
Kep |
|
| CommComms Posts: 392
Location: Daylsfeld
Magus Age: 121 years old
| Message #9303 Posted: Aug 3, 2008, 11:55 pm |
| +10/-10 xp seems extremely harsh to me. First thing I'm going to do here is knock off the nearest evil magus' golem and raid him again and again for the xp. Maybe just an xp penalty without the bonus for the attacker? |
|
| Tariana Posts: 162
Location: Broukendale
Magus Age: 112 years old
| Message #9305 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 12:11 am |
Won't this be really harsh if a clan ganged up on one person? You could go to bed and come back down hundreds and hundreds of XP!
Is there some way to put a limit on it--you know, like you can only lose so many XP until you log in again and have a chance to do something about it? |
|
| Yamikuronue Posts: 1288
Location: Mottonsborough
Magus Age: 116 years old
| Message #9308 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 12:45 am |
| Yeah, once someone destroys your defender then for the rest of the night you're leaking XP... Last Edited: Aug 4, 2008, 12:47 am |
|
| Gryficus Posts: 239
Location: Mottonsborough
Magus Age: 121 years old
| Message #9312 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 1:25 am |
I like the idea of this, but the execution looks to need some tweaking. It could be easily abused to keep someone down, and could be a negative that would turn many new people away from the game.
Two solutions:
A cap. Perhaps 30 xp lost/day?
OR
Only after you've been defenseless for 8-12 hours?
OR
10 xp lost/hour cap?
|
|
| deathpunk Posts: 154
Location: Nournsland
Magus Age: 117 years old
| Message #9318 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 2:32 am |
First, I support a cap in xp and score loss per day.
Second, will this happen if you catch someone while they are online and their golem is away? |
|
| Nageya Posts: 86
Location: Asylum
Magus Age: 111 years old
| Message #9328 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 3:52 am |
| or having a golem destroyed or disabled will make you safe from exp loss for 24 hours which would prevent some one from leaving nothing out but would give them enough time to put up a new defenses if they get raided |
|
| Poseidon Posts: 241
Location: Shuul
Magus Age: 113 years old
Real Name: Jack Website: Click HereEmail: kingclown00@hotmail.com | Message #9329 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 4:18 am |
I like Nageya's Idea, but make it 12 hours, and allow xp loss to continue indefinitely if they remove the golem from gaurding the shop.
So for example, I have a level 1 flesh out. It gets whooped, and people raid me. So I have 12 hours to get a new defense out and I wont lose xp. However, if I choose to remove the damaged golem from my workshop and allow it to remain unguarded, any further attacks will reduce my xp.
The xp numbers however are fine. It motivates you to have an actual defense.
Nvm, scratch that. As it turns out, if your front defender (not the clans) is disabled, but still out there, the xp loss does not apply. Last Edited: Aug 4, 2008, 4:22 am |
|
| Nageya Posts: 86
Location: Asylum
Magus Age: 111 years old
| Message #9331 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 4:27 am |
| also just leaving out a golem that can no longer fight should be penalized as well since it has the same affect as not leaving anything out. |
|
NecariaPosts: 505 Location: Rildesjan Magus Age: 115 years old Clan: OASIS | Message #9332 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 4:42 am |
| Poseidon said:
So for example, I have a level 1 flesh out. It gets whooped, and people raid me. So I have 12 hours to get a new defense out and I wont lose xp.
I would still consider this an issue. Fleshes as viable raid dissuasion (particularly armless ones) Just seems wrong to me. "My enemies are at the gates... Send out the serfs to meet them! Send the maimed first and follow with the crippled. Women and children first!"Last Edited: Aug 4, 2008, 4:44 am |
|
| Sconibulus Posts: 664
Location: Shuul
Magus Age: 116 years old
| Message #9333 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 4:45 am |
| I have a problem with the armless ones, but I don't see anything wrong with using a battle-ready fleshie to enforce to enemy to incur a loss. Especially considering fleshies are some of the fastest, and I often have ranged weaponry. |
|
| FatherCoyne Posts: 332
Location: Mallow
Magus Age: 116 years old
Real Name: Kevin Coyne
Email: KCoyne@umail.ucsb.edu
| Message #9334 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 4:52 am |
I think I've been attacked more times since this has been announced that I have in the entire last week. XD It's a good idea, but ten is a bit much. You normally have to find a golem that should rightly kick your golem's ass, or drag out a punching bag to get that much XP out of a fight.
I don't support a daily cap, though. All that does is make one person's hatred for you as valuable as 30, and that just isn't right.
Now, I need about 500 more golems than I have... |
|
NecariaPosts: 505 Location: Rildesjan Magus Age: 115 years old Clan: OASIS | Message #9337 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 5:10 am |
| Sconibulus said:
Especially considering fleshies are some of the fastest, and I often have ranged weaponry.
Ranged weapons are an exception.
I suppose I just oppose the golem disabled to prevent xp loss in general though, it's too exploitable even ignoring fleshes. Easy enough to stick out an iron golem with a single level 1 flesh leg to ensure it goes down with minimum damage to it or your barricade. |
|
| Moonsinger Posts: 4
Location: Arzenbourg
Magus Age: 113 years old
| Message #9350 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 10:33 am |
If the goal is to encourage there to be golems out for defence then penalizing something for having one out and it being destroyed seems a bit counter productive. They already made a good faith attempt at defending themselves.
The question would be what is a good faith attempt? One legged armless golems? I hope not.
I would think, that when I click the outside option for a golem, that the game could perform that evaluation.
1) If there is no shield effect as suggested above, there has to be a way to have the game deploy another golem(s) while you're not logged on. It would be very frustrating for a lower level magus to come back and find their workshop a smoking ruin and trival amounts of resources available to rebuild with. While two or three untouched golems sit pointlessly in the basement.
2) If you want a "shield" effect, base it off of the ECL of the golem played out front. If it gets crushed, then the bigger or more advanced the golem is then the longer they have to respond before taking a penalty. It also provides a bit of value for the higher level golems. |
|
| Nageya Posts: 86
Location: Asylum
Magus Age: 111 years old
| Message #9357 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 1:18 pm |
While I don't really see armless golems as a legitimate defenses flesh golems can be a perfectly good defense especially if you log in often and put up new golems. |
|
HalfteaPosts: 1307 Location: Darghelm Magus Age: 132 years old Clan: ADV | Message #9359 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 1:36 pm |
| Ranged weapons are an exception.
I dunno, before Clans and weapons, a fleshie in hangback was pretty much my main defense. Due to the speed, I could outrun/out distance pretty much any attacks that came my way, which was nice minimum damage to me and discouraged more than just casual attacks. |
|
NecariaPosts: 505 Location: Rildesjan Magus Age: 115 years old Clan: OASIS | Message #9377 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 6:38 pm |
I wasn't saying it wasn't a viable defense. I was saying I didn't think it should be(though ranged weapons were an exception). Having your golem run away to prevent them from getting into your workshop doesn't make any more sense to me than sending out armless ones(unless it's attacking at the same time, hence ranged). Yes it works as far as the mechanics go currently, it eats their xp(most likely. It is possible to take down barricades with flesh/bone/wood, but it takes some special preparation) it gives you xp, and it doesn't cost much(and if retreating works then it prevents looting as well), but it still doesn't make a lick of sense to me.
Anyway, that's off topic. My opinion is maybe reduce the numbers a bit as +10/-10 is a bit high probably, and/or give some means of keeping things going a bit while offline. Some way to slowly repair your barricade/golem, or a way to set a list of golems to go out after the previous has been disabled perhaps. |
|
[ADMIN] ArkhamPosts: 902 Location: Mallow Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: AGOMC | Message #9380 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 6:45 pm |
My goal with this was to discourage leaving no golem at all out as the defense; I feel that doing this goes directly against the spirit of the game. Hence that's why bypassing a broken golem (legless, etc) doesn't incur the penalty.
Sometime today, I'll tone the penalty down a bit. Caps on XP loss and other timers are possible, but combat is already fairly database intensive so I'll want to consider other options first.
I'll also set the penalty to consider a power-less golem as a non-defender.
This is just part one. The second part will involve something I refer to as "Messing up the Workshop." If the wall is gone, "destroy" attempts that get to the workshop will "mess the place up," freezing some functions (resource transfer, building upgrades, item construction, can not attack critters/others) until the magus spends X amount of hours cleaning the place up. This has been planned for awhile but hasn't been implemented since I've been struggling with a good way to keep this balanced (IE, so that it's not a huge problem for a new player to overcome, but still is enough incentive for an experienced player to keep a guard out).
With a more modest defenseless workshop penalty and the Messy Workshop(tm) feature, I think this will work much better overall.
Kep |
|
NecariaPosts: 505 Location: Rildesjan Magus Age: 115 years old Clan: OASIS | Message #9385 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 6:57 pm |
I did not realize it was only no golem out at all that resulted in the xp/score loss. If that's the case then I'd say the penalty is fine as is. Golems aren't totally destroyed that often, particularly high level golems(thus increasing their usefulness as guards), and totally ignoring defense should in my opinion carry a decent sized penalty. However as mentioned in my response to the suggestion that disabled/destroyed golems turn it off for a bit, it won't change too much. I wouldn't be at all surprised if people intentionally didn't repair a disabled golem and just left that out when not attacking. Pretty much leaving it defenceless, but nixing the penalty.
*edit* partial solution for this might be to make it so you can't put a disabled golem to guard the workshop. Would still mean you could leave a golem that got disabled out, but you then couldn't attack, and if you swapped out to attack you couldn't put it back without repairing it. Wouldn't be a perfect fix, as flimsy inexpensive limbs to make it easily disabled for minimal cost would still be viable, but would be better than nothing.
Come to think of it, if that's doable, it would also be an alright solution to armless guards, let them stay if they're already out, but force you to add an arm and hand to put it back out.Last Edited: Aug 4, 2008, 7:24 pm |
|
HalfteaPosts: 1307 Location: Darghelm Magus Age: 132 years old Clan: ADV | Message #9388 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 7:33 pm |
I'll second this. Not being able to put an unpowered/disabled/unarmed/partial golem outside in the first place sounds like a great idea.
After all, it wouldn't work as a defense or for harvesting resources, so having it outside anyway is pointless. Dunno how much of a DB check or coding that might require though. |
|
| ShaoKahn Posts: 99
Location: Jaaron
Magus Age: 141 years old
Real Name: Craig
Email: craigbrett17@aol.com
| Message #9392 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 8:01 pm |
Ark, I have now decided not to sleep until you fix this as I've been wiped of experience and I'll need to keep an eye on my workshop. Thanks a bunch, not only can other mages smash my golems barricades and raid my resources, they can now rob my experience and score and soon take up hours of my time before I can defend myself again.
It doesn't help that item specialised clans don't have anything that can do anything near a couple of hundred damage a turn like the spiked chain and morning star and spells aren't in yet either. So even if I do try to protect myself, I lose. Last Edited: Aug 4, 2008, 8:03 pm |
|
| FatherCoyne Posts: 332
Location: Mallow
Magus Age: 116 years old
Real Name: Kevin Coyne
Email: KCoyne@umail.ucsb.edu
| Message #9400 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 9:01 pm |
| ShaoKahn said:
Ark, I have now decided not to sleep until you fix this as I've been wiped of experience and I'll need to keep an eye on my workshop. Thanks a bunch, not only can other mages smash my golems barricades and raid my resources, they can now rob my experience and score and soon take up hours of my time before I can defend myself again. Have fewer enemies. ^_^ |
|
NanashiPosts: 1115 Location: Asylum Magus Age: 120 years old Clan: OTAKU | Message #9406 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 9:07 pm |
FatherCoyne said: ShaoKahn said:
Ark, I have now decided not to sleep until you fix this as I've been wiped of experience and I'll need to keep an eye on my workshop. Thanks a bunch, not only can other mages smash my golems barricades and raid my resources, they can now rob my experience and score and soon take up hours of my time before I can defend myself again. Have fewer enemies. ^_^
Umm...shouldn't you be speaking for yourself Coyne? I seem to recall you saying you were gonna need some 500 golems... |
|
| Jhaelik Posts: 1
Location: Agoia Talia
Magus Age: 112 years old
| Message #9408 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 9:15 pm |
I hate to say this...but I'm part of a large clan and being utterly pummelled by people who are using alts and such...they all but have to be. I keep my two chars stringently apart, and I'm losing points and EXP because I can't get back up while raided. No no...clanless or not, I'm afraid this is a rather nastily-planned idea, and to be blunt it shouldn't be put in until it's 100% foolproof.
Then again, I suppose that's why this is the game in beta stage, and that's what I get for not being premium. *slight grin* It is, after all, only a game. If I find it becomes too imbalanced, I'll just leave. |
|
| FatherCoyne Posts: 332
Location: Mallow
Magus Age: 116 years old
Real Name: Kevin Coyne
Email: KCoyne@umail.ucsb.edu
| Message #9409 Posted: Aug 4, 2008, 9:21 pm |
| Nanashi said:
Umm...shouldn't you be speaking for yourself Coyne? I seem to recall you saying you were gonna need some 500 golems... I have exactly as many enemies as I want, thank you very much. ;)
And yes, another 419 to go at this moment...
<3-St. Coyne |
|
| |
| Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Last | » |
