|Bring walls back please|
|10:47:00 Aug 9th 13 - Dark Spawn (Lord Dark Spawn):|
As I understand the game was very much different before, so walls use to give defending bonus and it was much safer to be inside the city walls. And its realistic that walls should give you some kind of advantage I think.
When ever you take a look at some movies with these theme, Lord of the Rings series, when Uruk Hai attacked Helms Deep, that fortification could be defended by much less soldiers, and it was almost unreachable. When they noticed such a huge army will attack, their tactical move was to retreat to the fortress.
It would be good to have that tactical option in the game too. Cause now when you see a large army, there is nothing much you can do against it, you just run, but defending is not possible, even with walls.
Same goes for example Game of Thrones, it was said that 500 men can defend one of those castles, against a huge army. In this game it only makes your enemy prep longer, but does not really help you in any way.
Did people ask for defensive bonus to go away, did people not like that? Did that give a sort of tactical ideas in the game, what were the pros and cons of that system?
|14:16:08 Aug 9th 13 - Mr. Squiddly Loo Hawt:|
Back in those days merges were on every map and magic protection was indexed to the level of the army or city. That meant that blockers owned by elves with full walls and large merges in them become almost unbreakable and extremely hard to CW.. This meant stalemates became frequent.
|16:13:29 Aug 9th 13 - Tyr (Mr. Hombre):|
Tho in the current state of VU it would probably make things more fun/ better if it was changed back to the def bonus.
|04:22:06 Aug 10th 13 - Mr. Orpheus:|
Defensive bonus does not work, unless there's merges to overcome that. No merges & defense bonus = complete and utter stalemate all the time. Although I would like to see this brought back in Zetamania.
|07:02:34 Aug 10th 13 - Arkantos (Mr. Landry):|
Or not as large of a bonus as there was, Instead of 100% defence maximum it should be changed to 50% defence maximum.
|16:05:31 Aug 10th 13 - Binh (Mr. Binh The Slacker):|
it would only become a stalemate all the time if the walls cant be broken. Without free upkeep in allies city any longer, cities are pretty easy to cw nowadays (unless you don't have a mage with range or you are soloing as a pure warrior)
I am neutral on this suggestion. Walls have proven to be pretty useless nowadays no matter what kind of bonuses it have :P Good mages will always crush your walls when and if needed :D
|16:09:51 Aug 10th 13 - Duke Himanil XII:|
Even realistically however, sieges were always only a matter of time when opposed by a large army. Given enough time a breakthrough was inevitable for the attacking army. Though that said if the level of the units defending is higher than the attacking units there should be a system to inflict proportionally greater losses on the attackers since once a breakthrough is effected at some points, superior numbers will count for only so much since it will be a head on head clash and superior level units should kill way more of the inferior troops before being destroyed themselves.
|17:03:43 Aug 11th 13 - shyers (Mr. Shyers The Vain):|
i'm against walls. nothing worst than a 55 tick travel through a zigzag of walls to get some rainbow cities
|18:11:00 Aug 11th 13 - Mr. Karta Killa The Return:|
^ no he means walls as in city walls not Great Walls. :P
|[Top] Pages: 1|
My bookmarksOld forum design