Town conquering

[caldar]

first of all, i don't know if the taking of towns will change in the next versions but here's my thoughts.

the current system with townwins is in my opinion limited and not realistic. The problems we now face is that towns are not populated enough to actually battle there and raise the clanwin and/or people staying there are such low levels that you don't get wins for killing them.

Apparantly you have to be on an "even" footing with your enemy to let the win count. Now if i'd try and take a town, which is guarded by young, inexperienced boys, i'd let my battlehardened veterans eat them for breakfast, that would be the realistic scenario.

taking away or at least expanding the margin between levels would make the game more lively. Especially because you'd (as a higher-level char) would have to choose between battling someone to gain xp or kill some lower level chars in order to defend/conquer a town. This would also make sure that people don't gather in one specific town at some point of the game (like now) but actually have to move around to defend their cities.

Maybe a defending a town should give one a defense bonus but that's up to the coding wizard.

i hope you people get what i mean otherwise let me know and then i'll elaborate some more. (bit weary, just out of work but wanted to write it down now otherwise i'd forget)

[caldar]

secondly,

because of the lowleveled occupied towns, clanmembers start to produce extra alts to be able to battle in such towns, so fixing the first would also partly fix another problem

[Tim]

How does this sound:

Right now you get 20 exp for a win and 10 for a loss. We build off that, but also factor in 2 other things: you opponents level and their equipment level compared to yours (this part might sound familiar, as I think I had this idea in another thread). For every level higher than you your opponent is, you get +1 experience (max +5). For every level lower, -1 (max -15).

Also, there will be 3 tiers of equipment levels based on how fully equipped you are. If you have the highest "level" equipment equiped at the time, you'd be heavily equiped (heavy). Not the best, but pretty good then you're average. If you could have a lot better equipment on, then you're light. So for each equipment level above you your opponent is, you get +2 exp and -2 for each level below (FYI, this will be easy in my new system. And the "level" of your weapons will be much more representative of the actual damage they do/prevent).

Losses will give you half the exp a win against that person would (rounded down). You also don't receive any of the bonuses below if you lose.

So that's all been said before, but what if we add this to it: If your opponent's clan controls the town you are in, you also get a small exp bonus (+2?). However, to make things fair and to make it worth it for people to stay in towns they control, they also get a small defense bonus (+10%?). So while you get more exp for beating the members of the clan that controls a town, it will also be a bit harder fight.

Now, last time I proposed this kind of idea, the big issue was it not making it fair for people at the top, as they don't have people above them in levels to attack. To counter that, I will suggest also adding a small exp bonus for beating someone in the top 10 (+3?). That will allow those people towards the top to battle each other and still receive decent amounts of exp. While the people below them are open to receive the same bonuses, keep in mind that the new battle system, the person at the higher level with the better equipment should actually be favored to will (a shocking idea, I know ), so if you can beat the best, you deserve the little extra.

So to wrap up...
Formula for exp gain for a win = 20+(diff in level)+(diff in equip)+(attacking control bonus)+(attacking top 10 bonus)
Formula for exp gain for a lose = (20+(diff in level)+(diff in equip))/2

This would open people up to attacking those at lower levels, especially those that defend a town, but still make it more worth their time to beat people closer to or above their own level.

One more quick note: to keep attacking the much weaker purely for gold down, I'd make it so for each level after 5 that your opponent is below you, you get a -1% to your gold steal. So if you don't have any gold steal bonuses attacking someone 15 or more levels below you will net you zero gold and 6-14 won't net you as much.

Thoughts?

[Mat Cauthon]

Yes this is definitely on the right track. just about perfect !

[caldar]

Yes,

that would indeed be interesting, but how would that reflect with my first question about the clanwins in a town. Attacking a way lower player will give you less xp but that will be a tradeoff then because that win will count in the clanwinlist?

[Tim]

Right. If the above system was implemented, there wouldn't be the limit on attacking those 5+ levels below you. You wouldn't get as much xp or gold (as it should be a relatively easy battle), but you get the win for your clan.

[caldar]

thank you,

i was hoping for that reaction

[Tintomara]

Hmm, I haven't thought about the exact details, but I like the idea, so I'm sure it will be great!

[Jenlyn]

Yeah, I like it too.