Clan citys and whats wrong with them

[arghysteelwill]

Walls.

Their to low, poorly placed and pose no barrier to an attacking force at all. The gatehouse's walk way is the perfect height, the fact that you have to walk down from the gatehouse to the walls should be a signal that its wrong.

Crafting buildings.

Redundant buildings costing absurd resources for outrageous risks, i focus to much on the defense so i'm sure someone else can fill this out.

Keep.

Outrageously useless, 150 modules for a static building that might as well be smaller and harder to hit. Instead of being the focal of the city its the red haired step child hidden in the corner, exciting for the first 5 minutes then dissapointing for the rest of its life. It has wonderful arrow slits except theres nothing stopping the person your shooting from charging right up into the keep, its got 4 friggin entrances with no doors or ways to prevent hostiles from entering. Keeps need to be far stronger for 150 modules and there should be a reason for both defenders and attackers to use this building.

Towers and cannon towers.

You have no choice in where you place towers instead you must place a tower were ever the blind folded city designer drew the wall kinks. Theres no strategic placement of the towers so they become expensive useless wall sections instead of special bastions of defense. Towers should be like cannon towers, extremely tall and objects of the defenders and attackers along with the option to build them or not build them instead of being forced to build expensive walls when war hulks are a daily occurrence.

We were promised NPC guards then told they were being replaced with automated towers, today we have neither. Theres nothing to stop your opponent from coming into your city at your off hours and destroying your buildings, nothing less then a siege should threaten your city not 10 bored guys with siege hammers. We need zap towers or automated defenses.

The current cannon towers are a joke, poor damage and horrible placement, anyone manning them will be killed almost instantly because hes this giant target. WAR had a great system with an imposed targeting thing on the ground showing you were your shots would land so the animation dident look horrid and fly straight forward instead of properly being arced. Arced cannon shots would allow for smoother shot placement and less lag, the animation could be behind the person firing it instead of filling his screen. The cannon would no longer be required to swing all over and instead be a fixed thing with shots firing out of it into the air then landing where the aimer is.

Risk vs reward.

With the current bugs(?) in were you cannot construct basic things such as rafts/siege hammers at your city workbench what reason is there to build your city up? I spent hundreds of hours building my city up and devote all this time only to watch others benefit from it, we cannot tell our merchants who to sell to and we cannot even deny the enemy access to our city with the shitty walls and no gates. Anyone can waltz through our gaping gates and destroy any building they see fit regardless of cost it appears(t3 keep in 10 minutes), what reason do i have to keep building the city? its 100g for a siege hammer and 250g for a single module- every single building loses against the siege hammer.

Why are walls so weak and incomplete? why can anyone assault my buildings regardless of whether or not they declared a siege? why cant i build the promised automated defenses to counter this? why is it so cheap to destroy a building yet so expensive and time consuming to build one?

I realize the game may not be complete but my clan city is, i worked hard for it why must i lose it because you are not ready and i am?

[arghysteelwill]

*Reserved*

[Rodhull]

Why are walls so weak and incomplete? why can anyone assault my buildings regardless of whether or not they declared a siege? why cant i build the promised automated defenses to counter this? why is it so cheap to destroy a building yet so expensive and time consuming to build one?

Because the game isnt ready for release and frankly if you didnt realise this you have no right to complain.

Im one of AVs harshest critics on here and people like me have been telling people for weaks it isnt ready for paid release, so really dont be surprised when stuff that is pretty fundamental isnt in the game, its a case of - i told you so.

If you enjoy the game more power to you, and by all means raise the issues, but dont ask questions to which the answer is obvious.

[arghysteelwill]

Why did they enable citys and sieges then?? these arent small under takings they are one of the reasons most guilds will continue to play the game. We dont get refunded when they find a bug that destroys something the GMs just thank us and walk away, the very least they could do is answer simple questions letting us know whether or not its intended.

I dont think a single guild that has spent significant effort on their city would mind if they disabled building damage until they fixed and explained the mechanics. Its better then everyone blundering and destroying everything fearing the same in return, the first thing that crossed everyones mind when we tried siege hamemrs was 'is this going to happen to us to?'. This is mutual assured destruction not city mechanics, at this rate everyone will go back to the capitals ensuring no city remains standing, after all theres not much else to do with that gold but make siege hammers!

[Rodhull]

Why did they enable citys and sieges then?? these arent small under takings they are one of the reasons most guilds will continue to play the game. We dont get refunded when they find a bug that destroys something the GMs just thank us and walk away, the very least they could do is answer simple questions letting us know whether or not its intended.

I dont think a single guild that has spent significant effort on their city would mind if they disabled building damage until they fixed and explained the mechanics. Its better then everyone blundering and destroying everything fearing the same in return, the first thing that crossed everyones mind when we tried siege hamemrs was 'is this going to happen to us to?'. This is mutual assured destruction not city mechanics, at this rate everyone will go back to the capitals ensuring no city remains standing, after all theres not much else to do with that gold but make siege hammers!

Dont get me wrong i totally agree but me and people like me have been saying since they announced release that the game isnt fit for purpose as yet and they shouldnt be charging for it.
But the fanbois blindly defend it (not saying your one) and there are enough people like me on these forums for you to be aware that really anything goes as far as broken game mechanics in DF.

Right up to the last few weeks of beta clan city walls weren't even enabled so its no surprise there are issues with them, there were reports (unconfirmed addmitedly) of GM affiliated clans taking out whole hamlets and cities in a matter of hours with simple weapons without declaring sieges early on in my beta time.

I didnt get involved in building clan cities so most of knowledge on this subject was gleaned from clan mates and the beta forums but i know that there were lots of complaint threads relating to cities right up till the release announcement.

[Heceldi]

*Reserved*

Its absolutely pointless to reserve posts.

You cannot edit them after 30 minutes.

[arghysteelwill]

Its absolutely pointless to reserve posts.

You cannot edit them after 30 minutes.

hahah BLAST!

[Nevok]

Pretty much agree with the OP overall, although a little whiny. Buildings should not be able to be damaged unless a siege is declared, basically. Personally my biggest gripe is enemies being able to use your bank. Tell me where is any form of realism in somebody coming into your city, killing a few people and then using your bank to bank their newfound shit in - before promptly being killed.

Oh and the wtb gates thing. Again.

[Rodhull]

Pretty much agree with the OP overall, although a little whiny. Buildings should not be able to be damaged unless a siege is declared, basically. Personally my biggest gripe is enemies being able to use your bank. Tell me where is any form of realism in somebody coming into your city, killing a few people and then using your bank to bank their newfound shit in - before promptly being killed.

Oh and the wtb gates thing. Again.

God know what they were thinking with clan banks, the first time in beta me and some buddies went into a player owned city ruins and i realised i could actually use their bank i was quite amazed... i assumed (naturally) it would be fixed before release :(

As for city gates, ill just say this can you think of one single piece of solid scenery in the whole world of Agon which, when interacted with by players, actually moves, i mean just think about it there isnt one moving door anywhere to the best of my knowledge... doesnt bode well

[arghysteelwill]

What the fuck happened theres like threads in triplicate now dear god this forum is ruined. I hope someone important atleast saw this thread before the forum got spammed with 7 pages.

[Nevok]

God know what they were thinking with clan banks, the first time in beta me and some buddies went into a player owned city ruins and i realised i could actually use their bank i was quite amazed... i assumed (naturally) it would be fixed before release :(

As for city gates, ill just say this can you think of one single piece of solid scenery in the whole world of Agon which, when interacted with by players, actually moves, i mean just think about it there isnt one moving door anywhere to the best of my knowledge... doesnt bode well

The doors don't have to move though. They should just adopt WAR's approach and when you use the door you get moved to the other side of it. Sure, it isn't as cool as an opening gate or whatever, but atleast people can't just run in to your city.

And yeah this forum got way too spammed, nothing is ever going to get read now. They'd have to have 2-3 fulltime staff to keep up with this.

[VerbalTachi]

Do structures in DF have more of a purpose than just being buildings in your city?

I mean you build a blacksmith crafting station, weapons crafting station, etc. Do they have anymore affect other than that?

Reason I asked is because if they don't then I think structures should have some type of added bonus to them that gives all guild members and players bound to that city the bonus effect.

Example.

Level 1 Keep - Gives guild members and players bound to city an added +2 to resource gathering.
Level 2 Keep - Gives +4

And so on.

Another Example is.

Level 1 Bank - Gives guild members and players bound to city an added +5% to weight limit.
Level 2 Bank - Gives +10%

And so on, I think you see where I'm headed here.

I think having added bonus effect to structures give more meaning to having them built. But they can also be destroyed so that effect would go away until structure is rebuilt.

This enables players to say "hmm this city has these structures and they give these bonuses that I like so I'm going to bind here and make it my home"

More players bound to the city the more it can be upgraded and grow.

Also opens a lot of other possibilities.

[Da Fleegsta]

Do structures in DF have more of a purpose than just being buildings in your city?

I mean you build a blacksmith crafting station, weapons crafting station, etc. Do they have anymore affect other than that?

Reason I asked is because if they don't then I think structures should have some type of added bonus to them that gives all guild members and players bound to that city the bonus effect.

Example.

Level 1 Keep - Gives guild members and players bound to city an added +2 to resource gathering.
Level 2 Keep - Gives +4

And so on.

Another Example is.

Level 1 Bank - Gives guild members and players bound to city an added +5% to weight limit.
Level 2 Bank - Gives +10%

And so on, I think you see where I'm headed here.

I think having added bonus effect to structures give more meaning to having them built. But they can also be destroyed so that effect would go away until structure is rebuilt.

This enables players to say "hmm this city has these structures and they give these bonuses that I like so I'm going to bind here and make it my home"

More players bound to the city the more it can be upgraded and grow.

Also opens a lot of other possibilities.


your batter than AV themselves rofl.. you should work for them and fix the game..

[arghysteelwill]

God no! then your city might actually become populated with hundreds of people being bound to there! The keep gives you 45 bind spots and has a city wide health regen buff which as you pointed out is pretty nifty, i wanted a square wide buff and special access to merchants/quests/dungeons depending on how your city was.

There can be so much then the current system theres just no ways its complete.

[VerbalTachi]

God no! then your city might actually become populated with hundreds of people being bound to there! The keep gives you 45 bind spots and has a city wide health regen buff which as you pointed out is pretty nifty, i wanted a square wide buff and special access to merchants/quests/dungeons depending on how your city was.

There can be so much then the current system theres just no ways its complete.

Well binding doesn't necessarily mean players spawn there but more like registered as a citizen in that city giving them the added bonus plus enables the city to be upgraded even more. Players can bind to other places for spawning but being registered as a citizen to a city is different.

Lets say to upgrade the city to level 2 requires 50 registered citizens and level 3 requires 100.

These city upgrades enables structures to also be upgraded in level. But cities will have a certain amount of nodes for structures.

This leads to cities to be different from other cities in a sense that guilds will need to choose the type of structures they place to lure players to register in their city.

Lets say for example I wanted to make my city more of a Magic type city. I create magic school buildings that give added bonus to magic users, this in turn lets magic users flock to my city because the bonus effects of the structures suits them better. The more registered players that become registered the more the magic school structures will be upgraded and in turn will provide more bonus.

In the same note, guilds that focus more on melee combat will create combat type structures that give bonus to melee combat.

This way creating a city has more of a purpose and leads to a tug of war with players and guilds trying to lure players to their city and also to be more diverse.

Also lets say that you create a "Market" structure, this would enable NPC merchants that'll sell items for you or you can buy items from them but also provides new quests for players.

Also by creating these structures it will open up new NPC's, quests, etc.

[Cuelda]

And yeah this forum got way too spammed, nothing is ever going to get read now. They'd have to have 2-3 fulltime staff to keep up with this.

I suspect that they just made this place for us to vent our creativity and complains about game mechanics.

When you have hackers to chase and servers to set up you don't give much of shit about suggestions on features.

also, thread is /signed

[Cuelda]

Do structures in DF have more of a purpose than just being buildings in your city?

I mean you build a blacksmith crafting station, weapons crafting station, etc. Do they have anymore affect other than that?

Reason I asked is because if they don't then I think structures should have some type of added bonus to them that gives all guild members and players bound to that city the bonus effect.

Example.

Level 1 Keep - Gives guild members and players bound to city an added +2 to resource gathering.
Level 2 Keep - Gives +4

And so on.

Another Example is.

Level 1 Bank - Gives guild members and players bound to city an added +5% to weight limit.
Level 2 Bank - Gives +10%

And so on, I think you see where I'm headed here.

I think having added bonus effect to structures give more meaning to having them built. But they can also be destroyed so that effect would go away until structure is rebuilt.

This enables players to say "hmm this city has these structures and they give these bonuses that I like so I'm going to bind here and make it my home"

More players bound to the city the more it can be upgraded and grow.

Also opens a lot of other possibilities.


One thing that would help the situation a lot would be taxes.
Have a fraction of the money used for crafting anything go to the clan vault. Then you can either drop the taxes bellow NPC cities to attract crafters, or if your city is already a trade center you can keep them high to make a profit.
I don't see anything like that happening anytime soon but it would be awesome ...

[VerbalTachi]

One thing that would help the situation a lot would be taxes.
Have a fraction of the money used for crafting anything go to the clan vault. Then you can either drop the taxes bellow NPC cities to attract crafters, or if your city is already a trade center you can keep them high to make a profit.
I don't see anything like that happening anytime soon but it would be awesome ...

Hehe yeah, that's actually one of my other suggestions from an economy thread that was just posted.

Gold that is used with guild controlled crafting stations should go to the guild itself. Guilds can control the price but it can never be free. :D

[arghysteelwill]

I do hope they eventually start dev feedback on features so we can communicate and so can the devs. I would love to hear how the devs see and imagine city combat.

[Rodhull]

Hehe yeah, that's actually one of my other suggestions from an economy thread that was just posted.

Gold that is used with guild controlled crafting stations should go to the guild itself. Guilds can control the price but it can never be free. :D

I suggested a similar idea in beta tied to localised markets and banking.

I dont need to explain local banking most agree its a good idea to add more depth and actual point to the game.

However i firmly believe that clan cities should be able to build markets which are essentially localised auction houses, players can place buy and sell orders there but can only collect and deliver the goods at that place (EG No email system)

The controlling clan can then set tax levels on all trading done. This way it would foster real links with respected crafters and traders who obviously would indirectly fund the clans who in turn would want to (where possible) protect said crafters while in their lands to attract more people.
In turn this activity (the flow of goods and money in and out) would attract raiders and hired mercenaries to protect small groups and solos from raiders.

People would gain reputations, clans who ganked and stole from potential trade customers would soon find their cities devoid of player life where as well organised well run clan cities would become thriving trade hubs.

Its things like this which DF really badly lacks, and lots of people in beta asked for things along these lines, and were ignored.

Hell if the game had that i might even play it, it would add purpose to a game world currently lacking in it.
Its basically just copying Eve to a degree but its those relatively simple mechanics which have perpetuated many years of corp alliances and hatreds, without them Eve would be a shell of a game...

[VerbalTachi]

I suggested a similar idea in beta tied to localised markets and banking.

I dont need to explain local banking most agree its a good idea to add more depth and actual point to the game.

However i firmly believe that clan cities should be able to build markets which are essentially localised auction houses, players can place buy and sell orders there but can only collect and deliver the goods at that place (EG No email system)

The controlling clan can then set tax levels on all trading done. This way it would foster real links with respected crafters and traders who obviously would indirectly fund the clans who in turn would want to (where possible) protect said crafters while in their lands to attract more people.
In turn this activity (the flow of goods and money in and out) would attract raiders and hired mercenaries to protect small groups and solos from raiders.

People would gain reputations, clans who ganked and stole from potential trade customers would soon find their cities devoid of player life where as well organised well run clan cities would become thriving trade hubs.

Its things like this which DF really badly lacks, and lots of people in beta asked for things along these lines, and were ignored.

Hell if the game had that i might even play it, it would add purpose to a game world currently lacking in it.
Its basically just copying Eve to a degree but its those relatively simple mechanics which have perpetuated many years of corp alliances and hatreds, without them Eve would be a shell of a game...

Yup, I'd play DF also if not for it being just a LMB PVP clickfest. Non of the really good features ever made it to the game that makes it worth playing beyond CS knife fight.

Very disappointed and at the same time I'm not sure we'll ever see those worthwhile features in the game, not for a while anyway.

Here's to hoping for another game in development that'll have the really good features that we all wanted in it.

[Viluin]

Perhaps every building should have some kind of "core stone", and the only way to destroy that building with siege hammers would be to attack the stone? Of course, cannons and whatnot can still attack from the outside.

Also, it makes sense if the keep gets one entrance only, with a closeable door that has to be beaten down with hammers before you can enter.

[tehzenmaster]

Right now it seems better to just hang out at an npc city... which is weird and sad :(

[jahosefat]

my biggest issue with clan cities is the fact that the owning clan has absolutely zero control over their city. People can enter our city and act like complete fucktards and all we can do is either watch them do it or kill them and go red.

Spending this much time and effort with little reward is far from what anyone expected. We have guilds camping our resource quarries, as soon as the server goes up we have about 30 blue players from random guilds raping our quarry until it is dry 10 minutes later. Then people sit and macro all day on it so every node that comes up the macroer gets.

Now I would have no issue killing them if we were able to do so in our own city without repercussions. Since there is an option for auto guard towers (which we don't have available) that allows us to make them friendly to all, alliance only, or clan only, I propose this.


Make that option make the people we do not want in the city turn red or at least gray when they enter. This gives us the right to attack them if they are not wanted there.

[arghysteelwill]

Theres no good argument for siege hammers and battle spikes to destroy clan buildings, during a siege yes but if theres no siege you shouldent be able to casually destroy buildings. Perhaps add a hp buff from the walls? the more walls you have up the more hps everything has? so a city fully built up with all its walls will boost hps far beyond a profitable margin for siege hammer durability. They've said multiple times your not supposed to destroy buildings during a siege or should atleast be discouraged so this will encourage people to focus directly on the stone instead of building attrition but anyone with proper siege weapons will still make short work of the buildings.

Once you build something as large as a keep or walls they should remain there, we have gate houses for a reason theres no good reason why you would knock down walls when theres already a hole- unless its so easy why not. Make the keep/walls/gatehouse very powerful and not worth destroying so atleast the gatehouses have reason.

Imagine your current city if the keep was larger and the bank/bindstone was inside the keep which had a door that you could close- that'd be a true fucking fight right there. The carnage at the door would be so epic and all those little windows could be used as back doors, 200 people fighting over every inch of the keep.

[Jorogos]

Well binding doesn't necessarily mean players spawn there but more like registered as a citizen in that city giving them the added bonus plus enables the city to be upgraded even more. Players can bind to other places for spawning but being registered as a citizen to a city is different.

Lets say to upgrade the city to level 2 requires 50 registered citizens and level 3 requires 100.

These city upgrades enables structures to also be upgraded in level. But cities will have a certain amount of nodes for structures.

This leads to cities to be different from other cities in a sense that guilds will need to choose the type of structures they place to lure players to register in their city.

Lets say for example I wanted to make my city more of a Magic type city. I create magic school buildings that give added bonus to magic users, this in turn lets magic users flock to my city because the bonus effects of the structures suits them better. The more registered players that become registered the more the magic school structures will be upgraded and in turn will provide more bonus.

In the same note, guilds that focus more on melee combat will create combat type structures that give bonus to melee combat.

This way creating a city has more of a purpose and leads to a tug of war with players and guilds trying to lure players to their city and also to be more diverse.

Also lets say that you create a "Market" structure, this would enable NPC merchants that'll sell items for you or you can buy items from them but also provides new quests for players.

Also by creating these structures it will open up new NPC's, quests, etc.

Outstanding Idea. Best I've heard so far.

[arghysteelwill]

Why the hell do i get hundreds of people sympathizing and piling their opinions about city building ingame yet no one wants to post them!! If you have ever taken part in building a city please share your thoughts, the entire point of this forum and post is to let the devs know our reaction to city building- if you have an opinion about something dont stay quiet.

[Suijin]

They do need some form of automated defenses.

They could base the attack power of the defenses to the number of people currently bound to the clanstone. That way if the guild is out raiding and bound to a closer stone to their raid, then their own city would have weaker defenses.

The automated defenses may have to be limited to either just attacking a single enemy player or all the enemy but very low attack damage. It has to be possible to attack the city to siege it and not have the city defenses dominate the battle. The advantage should be to the defenders.

[Cuelda]

Good to see a fine thread like this revived from the dead. :ninja:

[arghysteelwill]

We just had a flurry of sieges and attacks i'm sure more people now have an opinion about how their city fared against an attacking force.

[Fro]

Yeh they need to add closeable gates.

[Vindicore]

Good post

Overall I feel cities need more bind spots, perhaps 25% or 50% more, perhaps fixed by upping the bind spot bonus you get from building houses.

Repair shards are still useless since they upped the hit points of buildings during beta; the shards need to repair the same % as they did before the raise; currently they are simply stupid. I am ok with enemies being able to damage buildings without declaring seige, but I do worry what the state of cities will be in a few months time when people start building cannon and warhulks in greater numbers. Currently its simply not worth rebuilding structures when all your work can be wasted overnight again, once repair shards become more effective it will be, and cities will be more useful.

Got a fair few suggestions for city building options...

Walls/Towers/Gatehouses:
Make us able to build the complete walls, then build the towers on top of them, rather than having gaps in the walls until we build the towers.
Give us controllable gatehouses with doors! Operation rights controlled by the city mayor (clan, alliance, friends, blue).

Keep:
One entrance, not 4, with a door.
Add an internal bank, giving us two points to grab gear from, stopping the one bank being the focal point of all assaults.
Make bound players spawn inside the keep once built allowing them to get together and repel invaders.
Build the keep on top of the city stone, forcing attackers to capture the keep before claiming the city.

Bank:
Operation rights controlled by the city mayor (clan, alliance, friends, blue) stop allowing enemies to use it.

Trader:
Allow guilds to put items up for sale at this vendor, and operation rights controlled by the city mayor (clan, alliance, friends, blue).

Crafting stations:
Operation rights controlled by the city mayor (clan, alliance, friends, blue)

Houses:
Make all of them enterable, not having some of them as just blocks of nothing.
Double the bind spot bonus for building them.
Put doors on them.

Those buildings that have doors added would be able to be breached by enemies targetting the doors. Perhaps add battering rams to help them take the doors down.

Adding doors has been discussed to death but it is a very important feature that is missing. As it is enemies can just ride in and kill everyone, rather than giving defenders time to organise an effective and fun defence. regarding how strong the doors should be, say make 5 siege hammers take 10-15 minutes to take them down, giving the defenders a small amount of time to defend.

It would still be achievable by a small party to break into the city, but if defenders are around they would have a major advantage.

[Slothien]

Seriously why doesn't people lke Vindicore work for AV. :D

Few changes IMO:

-Make gates also openable by any player who can get to the gatehouse/keep.
-Doors health should be related to size of it so all doors will last about the same time to break with max amount of players hitting it. Also making door health city wide upgrade might add some options to city management.
-Make towers upg. from (specific parts mb) walls.
-Taxing system for vendors/players and using of clan structures (mage tower, crafting stations).

[Rodhull]

Said it once ill say it again, ever wondered why there are no moving doors in the whole game? Not even in npc towns?

Personally i think they havent figured out how to make them work yet in any way.

[arghysteelwill]

Hell walls are just giant NPC's bunched together with special armor and some modified hitboxes, i know this isent as easy and it sounds but the door could be a giant hitbox that just covers the entry way, add in a big groove then just let the hitbox fall into place. I tested my siege hammer on walls recently and i was horrified to find out that 4 people with siege hammers will make short work of a wall section.

What kind of wall gets smashed in seconds by 4 people with hammers? can you imagine what will happen with warhulks and cannons when walls get killed by hammers doing 5 damage? Walls need a easily 1000% hp boost because they wont even last someone looking at them right now. Its funny how we dont have doors yet walls are this weak haha i mean theres no point in destroying them with no doors yet theres no point in NOT destroying them.

When we get doors the walls need to be insanely tough other wise your just running around in a circle. You dont need to gates to close alot, adding a switch inside every building with a door will allow the trojan horse situation with citys being insanely hard to breach when the gates are closed but spys can hit the gate house and open the gates to the horde. If walls had say 20k hps and gates had between 1-15k hps(depending on the quality of your gate) then it doesnt matter how many people you brought you'll eventually be forced to attempt to breach the gates unless you brought a warhulk then the walls become a viable target.

From a defenders point of view you have really hard to defend walls(from hand held damage forms) or a easy to defend gate house(with gate) so the attackers also have a choice between the short dangerous road and the long hard road. You will need to redesign the gate houses so you can shoot at someone assaulting the gate while adding an actual gate switch. You could add this huge support infrastructure for gates, crafting professions to build them and special tools to breach and repair them- siege rams from hand held poles to covered wagons and braces that add a fixed amount of hps for a duration of time.

Every house could be turned into actual houses with firing slits- shit put them on the walls and your house could be a fortified tower with a door. The keep could be this massive structure that actually has uses, its own bank with its own bind stone at the top- 45 bind slots at its own bind stone but you'll once again need to ensure its field of fire is properly placed so you can shoot at anyone trying to destroy it- perhaps a moat? Its bull crap that they cant do any of this- they can but they are just lazy, the hand crafted citys are fucking horrible with almost 0 thought put into it.

[Cuelda]

On the wall subject, they can add upgradeable walls (lvl 2) that would be one level taller that the previous version and the previous level could become a series of firring slits on solid wall. That would make jumping over the wall (with the help of knockback or a spell) harder, and make the town look more impressive.

They could also add craftable moveable siege towers with a bridge and a ramp that can be used by the attackers to climb the walls and have to be destroyed (or ninja-hijacked :D) by the defenders.

Anyway that's my two cents.

[Macetotheface]

Your playing a pay to play beta.With that said they should make it where you have hamlet city limits ,and when you bring up the build map you can drag your walls on map to get the layout.Player controlled.Hell take a page from any rts C&C/dune,but like he said a blind builder.That and make it when the siege starts the gates close to the city....Like RL.If i was getting raided i think id shut the damn door.It wouldnt be that hard to code a free layout on a map editor.Give the guild builder more control.Also make it were if the city has every advanced building that the keep gets extra hp so its best for the raiders to take out the other buildings first.To lower the keeps hp.Just some ideas.

[NightRavenKW]

Good post

Overall I feel cities need more bind spots, perhaps 25% or 50% more, perhaps fixed by upping the bind spot bonus you get from building houses.

Repair shards are still useless since they upped the hit points of buildings during beta; the shards need to repair the same % as they did before the raise; currently they are simply stupid. I am ok with enemies being able to damage buildings without declaring seige, but I do worry what the state of cities will be in a few months time when people start building cannon and warhulks in greater numbers. Currently its simply not worth rebuilding structures when all your work can be wasted overnight again, once repair shards become more effective it will be, and cities will be more useful.

Got a fair few suggestions for city building options...

Walls/Towers/Gatehouses:
Make us able to build the complete walls, then build the towers on top of them, rather than having gaps in the walls until we build the towers.
Give us controllable gatehouses with doors! Operation rights controlled by the city mayor (clan, alliance, friends, blue).

Keep:
One entrance, not 4, with a door.
Add an internal bank, giving us two points to grab gear from, stopping the one bank being the focal point of all assaults.
Make bound players spawn inside the keep once built allowing them to get together and repel invaders.
Build the keep on top of the city stone, forcing attackers to capture the keep before claiming the city.

Bank:
Operation rights controlled by the city mayor (clan, alliance, friends, blue) stop allowing enemies to use it.

Trader:
Allow guilds to put items up for sale at this vendor, and operation rights controlled by the city mayor (clan, alliance, friends, blue).

Crafting stations:
Operation rights controlled by the city mayor (clan, alliance, friends, blue)

Houses:
Make all of them enterable, not having some of them as just blocks of nothing.
Double the bind spot bonus for building them.
Put doors on them.

Those buildings that have doors added would be able to be breached by enemies targetting the doors. Perhaps add battering rams to help them take the doors down.

Adding doors has been discussed to death but it is a very important feature that is missing. As it is enemies can just ride in and kill everyone, rather than giving defenders time to organise an effective and fun defence. regarding how strong the doors should be, say make 5 siege hammers take 10-15 minutes to take them down, giving the defenders a small amount of time to defend.

It would still be achievable by a small party to break into the city, but if defenders are around they would have a major advantage.


Definatly agree with most of this. As it stands now their is no reason at all to build a city. The only thing you build it for is so people traveling can have access to all your hard work.
I don't mind buildings being destoryed without a seige, but their also has to be some risk for the attackers. Towers, NPC guards or at the very least deny them access to your city services so they have the risk of being pk'd en route to your city and losing all their seige equipment. Right now anyone can come naked, catch you at your off time pull thier stuff out of the bank destroy a building and deposit their stuff in your bank. Terrible game mechanics and I can't wait for the sand to be put into this sandbox. This will be a great game soon.

[nathanpinard]

OP:

Have you exhausted all your options of building. Is there anything left for you to build at all?

[Gozzon]

Outstanding Idea. Best I've heard so far.

O'rly? I was almost knocked down from my chair when I saw there is actually damn creative people on forums.

[arghysteelwill]

OP:

Have you exhausted all your options of building. Is there anything left for you to build at all?

We thought we did but i swear shit keeps getting added on its impossible to keep everyone building!

[arghysteelwill]

Today someone took down a clan stone in apparently 10 minutes with siege hammers..... is that all it takes? 20 guys with siege hammers? i mean i can take any city over night then, wait until their low time then siege them between the shift changes- i can muster the numbers ahead of time no defender can. I accepted the war hulks and cannons being required to take over stones but letting siege hammers do it again is counter productive until you've fleshed out proper city defenses.

A cannon is a giant stationary target which is fairly expensive, you need to control the city before you can deploy them(as seen in the LoD city defense) so this allows defenders a chance to actually defend. Ask murder herd how defending their bank turned out- a small target like a bind stone but you cannot stop multiple people with siege hammers from getting whacks in. You used to have to work to siege a city not just waltz in and take advantage of the lag generated.

We built citys we can build fucking war hulks, dont devalue the work done on citys because everyone is bored. Siege hammers were perfect if abit powerful but thats the citys fault for being so weak now you've gone and over powered them and thrown out the careful balance. If no one is building warhulks then maybe a foundry is unrealistic- you expect me to spend 460k gold with the current horrible half assed system in place? fix your citys before you hand everyone the key to their destruction. I honestly dont know what the devs are thinking- my city(ITS MINE! you can call me mayor arghy) is practically done or so i thought until i learned we have over 1.2k modules worth of buildings to yet build!

A siege hammer is 100g 10 wood and some iron, my city fully built costs over 600k gold. You come in bringing 100 of your friends or people who want a fight, the lag and FPS drops and your wonderful memory leaks means everyone is going to crash every 20-30 minutes as long as we are all in one place. You rush my keep destroying it in 10 minutes, my side vainly trys to fight but its not easy to chase down a target in this chaos so the keep is gone- 45 defenders gone. You take down a few houses just for kicks 7 defenders for each house, at this time most of my allys have been crashing or trying to kill the attackers to little success and now the numbers begin to turn against them.

My city is now in the hands of the attacking force and not a single guild on the server can defend against this type of attack. You surround my clan stone and destroy it, for the mere price 4k gold you've taken my 600k+ clan city and theres nothing i could have possibly done about it because of game limitations. If you think this is a balanced system then you havent been on the receiving end- i havent i've been on the giving end yet i know a broken system when i see one.

Is your expectation of city siege mechanics ping pong? a series of indefensible attacks repeatedly taking the city? would you build a city if you knew that any attempts to defend it would fail against an attacker with commonly fielded numbers because the server cant handle it? I'm from eve i know the bottle neck that the numbers game makes- atleast in there you can split and focus lessening the effect but this is darkfall you cant hit 4 citys at once. Dont try to say 'attack their city!' because if you have the numbers to assault someones city while defending your own it destroys that entire argument and their city isent vulnerable at the same time.

Fix city defense and balance city cost before you destroy your entire game balance by giving it a quick fix, dont expect people to pay 2k modules for a foundry to get war hulks if its so goddamn easy to destroy the foundry- fucking boggles the mind.

[ElJayco]

Lots of good ideas.

I am very worried about the state of sieging if suc a small group can take over a city using only siege hammers.

I envisioned sieging be a massive affair involving lot iof time and planning (as is involved in the building of a city) amd involving a substantial army.

Also having been at the receiving end of a destroyed keep why oh why did my bind location change to somewhere random? I am a dwarf and ended up in Copperdale (human lands) and conveniently around the area of the very armyies that attacked our city.

[Harto]

Walls.
We were promised NPC guards then told they were being replaced with automated towers, today we have neither. Theres nothing to stop your opponent from coming into your city at your off hours and destroying your buildings, nothing less then a siege should threaten your city not 10 bored guys with siege hammers. We need zap towers or automated defenses.

This.

Also: PUT A GATE IN THE GATEHOUSE.:idea:

[Ghier]

I love the idea of clan cities and having to defend them. I really dont see people ever being happy with them though. Its obvious right now that cities need better defense but unless your city can basically defend itself, having only the help of whoever is on at the worst possible time. You will still lose your city because the raiding party is going to be all but 100% sure they can win before they set out. Of course if a city is incredibly hard to destroy then people wont be happy with that either. Im sure this is one area that will be tweaked many many times in the future. Right now the cities definately need better defense and for gods sake a GATE. Theres a lot of good suggestions in this thread I hope the devs are paying attention.

[Thorpeyrox]

I'm not in-game yet so my ideas may be slightly flawed however;
Gates: Need to be implemented asap. (Stating the obvious)

Walls and Keeps could be subjected to the following hypothetic upgrades;

Improved Masionry: Increases Wall and Keep health by 1k hp(?) and Armour by X amount.
This wouldn't be a one off upgrade, Clans should be allowed to research this over and over with the cost getting slightly higher each time.

Reinforced Walls: Makes wall pieces immune to damage from siege hammers and battle spikes and reduces the damage done by siege hammers by 50% on the Keep.

Gates would also need simular upgrades however not to the extent in which walls/keeps would recieve them. E.g. only 500 more hp per upgrade not 1k.

[Harto]

OP:

Have you exhausted all your options of building. Is there anything left for you to build at all?


It doesn't matter, if the walls and gatehouse and towers are complete then the city should be able to be secure, which they currently are not. I should need a mage tower in order to shut the gate on the gatehouse.

[arghysteelwill]

A gate wont change anything until the walls get taller and stronger, so you add a gate that doesnt stop someone from blowing a hole in your wall with a siege hammer and 1 bar of stam- walls are also so low/poorly placed that their easy to jump over- 1 person with launch or knockback means you can launch your entire raid over the walls. Theres some citys so poorly laid out that no matter what you add you wont make it secure, BKB's city is a perfect example and i truly feel for those guys. It has an insane amount of walls which go right up against this slope that anyone can use then its got even more walls inside the walls going in seemingly random directions.

A gate is one of the many problems, adding a gate wont change the many other problems but adding zap towers will. We already have cannons rolling around so its not like you cant kill a zap tower in a enemy city. We need to be able to freely place our buildings, give us a grid that has a highlighted area showing you where you can place buildings. Stronger buildings, taller walls, closeable entrances, every building with a purpose and automated defenses.

We build these useless towers every 5 feet why not integrate houses with doors into the walls? i get 7 bind slots and a multi tiered tower on my walls with a door that locks from the inside. Why is the gate house so dismal? its got 2 murder holes with such poor fields of vision- even if we had gates i would be helpless to defend it if someone started beating on them. We need gates with multiple murder holes giving us a wide field of fire at the base of the gate house and would it hurt to flesh the gate house out? When and if you fix all the problems then gate houses will become major focal points of combat this means the single story arch isent going to do, we need to cram defenders inside and give them firing lanes at people on the ground.

The devs did such an amazing job with the lands it just amazes me how bad the citys are, its like every single building is just a temporary place holder.

[Cuelda]

I'm not in-game yet so my ideas may be slightly flawed however;
Gates: Need to be implemented asap. (Stating the obvious)

Walls and Keeps could be subjected to the following hypothetic upgrades;

Improved Masionry: Increases Wall and Keep health by 1k hp(?) and Armour by X amount.
This wouldn't be a one off upgrade, Clans should be allowed to research this over and over with the cost getting slightly higher each time.

Reinforced Walls: Makes wall pieces immune to damage from siege hammers and battle spikes and reduces the damage done by siege hammers by 50% on the Keep.

Gates would also need simular upgrades however not to the extent in which walls/keeps would recieve them. E.g. only 500 more hp per upgrade not 1k.


This.
I would also suggest that upgrades where individual for each door/building/wall segment and lost if the building is destroyed.
No point in having to do all the work, only to have them get torn down by an enemy who takes the city and can then rebuild them without having to pay for the upgrades.



Also, it is a fairly known fact that the keeps are useless.
Here's my suggestion: First of all start by adding GATES, that's a basic one:rolleyes:. Then remove two of the four dours and leave only the main and the back ones. The back one should lead to a backyard where the clanstone is located and it should be surrounded by walls that can be destroyed without destroying the keep.
So that would leave the attacker with two options:
-Either storm the keep and reach the clanstone to destroy it with hammers or cannons
-Or, tear down one piece of the surrounding walls and get there directly.


In either case it gives one last bastion for the defenders to defend, makes the keep useful and makes the siege overall more interesting.

[Teth]

Vindicore makes ze awesome post and there's not much more I need to say. I especially like what the man says about keeps. Fucking make that so a thousand times over.

Tie bank access rights into the guard tower policy, though. You've already got the menu there. As it stands, the complete lack of bank access control is equal parts hilarious and face-palmingly idiotic.

[Cuelda]

I have an objection to the "bank inside the keep" suggestion. There is a far better way to equip naked fighters that spawn there. That's suggestion would help at many situations but it fits here as well.

Add dynamically placeable containers, like bags or chests that you can spawn on the ground and put stuff in them. You could have such a bag inside the keep filled with stuff for the naked defenders to equip. If you forget to do it you are the only one to blame. Also if the attackers get there, they can have the extra phat lewts so you would only put the necessities in them.

Of course you should be able to load them on warhulks and ships to transfer supplies for a siege or something.

(Never mind how useful they would be if they actually killed the universal banks and put up a localized system :bang:.)

[arghysteelwill]

I actually thought that was what crates and barrels were but the keep seems to be filled with shields and weapons haha would be awesome if it was a literal armory where you could pull weapons and armor off the wall.

[maestrojoe]

Today someone took down a clan stone in apparently 10 minutes with siege hammers..... is that all it takes? 20 guys with siege hammers? i mean i can take any city over night then, wait until their low time then siege them between the shift changes- i can muster the numbers ahead of time no defender can. I accepted the war hulks and cannons being required to take over stones but letting siege hammers do it again is counter productive until you've fleshed out proper city defenses.

A cannon is a giant stationary target which is fairly expensive, you need to control the city before you can deploy them(as seen in the LoD city defense) so this allows defenders a chance to actually defend. Ask murder herd how defending their bank turned out- a small target like a bind stone but you cannot stop multiple people with siege hammers from getting whacks in. You used to have to work to siege a city not just waltz in and take advantage of the lag generated.

We built citys we can build fucking war hulks, dont devalue the work done on citys because everyone is bored. Siege hammers were perfect if abit powerful but thats the citys fault for being so weak now you've gone and over powered them and thrown out the careful balance. If no one is building warhulks then maybe a foundry is unrealistic- you expect me to spend 460k gold with the current horrible half assed system in place? fix your citys before you hand everyone the key to their destruction. I honestly dont know what the devs are thinking- my city(ITS MINE! you can call me mayor arghy) is practically done or so i thought until i learned we have over 1.2k modules worth of buildings to yet build!

A siege hammer is 100g 10 wood and some iron, my city fully built costs over 600k gold. You come in bringing 100 of your friends or people who want a fight, the lag and FPS drops and your wonderful memory leaks means everyone is going to crash every 20-30 minutes as long as we are all in one place. You rush my keep destroying it in 10 minutes, my side vainly trys to fight but its not easy to chase down a target in this chaos so the keep is gone- 45 defenders gone. You take down a few houses just for kicks 7 defenders for each house, at this time most of my allys have been crashing or trying to kill the attackers to little success and now the numbers begin to turn against them.

My city is now in the hands of the attacking force and not a single guild on the server can defend against this type of attack. You surround my clan stone and destroy it, for the mere price 4k gold you've taken my 600k+ clan city and theres nothing i could have possibly done about it because of game limitations. If you think this is a balanced system then you havent been on the receiving end- i havent i've been on the giving end yet i know a broken system when i see one.

Is your expectation of city siege mechanics ping pong? a series of indefensible attacks repeatedly taking the city? would you build a city if you knew that any attempts to defend it would fail against an attacker with commonly fielded numbers because the server cant handle it? I'm from eve i know the bottle neck that the numbers game makes- atleast in there you can split and focus lessening the effect but this is darkfall you cant hit 4 citys at once. Dont try to say 'attack their city!' because if you have the numbers to assault someones city while defending your own it destroys that entire argument and their city isent vulnerable at the same time.

Fix city defense and balance city cost before you destroy your entire game balance by giving it a quick fix, dont expect people to pay 2k modules for a foundry to get war hulks if its so goddamn easy to destroy the foundry- fucking boggles the mind.


stuff like this makes me think they left out the non-fps stuff. someone in the forum mentioned wurm online and i've got addicted to that shut (well, 2nd try). still playing eve. Hopefully they add some economy, put in some of the very insightful stuff from this thread and make crafting more interesting, make ganking more consequential. If they do this, i'd look at the game again, as would i'm sure a lot of sandbox fans. But right now things like this make me wonder if its just halo -refinement +grind. I mean i loved halo, but if i want that i'll sign in and fight people on equal ground. More sandbox less mmofps!

[arghysteelwill]

Bump because other threads are getting made about the same thing!

[sokar24]

This.
I would also suggest that upgrades where individual for each door/building/wall segment and lost if the building is destroyed.
No point in having to do all the work, only to have them get torn down by an enemy who takes the city and can then rebuild them without having to pay for the upgrades.



Also, it is a fairly known fact that the keeps are useless.
Here's my suggestion: First of all start by adding GATES, that's a basic one:rolleyes:. Then remove two of the four dours and leave only the main and the back ones. The back one should lead to a backyard where the clanstone is located and it should be surrounded by walls that can be destroyed without destroying the keep.
So that would leave the attacker with two options:
-Either storm the keep and reach the clanstone to destroy it with hammers or cannons
-Or, tear down one piece of the surrounding walls and get there directly.


In either case it gives one last bastion for the defenders to defend, makes the keep useful and makes the siege overall more interesting.

This...

[Cuelda]

Bump because other threads are getting made about the same thing!

Qft
This is one of the best threads on the suggestion section, not only because of the OP, but also because of all the ideas that have been posted so far.

[Carbonlegend]

bump

[arghysteelwill]

Bump

[Tren]

/signed

Aventurine get it done.

[Vaks]

Tie bank access rights into the guard tower policy, though. You've already got the menu there. As it stands, the complete lack of bank access control is equal parts hilarious and face-palmingly idiotic.



This!

Enable bank access rights like "Free for all", "Neutrals", "Friendlies" or Alliance only.

Personally I would assume most clans would set bank access only to friendly or allied clans. If you controlled/owned a bank, would you allow your worst enemies to use your bank?

Could maybe throw in a tax system where neutral clans or clanless people could use the bank for a small set fee if access level is set to neutral to give an incentive for clans to allow neutrals bank access...

[Quimp]

Imagine your current city if the keep was larger and the bank/bindstone was inside the keep which had a door that you could close- that'd be a true fucking fight right there. The carnage at the door would be so epic and all those little windows could be used as back doors, 200 people fighting over every inch of the keep.

This would really give the keep a real purpouse besides the buff it gives.

[arghysteelwill]

LE bump! current sieges have become massive zergs taking citys ensuring nothing but ping pong occurs, any attacker with enough numbers is guarenteed a win as open gates just lead attackers to the bindstone and no one can stop the eventual hammerings of clan stones.

[DustStorm]

I sure hope they don't make a lighting tower for player owned cities.
What would work is having archer towers with npc hired archers. That can be killed without having to destroy the tower.
And guards and stuff. Or having a system in which your clan deposits money in cased it is attacked, which will hire random players near by to defend the city while the clan is away.

[DustStorm]

I also think that the clan stone should be inside the city's keep. (If they have one) and when the defenders die if they were binded that the city they should respawn in the keep. The keep should have weapon racks and armor that the clan can fill up to be used during attack. The weapon racks can be used by other players if they can get in the keep (Which doors should be able to be locked!)

[arghysteelwill]

A question was raised of why we should have gates since they thought it should be all about pvp and not your city vs players.

A city doesnt not give you enough bonus's to effectively slaughter anyone who comes inside, an attacker actually has the benefit of entering from any point in your city causing you to either get ambushed or stretching your forces out.

Recently i've defended my city from 9 attackers and we defended with 5 and a cannon, IT WAS ABSOLUTELY ONE SIDED. They ran through the gatehouse hitting us from all sides and someone FROM OUTSIDE THE WALLS managed to use launch and get up the cannon faster then someone starting from the bottom of the goddamn tower. We cannot add gates until they fix walls, the current tops of the towers should be the tops of the walls, the walls are fucking horrible and the equivalent of 1 story tall buildings.

Walls have roughly 30-40 hps, you cant even keep them up with a repair shard thats how weak they are- wall hitpoints need to be drastically increased, 1k hps AT THE VERY LEAST. We need goddamn gates and walls that actually keep people out, we need a form of automated defenses that arent affected by the lag generated by huge battles- we dont want to encourage people to bring that many.

Making siege hammers useful against clan stones WAS A HORRIBLE IDEA THAT IS DESTROYING THE GAME. You already stress the goddamn server with huge 200+ battles THEN YOU MAKE THEM ALL GATHER AT A SINGLE POINT IN THE CITY. When we had to rely on cannons then you had multiple points of interest that you'd want to space out so now instead of 200 players in a 20ft square you now have 200 players spaced around multiple points in the field.

Siege hammers cheapen siegeing and encourages attackers to bring overwhelming numbers because hammers ignore the lag where players get greatly affected by the lag. I dident play eve for 2 years because it was fun shooting some guys ship that he would instantly replace i played it for that long because we were building an empire and destroying anothers. Citys need to be greatly buffed because thats what will keep people playing when pvp gets boring. We need to know that investing so much will eventually pay off and it will not be so easily destroyed, we need reasons to own multiple citys AND WE NEED CITYS THAT ARE NOT RETARDEDLY DESIGNED!

Lets take a look at a few citys i've been to, i'll show good examples and horrible examples.

Kholesh, aflar city near the middle of agon.

PROS: Good step design that helps for defense with the bindstone/bank at the top which usually stops the collateral damage from spreading to the trade skill buildings on the rings.

CONS: Multiple redundant walls and entrances, huge glaring defense hole with the rock lip- cannons can shoot at the bind stone without fear of the defenders. You say these citys are designed for defense why are there so many holes? why not make every city have great defense?

Aflar city south western tip of agon(vindicator city forgot its name heh).

PROS: Brilliant design dominating everything around it forcing attackers to enter before they can assail it- every city should be like this, choice between a winding ramp whats clearly seen from the top or a slow exposed elevator.

CONS: Multiple entrances, redundant walls all over the place- would it hurt to have 2 entrances?? why must it be 3? you have 2 entrances nearly 20 feet apart this is not designed for defense this is designed to be assaulted and easily taken.

Ork city north eastern tip of agon(former orks r us city).

PROS: A nice choice between land or sea assault while keeping a balance of scenery and resources inside its control radius, semi smart design around the bank.

CONS: Gaping holes between the gates no one would ever build a city with a straight line between its entrance and the center of the town, the lack of gates means attackers can quickly get under defenders then become the defenders taking the second line before the defenders can. Not an overall bad city with workable weaknesses but the lack of gates caused it to fall in seconds.

Mar shral, near the center of agon.

PROS: Dominates the area with good wall coverage while having very good sight lines in all directions, good access for most races.

CONS: horrible bindstone/bank placement with a large useless upper plateau that just asks to get taken by hostiles, horrible redundant wall placement with gates that just beg the question WHY IS THERE 2? giant swathes of the plateau just asking for hostiles to loiter. If this city was designed for defense then it should have been moved to the center of the plateau with the bindstone/bank being on the upper plateau preferably inside the keep.

Ork city south eastern tip of yssam(former VG city).

PROS: Beautiful city with possible excellent defenses and nice backup palisades for the normal walls.

CONS: WALLS FACING WALLS, GATES ON EITHER SIDE OF YOUR BEACH DEFENSES, GIANT RAMPS LEADING INTO YOUR CITY FROM THE BACK WITH NO POSSIBLE WAY TO BLOCK IT, IMPOSSIBLE TO BLOCK OVER HANGS OF YOUR ENTIRE CITY JUST ASKING TO BE USED TO RAIN FIRE DOWN ON THE DEFENDERS. Whoever designed this city should be asked what defense means then smacked when he describes it.

Basically AV needs to go play some RTS games for weeks then study some ancient history along with the history of fortresses because i have not seen a single city with defense in mind- every single city seems to be designed with the attackers in mind.

[Sanshi44]

Our city is like a giant hamlet u can walk ever every wall surrounding the city granting no protection what so ever, we have some turrents place inside the city so when 3 bored guys get bored and come in during off peak they can jump on cannon and blow up like 2 hourses a farm a grove and 1 third of the walls yes these is so great. i may as well continue the trend from the above guy.

Darkmoore currently bkb city

Pros lots of resouces up on the platues, Platues make a relativly good defence spot.

Cons everyone wall surronding the city is usless cause people can just run over them, one of the inner wall is around the wrong way providing then enemy a way onto our wall without going round, u can climb the wall on one of the platue and drop down into the city from any direction, cannon inside the city that can destroy ur building when enemys jump on them.

[Death Saved]

Keep:
One entrance, not 4, with a door.
Add an internal bank, giving us two points to grab gear from, stopping the one bank being the focal point of all assaults.
Make bound players spawn inside the keep once built allowing them to get together and repel invaders.
Build the keep on top of the city stone, forcing attackers to capture the keep before claiming the city.



I like these idea's however i would prefer if the keep bank was localized and acted like an armory or treasury where the clan leader would keep emergency gear so that when his followers are spawning inside the keep the armory gets unlocked for use, while the treasury can only have items taken/placed in it by the CL and some officers.

[raff01]

My only concern about clan cities is that they should be able to have real gates, which you can physically open and close when needed, just like in real medieval times.
its useless to have walls in your city if players can enter the gate freely whenever they want.

[Jathen]

Good post. 100% agree.

[arghysteelwill]

If only i could assure everyone that this problem was recognized and that was going to be eventually fixed..... would go along way to bringing in recruits....

[Elphaba]

A lot of good ideas. I imagine that there are probably similar things on the dev's wish list as well.

Regardless, until the defenses are actually working, AV needs to disable the ability to destroy anything in a city/hamlet without a declared siege.

This is not a difficult programing issue, simply turn off the switch.

Once the mechanics are in place, flip it back on.