Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 12312 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 268
  1. #16
    2000+ EU1 Player
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    In your back
    Posts
    2,480

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laenih View Post
    Only "registered attackers" can actually win the holding.
    You should really explain a bit more what you mean by "joining the attacking side", do you mean by that beiing allies ? or do you mean by that beiing able to smash down the stone at live ?
    Because in the second case this would just be the same as yet (on this part of the feature) except the smash down, which is barely an issue in a siege.

    ------------
    Mad Slaaneth - Agenda

  2. #17
    Community Liaison
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lkx View Post
    Is the new system still based on an holding sieged at time?
    (As far as i've understood your "multisiege" implementation is about how many attackers there are. I'm not saying that it's bad, it actually remove self sieges)
    Not necessarily - this is something we can set in details as well but will be discussed in a second round of feedback requests.

  3. #18
    Normal User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    denmark
    Posts
    924

    Default

    no point in discussing any points or parts of the seige mechanics unless you reveal how everything works.

    how the attackers win the siege is the most important question and everything else relates to that

  4. #19
    5000+
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    germany
    Posts
    5,653

    Default

    1. Attacking clans should have a minimum number of players, maybe less for a hamlet than for a city.
    The clans should also have a minimum age, like 1 month or so.
    It would be hard to find enough people that stay 1 month in a fake clan enabling it to siege.
    Trial members should not count towards the player requirement for sieges.

    Apart from this point i find it hard to comment without knowing what multisiege rules are going to be implemented. For example

    2) In Case of several attackers
    What does this mean. Getting sieged by an ally or having multiple own holdings sieged at once by different clans?
    Last edited by Drago Palmas; 05-20-2011 at 15:19.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tasos View Post
    Thank you for the patience, we'll keep you informed.

  5. #20

    Default

    I need more information on how this siege system is to work.

    Please add more detail so I can give an informed opinion.

    For ? number one, ten is still too high. Five.

  6. #21
    2000+ EU1 Player
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    In your back
    Posts
    2,480

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Virindii View Post
    and make it so when you won the siege. you have to build the city up from the ground. and dont get a shinny city after the siege. if you have to spend again building mats there wouldnt be tradings to alt clans anymore etc.

    This makes sense aswell, in my opinion tho you should be able to trash the entire city to ground when the siege is dropped (or live, but defender shoudln't be able to repair something until siege is over), but in order to be able to trash something you should be on the registered side.
    if this comes with, then when a siege times out the wagger should go to the defending side.
    On the other side, when the attacking force declare a siege, when ever the defending side is adding allies, the wagger should go down (aka at the end of the siege if the attacker looses, a part of the gold go back to him and the rest to the defender).

    ------------
    Mad Slaaneth - Agenda

  7. #22

    Default

    Just my opinion on them.

    "1.Do you think attacking clans should have a minimum number of active players to be able to issue an attack and, if yes, how many? If “yes”, then should trial members be included in the numbers?"

    Tough one. On one hand I say yes as this 1 man siege clan thing gets abused so much, but on the other hand I have to say no because what about very small clans of friends (possibly new players on trial) that is being lead by a more experienced player, and they want to have a holding?

    I think trial accounts should be ok as long as they are in no leading position (general or supreme general, and whatever the required rank is to place siege stones). If we really need a limit, put it at 10 active players, but add an option for a clan to transfer a city to another clan instantly, so that holding purchases for small clans can still happen.

    "2.In the case of several attackers: What do you think the defenders should have to accomplish in order to win the challenge? Destroy the attacker clan stones (or siege stones), or to simply destroy siegestones placed?"

    I think the city wager thing must be removed. People wil continue to use alt clans for sieging otherwise. When that is done the only thing a defender can do is to destroy the siege stones or hold out untill the time expires. I think the total siege time should also be reduced to 2 hours to compensate for this (1h invulnerable time, 1h vulnerable time).

    "3.How do you feel about the timer running out without any of the sides having accomplished their goals? Should the defenders get the chance to both keep their city AND win the wagers for a successful defense?"

    If the timer runs out I think the defenders were succesfull enough in defending that they earn to hold their city and the wager. Combined with a 2 hour limit instead of 3 hours, defending based on a timer will become a more viable defense tactic.

    "4.What do you think of an attacker’s city not going vulnerable automatically but the need of having to issue an actual attack on that city? (with the option for the defenders getting a free attack option without having to pay a fee)."

    As I stated above I think the automatic wagering of a holding should be removed or otherwise we will continue to see siege/alt clans. The siegestone system is good enough, and future siege mechanics should be build around that fact (an offensive force laying siege on a defending force and camping outside the walls, its more realistic this way aswell).

    A 'counter siege' could then always still be dropped if the defenders wish to do this.
    Raap "Hitler" Naap, Tyrant of Moradar, Savior of EU

    The BlackHand Order

  8. #23
    Normal User
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    759

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Master Isaac View Post
    It would aswell make trading cities to non alt clans a bit difficult aswell.
    yes and thats the next big nonsense in DF.
    you want a city? fight for it! and build your own city-empire...
    Wirindi Rothschild


  9. #24
    Normal User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    534

    Default

    1. Do you think attacking clans should have a minimum number of active players to be able to issue an attack and, if yes, how many? If “yes”, then should trial members be included in the numbers?
    2. In the case of several attackers: What do you think the defenders should have to accomplish in order to win the challenge? Destroy the attacker clan stones (or siege stones), or to simply destroy siegestones placed?
    3. How do you feel about the timer running out without any of the sides having accomplished their goals? Should the defenders get the chance to both keep their city AND win the wagers for a successful defense?
    4. What do you think of an attacker’s city not going vulnerable automatically but the need of having to issue an actual attack on that city? (with the option for the defenders getting a free attack option without having to pay a fee).

    1. yes, and also depending on what u siege (like 5-10 members for a hamlet, 20 for a city) // and trial account should NOT count.
    2. Well, i think u have to try out both to be sure..
    3. Timer running out = Win win (Wager + Holding)
    4. no idea, test it out

  10. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laenih View Post
    Only "registered attackers" can actually win the holding.
    Yeah but who cares, seriously. My clan (that has the bare minimum number of players/actives) sieges a clan with significantly more members than we do. Via the scaling system, this makes it so it as difficult as possible for the defenders. Then we invite everyone else on the server and wipe the defenders no problem and win siege in easy mode.

    What is to stop this from happening all the time?
    Barden Jusik - Retired
    Barden Chi - UW

  11. #26

    Default

    Also what are you going to do to prevent one man siege clans?
    Barden Jusik - Retired
    Barden Chi - UW

  12. #27
    2000+
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laenih View Post
    Only "registered attackers" can actually win the holding.
    Does this mean if clan A, B and C are all enemies and clan A sieges clan B. Clan C can also siege B at same time. A and C must fight over ownership?

    very confuddled right now

  13. #28
    2000+
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,488

    Default

    or are extra registers attackers just official allies? if so what is the point? since there will always be unofficial allies participating.

    please explain this registered attackers thing in detail

  14. #29
    Normal User Joschmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    226

    Default

    min. 10ppl in the siege clan for a City

    But you have to have a hamlet with your siege clan, to siege a City+mabye a wager. You would be able to set additional stones besides the hamlet.
    ------pewpew------

  15. #30
    Normal User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laenih View Post
    Please use this thread to discuss the first instalment of Siege Mechanic Change information that will be posted on the blog shortly.

    As always, stay on topic if you don't want the moderators to hit you over the head with their hammers of indiscriminate justice.

    (will be unlocked as soon as the blog entry is posted)

    http://www.darkfallonline.com/blog/d...cing-feedback/
    all the iNfo regardiNg siege chaNges is alrdy oN our computerss

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •