The Problem

They are supposed to be hard to take down, but not as hard as they are right now, that is what I am arguing. I am not talking about the run of the mill game full of noobs who cant repair/defend, but of people who have a semblance of knowing what they are doing on the defence.
I am not thinking for the defensive side because I do not need to - the defence has pretty much all the cards right now, some need to be passed to the offence.
You can't really go over a wall, the defence can just build up with you or if you slack off and make a delicate but high structure just collapse it. Under is useless when the enemy can see where you are at all times underground, they can just block it off with more stone.
Ladders can easily be countered with good building, also known as an overhang.

Your bring up a point with the offensive builder, and I make a concession, well not really a concession because honestly I think this is a better idea anyway - the no repair debuff only works when under attack by a catapult, this would require a problem set up attack to breach a wall more easily but some pesky little walled in builder will not cause the same damage.

Now, I think we have probably given the devs (if they can stand to read this) enough food for thought to chew on. I ended on a concession on your behalf so we should leave the argument as it stands - you have made my point and I have made mine and honestly by this point its a "your wrong" "no your wrong" type of argument which isnt really going anywhere.

So I will bid you goodnight good sir, happy building to you.

 

I just see you as the kid who immediately searches for gold at the beginning of the match, builds a siege shop, and as soon as the game starts farms coins to buy a catapult. It's OBVIOUS you love the catapults, but frankly, I think people rely far too much on them.

Now that I see you're more worried about buffing the catapult, I'm done.

Why didn't you just say you want the catapult to be OP then?

 

Lawl I quite agree - poor admins
I just want castles to be easier to take down altogether, I have suggested a possible solution and have argued its points like a champ if I saw so myself, though 3 catapults seems a little excessive for one tower - as I said I think catapults should be stationary once you start firing
</br>--- merged: Feb 29, 2012 4:01 AM ---</br>
Signed on for one more non inflammatory point to sum it up - there needs to be a counter to major scale turtling, whether that be catapults or new siege equipment or anti repair or something, what that is is up to debate (as me and thebonesauce have just proved)

 

My reaction to your 3 catapults against one tower was rather dully noted. Although, it may seem that many castle sieges in medieval times required a lot more catapults against a standing fortress or castle. It would make sense that the more catapults the bigger the advantage of the attacking team especially when used with a well built temporary battle fortress. A good example would be fortresses with the "Strato's Wall".


I also disagree with stationary catapults, especially if it's design came with a pair of wheels. Travelling with a catapult on your back already seems a lot harder than most people think. Sometimes, you're not able to carry the entire thing over certain terrains that will form you into a sitting duck. In fact, Catapults are incredibly destructible in terms of archers and their arrows, and will continue to be even more weak when archers obtain their fire arrows in the up coming update. Catapults shouldn't be nerfed and in fact should be encouraged to be used in strategic matters especially against offensive enemy structures. It seems that you also want to put the attacking side in disadvantages when it comes to mobility, which again would tip the scale even more to the defensive side than the standing convergent boundary it already inherits.

 

anyone ever been involved with the military? ever heard of K.I.S.S ? Keep it simple stupid, Buildings do not need to be nerfed , don't take a fun game and mess up the recipe for something that is pretty well balanced as it is. I enjoy kag very much, i love springing up huge structures. Dont ruin a kag near you :(

 

Then just create your own server, with 1 sec build time, no ressource at the spawn, and unlimited life.

@ Quiles : I get bored before reading the end of the thread, but I feel that you are the wrost ever offensive builder of all KAG history. Do you think that destroying wall is the only solution for attackers? Did the Saracens blow up all the wall and tower of Jerusalem? Is destroying the only sieging solution? If yes, just build 10 cata and blow this tower down.

You just have to know that you still can ladder up and make the enemies defence your defense. Or go under. It's a free tower for just 60 wood, instead of building a new one for XXX stone XXX wood. Or by any other way you feel right. I've always know that warrior are stopid... but this is quite .

I m going to finish reading the thread. :p

And, as an offensive builder, I love good enemies defense. I never complain about tower hard to siege. I complain generaly about stupid-solo-rushing-knight-who-ask-me-to-ladder-when-he-is-alone-and-think-that-i-ve-got-a-shield-me-too-and-calling-me-noob-builder-cause-i-dont-want-to-die-uselessly. Kag is a team game ! Not a knight game ! Or a bomber man game...or a destroyer the tower game... and if you hate so much good defnse just do this :

Aaah just quoted my own post in my own post !

 

Chinizz said it quite well. A good defensive structure with someone actively repairing it is RARE. More often than not, a GOOD offensive builder will make their repairs, and then continue to move forward and try to ladder up a large structure. Overhang counters this? The hell it does! Just extend the ladders out, placing them like this;




...instead of just a single layer. The double layer gives more stability for your allies, and allows you to build horizontally instead of just vertically.

Everything you've been saying can be easily countered by even a decent minded builder.

The things we SHOULD be focusing on are how annoying tunnelers are, and how when they're cornered they just spam stone, forcing you to move further up and cut them off. We SHOULD be focusing on builders who entomb themselves, aren't doing anything useful, and are wasting a slot in the server that could be better suited for someone who actually wants to play.

I encountered someone named Detective_Raccoon the other day, a premium griefer. He won a premium account in some contest, so at the beginning of the round he spammed workshop tiles all around the spawn tent in abstract patterns that made it difficult for us to set up defenses. Then he ran around for AT LEAST 10 minutes cutting down EVERY SINGLE TREE he could, wasting the wood for the rest of the team that could have been better used on the front lines. Then, finally, he started blocking me and another player in while we were gathering resources.

Again, not only is this someone who doesn't care about the game and ruins it's for other players, it's a slot being used by someone who doesn't want to play the game. Plus, he's premium, so the only way I could effectively deal with him was to report him as an "abusive" player, but that didn't fix the issue while we were trying to play.

Those are REAL problems. Not the fact that you can't destroy a tower with one catapult...

 

griefers are definately the real problem. It is the only thing that can't be fix. It can be fixed, but there will be another griefer.
people remember there is a solution to everything. nothing is truly impossible. buildings for example have 4 ways to conquer

1. probably the best choice, is to go over the building.
PROS:
usually cheap
if successful you get a building which you could use to your own advantage.
cons:
go up outright against the enemy
more dangerous

2. go through
Pros

Cons
3 go under the building
pros
cons
time consuming
can be walled off/ which is then easier repaired
4 destroy
pros

cons
expensive for both lives and money materials

even though at this time i could not think of all the pros or cons of each strategy. there is still a way for every situation. Right now, i beleive the game is not really a fault (cept for all those dumb glitches like shooting through walls.) but more of the people who play it. :I

 

Wow, Toast, for once you said something I agree with!

The fact that Quiles plays mostly with people who do the turtling strategy, he insists on nerfing a builder's ability to repair, as opposed to making it more difficult to turtle. If you want my honest opinion, I don't think it should only cost 5 stone to repair a wall, it should still cost 10 stone since you're basically replacing it.

 

Maybe it should cost even more than placing a "fresh" block.

 

Best idea would be that, repairing stone takes the same time as destroying it.
You basicly hit the stone as you would destroy it but instead you add "1 integrity level" back to the stone until it is fully repaired. That would lead to a stalemate between builders who try to remove the same block while one repairs it until someone runs out of ressources but would make it possible for 2+ builders to dig out a turtling builder.

It would also slow down the process of repairing castles on the fly without nerfing the builder "too much"

 

The OP in this thread started the thread by saying Buildings are OP, and posing the problem of how to fix this
Thus, arguing whether builders/buildings is OP is irrelevant, it is already established that it is.
Personally I find when I play the builders on the other team are idiots and I just easily take the walls, I am refering to the OP's post who seems to know what high level/competitive play is like, where the meta seems to be turtling

I would like to point out Mugumaster's idea, that you all liked, is just harmful to building as mine, as it increases the time taken to repair by up to 6 or 7 times depending on how damaged the blocks were.

 

Turtling is far less prevalent than you're making it out to be. Of every 20 games, I see it maybe once. I don't know which servers you are playing on where this is such a widespread problem or why you think everyone does it at a competitive level (NO one does in more competitive games).

Furthermore, Contrary, the OP, is referring to the fact that buildings are DURABLE, and there aren't many ways of bringing them down CURRENTLY. He wasn't talking about nerfing builders or buildings or anything of the sort. He was referring to more ways to bring them down (more siege equipment, a charge attack for builders to destroy stone faster, etc).

How is being able to repair a tower in increments as opposed to not being able to repair at all just as harmful? I really fail to see what sort of point you're making. If a there are a string of blocks, and of the 5-6 blocks there only one is one hit away from being destroyed, you can opt to leave that one alone (unless it's integral to the structure) to focus on the other, less damaged blocks.

Do you see what I'm talking about? Mugumaster is simply suggesting it take a little longer to repair, whereas you are talking about removing the ability to repair altogether (unless no enemies are nearby, and in those cases are usually the towers/walls/etc near the flag that don't even need repairing to begin with).

You're using a lot of fallible logic that has more holes than Swiss cheese in a shooting range. Based on your suggestions, here's what you want;

-Allow catapults to easily tear through walls, making the catapult even more sought out and turning the game into even MORE of a projectile fest.

-If a friendly tower is under attack, even if it's by a single builder who is in a stone bubble, your ability to repair said tower is removed, making it far too easy to tear through buildings. And with the "stone bubble" strategy obviously being the best way to cut through walls/towers/etc, it'll become use far more and matches will go by so quickly that every game might as well be Rapid CTF.

With these two ideas ALONE, you're removing the strategic aspects of the game for ones that are even WORSE than turtling. What's the point in laddering up the front of a wall when all you need is about 60-100 stone, get a few knights in front of an enemy tower to clear it out, and then just entomb yourself next to the building and proceed to tear through, untouched?

If you actually READ the originally post, you'd see that Contrary has a huge problem with games turning into a "storm of projectiles" which INCLUDES catapults. If you make it so catapults take far less time to knock out a tower, then everyone is going to use it. All games will begin with players making the highest skybridge they can, a select few seeking out gold, and then spamming catapults. Fuck, I'd rather see ARROW SPAM than catapult spam. People rely on catapults far too often when there are much simpler, quicker, and more effective approaches to taking out towers.

Yeah, seeing a tower collapse is loads of fun. But do you know what's even more fun? Having about 100 wood, laddering up the front of a tower, hitting the teamdoor once and then converting it to your OWN team's color. Then, kill the inhabitants, destroy all enemy trap bridges/teamdoors and commandeer their workshops, effectively turning their tower into your own.

GASP! You mean, instead of DESTROYING everything, it's possible to use a little bit of effort and take over one of the ENEMY'S TOWERS? NO WAI!

Destroying everything shouldn't be the main focus of the game. Fighting the enemy, pushing forward, and using skills and wit to outsmart the opposition is the way it should be played.

THAT is why I love KAG so much. It isn't like other MMO games where the player gets avatar strength through his character. You don't have the option to grind for a bit, buy the stronger weapon and armor, level up a bit and then easily tear through a challenge that once seemed impossible. This game gives you AND the enemy the same bit of options; you can buy and use anything the enemy can. Therefore, the game focuses more on SKILL, TECHNIQUE, STRATEGY, and above all else, YOUR OWN WITS. Any player can be a hero, bomb jump off the top of a tower and into an archer nest, slaughtering the guys who were previously crushing your team. Anyone can build an effective trap in a tunnel that literally stops all opposition.

If we implement changes like stronger catapults and make the builder weaker than the knight and archer, then what's the point? Builders won't be NEARLY as feared and targeted as often as they are now. Offensive builders will be effectively useless, because even IF you manage to get a well designed wall/tower built on the front lines, it can't be maintained as long as there is opposition pressing against it.

Fuck, this is why I hate these types of debates. Everyone elects to make the game easier instead of practicing, investing time and energy into the game, and learning different methods. That's one thing that nobody realizes; for every strategy, there is another available to counter it. You just need to use your head.

That's all from me, because frankly, I have nothing else to say. If we take away the skill and teamwork aspects and give everyone machine guns or the ability to cut through shit like butter, I'm afraid I don't want any part of it anymore. The game is great where it is now, and I fear for the future if some of these ideas get a green light.

 

I hate this bloody wall of text repetition thread.

 

the sad part is, i have read all of it :/
(Mostly at work :P)

 

Most of that wasn't repetition. The first part, maybe, but after the first two or three paragraphs I'm a little more focused. Sorry though!

 

better be >.<
jk...

 

Actually more like Quilles using the same counter argument, turtling. While we brain storm many ideas to form rebuttals for it.

 

That one forum emote is causing quite a problem, QUICKLY SOMEONE NERF IT'S BBCODE!