1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hey Guest, is it this your first time on the forums?

    Visit the Beginner's Box

    Introduce yourself, read some of the ins and outs of the community, access to useful links and information.

    Dismiss Notice

Knight Destruction Of Backwalls

Discussion in 'Balance' started by Duplolas, Jan 7, 2014.

?

Do you think knights should be able to destroy wood backwall, both wood and stone backwall, or none?

  1. Wood Backwall

    12 vote(s)
    54.5%
  2. Both Wood and Stone Backwall

    1 vote(s)
    4.5%
  3. None

    9 vote(s)
    40.9%
  1. Duplolas

    Duplolas So Sad

    Messages:
    917
    Backwalls are an important part of any good construction. 1 single backwall can hold up and entire structure, really of any size. That is not my complaint on the subject of backwalls though.

    What I find important is the durability they possess in our current build. Currently, the only class that can damage them without using a item is the builder class. Yes, knights and archers can damage both wood and stone blocks with their respective equipment, but backwall is another story.

    Since backwalls are passive objects in the game, they cannot be directly targeted for destruction by any other class besides builder.

    To destroy backwall as knight you must set a bomb, keg, or mine, on a block close to the backwall you wish to destroy. If you can aim well enough, a bomb can be tossed to destroy a backwall, but in some cases the wall isn't even damaged when a bomb in the air explodes next to it.

    As for an archer, their bomb and fire arrows must make contact with their respective blocks to do damage to them; since both arrows do not stop when hitting a backwall. But there is little to solve this problem that wouldn't drastically change the way archer is played.

    So I would like to focus on the knight.

    In Classic, knights were able to slash stone and wood backwalls and break it after a certain amount of hits. Now, knights can't even destroy wood backwalls. The square symbol however does still appear, bringing to question why you can target a backwall, but not actually damage it?

    The builder class is rarely ever seen on the frontlines anymore, due to the amount of mobility knights have and the damage they can do via their explosive arsenal. So why not re-implement the ability for knights to destroy backwall?

    Wod backwall would make the most sense being the only backwall knights can destroy when thinking about how knights damage other blocks currently. Though, this really doesn't change gameplay that much (which can be good and bad). Wood is an infinite resource, so wood walls can be used more of without consequences down the road. Early game however, most of the primary structures built use stone backwall. Wood backwall only starts being used as stone becomes scarce, but by that time, most of each team's buildings are so damaged that backwall is forgotten and for the most part, unused.

    So with this existing problem, if the ability for knights to destroy backwall was readded to the game, it would work the best if you were to allow knights to destroy both wood and stone backwall.

    Wood would require 4 slashes to destroy it, since builders destroy it in 2 hits.
    Stone would require 10 slashes to destroy it, since builders destroy it in 5 hits.

    Thoughts and discussion?
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2014
  2. Trumbles

    Trumbles Bison Rider

    Messages:
    458
    I personally like the fact that a knight/archer can't cause a collapse on a well-made building without the help of a builder or a lot of kegs. Battle builders aren't at all non-viable, it's just an issue of teamwork/how each team's knights stack up against each other.

    If knights could destroy backwalls at all, i'd only want them to be able to damage wood ones. If they could damage both with normal attacks, it would render battle building almost obselete, as knights could easily cause a collapse with a few bombs and a lot of slashing.
     
  3. Duplolas

    Duplolas So Sad

    Messages:
    917
    Collapsing a building with standard bombs is not as easy as you think. The primary buildings, typically tall and wider than any of the others, really suffer no damage from bombs. Kegs are really the only source of destruction of backwalls for knight.

    As for builders helping on the front lines... it is about as common as a blue moon.

    Also, think of the time it would require of a knight to break a stone backwall. 10 slashes takes quite a bit. All while being inside of the enemy base. Keeping in mind that you also have to target the backwall; simply swinging your sword down a hallway will not slowly, overtime, break the entire construction.
     
  4. Jepton

    Jepton Shipwright

    Messages:
    147
    Knights breaking wooden support makes sense, as they can break wooden tiles easily.

    I'm all for it.
     
  5. Shambls

    Shambls Tree Planter

    Messages:
    65
    I think knights are not able to destroy backwalls because of there common flailing behavior. Now correct me if I'm wrong, if a knight uses a slash or jab to attack does he not also effect the area he is in with that slash regardless of whether the hit lands or not. Meaning doesn't he cause damage to trees and wood blocks and whatnot. Add in backwalls and I think a lot more buildings will be accidentally sabotaged from friendly knights trying to protect there hall or flag. Being that there is no way to discern between friendly backwall and enemy backwall I think this idea comes with a lot of problems for such a little change.

    If that's wrong I got one word for you:

    KEGS!!!!!!
     
  6. Duplolas

    Duplolas So Sad

    Messages:
    917
    So like I said before, in my previous post, no, flailing around with your sword does not do damage to the environment around you. You must aim, in your field of range, and target what you want to hit.
     
  7. Sir_Walter

    Sir_Walter Haxor Staff Alumni Tester

    Messages:
    273
    Yeah battle builders! But anyway I think that wood back wall should be breakable, but not stone- because that is how it is with normal wood, so why not?
     
  8. Duplolas

    Duplolas So Sad

    Messages:
    917
    Having just wood backwall is fine by me, but still would be nice to have the Classic way back.
     
  9. hierbo

    hierbo Ballista Bolt Thrower
    1. The Young Blood Collective - [YB]

    Messages:
    190
    Personally, I am of the exact opposite opinion. I feel that, as you mentioned, knights have such high versatility that things like battle builders are less common due to less need (hence less teamwork IMO). Further empowering knights to not need any help is a step precisely in the direction AWAY from what I would like to see.
     
    Trumbles and BlueLuigi like this.
  10. Klokinator

    Klokinator Such Beta
    1. Aphelion's Roleplay

    Messages:
    1,443
    Why are you suggesting knight buffs? They don't need buffs, they're already too powerful.

    I already intentionally target backwall with my bombs, one bomb will take out the tile of wood backwall it is superimposed on, and one tile in each direction around that one. If you toss them at just the right moment you can collapse exactly 5 tiles of backwall, or 3 vertical, three horizontal. Stone backwall though, that's a bitch. You can only collapse the tile the bomb is superimposed on, and weaken the 4 surrounding tiles. If there's a structure being held up by a single tile of backwall, one well placed bomb (Which costs a meager 20 coins) will bring the whole thing down.
     
  11. Duplolas

    Duplolas So Sad

    Messages:
    917
    Normally I would agree with both of you, but in all of the past threads I have made and debated in that would add changes to knight and make him less spamable, op, and so on, people completely shat on the idea. Nothing was ever added and more likely never even looked at by the devs.

    So instead of making another thread about giving buffs to other classes and nerfs to knight, I made a small buff to knight thread to see how it would turn out. Theres no point in making threads that propose ideas to add or remove anything major that could actually help the overall experience of the game.

    Logically this idea is sound when looking at only breaking wood backwall. You can already break wood blocks as knight, so there should be no reason that a knight can't break a much less thick wood material.
     
  12. BlueLuigi

    BlueLuigi :^) Forum Moderator Donator Tester

    Messages:
    3,620
    [​IMG]

    Empower builders instead in ways that allow them to have a presence on the field. Remove the glitches and things that allow you to say "But if we have that when they have X they'lll be OP" like the doors as defense. The thing is as it is builders place in the meta `should` probably be something like the defender type, but the problem is that they are subjugated to just building and extremely minor defense, their buildings are usually easily handled by knights, and their fighting capabilities if they ever 1v1 means they have 0% against even most retarded knights to win. Allow builders some changes that let them hit those front lines easier and we might see more of them/a better time for builders. No one likes minecrafters, but if you enjoy builder only, there also isn't as much to do on the front line unless you are careless, reckless, or fucking cool.
     
    Shambls likes this.
  13. Yagger

    Yagger Kouji's bitch 5eva Staff Alumni Tester
    1. SharSharShar - [SHARK]

    Messages:
    646
    [​IMG]
     
    Apronymous and BlueLuigi like this.
  14. hierbo

    hierbo Ballista Bolt Thrower
    1. The Young Blood Collective - [YB]

    Messages:
    190
    Don't be discouraged by those that would simply attempt to refute your idea by saying it is dumb, or cancer, or whatever it is they like to say. Those are insults, not counter-points. Also, just because an idea you had to better balance the classes was not well received, it does not follow that the classes are balanced. It may be that the particular idea that you suggested that time was not the best.

    If you truly feel that knights are more powerful than the other classes overall, and that this situation leads to an undermining of teamwork, as you have said in other threads, then I would advise you to continue to hammer on that point. I have tons of ideas on how to impact game balance. I'm sure they're not all going to pan out when tested, but that doesn't mean the classes are balanced and I was all wrong; it means that the particular approach I thought of that time was no good. All I'm trying to say is that it is very easy to respond to a balance suggestion with a comment like "you're just not good enough with this class", or "quit being such a noob", but those types of comments contribute nothing and exist only to discourage.

    In this case, it appears to have worked. You claim that you agree that knights are too good overall, yet here you are suggesting additional buffs for them at the expense of the builder. Stick to your guns.

    Finally, remember that these forums are not strictly for the viewing pleasure of the dev team. You or others in the community can be inspired to make mods based on your suggestions, if they can be so convinced. Nothing is more convincing to a developer than a pre-made solution which involves virtually no work on their part. There are a number of community mods that have made their way into the canon KAG code, and I'm sure there are more to come.
     
  15. Duplolas

    Duplolas So Sad

    Messages:
    917
    Problem is, when moderators and admins of the community continue to make such comments, which seems to happen quite a bit. Especially when there are rules made by such mods and admins that they then break.

    But thank you for the advice, it was very well written, and very much appreciated.

    Now to bring back up the basic reasoning behind why atleast wood backwall should be able to be destroyed by knight. Knights can destroy wooden blocks already. Wooden blocks cost 10 wood, wooden backwalls cost 2 wood.

    Why shouldn't a knight be able to destroy a block that is 5 times less thick?
     
    Trumbles and BlueLuigi like this.
  16. Shambls

    Shambls Tree Planter

    Messages:
    65
    @Duplolas
    I can see wear you are coming from on this idea because it is such a tiny thing, microscopic really. Why not?

    Overall I don't think it vastly change game play even as a forward builder rarely have I had to destroy wood backwall and as a knight with this ability I don't imagine it would get used very often. So yeah, what is a microscopic buff going to do?

    Maybe the better question to ask is why do you want this buff?
    Just because it was in classic means it needs to be in beta?
    Maybe we should trust in the infinite wisdom of the Developers

    Or the best question of all what does this add or take away from the game?
    Now truly it really doesn't add anything and as others have stated it actually takes away from the game. specifically from the builder.
     
  17. BlueLuigi

    BlueLuigi :^) Forum Moderator Donator Tester

    Messages:
    3,620
    The buff is a lot larger than you think.

    Ballista can't break backwall (can leave large walls standing/easy to repair after ballista/bomb ballista shots).
    Bomb arrows are the same thing.

    This means that if you don't finish the job a builder on the enemy team that is competent can repair it. Breaking the whole thing down especially if stone allows you waste a lot of their resources as those resources will not return to them, and they would no longer be able to make use of what was left standing by back wall alone essentially.

    In the last match I played today a lot of people were leaving this stone behemoth up that had 2 background tiles supporting it, when I finally got a chance to I lit a bomb and finished off that backwall dropping over 50 stone tiles (500+ stone). This means I essentially removed 500 stone from being reused by the enemy, it was in a prime position on the water front, and we had only blown up the bottom/middle of it, several times however.

    If I was able to do this without a bomb I could have done more after as well, but really either way, it makes those points where a knight gets somewhere and then can't do anything even less, which is a problem, because as a builder that's your job, to make buildings that even when knights get through certain points they are effectively just scratching their heads with nothing else to do, a good defense, one they cannot harm all at once.
     
    Trumbles and Auburn like this.
  18. Shambls

    Shambls Tree Planter

    Messages:
    65
    @BlueLuigi

    Lets just look at the pros and cons of this Idea and it will work itself out.

    Pro
    Another tool in the knights arsenal of destruction.

    Con
    Lowers skill cap on knight.
    encroaches on builder skill set and utility as a class.


    I'm sure the forum can dream up more. Overall I would have to say I am against it but I can still where Duplolas coming from it does seem small. (key word being seem)
     
  19. Duplolas

    Duplolas So Sad

    Messages:
    917
    @BlueLuigi

    Gearing towards only allowing woodback wall to be broken at this point.

    I can understand why you think this would be a major change to the overall game. The main point I think you are getting at is if you allow knights more destructive power, it takes away the some of the overall need for builders.

    But to restate the argument from my initial post and expand upon it,

    If backwall is actually used late game, it is likely to be wood. Stone is so limited that every last bit of it is used to place stone blocks. You can understand how annoying the late game stalemates can be from your experience.
    Giving knights the ability to break the wood backwall helps end the game just a bit faster without the game having to go to a stalemate vote.

    (sorry for there being no good transition here, I tried to but couldn't come up with a good way to do it)

    Think of the buildings you have seen on the battlefield. People bomb, drill, and so on buildings that only create a tunnel that is just large enough for people to pass through. This always leaves the building standing, allowing builders to simply quickly re-wall it and destroy the good 5 minutes or so of work they took to make that hole.
    Buildings like that should be able to be destroy by knight. (sorry this was poorly worded, im in a rush).
     
  20. Kouji

    Kouji Cold, Uncaring, Sadistic, Evil and Cruel Meanie Administrator Global Moderator Forum Moderator Tester
    1. MOLEing Over Large Estates - [MOLE]
    2. REKINS OF SEAS: Super Crew of Ultimate Havoking 2: Return of King of KAG: Chapter 420blazeit - REKIN

    Messages:
    2,910
    Just going to chime in here: all tech is unlimited in TTH (you only "run" out of stuff when you are using stuff faster than the factories can produce) and in CTF you have coins which are always going to be unlimited meaning that in either case you can't really run out of destructive power or ways to destroy backwall. I'd say the only real reason stalemates occur is because of fast, unlimited wood in the first place. If you reduced tree growing rate and reduced how much wood you got from each tree, you wouldn't really be able to spam it in the first place cause you'd run out of it faster than it is destroyed. Although I'm pretty sure reducing tree growth/wood spam was discussed in another thread elsewhere so I won't go much further on that, just felt that it was sort of relevant since you are arguing unlimited wood.

    Basically all I'm saying is that the only reason there are stalemates so often is because you have unlimited resources for offence and defense. People can correct me if I'm wrong though.
     
    BlueLuigi likes this.