Alliance HQ Support Powers (Thread renamed/Bumped)

[Deathcult]

Not gonna make this too long but How about an air strike to where it makes the crops produce 75% less seeds than what it normally does for a few ticks. Military Route.

Spec Ops Route make enemy units cost very expensive.

Protestor route, make a random unit disabled (non-generic) to where they cant buy that unit for 5 ticks

Thug route, make enemy units lose one "*" from health for 2 ticks.

Robos route, make enemy unit lose one "*" from armor for 2 ticks.

Fantasy route, make enemy units plants (if they planted) produce 75% less plants for 5 ticks.


I thought it be a simple add on that doesn't kill unit but give an annoying factor to the game when sending units out. :] Ideas?

 

[LuckySports]

Thug and robotics would have to be a percentage, and the protestor one is ridiculously underpowered. Fantasy route would only be useful in a few rare situations, so it's useless.

I don't mind the idea, but would need a lot of work to make it balanced, and even more to implement.

 

[Dimitar]

Most of them don't really make sense. Also I haven't figured out when these events take place. If I get attacked eta 8 by a protestor, in which 5 ticks won't I be able to buy my random unit? If I'm attacking/defending somewhere else and I get attacked by a thug, will my units fighting in the other attack/defence lose health?

 

[Dark_Angel]

I interpret this as some kind of "Area of effect" "spell", type thing. Interesting. It'd add a huge, new dimension to the game, but balancing it could be pretty nightmarish.

 

[Ogluk]

Mmmm, route specific 'support' powers... doesn't REALLY fit with anything else currently ingame, and as DA says, balancing would be one mother of a biatch.

 

[Dark_Angel]

Mmmm, route specific 'support' powers... doesn't REALLY fit with anything else currently ingame, and as DA says, balancing would be one mother of a biatch.

Apart from the balancing issue I do like the idea of being able to send in a kind of "support power" to soften up an otherwise difficult opponent.

The whole idea of such a power messing with unit stats just isn't viable though, imo, as it'd be far too difficult for a defender to work out if they're still able to beat the incoming (something that a defender should be able to assess with relative ease at the moment).

 

[JJB]

Will this not make it even more confusing for new players trying to learn how to play the game?

 

[Deathcult]

I'll work on balancing this later tonight because I had to type this up fast before I left. I'll work on it after work today.

As for being confusing, well, every game is confusing at first till you play for a bit and learn the controls. The biggest pet peeve of mine in this game is people who stop playing because they aren't rank 1 and people who think that things would be confusing for new players. All games are confusing. Even if its Black Ops (still gotta learn the maps) or even world of warcraft. This just gives the player a new way to make it difficult for the opponent to sustain his/her score or land or troops. Can be modified by anyone if they want to share input.

If you have any Ideas for me to help me balance it, PM me with what you think would be reasonable.

PS JJB I wasn't trying to bash you, just an overall statement. Didn't mean to make it sound hard. Sorry.

 

[Dimitar]

RPG attacks a robo, thug sends one hooligan along. All robos lose health, RPGs get crazy ratios. I really don't think this can be balanced well enough. All of the effects that are listed in the first post are either tremendously overpowered, or completely useless

 

[Deathcult]

How do you see it useless? Its meant to add a new dimension to the game from the typical "killing and getting land" concept. Just needs work done to it. Its just a base idea for a new concept.

 

[Dimitar]

All of the cost/hiring based ones are pretty useless. I usually don't hit people who are online and have a huge stack of seeds/cash/plants so they can buy and completely change the BR

 

[willymchilybily]

i have to agre with what has been said. i thought maybe the seed idea wud be useful the airstrike. then i realized if you aim to kill and land, then military would kill the target and land and on the last tick? airstrike? so for a few ticks they get no seeds or less seeds. but tis likely if you did it right or are striker route and target innocents, that the harvs will die and wont come back till insurance kicks in. so those few ticks of 75% production are likely when the target is not producing seeds anyway after the zero.

id go down the option of making alliances hq units with abilities, if they attack the enemy hq and kill it, then the enemy could drop to eta 4 view or eta 3 view for a few ticks. all the alliance members could suffer an effect, lack of ability to send defence boost, ability to remove land caps, (id go with no injuries etc but that is achievable by declaring war)

and defencively maybe the ability to force the attacker to get capped. or increase the cap by a few % so it could be balanced out or increase in insurance and injuries by a 5-10% if you defend with, or have enough of "abulances, and accountants" etc and they dont die. id look at not making it more complex and route specific. but get it more involved with alliance ability and troops. as that is somethign that has needed an overhaul for a long time. and is more likely to be implimented as azzer wants to do something more with the HQ anyway.

i mean my suggestions i plucked out of the air without any real thought. but its the route i think you would have more success with and get more use out of, without adding the complexity to the whole game. only to alliance tactics. etc. if you hit an allaince the enemy would ahve an idea you were planning to follow with an attack, so its not completely overpowered. and other devs like data scrambler so the target is less likely to know what you have at hq and less likely to know what units you sent and the effect you want to cause them suddenly are more useful and worth puttiong funds into. also satalite stations may be more useful as a drop in eta view would be no problem if you started at eta 6 view anyway.

as for legnths of time it would need to last 12 ticks imo, offencively. if not a few more

 

[Dax]

The idea is a good one, but is far too easily abused in a game like this.

 

[willymchilybily]

well you would have to alter things. not any alliance hq can attack any other its 30% of alliance score or something, you wouldnt be able to have all the abilities at once. you would have one selected on the alliance military page,

it would then be a trade off. if you are looking to stealth rush an eta 3 view would hinder the rolling stealth. but the no defence boost would allow you to hit offliners more effectively.

then you get on to length of time of effect do you send with the hq troops to get the job done. and reduce ability to defend hq from the attack. but forfiet the full advantage of the defence boost removal for example so that by the time you return from enemy hq and resend they could still boost sd/poms/newsvans/stuns effectively but wont be able to boost thier robos so easily to get to the first tick of the incoming. or do you fake it draw some defence to the alliance hq. and actually send a few ticks behind, with defence drawn to the hq. and you have actually gone for an increase in land steal by a few extra % (on top of uncapped war declerations or in addition to a cap depending how you play it). do people spend thier fund to buy up and donate to keep thier perks. or do they lose thier eta view/increaseland loss/deffence boost. but get more troops.

do you send real/fakes with hq attack but have less troops to send fakes with on your mass attacks. it adds alot of different tactics. but if implimented right it wouldnt be easily abused.

the only abuse i see is if a resistance was formed. and two/three alliances attacked together. and got multiple hq advantages, increasing land removing defence boost, and removing eta view all at once. this you may think is acually fine as it improves the odds of the resistance. so leave it. or make it so an allaince can only have one effect at a time.

but if you can be more specific on how you invisage the abuse maybe it will be easier to form some ideas on how to prevent abuse

 

[Ogluk]

I like willy's ideas of tying some element of support powers into the AHQ, its a neat twist and could help bring some useful function to the AHQs besides eta 5/6 view and Tanks.

 

[Dark_Angel]

I like willy's ideas of tying some element of support powers into the AHQ, its a neat twist and could help bring some useful function to the AHQs besides eta 5/6 view and Tanks.

Something war-focussed mebbe. Whereby a support power has a cooldown and can be used, say, once a week, on another alliance - in order to weaken a stronger opposing force before an all out mass attack. Nice in theory, not sure how it'd work in practice.

 

[Dark_Angel]

As this thread developed and moved away from the idea of individuals having support power facilities (and moving towards HQs having them) I've renamed and bumped this thread.

Can anyone else think of some cool alliance HQ "support powers"?

I love the one that screws with the ETA view of the enemy alliance HQ (reducing it to ETA 3 or 4 for a set amount of time (obviously with a suitable cooldown on this)).

I could see this being a great tool for future resistance movements. There are so many possibilities in terms of support powers, come on?

The support powers could potentially be available after X development, and take X number of ticks to "Charge" before they can be used. For example the power that reduced your enemy HQ's ETA view could be projected for say, a couple of hours, but if you're working with other alliances they could use theirs straight after. This'd give a great incentive for alliances working together to mix things up a bit.

-

I found it useful to think of real time strategy games! I know they're a lot different but I see an application.