Punishing the Repeat Attack

[Max]

Just a reminder, there needs to be a real deterrent to the repeat attack.

I have abused the lack of such a counter this round and I feel sorry for the players that I have sent at repeatedly over the past few months! They deserve better

So, I suggest that a repeat attack counter be used similar to the old days, but this time have the land grabs reduce rapidly.

If it's the first time you've attacked a player, you get the maximum steal for their valuation percentage of yours (eg: 15% at 80% valuation). If you send twice in a short period, this should drop to 7.5%, and three times gives you 0% land. Harsh? Perhaps, but without a large bounty to accrue, I believe the punishment should be severe. I would also insist that the time for the counter to be reset is known to everyone, so that they know how long they can leave a target before attacking them again.

These are just a few ideas, please add constructive criticism to improve or destroy it

 

[Hobbezak]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

I agree, but this can't be introduced during the flakwars.
Maybe make it linked to the dev multiplier, so that the lower the dev multiplier is, the less you can repeat your attack?

 

[tobapopalos]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

I agree, but this can't be introduced during the flakwars.

Why not? Getting repeatedly flakked in flak wars is just as annoying as later in the round.

 

[harriergirl]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

I agree, but this can't be introduced during the flakwars.

Why not? Getting repeatedly flakked in flak wars is just as annoying as later in the round.

annoying yes, but since lets arent out it's not really a big problem...once again, get rid of injury, it's hard to reattack a player that has dropped out of your score range

 

[tobapopalos]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

I agree, but this can't be introduced during the flakwars.

Why not? Getting repeatedly flakked in flak wars is just as annoying as later in the round.

annoying yes, but since lets arent out it's not really a big problem...once again, get rid of injury, it's hard to reattack a player that has dropped out of your score range

Hmm...in the midst of all my gay PoM fervour, I forgot that lets existed. And I agree about injuries. I don't like them.

 

[vlad]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

Injury has a larger positive side to a larger part of the player base than it does a negative side.
I'm not sure where Azzer stands, but its one of those "love to hate" things, it should realy stay, benefits alot more people.
open your views a little, and you will see.

 

[Garrett]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

meh injury is like most things 4.5

it's from 4.5 and so you can't trust it.

all injury views should wait until the 'next age'

cuz right now rounds and everything are just retarded.

 

[tobapopalos]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

Injury has a larger positive side to a larger part of the player base than it does a negative side.
I'm not sure where Azzer stands, but its one of those "love to hate" things, it should realy stay, benefits alot more people.
open your views a little, and you will see.

I don't think you understand. I do benefit from injuries. Recently I've forgotten to send out from attacks more times than I can care to remember. Yet I still have troops when I really shouldn't. And I don't think injuries are a benefit at all. It just means I can get killed all over again by the same people.

 

[No-Dachi]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

I agree with the original poster. A land cap that's originally based on the two players score (as it is now), which additionally increases if you've stolen land from the target in the last.. 24 hours? 36 hours? Ish. Also, I think the time should vary from say 24-36 (without the numbers being public). If we want to remove repeat attacks then we shouldn't make it too easy to avoid.

 

[harriergirl]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

I agree with the original poster. A land cap that's originally based on the two players score (as it is now), which additionally increases if you've stolen land from the target in the last.. 24 hours? 36 hours? Ish. Also, I think the time should vary from say 24-36 (without the numbers being public). If we want to remove repeat attacks then we shouldn't make it too easy to avoid.

Land cap won't stop repeat attackers who aren't attacking for land. Noone will be playing for effictiveness anymore so that won't stop them either. As far as opening my views, how's this. Injuries, suck. The only thing they do is give the people who buy gamecash more bang for thier buck. Give us back insurance that way I can at least choose which crappy unit's I want to buy back instead of getting a smattering of everything... which is annoying if you play anysort of bribing route. Also injuries practically eliminate the possibility of purposely suiciding unwanted/unneeded troops.

All that being said.. I know it's not going to change. so ...whatever.

 

[No-Dachi]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

Land cap won't stop repeat attackers who aren't attacking for land. quote]

Definitely not. But it will stop some of the repeat attacks - and that's surely better than nothing at all?

 

[harriergirl]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

Land cap won't stop repeat attackers who aren't attacking for land. quote]

Definitely not. But it will stop some of the repeat attacks - and that's surely better than nothing at all?

Maybe... Depends on the size of the cap. I mean, honestly unless the land cap is 50% or more... the repeat attacks won't be stopped that much either because going back for a sure thing is easier and more efficient than organizing and planning on a new/untested target. If I were playing for the win, I know it wouldn't stop me.

 

[ooccoo]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

It shouldnt just be about land, last 2 nights i've had my staff slaughtered by the same 2 ppl attacking for the range/mid ticks only about 3 times each.

 

[No-Dachi]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

You might perhaps want to consider getting into an alliance, or getting some friends to kill them for you.

If we punish attacks too harshly, we'll stagnate the whole game. We need a system that will prevent most of the repeat attacks, while still allowing people to play.

 

[ooccoo]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

You might perhaps want to consider getting into an alliance, or getting some friends to kill them for you.

im screwed there, Pure Solo + i have no friends, havnt played for years so i can't remember people i used to group with.

 

[Martin]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

If people are silly enough to get flakked, let them be flakked!

anything detering people to play and hiding behind mechanics and rules just makes it more of what has already stagnated the game.

 

[Chezz]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

BUT this isn't just about flakking, is it?

 

[Martin]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

BUT this isn't just about flakking, is it?

It was talking about land grabs, and if someone stays in range to keep being hit, I guess it is flakking, as you're obviously not killing them properly?

 

[harriergirl]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

BUT this isn't just about flakking, is it?

It was talking about land grabs, and if someone stays in range to keep being hit, I guess it is flakking, as you're obviously not killing them properly?

With injury it's impossible to kill someone "properly" say you go on a lawful attack in your 80% range, even if you do alot of damage, with injury your target is back in range in 18 ticks... but I agree, restricting attacks anymore is not the way to go.

 

[DR4545]

Re: Punishing the Repeat Attack

The positive I can see is at round start, people lucky enough to find a few solos before spies get out won't have such an insane advantage. And, solos will stand a bit more chance once spies are out. A MIL solo at round start is completely helpless for example.

As long as the timer for a repeat penalty is short (say, 38-hours) I could like this change. But, I'd make the penalty maybe 15% first steal, 12% second steal, 3% third steal. Also, make this only a repeat *steal* penalty. Attacking to kill a player, then sending for his land you could still steal 15%. And, attacking a solo, triggering, and trying again won't get punished which was retarded.

As for repeat killing, you could make the attacked player get back a bit more injuries (40-50% or so) when getting killed repeatedly, with no penalty for the attacker. I think most people would be happy with that. (You could argue this keeps the player in range allowing yet another attack but I see more injuries as a benefit.)

Also injuries practically eliminate the possibility of purposely suiciding unwanted/unneeded troops.

I remember Azzer saying that made people think more about what they buy, and he liked that. Agree or disagree, just sharing his take on it.