QR change idea

FriendsInSpace

Zones You don't want it to be an auto lose, because if that's the case then using an auto lose on offence is a sure-fire way to zero someone.

10 guys line up on QR and hit you, they will all auto lose, therefore you will never enter protection. Bye bye army.

skigglez

FriendsInSpace I think it would still be the default strat because current QR you lose over half your army and most people are able to retal. New QR and you’re guaranteed to retain 50% or more of your army (MCs), so your retal % would probably be close to 100%. There has to be a serious downside associated with it because the potential army preservation is incredibly strong.

skigglez

What if it grants retal but your land losses are higher if defending with QR, and less if attacking with QR. Something significant like 50%. The tradeoff then becomes preserving troops at the expense of losing more of your kingdom. Still gives the smaller kingdoms a chance to retal, but if you engage in an attacking/defending loop with someone you lose out long term.

Psidon

Zones its literally the only thing giving me a chance after getting hit and realizing the aggressor is now twice my KS......

trupheus

Psidon

You were likely right at 70% their size and assuming you have a decent sized army and MCs you should have a really solid chance at the retal.

skigglez

Lord Thane Having 50% of the army alive is pretty meaningless when the guy that hit you is in cli pro, so you have 50% of your army - now what? Not a good tradeoff.

Not sure I agree with this logic. I've heard plenty of complaints that people get bottomfed and can't take the retal currently (I personally think alot of that is them not even trying to retal, but those are the complaints regardless). Wouldn't this be a superior situation for them, considering they aren't taking the retal from the bottomfeed anyways? They still lose the attack, but instead of losing 80% of their army they lose 50% of their army and can rebuild within the protection window to hopefully make an attack of their own. If you just sit there and wait to be attacked the whole round there isn't a strategy that's gonna work out for you. There has to be downsides built into a situational defensive strategy or it doesn't become a choice, it's just auto picked without any thought. Can't have the best of both worlds where you preserve your units plus get the ability to gain back what you lost.

Lord Thane

skigglez every attack in the game is not a hopeless bottom feed, ppl retal all the time, some ppl even retal on a daily basis. Getting hit on QR and then retaling it is most likely the most popular strat.

Now you take away the retals from the equation.

In what universe is that good for the player? Saving a little bit more of their troops, can't even attack the person that hit them because that person is in pro and they got no retal. Can't hit anyone else because they only got 50% of troops.

The only ppl I see benefiting from that is the top 30.

skigglez

Lord Thane That's exactly my point - I was addressing the niche example given that someone gets relentlessly bottom fed and can't take the retals. In that scenario having more troops live is just a better outcome for them. If all other things are equal and in one scenario you have 20% army left and the other you have 50%, in what universe is that NOT good for the player?

Lord Thane Can't hit anyone else because they only got 50% of troops.

You're assuming that they are just immediately attacking after they get hit - why? They get protection from being attacked, in that time they are able to rebuild their army. If they are running MCs I find it hard to believe in 24 hours they can't fill close to 40% of their GH space.

Lord Thane Getting hit on QR and then retaling it is most likely the most popular strat

Exactly - which is why it needs to be addressed. The strategy that is intended to be one that concedes victory to preserve troops is the best defensive one in the game - does that not seem odd? There's essentially no downside to using that strategy now, which takes away the strategic aspect.

On top of that it enables a large kingdom to be borderline immortal once they gain ground on the rest of the players.

trupheus

If 60% of my army is alive and I have to find a different target, I have options. If the retal is there it is essentially a guaranteed win. Are there other tactics people could use to take counter someone being on QR? Absolutely. That is called strategy.

I’ve been smashed on QR and still lost 100% of my defending army so I came out with 36% and 24 hours to retrain as much as possible.

My hunch is today the majority of retals are taken and successful. I think I’ve had one person bounce on their retal and he tried knowing he had no shot, but it weakened me which was a good thing for his alliance.

The BF penalty hurts, it helps the smaller kingdom. Forces larger kingdoms to commit more of their army which opens up the door to the retal.

The situation to address though is breaking extremely large kingdoms who sit on QR because it is their best defensive strategy to bounce attackers. When you know you overpower the enemy, sit on QR so they kill less. You’re still going to kill a ton because you are stronger than they are.

trupheus

Another idea. Make QR only change the defender. They get -50% attack and +50% the defense. Attacker is not impacted.

Just throwing ideas out there.

Vesuvan

I heard some rumblings about an idea being tossed around to change QR so it no longer gives a retal, and I just gotta say I wholeheartedly disagree with that logic. Yes I understand the mechanics would also be different if you’re only defending with 50% and you would most likely lose any defend on QR…but for just a moment, imagine if an attacking group knew you were on QR and got 5-6 people together and had each only send 20%-25% of their troops at you to ensure you actually win the defend, then the final person finished you off with 40-50% once you have had your army wiped. You now have 24 hours of pro to recover, but essentially 0 army, and 0 retals to boot! Yeah, there’s nooooooo way this would ever be abused.

I get that QR in its current state isn’t working as intended, but I don’t think this is the right approach to fixing it. If anything all this would do is make it such an unappealing strategy that nobody would use it anymore, and at that point why not just remove it from the game entirely? The reason QR is so effective at the moment is it makes if so the defender can almost always immediately retal and win since so many of their troops survived the fight, if your really want to curtail that maybe consider putting a timer in that makes it so if you defend on QR you cant immediately retal, maybe you have to wait something like 5-6 ticks before the retal is allowed? This now adds the “negative” component to QR, but still makes it a viable strategy.

Cora

Vesuvan very well said, Ves!! Great suggestion about adding a timer!

trupheus

Vesuvan change QR so it no longer gives a retal, and I just gotta say I wholeheartedly disagree with that logic.

I think the no retal piece has been thoroughly beat out of the idea now.

At this point I'm really just throwing out any idea to make QR not so damn viable.

Whatever the mysterious win conditions are... too many bounces are happening when the defender is on QR so the intended purpose of giving up the easy win to keep more army alive, isn't happening. So maybe it's as simple as QR increases your change to lose by 4x instead of whatever it is today.

skigglez

Vesuvan timer does nothing, most people delay retal now. Multiple hits can be done against anyone on any strategy, not sure why it would be a downside unique to QR. The vast majority of attacks are one hit against someone lower than you, not a series of small coordinated hits. Flip side to your hypothetical is what if that guy isn’t on QR? Now he has 5 retals. How would you even know he’s using it to begin with? You’d have to test it with a small send, and that’s probably getting zeroed out by 50% defending army so you’d just be guessing. If anything it actually adds an interesting wrinkle to combat, especially big groups fighting each other.

Konkistador

Not sure about changes to QR. However revamping the others that no one uses could be a good idea. Even better new strategies. Something like the reverse of QR could be cool. That would neutralise QR.
Attack stay same and defence is halfed for both sides.

Lord Thane

trupheus I can check a few random days to see how many defenses on QR are bouncing, on Monday or Tuesday.

Bounces on QR just means the attack was underpowered.

If the goal is to nerf QR, maybe we should just give a defense debuff, we could do like -25% defense points or something. This would cause 2 things to happen = more defender casualties + easier to attain victory conditions for attacker... I think ppl would be against it though, since that kinda goes directly against the whole reason ppl use it, to save troops lol

Psidon

Let’s stop bottom feeding….

That’s way to keep the regular players, casuals and newcomers.

skigglez

Lord Thane why not just make the downside be increased land losses? So you preserve troops at the expense of kingdom

Vesuvan

skigglez Multiple hits can be done against anyone on any strategy, not sure why it would be a downside unique to QR.

I was referring specifically to if QR was changed so it no longer provided retals, which would make this a situation where it would be a downside very unique to QR seeing as it would be the only strategy in the game that doesn’t give retals.

FriendsInSpace

skigglez

50% army defends/attacks, say you lose 50% more land or gain 50% less (on attack QR)?

skigglez

FriendsInSpace Ya that would be reasonable numbers. Doubt the general group will agree, everyone seems to want the best of both worlds for the defenders.

Lord Thane

FriendsInSpace what is the purpose of switching to a 50% for? To guarantee some troops always survive even when someone sends 200% attack? Is it only the person on qr that is getting halved? That will make it really easy to break ppl, then adding a larger loss for them as well - qr would be a terrible option.

I couldn't see anyone using it once they realize it's almost entirely all negatives. Why would an average player want qr changed to this option?

« Previous Page Next Page »