City Raid Quests - New Envoy - PvP option

Have a suggestion or idea for Nile Online?
PantherX
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:00 am
Location: The Beautiful Monterey Bay California

City Raid Quests - New Envoy - PvP option

Postby PantherX » Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:41 pm

City Raid Quests, you can send an envoy to an opponents city to demand a tribute payment, if the request is paid (something midsized like 50 X palace level goods) you can not attack. If the tribute is refused you can attack, they can defend, the winner of the battle takes all. As for the risks I would again suggest something like the following..

Attacker, ships solders with 10 x bread per solder and risks (100 x defenders PalaceLevel) Lux goods.

Defender, gets 24 hours after refusing envoy demand to prepare defending forces. If the defender wins the battle (perhaps a home city advantage similar to defenders bonus on the monuments) he gets the attackers lux goods and leftover bread (maybe 5 per attacker) and gets to assassinate the attackers army.

If the attacker wins he can loot the city (100 x defenders PalaceLevel).

Perhaps there can even be different city attacks... Levels depend on the defenders Palace Level

1-envoy
Tribute demand: Lux goods = 50 x Palace Level
Reward for win: Lux Goods (100 x palace Level)

2-envoys
Tribute demand: Lux goods = 75 x Palace Level
Reward for win: Lux Goods (150 x Palace Level and
Destroy one aux building level - Random aux building - Not Palace, Exchange or Warehouse.

3-envoys
Tribute demand: Lux goods = 100 x Palace Level
Reward for win: Lux Goods (200 x Palace Level and
Destroy One level of Main Building Palace, Exchange or Warehouse.

I would guess 1 tribute demand every 24 hours, If a tribute demand is sent the scroll should have the following options...

Send tribute payment...
Refuse Tribute Payment and prepare for War!...
Do not participate in City Based PvP...

What do you all think? Feel free to suggest tweaks to this scenario.

:cool:
:cool:

abana
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:29 am

Postby abana » Wed Oct 07, 2009 5:01 pm

I like the idea of city raiding, I would amend it to include only cities who participate in military. I think that it amounts to extortion if not limited.

PantherX
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:00 am
Location: The Beautiful Monterey Bay California

Postby PantherX » Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:00 pm

"abana" wrote:I like the idea of city raiding, I would amend it to include only cities who participate in military. I think that it amounts to extortion if not limited.


Agreed partially, But also that's why I suggested that you can choose "Do not participate in City Based PvP" in the initial envoy scroll. Keeps it separate from monument PvP. Although the two could be combined into a single PvP/noPvP tag.

Although I may actually participate in monument PvP, I would never want any risks to my cities. ;)

And I guess there is still a lot of reward/risk assessments to be done. But I really want the ability to accept war or not to accept it. This is a game and not real world, war should be optional. Balance would be TM's job, good luck guys!

Oh, how about this....

On option 3 where you are risking a level of a main building.. perhaps the attacker needs to pay one Scarab to pay for the heavy equipment required for demo. Or perhaps the attacker has to pay the defender if the defender wins. Risk, one level of your palace, chance reward of 1 Scarab (afterall maybe the envoy died with the coin in his pocket) and the lux goods.
:cool:

Tinkerbell
Posts: 5415
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:42 am
Location: San Diego, California
Contact:

Postby Tinkerbell » Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:21 pm

Interesting suggstion, PantherX!

However, I am a bit concerned about opening up our cities to be attacked. In general, I never want cities to be PvPed by other players, mainly due to the ganging up problem especially by multiple accounts/"team" playing.

However, you DO supply an op out. This takes care of a lot of problems.

PvPed by TM AI raiders, absolutely! No op out. :D

PantherX
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:00 am
Location: The Beautiful Monterey Bay California

Postby PantherX » Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:33 pm

"Tinkerbell" wrote:I never want cities to be PvPed by other players, mainly due to the ganging up problem especially by multiple accounts/"team" playing.


I can just see the fun to be had by having the "Let's Crush Tinkerbell™" party!
:D
:cool:

Tinkerbell
Posts: 5415
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:42 am
Location: San Diego, California
Contact:

Postby Tinkerbell » Wed Oct 07, 2009 7:08 pm

"PantherX" wrote:I can just see the fun to be had by having the "Let's Crush Tinkerbell™" party!
:D


I already have a taste of that one. Several times in both worlds. It rocks too!

:cool:

:D <=== forgot the

Mr Ears
Posts: 246
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: Anyville

Postby Mr Ears » Wed Oct 07, 2009 7:51 pm

-

;)

l

:D

mobius
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:14 am

Postby mobius » Wed Oct 07, 2009 8:15 pm

There needs to be a delay in time a player can attack the same person. Combat also needs to be improved. There's a fatal flaw in combat.

PantherX
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:00 am
Location: The Beautiful Monterey Bay California

Postby PantherX » Wed Oct 07, 2009 8:21 pm

"mobius" wrote:There needs to be a delay in time a player can attack the same person. Combat also needs to be improved. There's a fatal flaw in combat.


Yep, thats what the envoys and built in delays accomplish.

An envoy needs to return after 24 hours. He returns with the news of the demands - Tribute/War/non-PvP.
After this initial 24 hours, or the time the defender replies to the envoy, the defender gets 24 hours to prepare. The defender can always vote non-PvP and if there is no answer to the envoy scroll after 24 hrs he returns home with basically a non-PvP flag.

This is a new combat suggestion to think about. What else does it need? other concerns?
:cool:

Ivy
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:39 pm
Location: Scotland

Postby Ivy » Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:31 pm

Personally I do not want my cities to be attacked by other players but there are others for whom this may add something extra to the game.

However, I have a concern... if the defender gets 24 hours to answer the scroll, what if they do not log in during that period? There are plenty of players who only log in every few days and even regular players sometimes have a day or two away. Or horror of horrors, internet connection problems! :eek:

One possibility could be that if the scroll is not answered then it is set as non-PvP.

abana
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:29 am

Postby abana » Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:55 am

You have a point, Ivy. How about if the battle takes place if the attacked player accepts[I] the challenge, not [I]fails to decline.[/I][/I]

Edit: I just thought of an addition, with 6 envoys, it is a fight to the death, the looser will go immortal, or delete their account, as the situation permits.
Last edited by abana on Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:02 am, edited 2 times in total.

PantherX
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:00 am
Location: The Beautiful Monterey Bay California

Postby PantherX » Thu Oct 08, 2009 3:23 am

"Ivy" wrote:One possibility could be that if the scroll is not answered then it is set as non-PvP.


Exactly, the initial envoy is basically a scroll to the defender..

Pay my demands
or
Fight
or
Refuse to PvP

If the initial scroll is not answered in the 24 hours, it defaults to Refuse to PvP and the attacker has risked only his envoy's time. The defender has risked nothing.
:cool:

abana
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:29 am

Postby abana » Thu Oct 08, 2009 3:36 am

I think that sounds great, Panther X. What do you think of my proposed 6 envoy attack, I would suggest that this one also have another reason to decline, "not enough goods in my capital to go immortal". and this challenge can only be made to level22 cities. An extreme stake in this challenge might be that the attacker can loose everything in all cities except for 50 bread and 40 bricks in each city, all shops and barracks will be destroyed, resources reduced to level one plots. And the defender stands to loose all inventory except than needed for immortality. If the attacker looses, ha can only have a level 1 tomb, no matter what his rank was. But if ye wins, he will have a jewel-crusted tomb(larger than the existing level 1 tomb). This larger tomb cannot be reduced even if he looses subsequent challenges, and will be rewarded whenever he chooses immortality.

PantherX
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:00 am
Location: The Beautiful Monterey Bay California

Postby PantherX » Thu Oct 08, 2009 3:58 am

The 6 envoy attack! Wow, that's pretty much do or die :) It seems a little high stake for me, we would need to define more exact requirements/reward/costs and losses.

But then I'm all for more input and what people think would be fun. As long as everything is optional I think it can remain fun and not be used for griefing.

:cool:
:cool:

abana
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:29 am

Postby abana » Thu Oct 08, 2009 4:19 am

I think that we want to make it the ultimate in high stakes. A lower ranked player could use this to help clear up the bottleneck, and the defender would want to go for that special status.

Some of it would depend on the level of work that it would be for TM. After the battle, I think that Reed would have to go into both accounts, make the adjustments; if the attacker won, transfer all of the inventory from the defender(except for the immortality goods, in the capital, he won't need anything at all in his other cities, because he is going immortal right away, and he is going with his tail between his legs. If the attacker lost, Reed would have to transfer all of the inventory except for 50 bread and 40 bricks in each city, level the monument if there is one, destroy all shop plots and barracks, reduce all resources to level 1. Should that also include the market and exchange? I think that we should leave him the palace, though.

tutmoses ii
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:46 am

Postby tutmoses ii » Fri Oct 09, 2009 11:55 am

Egypt isn't Greece. I'm not aware of any civil war scenarios in Egyptian history. Now that I'm at it, the game recommends remembering the Egyptian setting for your city names. I submit *cough* that Tinkerbell, who is always quoting Reed, is one of the worst offenders against that rule. :cool:

abana
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:29 am

Postby abana » Fri Oct 09, 2009 12:47 pm

There were many civil wars in egyptian history.

mobius
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:14 am

Postby mobius » Fri Oct 09, 2009 12:59 pm

I'm not sure why anyone would participate in this. The defender has the advantage.

Get message.
Build troops.
Mash up attacker with more troops than he sends.
Win lots of goods.

The defender doesn't need to get anything. Maybe the attacker loses all his boats because the defender burned them all. The 24 hour notice gives the advantage to the defender.


This could be made to who gets the actual top spot from the top 10 players. Win and get the #1 immortal tomb.
Last edited by mobius on Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

abana
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:29 am

Postby abana » Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:07 pm

How are you sure that you will have more troops than the attacker? The attacker also stands to can a lot of goods. And I would pick players that I would challenge based on whether or no, I believe that they would take the challenge.

I am trying to find ways to clear up the bottleneck, giving a top tomb to the number one player, would only increase the motivation for sticking around, and would therefore increase it.
Last edited by abana on Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Tinkerbell
Posts: 5415
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:42 am
Location: San Diego, California
Contact:

Postby Tinkerbell » Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:01 pm

"tutmoses ii" wrote:Egypt isn't Greece. I'm not aware of any civil war scenarios in Egyptian history. Now that I'm at it, the game recommends remembering the Egyptian setting for your city names. I submit *cough* that Tinkerbell, who is always quoting Reed, is one of the worst offenders against that rule. :cool:


And I will keep breaking it too! ;)


Return to “Suggestions / Ideas”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests