New Siege Implementation: Siege Claims

[shubla]

If all mechanics are trivial on the first hour that you play the game, you get bored.

Yeah, games like go have zero replay value

I would like to see you play go if you think that it is a trivial game.

[Dakkan]

The attacked object can be covered by two claims, a village and/or a private claim.

For each tile within a 100x100 area of the object (wall segment) attacked, we ask the question: Are the claims present on the attacked object's tile present on this other tile? If yes, the created siege claim will exist on this tile. If no, then no.

I'm dumb too apparently.

claims.png

Red: Village claim
Blue: Private claim
Cross: Point of attack
Black: Imaginary 100x100 area around point of attack (not to scale)
Shaded: Resultant siege claim

Okay, I get it now, thanks.

[boshaw]

hey wait a minute, i just finished my village which has 35 complete rings of brickwalls that i paid chinese 12yo's to build for me. i can't walk outside my base without opening and closing 35 gates on my way out, and i only have space to plant a few carrots, and now you make this update?

totally unacceptable, i expect a full reimbursement for what i paid to those poor chinese kids

It's okay, having layers still works out with this compared to just 1 wall.

[shubla]

Im fine with any system as long as I dont get sieged.

[loftar]

Not sure how you drew that conclusion. It isn't even possible for an attacker to create a pclaim overlapping a foreign village.

Where is the forward attacking claim then? Because no one is gonna do this without that first.

I didn't draw one, but it would be outside the claims in the picture, and therefore not shaded.

Regarding the concept: Ysh has a point that attacking a forward (palisaded) base erected by your enemies to protect the siege engines used to project a siege claim (by attacking your walls) could effectively lead to fueling them in case you use siege engines to break the palisade from inside your walls as this would project another siege claim that could then be used by the attackers.

The addition of intersecting the siege claim with the claims on the sieged location would supposedly fix that flaw.

[jorb]

at this point id just be happy if you make any change to the siege system

big villages can just hire 500 iq asians to decipher this mess

Think of something better and make constructive posts instead of being a high and mighty retard. You've added nothing but noise to this conversation.

[Kaios]

I didn't draw one, but it would be outside the claims in the picture, and therefore not shaded.

...why would it be there... and not like... where they are sieging?

[Potjeh]

There are no critical systems in MtG because it's not a persistent game. You can get away with a lot more in a game where a fuckup ruins a half-hour session rather than one where a fuckup ruins 2+ years of playing.

This is a minor question as to the exact extent of a siege claim. It's not important that you understand it perfectly. The basic mechanic would still be point the siege engine and shoot, and to even get to that point you'd have to be at least, idk, 100? hours invested in the game already.

As the defender it is of utmost importance that you understand the siege system perfectly. The attacker stands to lose fairly little and fuckups aren't that bad, the defender stands to lose *everything* so any fuckups are totally unacceptable. Coincidentally, it takes a lot less hours of gameplay to find yourself in the role of defender than it does to be in the role of attacker.

[irongete]

Maybe you can work on a different aproach like this:

Palisade has 100 health, Brickwall 200 health.

Wrecking Ball mechanics:
- Has 100x100 virtual claim.
- Unatackable if any owner* is online, alive and inside this virtual claim.
- Only owners can use it.
- Hits for 1 health (maybe more based on quality?).
- Builds up a stacking 0.02 +damage buff each time it hits a wall.
- Can only do one attack every 7 minutes (time to destroy wall if not defended ~12 hours).
*owner means the person who built it, any member of his village or any player in party with any builder village members.

Walls can be repaired for 15 health every 6 hour.

[Potjeh]

If all mechanics are trivial on the first hour that you play the game, you get bored.

Yeah, games like go have zero replay value

I would like to see you play go if you think that it is a trivial game.

It's not a trivial game, but it has trivial mechanics. That's my entire point. Good game design is about minimizing rule complexity and maximizing strategy complexity. Haven's combat system is basically anti-go, and siege seems to be set to be the same.