Multiplayer Hub Logo  
  Powered by Noble Master Games, http://www.noblemaster.com Multiplayer Dragon
  Forums Twitter Dev. Blog ⊕  
Home > Forums

MultiplayerHub.com
» Forums|New Posts
» Twitter
» Dev. Blog
» About
» Contact Us
Showcase
» Age of Conquest
» Demise of Nations
» Retro Commander

































Multiplayer Forums


Board index » Games » Age of Conquest (AOC)


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: And again about gung-up
PostPosted: 27 May 2017, 11:31 
Freeman
Freeman

Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 08:15
Posts: 136
Location: Russia, Ekaterinburg
Give specific examples of games. I can speak for myself only. And I gave a specific situation, unlike you.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: And again about gung-up
PostPosted: 28 May 2017, 04:23 
Peasant
Peasant

Joined: 28 May 2016, 03:18
Posts: 34
I like Noble's approach of rewarding the defensive team, and the border city bonus is an interesting idea.

However, I think ANY BONUS would be a HUGE abuse, since now the clans would just declare on each other to gain the bonuses...it would be misuse by a lot of people trust me.

WE COULD, start putting penalty on war time, something like population goes down from time to time. (in the name of people leaving the country or antiwar protest, -7% happiness every 12 turns, or -5% whole population every 12 turns) This will encourage people to engage in necessary wars only, where they know it'd be a risk to attack, and NO war penalty for the defenders.


In Petraa's case, this is where the clan reputation comes in. Cadliker was attacked by a planned, team-based, coordinated attack. This is what diplomacy and good co-op looks like. If Cad wasn't in The Shadows, this wouldn't happen to him. I think it's best to leave it as is. It's not the developers' duty to solve the gang-up issue. It's part of the game, and how players choose to play it. (now you know they'll gang up on people, let the players solve it out)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: And again about gung-up
PostPosted: 10 Jun 2017, 03:40 
Serf
Serf

Joined: 24 Jan 2017, 22:02
Posts: 7
Reviving the topic, sorry if that's inappropriate.

The shadows have a bad reputation, nothing new to that. I just finished a game against two of them, although one was new (as a member), so I'm not sure how "corrupted" he is. Anyway, it was a major discouraging factor for fighting through, even if I could probably have taken them 1v1, or at least have had the chance. I simply did not dare to take the chance, and settled for 3rd place out of the remaining 5 or 6 players. Anyway, enough about the shadows, any current or future clan might be deprived of morality or otherwise indulge in grey area exploits and the like.

How about if same-clan players start with alliance as default, but leave the option open not do so? This should of course be highlighted in game details before joining, to avoid setting up ganking games and such. Also some clans might like to fight each other in specific setups.

Slightly but not completely unrelated, how about an anonymous game mode with igm's disabled and no user names? You (@noble) could probably set up an AI to detect if players talked about the games outside AoC, machine learning has come a long way. But to begin with even the simple approach would work just fine until the finer details are sorted out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: And again about gung-up
PostPosted: 10 Jun 2017, 10:23 
Game Developer
Game Developer
User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2005, 02:34
Posts: 8030
Location: Honolulu
I'm working on an incognito mode, it just won't solve the problem though!

re-Clan Gang-Up: did you join a clan-game?

_________________
play: Age of Conquest IV


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: And again about gung-up
PostPosted: 12 Jun 2017, 18:48 
Freeman
Freeman

Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 08:15
Posts: 136
Location: Russia, Ekaterinburg
I found an interesting bug in the game. Rather, I noticed that the clan Viking uses it. The essence of the following. I'm fighting with 4 enemies. 5 potential enemy puts in my territory its troops. Then, received an invitation from one of my current enemies to take part in the war. And immediately captures many of my provinces. A fine of 50% in the presence of his troops in my territory he not gets.

That is, he should get a 50% penalty for the presence of troops in my territory, 32% existing 4 opponents and 4% for declaring war. Penalty not.

Of course. Almost all of my territory comes under the control of 5 of my new enemy.

It's all the same game. Very funny. That gung-up it was not enough to get to win. Had to use tricks and flaws of the game.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: And again about gung-up
PostPosted: 12 Jun 2017, 23:58 
Game Developer
Game Developer
User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2005, 02:34
Posts: 8030
Location: Honolulu
OK, let me fix!

_________________
play: Age of Conquest IV


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Green Smilies by http://www.greensmilies.com/

Home  |  Forums  |  Twitter  |  Dev. Blog  |  About  |  Contact