a

[Ta 152H]

good point. i am aware of this. thanks for pointing it out. (glad so many people like it)
this is obviously called strategy. like most games, strategy is different at different points in the game.
people who do this are generally doing so to increase their chances of winning. they are making value judgements to improve/increase their control of resources in the game...(if i do this i will have more money in the over-all long term)
people generally don't do it cause its 'fun' or they like watching other people go around the board while they sit there. they don't have competitions with each other about it.

if someone was doing a strategy that decreased their chances of winning/succeeding, or lowered their control of resources (i.e. sitting in jail during the very early stages of the game.)
what would your interpretation of that strategy be?
=
as my numbers indicate, and everyone else's numbers would indicate...in most cases, city defending decreases a persons usable production thereby decreasing their control of resources, which would then hinder a persons ability to build and grow their city and advance in the game.

if people are fine with that great. but i'll be the voice in the forum giving people those facts/ that info so they can make a fully informed decision.
[FULL DISCLOSURE: i took some 1-sided 'defend your city' advice when i first started..took me 2-3 months to figure out my defense was causing me to lose even more than the plundering ... still regret taking that advice to this day.]

very late in this game AF and OF, defense may be more valuable. there are fewer players in the most advanced ages, so being in the same hood with the same people is more likely. it would be much harder to get away from people like it is in the early ages.
if this was true, a late game player could make necessary adjustments to their defense within a week or two.
the losses from having defense for months-years through the lower ages, would be significant.
city shield would be an interesting factor here.

Your facts are not really facts, that's the problem, but I think you've already recognized that by what you say in your last paragraph. Situations vary.

I don't build goods buildings anymore, I consider them obsolete. I do like Terrace Farms though.

You make a lot of suppositions based on your specific situation and then try to broadly apply them when you tell people city defense is a waste. In your situation, you've pretty much proven that strategy works, no question there. But situations can vary by a lot, and I also believe it is very valuable in others.

One difference between Monopoly and many other games, and FoE is, there is a winner, and a loser, of the entire game. That does not apply to FoE. There might be a winner or loser in a specific incident, the but context is always much more limited.

As such, that logic is not applicable. And also, because the situation changes so much, it actually does tie into the Monopoly example quite well, despite this. Early in the game, jail is bad. That's one situation. Later in the game, it's good. Sometimes defense is good, sometimes it's bad. It depends a lot of things you do not control, unless you've got some voodoo that makes other hood players think a certain way. It also depends on things you can control.

Also, you've inherently compromised by going to 24 hour production, so already are inefficient. If you could defend your city, there is a good chance you could go to something closer to eight hours per production. Plus, efficient FP generators like MSL would be good for you. So let's recognize the inherent inefficiency of using 24 hour production.

It's also limiting. For example, let's say I'm in an age where goods are worth a ton. I could use my Terrace Farms for goods instead of FPs, since I can trade those goods for a higher amount of FP. That's eight hour production. And Terrace Farms are fantastic goods buildings.

Even if I want to run them for 24 hours, and I have a few, I don't necessarily want an open gate for people to take 5 FP productions. If I have several, which is very likely to happen, and an aggressive neighborhood, having no defense is crippling, if I have a life that actually is more important than setting a clock so I can collect from FoE. And I do, thank goodness, and it's not a bad thing like everyone here likes to claim (pick up on time, or you're a loser. Guess again).

So, I'm by no means advocating everyone have a strong defense, or a weak one. The only thing I will say is, if you're spending 100 spots to put up watchfires and ritual flames, and don't put up the GBs to help defense (SBC, DC, AO), you're probably making a mistake, because it's very easy for me (and thus others) to break. Do it right, or don't waste the space. Halfway is the worst of both worlds.

 

[DeletedUser]

as my numbers indicate, and everyone else's numbers would indicate...in most cases, city defending decreases a persons usable production thereby decreasing their control of resources, which would then hinder a persons ability to build and grow their city and advance in the game.

The trouble with this statement is that your numbers are cherry-picked to favor your viewpoint, and you ignore factors that contradict your point.

a late game player could make necessary adjustments to their defense within a week or two.

That is hilarious, and shows you know little about the subject you're trying to pass as an expert on. In late game, if defense "becomes necessary", it would have to be formidable at that point. I'm talking 600-700 minimum, with a significant GB-provided attack factor to it, like at least 60-100. You don't get those numbers in "a week or two". If I remember right, Ardak had over 700% defense and still got plundered a few times by bigger OFE players. And he had spent months if not years building that defense. "A week or two." That's rich.

 

[DeletedUser32973]

I don't think he is necessarily saying full defense is a waste, just that it's likely going to lower you production compared to having 0% defense. I think you guys are going to be hard pressed to properly defend against your argument for going full defense without data to back up your claims. We're talking about pure numbers here, not "I like beating back my opponent." These are very different things. This isn't about which play style is better, but simply what results in greater net gains. I'd be very curious to receive any data you all have collected that points to heavy 700% defensive cities out producing 0% defensive ones. Yes they're two different play styles, and I'm not saying one is better than the other, but one WILL produce more than the other. Honestly, I think a lot of you have built up very heavy defenses and are taking this very personally. It sounds like you don't want to hear that maybe your defensive strategy is resulting in lower gains.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't think he is necessarily saying full defense is a waste,

No, he's not. He's saying any defense is a waste. Repeatedly.

I think you guys are going to be hard pressed to properly defend against your argument for going full defense without data to back up your claims.

You mean like the one-sided, cherry-picked "data" that he posted?

I'd be very curious to receive any data you all have collected that points to heavy 700% defensive cities out producing 0% defensive ones.

First, the 700% figure was for end-game defense, and just an approximation. Second, any data on production would be affected by way more variables than just defense. I do know from experience that, contrary to the OP's experience, there are plenty of hoods out there where that production will be affected by whether you can stop people from taking your production. And there's plenty of evidence to back that up right here in the Forum. A multitude of threads/posts complaining about their stuff being "stolen".

Honestly, I think a lot of you have built up very heavy defenses and are taking this very personally.

Not at all. The original poster is setting forth this concept of 0% defense as optimal in all cases. In doing so, he is both relying solely on his own unique experience and using cherry-picked data that ignores multiple factors and makes incorrect assumptions about how much you have to give up to have a decent defense. Both of which my experience on multiple worlds over 3 years totally contradicts. He seems to take it personally that there are multiple players that disagree with his proclamation.

 

[DeletedUser13736]

Yes they're two different play styles, and I'm not saying one is better than the other, but one WILL produce more than the other. Honestly, I think a lot of you have built up very heavy defenses and are taking this very personally. It sounds like you don't want to hear that maybe your defensive strategy is resulting in lower gains.

One will not produce more than the other. It is all in the way you set up your city. I have a 0/256 defense and I rarely get attacked, almost never plundered. I use WF and RF's and other various defense boosting buildings. Most of the buildings I have that give a defense boost ALSO produce goods or other items, so it cannot be considered wasted space.

In regard to the lower gains vs heavy defense, we have to take into consideration whether or not they plunder. If they do, they might make back the goods that would be "lost" by a spot taken up by defense. I do not have any data on this myself, so this is all speculation-not fact.

I think an important factor to consider is where you are in the hood rankings. If you are towards the top, let's say top ten, you probably don't get attacked as much as you'd be if you were in the bottom 60. Some players don't choose to build a defense and they do well enough if they collect on time. But like it was stated earlier, having a solid defense gives you a cushion of potential time

 

[DeletedUser34800]

I agree that if you collect on time and never/rarely get your goods plundered, than a 0% defense strategy will out produce a defense strategy. It is just numbers. If you can have more buildings to produce more goods, and nothing gets plundered (from either no or big defense cities) than the 0 defense city will produce more. Obviously.

Of course you will eventually get plundered. Perhaps not enough to merit a city defense, but it will happen. And that's where every player will differ. Do you care at all? No? 0 defense city is for you! Do you care at all? Yes? How much? If only a little, maybe you just fill in some gaps with 1x1 or 2x1 small defense structures. If a lot, maybe you fill all available spaces with small defense structures, and build the defensive GBs.

I collect on time, so I don't care. There's nothing to plunder. I do however enjoy watching my enemies battle me and lose, or lose 7 out of 8 only to get nothing for the victory. I do enjoy watching them struggle because I use units an age above my tech. I do enjoy knowing they'll never be back because my city is annoying and has nothing worth the effort. But that's a play style choice, and only I get to make it no matter what anyone else says.

Basically, just ask yourself if you care about plunders, how much, and how you want your city to be.

 

[DeletedUser32973]

So this is a min/maxing thread the way I see it. Yeah, there are definitely cases where defense will help you in extremely active hoods, but you probably aren't a min/maxer. A min/maxer, or even simply a serious player, will almost always collect on time, thereby making defenses result in lower production every single time. This is simply a fact.

Of course you will eventually get plundered. Perhaps not enough to merit a city defense, but it will happen. And that's where every player will differ. Do you care at all? No? 0 defense city is for you! Do you care at all? Yes? How much? If only a little, maybe you just fill in some gaps with 1x1 or 2x1 small defense structures. If a lot, maybe you fill all available spaces with small defense structures, and build the defensive GBs.

It has been stated before, this isn't about how we "feel" about being plundered or attacked, it's about what produces more. If you love crushing your enemies and hate being raided, make those defenses, it's worth it to you. You're probably going to be producing less though, and that's ok, because you're having fun.

 

[DeletedUser34800]

Exactly. And I agree.

If there's 1000 city squares available for 2 cities, the one that fills them all with production (goods, gold, supplies, FPs) will produce more than the city that devotes 50% (random%) to defense, via GBs, small structures (RF, WF) or buildings that add defense % as well as something else (Nish pond of the Cherry Blossom set for example).

 

[DeletedUser32973]

First, the 700% figure was for end-game defense, and just an approximation. Second, any data on production would be affected by way more variables than just defense. I do know from experience that, contrary to the OP's experience, there are plenty of hoods out there where that production will be affected by whether you can stop people from taking your production. And there's plenty of evidence to back that up right here in the Forum. A multitude of threads/posts complaining about their stuff being "stolen".

Of course, there are a lot of factors that go into this. I think that there is a tipping point that relies on a player's frequency of activity, play style, and wild hood shenanigans. A nasty combination of these factors results in that multitude of complaints about things being stolen. For these specific people...more defense, yeah woot, go for it (or collect on time ). How many people fall under this specific "nasty combo" though?

Some data is better than no data btw . I agree he needs more data, and more varied data at that. But it is something at least. However, I'm not sure I'd say it's cherry picked, as I'm sure he accumulated whatever he could through his various current cities. It's not a one man job tbh.

 

[DeletedUser30900]

Why are we still taking about this? 0 defense wins. Let everyone do it plz. Spread the words in game. Specially W world

 

[DeletedUser32973]

Why are we still taking about this? 0 defense wins. Let everyone do it plz. Spread the words in game. Specially W world

Could we get more constructive responses please? What is with this forum and it's snarky, sarcastic, and unwelcoming atmosphere? If you guys want an echo chamber, just say so.

 

[DeletedUser30900]

Could we get more constructive responses please? What is with this forum and it's snarky, sarcastic, and unwelcoming atmosphere? If you guys want an echo chamber, just say so.

I’m serious about asking for help on spreading this strategy at W world. Just like i asked for iced tea without ice in the restaurant and they think i'm joking. But i'm serious.

 

[DeletedUser]

city that devotes 50% (random%) to defense,

See, this is misinformation of the type that the OP was using. Here are the defense stats for my 4 main cities, along with the % of available space taken up by defense.
Future Era: Boost: 21/422 Defense tiles in city:10.1% (214) Defense tiles with other benefits: 54% of total defense tiles(116)
Contemporary: Boost: 18/446 Defense tiles in city: 11.2% (208) Defense tiles with other benefits: 48.6% (101)
Indy Age: Boost 0/174 Defense tiles in city: 4.4% (56) Defense tiles with other benefits: 21% (12)
Colonial: Boost 0/65 Defense tiles in city: 2.3% (28) Defense tiles with other benefits: 32% (9)
As you can see, none of them are over 12% of total space devoted to defense. And if you go strictly by tiles devoted to nothing but defense, with no other benefits, the highest % would be my CE city with a whopping 5.8%. Almost all of which are 1x1 or 2x1 stuff stuck in where nothing else will fit except decos.

 

[DeletedUser32973]

See, this is misinformation of the type that the OP was using. Here are the defense stats for my 4 main cities, along with the % of available space taken up by defense.
Future Era: Boost: 21/422 Defense tiles in city:10.1% (214) Defense tiles with other benefits: 54% of total defense tiles(116)
Contemporary: Boost: 18/446 Defense tiles in city: 11.2% (208) Defense tiles with other benefits: 48.6% (101)
Indy Age: Boost 0/174 Defense tiles in city: 4.4% (56) Defense tiles with other benefits: 21% (12)
Colonial: Boost 0/65 Defense tiles in city: 2.3% (28) Defense tiles with other benefits: 32% (9)
As you can see, none of them are over 12% of total space devoted to defense. And if you go strictly by tiles devoted to nothing but defense, with no other benefits, the highest % would be my CE city with a whopping 5.8%. Almost all of which are 1x1 or 2x1 stuff stuck in where nothing else will fit except decos.

It doesn't really seem like you're super devoted to defense here. I'm curious if your defense in Indy/Colonial is really making a difference though. And yeah, it doesn't look like the space consumption is all that bad, though I'd still argue you probably produce more without the defense. As for the OP's statement, that sounds like an exaggeration to me. I don't think I've ever seen a city that used 50% of its space on defense. And it's not all simply about space. I have no idea if you have Deal Castles, but you have to consider the 1000's of FP dumped into structures like those.

 

[DeletedUser]

It doesn't really seem like you're super devoted to defense here. I'm curious if your defense in Indy/Colonial is really making a difference though. And yeah, it doesn't look like the space consumption is all that bad, though I'd still argue you probably produce more without the defense. As for the OP's statement, that sounds like an exaggeration to me. I don't think I've ever seen a city that used 50% of its space on defense. And it's not all simply about space. I have no idea if you have Deal Castles, but you have to consider the 1000's of FP dumped into structures like those.

Just to clarify, it wasn't the OP that mentioned 50%.
And if you want to argue data, let's take my Future Era city. Total of 214 tiles devoted at least partially to defense. Now, how many tiles would it take to have one more goods building? Let's assume for the sake of this example that there is 0 available population, and exactly enough Happiness to keep the current population enthusiastic. Let's also factor in the supplies needed to produce goods. If you add up the average size of an FE goods building (26) with the tiles needed by 1 residential building (36) for the pop and coins needed with the average size of an FE production building (20) for the supplies with the average size of a cultural building (32) for the Happiness needed for enthusiastic, you come up with 114 tiles. However, you then have to add in the average size of a PME goods building (26) and an Indy Age goods building (16) for the unrefined goods necessary to produce the FE goods. That brings the total needed to 156 tiles. And just like that, you've used up 75% of the space I've got devoted to defense and only gotten 1 FE goods building out of it. And that's assuming you can make all that fit with what else is in the city. I know that a counter-argument would say that if you have goods-producing GBs, you don't need the PME or Indy goods buildings, and if you have the pop/coin/supply/Happiness GBs you won't need the other buildings. So, let's look at that. Dresden (25) for goods and Happiness, Capitol (35) for population and supplies, Space Needle for Happiness and coins. Add that to the FE goods building (26) and you get 116 tiles. Still over half of my defense space for one single goods building. And, you have to hope that the Dresden only produces the good required for the goods building that you have or you're out of business. On top of that, in order to make all this work you would have to have them all leveled to at least level 10 if not higher, since you mentioned FPs required.

And then, unless you used the rest of the space for defense (which would negate the 0% defense argument, incidentally), you would still have to worry about collecting that one goods building on time.

 

[DeletedUser32973]

Hmm, but here you're speaking of replacing your defense with standard goods buildings. I would say you'd be replacing it with FP producing special buildings or special goods buildings that don't require unrefined goods (terrace farm for example). If you're speaking of a basic gaming strategy where all you have are regular buildings and GBs certainly your points apply and are valid. In this scenario, I think a solid defense holds merit. I'd assume, however, a Future Era player would have better buildings than the standard goods structures to replace their defense with.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hmm, but here you're speaking of replacing your defense with standard goods buildings. I would say you'd be replacing it with FP producing special buildings or special goods buildings that don't require unrefined goods (terrace farm for example). If you're speaking of a basic gaming strategy where all you have are regular buildings and GBs certainly your points apply and are valid. In this scenario, I think a solid defense holds merit. I'd assume, however, a Future Era player would have better buildings than the standard goods structures to replace their defense with.

All very good points, but that's not the argument the OP is making. He's talking strictly regular goods buildings.

 

[BruteForceAttack]

The beauty about this game is you have lots of ways to play. I don't think there is one way to do it, for every choice you make there is a set of pros and cons.

In context of this thread, if there isnt much in your city to plunder because a. you dont have goods buildings, b. you set and collect and buildings at 24 hrs, then you dont really have to compromise QOL (Quality Of Life) and still pull thru ahead.

E.G I dont have any dedicated defense, I dont even put much DA 99% of the time. I dont go out of my way and hit other folks either. (It is just waste of my time).

I make so many goods/coins/supplies with RQ I dont need to waste even one tile for DA.

So for me no defense has helped me to grow my city way stronger.

 

[DeletedUser32973]

All very good points, but that's not the argument the OP is making. He's talking strictly regular goods buildings.

Ah, true enough, I suppose this then depends on the era/age you're in then.

 

[DeletedUser34800]

It wasn't misinformation. I literally stated it was a random %. It's just a fact. A city with 0 defense buildings what so ever can produce more than an equal city that devotes to defense, when talking about purely producing buildings, as I stated.

If arranged in a perfect (probably impossible) manner where every square is devoted (every square) to buildings that produce goods or GBs that produce goods, or even special buildings that produce goods, that city will be able to output more goods than a city that doesn't do that.

Pretty simple. I'm not even advocating for the 0% defense strategy. It's pretty obvious though. Don't care about happiness, don't care about FPs, don't care about anything but the ultimate in production design. You'll produce more than someone that uses happiness, military, defense/attack, etc.

It's unrealistic that anyone would do that, but maybe someone would want to try? I wouldn't.