• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

Defending army is immortal. why so?

JoyfulRider

Member
Just having only one set of defending army units and it fights with unlimited attackers.

What will be worst case, when the defending army got lost and another attacker jumps in for plundering. Currently, immortal defending army tries to defend with full power auto healing 100% and safeguards the city. Felt like, it got implemented to reduce the people cry on getting more plunderers.

Expecting changes like,
  • defending army got lost with one attacker and another attacker tries to attack.
    • next attackers must get two spear fighters which is default if the battles got lost with any of the attacker previously.
  • defending army took heavy damage and another attacker tries to attack.
    • it should not get auto healed to face the next attackers.
  • multiple attackers trying at the same time (very rare but possible).
    • defending army units are busy, so default two spear fighters for one of the attacker (based on server time who comes late)
Making above changes are little rough and rude for the current game play, but felt like it should be the logical approach.
Will this make everyone worry to much?
 
Last edited:
Great ideas and comments. You would receive no complaints from me, especially given that just because the attack is successful does not mean that the plundering will follow or that the plundering will be successful. I do agree that some players would not like it..and others would love it. I say to each their own and just enjoy playing the game however you so chose to play it. All the “expert” players in this game and still no one has ever “won”. Love the idea. Change is always great.
 

Emberguard

Well-Known Member
You have what? 70-80 Hoodies that can attack you.

In the event they had gone for a army that can be damaged I’d like the ability to stack on multiple waves of units so I don’t have to replenish every 5 minutes if attackers are close together (back when the feature was new plundering was a lot more common)
 

Ironrooster

Active Member
If defenders took permanent damage it would drastically alter the game to the point that city defenders would be pointless. Unless you are constantly playing you would not be able to refresh to defend against the next attacker. Even if you had an automated refresh the number of units required everyday would be huge even if only 20% or so of the neighborhood attacked - way more than could be generated by most players.
 

The Winning Bid

Talk about a set up for revenge attacks. Don’t forget that you must be able to heal your advanced defending units. How so if you’re not there ? That would erase the entire strategy for getting later aged troops because they would just be targets and less than useless.
 

wolfhoundtoo

Well-Known Member
It would just devolve into a way to be able to plunder without actually having to beat the defender. I'm guessing someone likes to 'pack' attack and wasn't able to get the goodies someone else found.

As for why it's that way the attacker has a HUGE advantage over the defender if they opt to manually battle. And as pointed out by others there would be no point to defending armies which would negate (just off the top of my head) the defending GBs, the buildings that give extra defense to the defending armies, and any of the special buildings that do the same. It's a major change to the game system and for what so people can have an easier time to be able to try and plunder someone?

For all of those that would like this I would offer the counter idea of reducing the cost of a city shield to a 1% of its current cost. I'd say that the amount of 'crying' that plunderers would do would be greater than the ones that 'cry' over being plundered. :p
 

JoyfulRider

Member
If the game developers keep this logic initially, everyone might have suggested the current logic and it might get falls under DNS for making the game easier. Luckily or unfortunately, defending army got the immortality and healing power.
 

Robbenn

Member
I haven't had a defending army in years. If you were to lose the defending army and have to replenish it, it would literally make no sense for anyone to set up a defending army, ever. If you are low level enough to care about getting plundered, the units you lose are worth more than whatever they can get from you.
 

Emberguard

Well-Known Member
If the game developers keep this logic initially, everyone might have suggested the current logic and it might get falls under DNS for making the game easier. Luckily or unfortunately, defending army got the immortality and healing power.
I've seen games where that kind of logic works for the game. But they're balanced a lot differently from what FoE is. Had FoE gone down that route the amount of units lost on a constant basis would have needed to be taken into account along with how often you can be plundered and how much can be taken
 

Nice2HaveU

Active Member
Joy, with your expectation cause one trouble. Some people will dislike the game process and lost interest to play continuously. Like real world situation, rich get richer and poor get poorer. So FOE they realized the problem or kept without any idea of the problem, no clue but it is one of the decent approach to keep defending army with immortality (which is never be a case in real world to be referred as logical approach).
 

JoyfulRider

Member
the amount of units lost on a constant basis would have needed to be taken into account
For attacking army, foe doesn't have the same concern. Because attacking is user choice of action and defending army units gets into work only when others attack. My point is, army units should go under energy bar mechanism, not by programmable logic to give same defending army with full health for everyone who comes into attack.
decent approach to keep defending army with immortality
With this change, even the top most person in the game should be having nightmares. Changes will make pure chaos, but everyone will have fair chance. Even a poor ( novice attacker) can smile on rich ( expert attacker), at the same time rich person can punish the poor however they want. IMO Immortality concept in a strategy game is a loophole.
 

Graviton

Well-Known Member
For attacking army, foe doesn't have the same concern. Because attacking is user choice of action and defending army units gets into work only when others attack. My point is, army units should go under energy bar mechanism, not by programmable logic to give same defending army with full health for everyone who comes into attack.
The fact that it's designed this way (which means that it's not a loophole) is because Inno wants attackers to win more often than not. Because winning is fun. That's the same reason the defense loses no units, nor even health: to make losing a defensive battle as painless as possible.

As others have said, this would not be a tweak nor even a minor change, this would completely upend the game's design. No bueno.
 

The Winning Bid

I agree with the majority. This would upend the whole game and be a slap in the face for the ones spending years building up their attack and a slap in the face for the ones spending years defending their city. It will never happen because it would be a game killer.
 

qaccy

Well-Known Member
It'd be too drastic to change the defense system in that way. I've been playing FoE since late 2013, and the current defense system is the one that was present all those years ago when I started playing. Over the years, Inno's approach to pvp has been to add new features to the game rather than to change existing ones. That way new stuff doesn't really have a negative impact on folks who may not want to engage with it.
 

Emberguard

Well-Known Member
For attacking army, foe doesn't have the same concern. Because attacking is user choice of action and defending army units gets into work only when others attack. My point is, army units should go under energy bar mechanism, not by programmable logic to give same defending army with full health for everyone who comes into attack.
it would need a lot more then just changing the defenders troops to perishing. Everything at the moment for plundering is balanced around the defence being immortal. This would have to be done in a way that allows brand new players who haven’t touched any Great Buildings to keep up with.

With this change, even the top most person in the game should be having nightmares. Changes will make pure chaos, but everyone will have fair chance. Even a poor ( novice attacker) can smile on rich ( expert attacker), at the same time rich person can punish the poor however they want. IMO Immortality concept in a strategy game is a loophole.
Or the top person won’t bother defending because they already have a plunder immune city from aiding and certain building mechanics
 

Algona

Well-Known Member
With this change, even the top most person in the game should be having nightmares.
Nightmares are the stuff of fun gaming?

Just can't wait for the donkey to river the inside straight when you're all in?

So happy to blow a tire leading the final lap of the race?

Relish your quarterback throwing an interception on the one going in for for the go ahead touchdown at the end of the Superbowl when you have the baddest ass running back on the planet?

Well then you are in luck!

You don't have to wait for INNO to make that change, you can implement your idea tonite.

Roll a d8 before going to bed and destroy that many of your DA.

Let me know how that works out for you.

Pleasant dreams.
 

JoyfulRider

Member
As a matter of fact, city can be breached only once. Not again and again. Felt like it was kept to prevent from players who are behind us not to gain victory. Players above us can break through anytime.

Now people are relaxing in a strategy game with the intentional flaw of defending army. Forging an empire, it should not have this minor flaw, which is an escape factor given to all players by default.

Anyways Happy Forging to everyone!!
 

Ironrooster

Active Member
As a matter of fact, city can be breached only once. Not again and again. Felt like it was kept to prevent from players who are behind us not to gain victory. Players above us can break through anytime.

Now people are relaxing in a strategy game with the intentional flaw of defending army. Forging an empire, it should not have this minor flaw, which is an escape factor given to all players by default.

Anyways Happy Forging to everyone!!
It;s one attack/breach per attacker per day. Everyone in your neighborhood could attack you once, that would be 70-80 attacks. The immortal defending army enables the defender to have a chance.