PDA

View Full Version : Capture the whole city by blockading it



Raydoovah
01-18-2018, 11:37 PM
I've read the Art of War blogs, and it was mentioned that you need to destroy the main warehouse to capture an island. I think this will be too easy to exploit for both the AI and the player.

Build a deathball of ships - take it to the enemies harbor, destroy all the defenses with ease - kill the warehouse in less than a minute. Wham, it's your island.
If the enemy's deathball is not close enough to their main island - they're screwed

I think what would be a better way is to make it so that to capture an island, you need to actually capture the opposing warehouse. That should take about 30 minutes. Which is enough for the defending player to retaliate .

stylisticsagi
01-19-2018, 10:00 AM
bad idea

Raydoovah
01-19-2018, 04:49 PM
Why is it a bad idea?

iruet
01-19-2018, 08:34 PM
I'd rather have no PvP at all, but I like the idea... make them do some effort before they can take over you city :)

Raydoovah
01-19-2018, 11:19 PM
@Iruet - PVP will be toggleable in 1800, that we know for sure.

But yeah, if we need to destroy the warehouse to capture the island that'll be easily exploitable.

iruet
01-19-2018, 11:44 PM
@Iruet - PVP will be toggleable in 1800, that we know for sure.

But yeah, if we need to destroy the warehouse to capture the island that'll be easily exploitable.

Yeah I know, that does not mean I like it...


And yes, it might be best to have to capture the citycentre or marketplace or mayor house to capture entire islands

stylisticsagi
01-20-2018, 09:28 AM
If you could capture entire islands with just a fleet and nothing else then the game is your the moment you have naval supremacy.
The game is bad enough as it it when you have lost a larger battle on the sea, this would make it even worse.

AgmasGold
01-20-2018, 12:26 PM
To be honest, if you have naval superiority its only a matter of time anyway, but I see the point... I think we need some way to progressively capture the island, or at the very least, have a limit on how long you need to "hold" the main warehouse for with your ships. If the system is as simple as just destroying it, and that results in an instant capture of the island, then that is a little exploitable. 30 minutes is way too long though, I would get so bored....

ruuti0
01-20-2018, 01:42 PM
To be honest, if you have naval superiority its only a matter of time anyway, but I see the point... I think we need some way to progressively capture the island, or at the very least, have a limit on how long you need to "hold" the main warehouse for with your ships. If the system is as simple as just destroying it, and that results in an instant capture of the island, then that is a little exploitable. 30 minutes is way too long though, I would get so bored....

I agree. Maybe good time would be something like 15min? It wouldn't be too short, but not too long either, at least in my opinion.

And maybe there should be done something more too than just hold the main warehouse to capture island.

stylisticsagi
01-20-2018, 02:20 PM
Perhaps an idea for this then...
If you allow ships to capture a whole island by standing idle by it's coastal warehouse.
Why not use provisions?
Larger island with more buildings or valua would require more minimum provisions on board.
Then the more provisions you have to spend the faster the island would be captured. Since a ship can only hold so much sending multiple ships full with provisions will also speed it up to a minimum limit or let's say at least 5 minutes at max provision price and 30 minutes at minimum provision price.

Provisions are not cheap and therefore capturing the island will still be quite an investement.
I can't accept capturing an island with ships laying idle in the harbour for the same price they would have been idle in your own harbour.

Raydoovah
01-20-2018, 08:00 PM
I think 30 minutes for 1 big island is perfect. Because it allows the defending player to actually defend.
Capturing a whole island shouldn't be an easy task.

Actually, Maybe it should depend on the Size/Value/Population of the island. So say a small island would take 10 mins, the main one 30.

Also requiring provisions puts another barrier to capturing an island, which is great imo. Because it requires a big investment from the attacking player. Also, allowing capturing cities only with trade ships, that would carry the "provisions" would be an option. So the defending player could need to only need to delete some specific ships.

Because in my opinion, the defender needs a huge advantage in war. It shouldn't so that when you take your ships to the other part of the map - the enemy can easily come in and take out your main island. That ain't cool.

iruet
01-21-2018, 03:58 PM
I agree that the defender should have some sort of advantage, but I also agree that the attacker should not wait for 30 minutes before an island get captured. I think 10-15 minutes would be best :)

ruuti0
01-21-2018, 05:41 PM
I think that attacker should have certain number of ships needed to capture an island (and first you should destroy all defend turrents, and ships defending island).

To me it just sound stupid that big island with big population could be captured by one small warship.

stylisticsagi
01-22-2018, 03:16 PM
There could apart from provisions be indeed also a minimum fleet requirement befoe a capture can begin.
Provisions can be quite expensive and so the minimum fleet size could be sufficient if loaded full with provisions. Trade ships (or just more warships) could then boost the time to capture the island with more provisions (and thus also higher cost). I think the assaulting player should not have to wait so long if he doesn't want to be then he must also be willing to pay a higher price.
As for the defending party's advantages, coastal defences need to be good and absolutly not being outranged ever by ships. I think 2070 had a good system for defences had to take a minute before they where active from the moment they where build. Defending players should not be able to win a coastal siege by placing in the heat of battle extra defences.

On the other hand i think there must be weaker and cheaper coastal defences available early on with common goods. (it would also boost the looks of early on harbours).
And then the more standard defences wich actually requires you to have a weapons factory of some sort.
In some anno games it bugged me if you came somewhat unexpected into a war you had absolutly no way to defend yourself because you did not yet build a weapons factory.(and advanced building materials for the matter).

Raydoovah
01-22-2018, 04:23 PM
There could apart from provisions be indeed also a minimum fleet requirement befoe a capture can begin.
Provisions can be quite expensive and so the minimum fleet size could be sufficient if loaded full with provisions. Trade ships (or just more warships) could then boost the time to capture the island with more provisions (and thus also higher cost). I think the assaulting player should not have to wait so long if he doesn't want to be then he must also be willing to pay a higher price.
As for the defending party's advantages, coastal defences need to be good and absolutly not being outranged ever by ships. I think 2070 had a good system for defences had to take a minute before they where active from the moment they where build. Defending players should not be able to win a coastal siege by placing in the heat of battle extra defences.

On the other hand i think there must be weaker and cheaper coastal defences available early on with common goods. (it would also boost the looks of early on harbours).
And then the more standard defences wich actually requires you to have a weapons factory of some sort.
In some anno games it bugged me if you came somewhat unexpected into a war you had absolutly no way to defend yourself because you did not yet build a weapons factory.(and advanced building materials for the matter).

Minimum fleet requirement is not needed. If you send 1 ship, then that attack can easily be defended against. Trade ships with provisions boosting the speed is something I agree on.

But we must remember, that the defender needs time to respond. And Anno is a very slow game. So the minimum time it takes to capture an island should be 15 minutes

Raydoovah
01-22-2018, 04:25 PM
I agree that the defender should have some sort of advantage, but I also agree that the attacker should not wait for 30 minutes before an island get captured. I think 10-15 minutes would be best :)

The problem with quick capturing an island is that it means you can end the game in 15 minutes essentially. It's very punishing for the defending player, that if their ships are far from their main island - so their island will get captured before they have time to respond properly. Which isn't cool imo.

ruuti0
01-22-2018, 05:27 PM
The problem with quick capturing an island is that it means you can end the game in 15 minutes essentially. It's very punishing for the defending player, that if their ships are far from their main island - so their island will get captured before they have time to respond properly. Which isn't cool imo.

I am pretty sure that getting your ships to your island won't take 15min in any Anno version, though it has been some time when I last time played earliest Anno versions.

There should be something more more than for example one ship taking control of enemy island, to prevent that you can lose game in really early game (for example if you get attacked by multiple opponents in begin and you don't got allies defending you, otherwise in situation like that you can't do much in early begin)

Raydoovah
01-22-2018, 07:37 PM
I am pretty sure that getting your ships to your island won't take 15min in any Anno version, though it has been some time when I last time played earliest Anno versions.

There should be something more more than for example one ship taking control of enemy island, to prevent that you can lose game in really early game (for example if you get attacked by multiple opponents in begin and you don't got allies defending you, otherwise in situation like that you can't do much in early begin)

This is a good concern. It can be solved in a number of ways imo:

1: Add an item that a capturing ship must have to start the capture process (the item can be built only at a specific civ level);
2: Allowing cities to be captured only when both players have reached a specific Civ level (like in 1404 Venice where you could start buying shares only after both parties got to Patrician)
3: Allowing people to build some cheap but powerful harbour defense buildings.

Godream50
01-23-2018, 07:38 AM
This is a good point... In Anno 1404, it can take a long time (especially against a person) to actually "take" an island from their control. I have even seen AI land additional troops to fight and defend the island. I noticed in the Art of War Devblog they have mentioned that there will be no land troops or armies...so I am also curious to see how the process of "invading" or taking an island will work and what is required. I think especially that the concept of blockading, and invading an island are both different. Cutting off an island which produces one type of resource or cutting off the home island itself (should be a more difficult task) from it's supplying colonies should both be viable options if even to convince another player to secede resources or control of an island versus an outright invasion or war...I'm just speaking from personal experience with other players :)

stylisticsagi
01-23-2018, 03:06 PM
This is a good concern. It can be solved in a number of ways imo:

1: Add an item that a capturing ship must have to start the capture process (the item can be built only at a specific civ level);
2: Allowing cities to be captured only when both players have reached a specific Civ level (like in 1404 Venice where you could start buying shares only after both parties got to Patrician)
3: Allowing people to build some cheap but powerful harbour defense buildings.


1- provisions (like in 1404) could do that since they are only possible to produce in the latest civ level.
2- agreed.
3- agreed even more however they must have been build before the blockade it must not be possible to build them when it is already to late.

apart from those i still want to adres that war is an expensive buisness and in an economic game like anno it should really be expensive!
fighting wars on the seas should not be all that expensive but when we are talking about capturing island it really must have a price tag!

Then again i still want to adress more other tempting options because i cannot express enough that anno is in the first place an economic game and war is something wich it can't miss but the focus must not be on war. Therefore capturing islands must apart from the price tag must not be that easy either.

banan1996.1996
01-24-2018, 09:35 PM
Defender really has an advantage with the harbour defences - there will be some as we've seen them during AnnoCast.

Not having defences or weapon factory when being attacked? - that's player's fault, you need to keep up to your enemies and progress fast enough so that you can be ready to defend yourself - that's the point, isn't it?

Capturing the island should take some time but still it will always depend only on both players fleets size and defender's number of cannons in warehouse area. I like the idea of making it faster with provisions. And definately warships should be much more expensive than trading ships - war is expensive indeed.

Building defences should be possible at the same time when you can start building warships - so that both players can defend themselves when first attacks are possible. Harbour defences have to be quite cheap compared to warships so that it's easier to defend than to attack - but it has to be impossible to just indefinitely spam your harbour with more defences - the time needed for the turrets to start working was great in Anno 2070.

stylisticsagi
01-24-2018, 10:15 PM
I think your defences should be able to be build a civ earlier then the means to attack.
if a player does not defend himself it would be his fault i partly agree.
i disagree if a more experienced player maneged to rush a bit faster to the first weapons and then rushes a weaker player who is unable to defend himself and since he is unable to fight back it will be unlikly he will be able to do it later and even if he manages it will probably damage him so hard he can't come back knowing that is a less experienced player in the first place.

That's why i suggested to have a cheaper version of harbour defences(wich require basic tools, no weapons) so an early attack will still stay clear of your harbours, if early on enemy ships are keeping you into your harbours that's early on on punishing enough, i don't think capturing island should be something you can do very quikly in the game.

iruet
01-26-2018, 08:05 PM
I think your defences should be able to be build a civ earlier then the means to attack.
if a player does not defend himself it would be his fault i partly agree.
i disagree if a more experienced player maneged to rush a bit faster to the first weapons and then rushes a weaker player who is unable to defend himself and since he is unable to fight back it will be unlikly he will be able to do it later and even if he manages it will probably damage him so hard he can't come back knowing that is a less experienced player in the first place.

That's why i suggested to have a cheaper version of harbour defences(wich require basic tools, no weapons) so an early attack will still stay clear of your harbours, if early on enemy ships are keeping you into your harbours that's early on on punishing enough, i don't think capturing island should be something you can do very quikly in the game.

I like this idea, it makes it possible to play longer if your "friends" play more violantly

AgmasGold
01-27-2018, 03:42 PM
To be honest though, if you could get defenses with just tools (before you had weapons) I can see myself just exploiting that fact and spamming down loads of defense, making an attack on any of my harbour's hard, if not impossible, by the time the civilization and population levels for weapons had been reached.

stylisticsagi
01-27-2018, 05:02 PM
This is easy to balance.
like i said i mean early cheap weak defences wich should be easely destroyed by more advanced ships then the first warships.
you will still have the construction time like in 2070 where it took a minute or 2 before defences where constructed.
spamming alot of defences would be bad for maintenance price but basicly yeah early on it should simply keep you away out of enemy harbours, those kind of attacks are for later in the game with more advanced and stronger warfare options.

ruuti0
01-27-2018, 05:53 PM
This is easy to balance.
like i said i mean early cheap weak defences wich should be easely destroyed by more advanced ships then the first warships.
you will still have the construction time like in 2070 where it took a minute or 2 before defences where constructed.
spamming alot of defences would be bad for maintenance price but basicly yeah early on it should simply keep you away out of enemy harbours, those kind of attacks are for later in the game with more advanced and stronger warfare options.

I agree with you.

I have question that goes little bit more far in this situation than just begin, what you do then (your opinion) if your trade ships & cargo ships and warships if you have them (practically your whole fleet) get destryoed early by multiple players?

Your harbor defence might be strong enough to protect you from them taking your island, but
you can end up in situation where you can use goods only from your island and you can get little other goods that you island doesn't produce from other traders, and it is known in Anno that one island can't produce all goods you need and random traders don't bring enough other items, you need your own produce on another island.

You got harbor defence that stop them destroying you in early game and that only buy you some time, but aren't you doomed anyway then?

I am now thinking a situation where multiple enemies same time have taken you to their target in early game. Enemies would have multiple islands in their control and multiple resources because of their numbers (of course this also depend how fast you can build infrastructure, but in theory they would have superior resources compared to you). With enemy NPCs you can try make peace, but with fellow human players it might not work out.


In situation like that I think it would be really useful if you could make alliances with NPCs, that kind of alliances where they would come to defend you (I already talk more about this idea here: https://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1817359-Some-new-ideas-to-Anno-1800 ).

Because otherwise alone you are pretty much just waiting your doom.

What ideas you got to this? Anybody else can answer too.

stylisticsagi
01-27-2018, 06:07 PM
this is not off topic at all it is very on topic.

personally i think the earliest trading ships should be cheap. i also think that when they are empty they should sail faster then early warships. however when loaded with cargo the warships should catch up with them. so you would need a few warships and organize them to succesfully sink trading ships. As for players (and perhaps also ai) when a trading ship with cargo is under attack it could throw the cargo overboard so you would not lose the ship. This would also make a nice extra for people who love to do more piracy since i think i heard this a few people mentioning.

But here can be some very interesting new game options.
we can't do enough with our money in anno games i can't state that enough.
i think it would be anice addition to hire ships for transportation.
Those ships would therefore not be at war with that other player and you can still move your goods.

another option would be to have some more interesting trade agreements. perhaps you can with the free traders (under whatever name they may sail) make more contracts they will visit your harbours more often. Anno has always been to much about selling our stuff we need to have more options to buy stuff.

p.s. both of these option should definitly NOT being cheaper then doing it yourself.
however come to think of it, if you could hire trading ships perhaps trading ship could be more expensive (i know opposite of what i just said) and therefore in the beginning you would have to rely more on hired help. It would certainly give you a bigger feeling of climbing up the ladder when you start to build your own ships.

perhaps smuggling one way or another (not sure how this mechanic could work properly just an idea).
perhaps people needing more stuff from the beginning but not requireing them all to advance could also create that on more island civilasations can be reached wich are more capable of defending themselfs.

ruuti0
02-01-2018, 03:21 PM
this is not off topic at all it is very on topic.

personally i think the earliest trading ships should be cheap. i also think that when they are empty they should sail faster then early warships. however when loaded with cargo the warships should catch up with them. so you would need a few warships and organize them to succesfully sink trading ships. As for players (and perhaps also ai) when a trading ship with cargo is under attack it could throw the cargo overboard so you would not lose the ship. This would also make a nice extra for people who love to do more piracy since i think i heard this a few people mentioning.

But here can be some very interesting new game options.
we can't do enough with our money in anno games i can't state that enough.
i think it would be anice addition to hire ships for transportation.
Those ships would therefore not be at war with that other player and you can still move your goods.

another option would be to have some more interesting trade agreements. perhaps you can with the free traders (under whatever name they may sail) make more contracts they will visit your harbours more often. Anno has always been to much about selling our stuff we need to have more options to buy stuff.

p.s. both of these option should definitly NOT being cheaper then doing it yourself.
however come to think of it, if you could hire trading ships perhaps trading ship could be more expensive (i know opposite of what i just said) and therefore in the beginning you would have to rely more on hired help. It would certainly give you a bigger feeling of climbing up the ladder when you start to build your own ships.

perhaps smuggling one way or another (not sure how this mechanic could work properly just an idea).
perhaps people needing more stuff from the beginning but not requireing them all to advance could also create that on more island civilasations can be reached wich are more capable of defending themselfs.


" we can't do enough with our money in anno games i can't state that enough.
i think it would be anice addition to hire ships for transportation.
Those ships would therefore not be at war with that other player and you can still move your goods."

I don't like that idea becaues then you could practically exploit it and only hire other ships to do transportation, ships that cannot be attacked by enemy. It would be simply smart to not even make own transportation ships at all which can be attacked and only use hired transportation ships. This would elimate would of key aspect of Anno games, robbing or destroying enemy transportation ships.

Otherwise hiring others do transportation is good idea. There should be also option to attack those hired transportation ships.


" another option would be to have some more interesting trade agreements. perhaps you can with the free traders (under whatever name they may sail) make more contracts they will visit your harbours more often. Anno has always been to much about selling our stuff we need to have more options to buy stuff."

This would also cancel idea of making own tradeships, because you could choose ships that cannot be attacked to bring you goods you need.
This also would bring exploit part and remove one of key parts of game.



"i also think that when they are empty they should sail faster then early warships. however when loaded with cargo the warships should catch up with them. so you would need a few warships and organize them to succesfully sink trading ships."

They surely could be faster empty, but not too fast either, otherwise (early) warships could become totally useless vs tradeships.


What kind of smuggling you were thinking? This sounds interesting, but how you are going to execute it in practice?

stylisticsagi
02-02-2018, 09:47 AM
Well i can agree with the fact that hiring transportation is very exploitable, however...
In an earlier topic (can't remember wich one) i mentioned that the player should be able to go to war with anyone and be able to wipe the map clean of everyone.
This also includes the free trader(s) Therefore if a players hires the free traders to supply his islands the assaulting player could go to war with these traders and still blockade you.
Altough if he does this... it would also means he himself would have a trade partner less. This would make war much more political as it should be.

as for the faster trading ships they should not have supper speed either they should just slightly be able to outrun early warships when empty.
perhaps their damage slowdown could be made much worse when also carrying cargo then when they are empty, so when they are empty they could still lsightly outrun enemy warships even when already half damaged. This would simply make an attacking player really aim for the loaded ships and not the empty ones knowing that losing your cargo with every attack is also quite punishing. Also keep in mind that mid game you would have warships who DO can intercept those early trading ships. It's just a bit of giving some slack to the player who early falls behind a bit and is losing the war early on and therefore preventing him from comming back from it at all.

Another thing wich would go against this exploit is having your own ships must be much much cheaper.
I therefore liked a bit of having to realy on hired traders more in the beginning cuzz ships would be more expensive, cuzz they could balance the economy of the game more so you would earn more early on because you would have to spend it on traders but mid game you would make more money because you are getting your fleet and replacing the hired traders with own ships.

as for smuggling there are a few options wich could be used for this altough when i think of it i doubt if this will really be an add-on for the game.
you could manually have your ship near an island and manually use the smuggle option to trade as if you where in the harbour at the cost of some goods (things brake when they are smuggeld).
pirates could trade with u in a simular way.

another more interesting part of smuggling could be in the form of sabotage.
sailing with your ship near another players island (war or no war irrelivant) and sell your cargo directly to the population and the victem player would lose portions of tax income when a player does this to him.

iruet
02-02-2018, 12:35 PM
Well i can agree with the fact that hiring transportation is very exploitable, however...
In an earlier topic (can't remember wich one) i mentioned that the player should be able to go to war with anyone and be able to wipe the map clean of everyone.
This also includes the free trader(s) Therefore if a players hires the free traders to supply his islands the assaulting player could go to war with these traders and still blockade you.
Altough if he does this... it would also means he himself would have a trade partner less. This would make war much more political as it should be.

as for the faster trading ships they should not have supper speed either they should just slightly be able to outrun early warships when empty.
perhaps their damage slowdown could be made much worse when also carrying cargo then when they are empty, so when they are empty they could still lsightly outrun enemy warships even when already half damaged. This would simply make an attacking player really aim for the loaded ships and not the empty ones knowing that losing your cargo with every attack is also quite punishing. Also keep in mind that mid game you would have warships who DO can intercept those early trading ships. It's just a bit of giving some slack to the player who early falls behind a bit and is losing the war early on and therefore preventing him from comming back from it at all.

Another thing wich would go against this exploit is having your own ships must be much much cheaper.
I therefore liked a bit of having to realy on hired traders more in the beginning cuzz ships would be more expensive, cuzz they could balance the economy of the game more so you would earn more early on because you would have to spend it on traders but mid game you would make more money because you are getting your fleet and replacing the hired traders with own ships.

as for smuggling there are a few options wich could be used for this altough when i think of it i doubt if this will really be an add-on for the game.
you could manually have your ship near an island and manually use the smuggle option to trade as if you where in the harbour at the cost of some goods (things brake when they are smuggeld).
pirates could trade with u in a simular way.

another more interesting part of smuggling could be in the form of sabotage.
sailing with your ship near another players island (war or no war irrelivant) and sell your cargo directly to the population and the victem player would lose portions of tax income when a player does this to him.

I like this idea, but I think there must be difference in speed between a empty or loaded ship if it will get implemented like this... Obviously a loaded ship does have more resistence, so it can't escape pirates for instance...

stylisticsagi
02-02-2018, 01:09 PM
that has always have been the case ever since the first anno.
However the first trading ships could never outrun the first warships.
So i am referring that whilst empty, they could outrune the first warships.

Then you still have off course the items wich could boost the ships speed. They would be much more often used if you can create these yourself (even at early stages of the game) instead of having to buy them with precious things like honour.
This is one of the reasons i liked the sail itme in 1404, with it they could outrun warships.
So if they could do it all the time it would be perfect, warships however could with such an item catch up with even empty trading ships without such an item.
However once the trading ship has again also such an item he will again outrun early warships.

I think they can give such a favor to the defending/ running player. Don't forget with more warships it would still be possible to sink them in time if there firepower is great enough.

mid to late game there will of course be multiple ship choices, there will be a fast cargo ship wich would be the fastest ship in the game but with lower cargo space and the big cargo ships wich are much slower and cought up with everything but have very very large cargo space. but those options where also always in the game.

and now also to know that it has already been confirmed there will be an effect by the wind in this game and there would also be steam ships wich would not be affected (as much) by wind.
Those are going to give a lot of costumization options for playeres preferences and map desires (large routes small routes need for lot's of cargo spaces, enemies presents etc...)

iruet
02-02-2018, 03:39 PM
that has always have been the case ever since the first anno.
However the first trading ships could never outrun the first warships.
So i am referring that whilst empty, they could outrune the first warships.

Then you still have off course the items wich could boost the ships speed. They would be much more often used if you can create these yourself (even at early stages of the game) instead of having to buy them with precious things like honour.
This is one of the reasons i liked the sail itme in 1404, with it they could outrun warships.
So if they could do it all the time it would be perfect, warships however could with such an item catch up with even empty trading ships without such an item.
However once the trading ship has again also such an item he will again outrun early warships.

I think they can give such a favor to the defending/ running player. Don't forget with more warships it would still be possible to sink them in time if there firepower is great enough.

mid to late game there will of course be multiple ship choices, there will be a fast cargo ship wich would be the fastest ship in the game but with lower cargo space and the big cargo ships wich are much slower and cought up with everything but have very very large cargo space. but those options where also always in the game.

and now also to know that it has already been confirmed there will be an effect by the wind in this game and there would also be steam ships wich would not be affected (as much) by wind.
Those are going to give a lot of costumization options for playeres preferences and map desires (large routes small routes need for lot's of cargo spaces, enemies presents etc...)

Yeah that first part was what I meant... Eventhough it is unrealistic sometimes... :)