ARKS V2 demo details

Welcome to the Tour of Generals forum.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

ARKS V2 demo details
Topic Started: Dec 31 2009, 07:25 AM (119 Views)
ARKempire	Dec 31 2009, 07:25 AM Post #1
Posts: 114 Group: Members Member #334 Joined: Mar 31, 2009 Clan: Ordanary Legends	i will be updateing this as i go along with this and welcome insight on my well thought out plans for the v2 demo admin if u like my final product i hope u consider me as an offical partner =p anyways to start off .. i present the new scoreing system the new battle system is in the woks ````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` UNIT KILL TO DEATH RATIO FACTORED IN TO YOUR WIN LOSS RATIO FACTORED INTO HOW MANY GAMES TOTAL UV PLAYED SO SAY I HAVE 2 KILLS FOR EVERY ONE DEATH IN MY WAR HISTORY MY SCORE IS "2" SAY I HAVE WON 50 GAMES AND ONLY LOST 10 THAT IS FRACTIONED TO 1 OUT OF 5 A POSITAVE "5" AND THE POINTS EARNED FOR EACH GAME USEING THE CURRENT POINT SYSTEM SAY "25000" AS EXPERANCE 2 x 5 = 10 SKILL LEVEL IS 10 ONE POINT IS ADDED FOR EVERY 10,000 IN GAME POINTS SO +2 SKILL IS 12 25000 OR U CAN USE SAME NUMBER WITH "00" IN THE HUNDREDS FOR ACCURACY SO SET UP SHOULD LOOK LIKE CURRENT SKILL RATEING +12 (10 WITH OUT EXP BONUS) GAME EXPERANCE 25000 PLAYER COMMENTS: ALL COMMENTS HAVE A AGREE AND DISSAGREE FUNCTION SO IS SOMEONE SAYS "NO U DONT PLAY FAIR U CHEAT AND NOONE PLAY U" I CAN "DISAGREE" AND IT WILL SHOW UP AS "ARKEMPRE DISAGREES" AFTER 10 OR 15 DISSAGREE IT IS AUTO FLAGGED FOR MODS TO INVESTAGATE AND DETERMINE IF IT WARRENTS REMOVAL ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````



ARKempire	Jan 4 2010, 06:57 PM Post #2
Posts: 114 Group: Members Member #334 Joined: Mar 31, 2009 Clan: Ordanary Legends	''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' BATTLE SYSTEM IN ORDER TO PREVENTEXTREEM LOPSIDED BATTLES UNIT SPECIALS AND BONUSES WILL HAVE TO HAVE A PRESET NUMBER OF CASUTALYS BUT STILL ON A DICE ROLL TANKS KILLS INFINTRY INFINTRY KILLS ARTILLERY ARTILLERY KILLS TANKS TOO KEEP THE STILL MYSTERY OF WAR ALIVE A PRESET NUMBER OF CAUSTLS BUT BE SET TO MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM 100 TROOPS = 1.0 1 TANK = 1.0 1 ART = 1.0 ATTACKING ARMY TO ARMY 1 TANK TO KILL BETWEEN 75 - 150 SOLDIERS 1 ARTILLERY KILLS BETWEEN 30 - 100 SOLDIERS 1 ARTILLERY KILLS BETWEEN 1.0 - AND 2.5 TANKS, RESULTS OF THIS BATTLE TO BE ROUNDED TO THE NEARIST WHOLE NUMBER DEFENTING ( CITY OR FORT ) ARTILLERY HAS A BOMUS ON TROOPS AS THE TROOPS ARE STATIONARY WHICH MAKE THEM VERY VONURABLE TO ARTILLERY TANKS ARE AT A SLIGHT DISSADVANTAGE BECAUSE OF SOLDIER DEFENCIVE ANTI TANK THE ONLY SYSTEM ICOULD COME UP WITH WITH OUT ADDEING IN AIR UNITS TANKS KILL 50 TO 100 SOLDIERS ARTILLERY 75 TO 170 SOLDIERS 1 ARTILLERY KILLS BETWEEN .5 - AND 1.5 TANKS, RESULTS OF THIS BATTLE TO BE ROUNDED TO THE NEARIST WHOLE NUMBER AGAIN THESE PRESETS ARE A PRILIMINARY SETTING AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE IF AN ATTACKING ARMY ATTACKS A FORT OR CITY AND FAILS THE FIRST BATTLE THEY ARE GRANTD A RETREAT OR FALLBAK OPTIONN WHICH MOVE THEM BACK EXACTLY ONE MOVE IN THE OPPISIT WAY TURN FREE (ADDD FOR REALISM AND TO ADD BALLANCE TO THE NEW FORT ( FORT SYSTM WILL BE EXPLAINED IN THE NEXT SEGMENT



Niels	Jan 4 2010, 10:40 PM Post #3
Posts: 319 Group: Members Member #207 Joined: Jan 18, 2009 Clan: Good Natured Gamers	I think that the idea to add various cases (Army v. Army or Army v. Army-Defending-City), and to put in strict ranges as to how much of one thing another can destroy is not a good solution. Plus, from what I am reading, your numbers are both restricted and more extreme than the current system (I am under the impression the triangular unit relations only conferred up to a 10% strength bonus). What I would rather see instead is that instead of strict quotas of what can kill what in certain numbers, is that battles just result in a more even parity of casualties between the battling armies with the rest of the system being more or less kept in place. Even in a great victory, the winner should still lose more than 5% of the strength it kills (I would say a good minimum from real battles would be that the winner should lose at least 1/3 strength for even 1 strength the loser loses, and possibly even up to the same amount or more in less-than-great victories). Mostly the issue is not the way the current system is done ... random outcomes, random survival is what makes the game interesting ... but that the outcomes are often unfair. Armies of 30 str. and 30 str. engage, winner left with 27 str., loser with .01 (the undying general), is not realistic, nor keeps the game fun for the loser of that. If those armies engage and instead, winner is left with 12 str. and loser with .01, then the outcome is more realistic and the loser still has a shot at resistance. At least in my opinion, tweaking the system to promote outcomes like the latter instead of completely altering it with cases, and ranges of what can be killed by what, would be a better way to improve the game (this version or V2). Also, I don't like the idea of a retreat option from a lost battle. We have this already in the form of manually moving back if one wants (and still has a movement point). If the option is granted without moves left, then it is a free move being given (albeit with the caveat you must lose a battle and you don't get to choose how to use it). If it is mandatory, then what of someone who uses their moves to attack somewhere, loses the first time 4-3 and is forced to retreat? - if allowed to stay, he might lose, or the next battle could be a victory and he might take the base - if forced back, he cannot move to try again, and not being near an owned base, may be easy pickings by the other player that turn or next. - - - PS: There's no need for CAPS LOCK to be used, studies have shown that doing so decreases the speed that the text can be read.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · Version 2 Suggestions · Next Topic »