Does Anti-Rape need a re-design?

[Azzer]

Does anti-rape as it currently stands simply want re-designing, possibly from the round up? And if so, why & how! This would be long term changes - eg certainly not this round, and maybe not for a few rounds, but it's something I'd like a discussion on.

Currently I have a couple of vague concepts.

Making AR only target "responsible players"
(at least to a degree... eg make them fire at specific ranges)
For example;

Player A sends, ETA 4.
Player B sends, ETA 5.
Player C sends, ETA 5
Player D sends, ETA 6.

Player A is not going to trigger, but players B, C and D will all trigger up until the final tick when only player D remains, which would not warrant a trigger.

Tick 1: Player A attacking range, no AR.
Tick 2: Player A attacking Middle, Players B & C attacking range. AR troops that are "range only" arrive - while they will be targetted by player A's troops, they will only shoot at players B & C.
Tick 3: Player A attacking close, players B & C attacking middle, player D attacking range. Last ticks AR disappears and are replaced by AR troops that fire "Middle & range only" arrive. Player A will be free to steal land unhindered. Players B C & D will all be targetted by these AR troops.
Tick 4: Players B & C attacking close, player D attacking middle. AR troops arrive that fire close and middle range only - all current attackers are targetted by AR.
Tick 5: Player D attacking close, no AR.

Type of AR Units:
I'd also like more of a mix/balance of AR units (eg if you trigger AR and have a lot of lethals, you don't instantly get WTFPwned by an army of SAS first tick), but that's going to need some serious planning as I'd need to consider all of the unit stats currently in the game, and naturally some units will end up being able to fare against AR more than others (it'd be too complicated to have different AR troops arrive based on what kind of troops are attacking, so don't suggest this - other than a basic difference between LET/INN/NLT/NLD etc!).

[tobapopalos]

I've always liked the idea of AR only targetting the people that trigger it. So if I get through on a player and I have one person behind me who triggers, it doesn't ruin my attack. If that's possible I think it should definitely be done. And it'll stop AR triggering solos from annoying everyone.

[Azzer]

The only thing it wouldn't fix would be if you send at a player, and an "AR Triggerer" sends and arrives on the same tick as you - the "range changes" would still mean they hit everything at a specific range/ETA.

[Polo]

Like you touched upon in your last paragraph, AR should be much more of a grey area rather than the current triggering = recall or dead situation. Together with this, the AR limit needs to be reduced to about 1x rather than 1.45x. This means someone can only attack a solo player in a "fair" fight (with similar values). But if they do trigger AR, rather than getting wtfpwned, they have a chance to fight.

This also helps deal with AR triggering itself. Say the "new version" of Police was a unit similar in anti-flak power to a Prot Guru. If someone sent their units at someone else to trigger AR (on the same tick as the original attacker), instead of blocking all the incoming easily (as it does currently), the Police will have their work cut out to block it all. The person triggering will actually be helping to flak the original attacker past the Police. Whether they landed or not would really depend on the units of the defender. Of course, this does have the problem of the person triggering sending a tick or two after the attacker. But this can easily be fixed by your idea about AR firing at the player triggering only (or by reverting AR to how it was back in the first half of age 3?).

[Saints]

I say keep it the same

[Davis]

azzer with what you suggested i can see that being abused, because the first guy can get flaked from the second guy who triggers so the first guy still gets the benefit of the second guys men w/o the loss to AR. just how i see it.

[DarkSider]

It would be a better system imo, even if i'll miss randomly triggering on solo's :D
Though you have to take into consideration in your example if players B + C die enough their first tick not to trigger anymore but player D triggers again.

I'd suggest that when 2 players arrive on same tick and they trigger because of their cumulated score, the one with the highest eta is considerated the original attacker and if he wouldn't trigger alone, AR troops don't fire at him.

[Tim]

Why not make the AR units that come the same type that the player already has, up to the same valuation score that the attacker has sent (evening up the battle) and is sent by the Government at the same ratio which the player currently has, e.g.

The target has: 2 mil Ninja, 5 mil Assassin, 3 mil Secret Agent, 10 mil gardeners and 2 mil hippies.

So if an attacker was sending double the valuation score of the target's units, the defender would receive a further 2 mil Ninja, 5 mil Assassin, etc etc.

This would have the effect that all AR did was evening the fight between the two players - so if a player has poor ratios and gets attacked, or is attacked by a route which does well against his own, he can still be defeated, but the losses would be shared by the Government - and it also gives attackers an incentive to attack solo players and try to beat the AR.

[LAFiN]

I'd love to see your basic concepts put into effect. I always hate attacking and having to recall if someone a tick behind me sets off AR. I've always felt that being the first player to a target you should get some reward while piggiers shouldn't take away from your attack.

[pinpower]

will post a longer comment later probably

but i think AR should be made so you have a chance to fight it...so basically it just helps the defender...making it up to a fair fight...so the defender actually has to have a decent route set up/some units as well

at the moment the defender rarely even fires (and not to any significant degree)

[saint1d]

the only issue i have with the current system is other players triggering, but i dont really see the necessity to change things.

ok its annoying but most players recall if asked nicely and if they dont then they become enemies, which adds to the fun.

[CrazyMonkey]

AR should be redesigned, players shouldnt have to recall just cause they triggered.

[Garrett]

AR should be redesigned, players shouldnt have to recall just cause they triggered.


omg I've been blinded by the insight!

anyway... responsible player sounds good, but in wave situations or in cases of tasty target solos unintentional waves (it happens :P maybe) when trying to spy and read the report i think it would be virtually impossible to tell from the intel scan if i'm the responsible party or not... whether i need to recall or not. I know be safe and recall, but seriously if I'm not the one who triggered then I want to be able to stay and hit my target instead of waste 50+ mins on the return then resend.

I do like the points on adding defensive units to stand and fight and make it possible to stay and fight and win. Imo, this is more of what AR was supposed to do anyway help combat... when you have alliance friends you don't always 0 without the other person firing which is what happens most of the time with sas (unless you are robotic or way heavy on the armour like striker route).

[KISA]

A couple thoughts. Solos really have it tough enough... Essentially removing AR as this suggestion seems to be going is not helpful... People will stay MUCH more often, take the first hit, then kill and wipe the solo. I'm not certain this is such a great idea. Solos die enough and easily enough currently.

When a wave is sent, everyone deserves to be sent back. If you want to attack a solo with overwhelming forces you deserve to be zeroed. And of course, getting all your friends to send each tick so before the solo gets back online he's got no land is stupid. I say don't let them recall once AR is there and zero them all, Azzer.

I still think AR should go to 99% after zeroing, then decrease quickly at first then more slowly. This would also solve the problem I just "mentioned" above.

What I do like is more variety in AR. Tim's (wtf is he doing here anyway ? ;-)) idea of sending equal of the same troops is interesting. On the other hand, it would be possible to choose the right mix of troops to get past it (see his example, but remove the SA since you dont' buy PU :D ), if you're attacking robo, you might be ok since ass dont' kill ass too well, (note this is an example, I didn't think it through too well).

And a question. Is AR gone this round? At least the AR mod seems to be. The amount of ticks of land I've lost and no AR. My AR is lower now than when round started and has hovered around 20-30% so far as I lose land several times a day.

[SentiNell]

Here is my idea:
Every mob that is sent that would trigger is teleported back or just sent back with the same ETA they came or are 100% put into injury system.

So same attack example as Azzer:
Player A is not triggering, player B would trigger as A is already there so is sent back, player C however hasn’t sent enough to trigger (even with playe A being there) and is let trough, player D however not having sent enough to trigger on his own, he now triggers because player A and C are already there so is sent back.

The way of sending back is determined by how much you trigger. So maybe compared to the current system:
- if you would trigger police then you are teleported back
- if you would trigger SAS you are sent back (with same ETA as you have come)
- if you would trigger Biomechs you are teleported back but all your troops are injured (so you are 18 ticks without them)

This will make people who trigger being sent back and leaving valid attacks go trough to battle. The only problem would be if a valid attack gets hijacked by someone who triggers on the same tick. This can be solved as seeing the first to attack as the original attacker. If both are ETA 5 attackers then the first who have sent within the tick (is visible in spy report so should be able to be identified by program as well I guess).

There no longer will be troops pounded by SAS or Biomechs, only fair fights will occur. A adjustment to the AR level must be made however. I think the AR cap should be somewhere between 1.0 and 1.2 times the troop score. AR-mod is removed and replaced by Government protection program (or any other name). This GPP will activate when the targets troop value decreases to equal or less then 10% of highest troop value from the last 3 ticks. All it does is teleport any attacks that are att3 for the coming 12 ticks back (that’s the time a big chunk of the lost troops are back so fair fights can begin again). So attacks ongoing (att2 and att1) the moment GPP is activated will still happen). This to overcome a train of geo only attacks after being zero’d as you still have land score which makes geo’s only not trigger.

Values of AR-cap, AR-mod and % of troop losses that sets GPP are up for debate and mentioned only for example purpose. GPP is basically the same as AR-mod at 100% while only triggering police at all times, making this system trigger on every following attack and make the attacks teleport back. GPP should be visible on spy reports.

This idea basically works on the same principle as the current system, so maybe it’s easy to implement, but it might not be the case as some things are different (teleporting back instead of sending AR troops.

I think it makes it easier to calculate what you can send at a solo. At the same time the cap should be set at such a point that it also ensures to be a decently fair fight, though the attacker should be able to send just a bit more then the defender has thus also making a solo beatable. Pnaps for solo’s should be removed however as those would complicate things to much and make fights unfair.

This system can also be applied to alliances. Except they would get a different AR-cap and no GPP. The cap should be based on total troop score of the alliance and they should not be able to get x times that score for incoming. There can be sent more, but all triggerers would be teleported/sent back/injured based on who sent first.

Now for alliances like solo’s it will be clear what can be sent to have a “fair” fight.

[Cheese]

Only problem with if you trigger you don't get to fight is you then lose the option of fighting obviously. You might want to do damage still (it is possible)
Oh and as I showed in r8 you can land even if bios are there.

[SentiNell]

Well I think with every solution that will be made up for the problem there is a drawback somewhere. I think that not to many people want to fight AR. If police only then very few manage to get by the police, so there is only a minority that might find that a disadvantage. But that's my opinion. Is it better to have the option to fight government troops and maybe get away with it or have reasonable fair fights all around (unless I overlooked some things)?

[BlackWolf]

First of all SAS should only target LET. Not killing innocents for no reason. It would be something to be added to attackers side supporting less painfull playing style against poor solos.

2nd of all AR should raise less from losing troops. Atm its calculated with amount of units lost not counting in anyway how insurance is giving those units back.
Also one good idea might be to have AR combined to score so when player reaches same score he was before AR hes AR would drop dramatically.

As 3rd land should give solos way more AR. Losing land when playing as solo is supposed to play?! (low land fat) is same as nothing to AR. You get next to no protection against waves and multiple attacks from same person throught AR and as long as landfat stays small and gets smaller by every loss of land amount of AR doesnt increase but actually amount you get from each loss goes down which is ridiculous. As such player can lose 90% of his acres and get next to no AR.

What comes to waves and how waves should work im not going to say anything cause havnt figured single working thing out yet. But i will.

[Pete]

if it just aids the defender it would be pointless being solo. Alliances dont send exact amounts do they? THey just mass up leaving the attker no chance, why play solo? There bonus is if it ISNT a fair fight, its not a fight atall.

[Saints]

do not change ar

[Nonny]

A lot of posts with interesting points.

All I'll say is that in theory, making any individual fight against a solo a fair one in which the attacker always has a chance to land is great.

Add a dose of reality and put it into practise. Will you simply create an orgy of attacks on solos as everyone now knows they have a sporting chance to land? Whereas they know that if they attack an alliance they still have a wall of defenders to get around. Viva la alliance solo list?

BW is spot on re: the land effect on AR. If AR is going to be redesigned land must surely be taken into account?

[willymchilybily]

Why not make the AR units that come the same type that the player already has, up to the same valuation score that the attacker has sent (evening up the battle) and is sent by the Government at the same ratio which the player currently has, e.g.

The target has: 2 mil Ninja, 5 mil Assassin, 3 mil Secret Agent, 10 mil gardeners and 2 mil hippies.

So if an attacker was sending double the valuation score of the target's units, the defender would receive a further 2 mil Ninja, 5 mil Assassin, etc etc.

This would have the effect that all AR did was evening the fight between the two players - so if a player has poor ratios and gets attacked, or is attacked by a route which does well against his own, he can still be defeated, but the losses would be shared by the Government - and it also gives attackers an incentive to attack solo players and try to beat the AR.

wont work. some routes attack others because they are designed to kill that route no amount of unit increase will help. making it a disadvantage to certain routes. like terrors vs robo.

any way if the player is wiped out how can they know his ratios are good,.



secondly nice idea azzer. i'd be willing to try it. it seems to make it alot harder to abuse the ar. and i do find it annoying that on my last tick sometimes i get someone trigger and get no land. happend too many times.

on the other hand. if some one is wave attacking then surely you have to defend against a and d. what if together they are raping you but individually they are fine. you get killed by thier combined efforts. and split your fire. on a's last tick and d's first tick. so 'a' lands you

and you technically got raped.

unless it accounts for this. so my question is. what if combined a and d are overkilling and raping. will you get defence.but as individuals they are fine to attack you. surely this makes it harder still for solo's
i know at the moment as a solo i dont get waved. but it makes it an easy steal if you change the system.

edit: for got to add the example for the interlectually challenged

using azzers example
player 'a' sends geos and flack. Your, lets say, a robo player just with cyberwarriors for example. No problem normally. he sends lots and lots though. almost too much almost rape. almost too much for you to handle.

then player D sends lethals nearly enough to rape you but just under. just bellow rape. boom combined they are raping you. how does they system tell if its an intentional land grab to make your cybers taget the lethals first and the first guy's (player a's) remaining flack lands.

this is rape. two ppl ganging up on one. but how does they system know if its an innocent mistake or 2 ppl abusing the system to land

i like change just dont want to see allaince waving solos that have high scores and lots of units just to get land. they will be so easy to farm with the new system. and though land=score they can do it without needing to kill the guy

[Charlie_B]

Oh and as I showed in r8 you can land even if bios are there.

And of course, cyborg gardeners haven't changed at all since round 8 have they? ;)
I've landed on bios too before, and it's probably still possible, but very little of what happened in round 8 has much application to the game in round 25.

[TeaL]

AR its self is nice.. however the unit behavior needs to be looked at. Nothing and i mean NOTHING is worse then going in on a higher % target with the majority if not all your LET units, just to get WTF RAPED by SAS first tick, leaving you ZEROd. Anti rape is good, but prehaps even if LET units are used, the police should send some disablers with a lower initiative as well as LET units with a higher initiative, so that at least SOME of your units get disabled instead of wiped off the face of the earth. (maybe 50%? :D )


its soo hard to recover from getting police raped.

[Bobbin]

Oh and as I showed in r8 you can land even if bios are there.

And of course, cyborg gardeners haven't changed at all since round 8 have they? ;)
I've landed on bios too before, and it's probably still possible, but very little of what happened in round 8 has much application to the game in round 25.

I landed against Bios not two rounds ago :P

[wrath]

maybe put in a base AR for pure solo players my AR has been zero since before christmas and i'm only being land raped once a week by pom players

sure i could get some friends to help me farm it but thats cheating and defeats the point of being pure solo

[Saints]

Yes i change my vote to redo ar from ground up... No matter what a psolo who hasnt been attacked with 0 ar is bound to die even if they hold it off.... they have to sleep some time and when they do they get raped nothing they can do about it... some one send in lets to injure the units then they go in and take the land like non other

[willymchilybily]

AR its self is nice.. however the unit behavior needs to be looked at. Nothing and i mean NOTHING is worse then going in on a higher % target with the majority if not all your LET units, just to get WTF RAPED by SAS first tick, leaving you ZEROd. Anti rape is good, but prehaps even if LET units are used, the police should send some disablers with a lower initiative as well as LET units with a higher initiative, so that at least SOME of your units get disabled instead of wiped off the face of the earth. (maybe 50%? :D )


its soo hard to recover from getting police raped.


surely by attacking some one bigger than you yourd get a high injury rate. so is this going to be a big problem this round?

assumming those that are griping injuries is broken aren't right, and you do get back the 50% you should

[Scorpio]

+ then simply don't fight SAS
It's your attack so it's also your responsibility to spy your target at attacking for 3...
If you always get p00ned by SAS then simply don't fight it :p
And then you know for future attacks that you have to send less troops or pick another target...

[KISA]

I would suggest a redesign. I don't play enough to pay attention anymore. I just died on AR for no gain. I hit delete. There is no fuggin point in playing a game that wipes out days of saving because of the pique of the creator. The target was 70% of my score and on my enemies list. Sure, you'll say "watch and spy". Well, I can't do that any more because I'm not wasting an hour of time on this game for each attack. You can say it's my fault, that's fine. You can say I should do this or that. That is fine. But in the end, there is one less player because I couldn't care less about what you all whine and explain.

[CFalcon]

It *shouldn't* be changed so that it only "evens" up a fight, it should definately give an advantage to the defender. However it does need to be changed so it isn't an instant wipe. You should be able to beat AR with a bit of planning.

The big thing that needs to be changed is to make AR so it protects the average solo more, cos your average solo gets it pretty tough. However it should also be changed so it cannot be so easily used by active/pro players to make themselves almost invincible. It's very difficult to find a solution that works for both the lower and higher ranks, I'm not quite sure how, but that's what needs to be done.

[Scorpio]

I would suggest a redesign. I don't play enough to pay attention anymore. I just died on AR for no gain. I hit delete. There is no fuggin point in playing a game that wipes out days of saving because of the pique of the creator. The target was 70% of my score and on my enemies list. Sure, you'll say "watch and spy". Well, I can't do that any more because I'm not wasting an hour of time on this game for each attack. You can say it's my fault, that's fine. You can say I should do this or that. That is fine. But in the end, there is one less player because I couldn't care less about what you all whine and explain.

[To KISA]That's an indicator that you should retire for a bit and then make a comeback with new energy! :P If you care that less about your troops...[/To KISA]

Na really, I'm CONTRA redesign, especially with weaker AR units like suggested in here... Solos have it hard enough already. You should see the impact of it, not just for *your* attacks, but also ask yourself the question "What would this mean in general?".. Imagine solos with a somewhat decent (better) ranking... they can get pwned by higher players. If they are health based they get distracted by PoMs who don't easily trigger w/o the solo even firing one shot back, or get WTFPwned by the Biomechanical Warriors in disguise (Vampires). In other cases they get flakked easily and stuff like that, and there's nobody there who's keeping an eye on them while they are asleep(their pnaps can't spy them every tick).
This way only uber-active solos with insomnia pnaps are the only ones who can survive and have a fun round.

As I've said before, if you don't check your attacks then simply don't attack :P There is nobody telling you that you have to attack that solo id.
I don't hear people complaining about them getting killed by alliance defense on their targets do I? Alliance defense is sent because the id that's being attacked needs help to battle his target, government defense works the same.
If you're looking for targets and you see chances are he's solo, then you know the pros en cons. Pro being he's unlikely to get much defense, cons are you can't send an overwhelming force and you have to be online in 50-70 minutes to check for government defense. And if you see in the spy scan that he's been killed off some times before in the recent past then you know for sure you can't send too much LETs.

I think ppl who are pleading for weaker AR are ppl who tend to play in alliances most of the time. Have some empathy for the solos here ;)

[DarkSider]

2nd of all AR should raise less from losing troops. Atm its calculated with amount of units lost not counting in anyway how insurance is giving those units back.

As 3rd land should give solos way more AR. Losing land when playing as solo is supposed to play?! (low land fat) is same as nothing to AR.

I partially agree with your first(2nd :P) point. Overall you shouldn't get as much ar mod from loosing troops, but you should be protected against waves where even if the first attacker kills most of your troops you get a temporary solid ar mod until injuries come back. Having lowish ar mod with majority of your troops injuried make you easy to zero by the next attacker and free land by followers.

And absolutely agree that loosing land when you have a decent amount of troops should give better ar mod. Especially routes weak against protestors are easy farms as they get no ar from loosing troops and next to no ar from loosing land. With my former account i was loosing ~500 acres doing almost no damage back to poms (i was ranger) and got a mighty 3% ar mod. If you add that repeat attacking it's not as paintfull as it was last age you have this players constant farms. A 5% grab for free it's good enough as you can resend twice more with no problem. Maybe the formula should be changed to focus more on land drop and less on overall score drop and land fat.

[tomtree]

i dunno, if this has been changed already, or already discussed, cos i havnt been playing for a few rounds, but it always annoyed me when i sent a flak only attack against a solo, and one of his mates sends lethals and triggers, resulting in me losing me men. basically what im getting at is; SAS should only target lethals, and then have riot police, or whatever to stop the flak.

[Pete]

I think its fair though, just make trigg illeg again, only a handful of solos do it, other have to much pride.
But if you get waved, it still counts, as thats what solos count on.

Payer 1 attk for 3
player 2 attk for 2
player 3 attk for 1
None trigg on own, but together they do. All flak

The way your saying it is that, they can get waved. Player 3 can attk last tick without trigg. Then player 2 gets last tick without trigg, then play 1 is ok for last tick, slightly unfair, they all land. If people are stupid enough to follow close, they should be punished

[Lupus]

i think that a larger range of AR troops would be interesting. There are lots of ppl that attack solo's and can't for some reason refresh and spy and recall and when they finally do refresh find that all of their troops are gone with only a fraction coming back injured. For this reason i think that there should be more AR troops that simple disable the attackers troops instead of obliterating them.

P solo's should be able to have extra protection at night. So they input thier gmt at the start of the round and for a set 8 hours they would get a 5% AR jump. This would stop us having a load of insomminiac solo's. It would only be a small jump but enough to give them added protection whilst asleep.

i also think that alliance members should get a version of AR as there is too much Rape bashing and no one has a fair fight anymore. For alliance member AR it could be that they dont receive any AR Let troops but just disablers, this would stop the mass bashing that occurs atm. It would also make the alliance's have to think about their attacks and actually fight 1v1.

[[Thinking]]

i just think it needs a few fixes. definatly think it should be made more powerful tho, but to only kill the person that triggers it.

[Pete]

i dunno, if this has been changed already, or already discussed, cos i havnt been playing for a few rounds, but it always annoyed me when i sent a flak only attack against a solo, and one of his mates sends lethals and triggers, resulting in me losing me men. basically what im getting at is; SAS should only target lethals, and then have riot police, or whatever to stop the flak.

juust make trigg illegal. Plus who cares, hes the one who loses the LET, if he dont stay, AR recalls aswell....

[willymchilybily]

if people are going to be babies. not able to spy for reason-x then make the government units all stunn.
that way the attacker only looses what the defender kills. and he wont land or kill anything if he triggers. mass the stunns so make sure if he triggers. he gets nooooooo kills not even one. hes all stunned to ****. but not dead. and the army that he was going to take on any way is left to take pot shots at him.

seems fair to me in addition theres a possible way here to modify the system so you can change ar for the unfortunate attacker that gets piggied. thus stopping people sending troops to attack a nap to trigger last ticket defence. ofc if they piggie on the same tick as you and dont recall they share youre fate. if they do recall then ar use to modify any way and calculate if it is required on before the battle actually kicks off on like phase 1 or 2 of the ticketing system.

http://www.bushtarion.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=393

[[Ninja-7]]

What if you were to allow anti rape protection to small alliances? Say if you were to make it so that you have to have over 400% of either your alliance's mean valuation, or your alliance's top player's top score (whichever is higher) in troops attacking a single player in a small alliance. And it could also only work when no defence has been sent from your allies....
I realise this will probly get flamed, but im just trying to come up with something to help smaller alliances who constantly get land bashed....

[Melnibone]

nah dont think you'll get flamed but your suggestion would mean that allies would be better off not defending if they had a big incoming as govt would take care of it

as for changes needed to AR, my suggestion would be to simply do away with it, instead id place different attack limits on allies and solos simply put no ar no ar troops but solos can only be attacked if they are in your 70% range
the limit for allies remains the same 30% or 40% without a mod, to compensate for solos having removed AR the system itself will calculate when a mob is being launched if there is already a real mob on its way to the target (not a fake or a small mob to block incoming - the main possible abuse of this idea) then have a simple message displayed to the attacker something along the lines of 'the UN has decided that it will intervene on this occassion to stop your attack as the target is already in a state of war with a large enemy force' when he clicks on send

This will make solos targettable but not easy to kill (unless its your counter route) as they only ever be facing one mob from someone of similar score

benefits and drawbacks

solos can no longer trigger on each other
you will not be zerod by sas on attacks
solos can not be landraped to the ground (if a large incoming mob is on its way a second mob even geos only can not be sent)
with 12 tick injuries for solos it will make it challenging for them without being as easy as it is now

just a basic idea so far opinions welcomed

[xtowers]

I've read most of the first page and this is what comes to mind:

Part of me feels that AR works just fine and should be left alone. The other part says, "Hey, I shouldn't have to recall just cause some dude sent after me!" So I guess I'm for responsible targeting, but under a system closely resembling what we already have.

I'm also a bit excited to see a host of different AR units, but something tells me that this will require very very careful planning/development. One thing that I'm worried about is, using the OP example, player B+C triggering AR and getting hurt, but not enough (perhaps from the lack of effectiveness of the new variety of units) and the defender has to spread out the damage among three people, instead of one, with his/her already damaged units. See, I'm worried about flakking still being effective, even if triggering AR, but if the new units/system is done well we shouldn't have to worry about it right? ;)

[No-Dachi]

Melnibone: How will your suggestion stopping a group of solos attacking each other all the time, hence making them invincible?

Or if you're trying to take down a group of solos with fake attacks, say stealth rolling. With your system he could just get a friend of his to send a small force to him to determine whether or not the incoming mob is a fake. That is, of course, assuming the system works on the incoming mobs score - not just an incoming mob (in which case it'd be ten times easier to abuse with rolling attacks from friends).

[Melnibone]

(not a fake or a small mob to block incoming - the main possible abuse of this idea)

from the above post or sorry did you mean something different?

[No-Dachi]

That rules out my first point ;p However, my second still stands: when you as a solo get a stealth inc, you can get your friend to send a real mob at you to see if the stealth is a fake or a real mob.

[Melnibone]

Tbh its going to be impossible to create a system that experienced players like yourself cant find a way around hence why there are so many problems with AR just now i'll have a think as to how best to work it so that the abuse you mention can be prevented but any help on it is appreciated :lol:

[Augustus]

So far there have been a lot of extreme suggestions, most of which seem to favour alliances. The ones which seem to benefit the whole player base are: land loss increases AR, SAS only target LET's and responsible targeting. However i think Azzers example of who would/ wouldnt trigger is too complex. It would be far easier to say that once AR is triggered by someone it stays for all following mobs unless they are of a low value. I can only begin to imagine the agro of trying to work out if AR will stay for your attack or not. Far better to know that it'll probably stay. Also i think that rather than changing AR units to reduce loss of value, injury should be better(depending on the fairness of the attack). Another thought, how about 2 types of AR that can be chosen. 1 triggers heavy SAS that drops the AR mod significantly. The other triggers riot police (that target ALL) that drop AR less. This would spice things up a bit and give solos some control over AR. Obviously you would be stuck with the AR 'type' you have chosen for a while to prevent abuse. And to all those of you complaining about having to spy to see if you triggered or losing troops, stop whining! These are the same problems you face when attacking alliances!

[antisback]

add More Levels of AR

Level 1 Police - not as Strong though, should balance the odds not just make certain the solo doesn't lose land
Level 2 Stinger - Some form of lethal Trap that fires last tick, but possibly slightly stronger than police (maybe not depending on how strong police are)
Level 3 Riot Police - Can Be sent for lets, around the same stats as the pom unit
Level 4 Riot Vans - Some form of let flak with around the same stats as a humvee
Level 5 SAS - Same Stats as currently, but maybe slightly nerfed init (the fact they're stealth make them annoying enough)
Level 6 Helicopters - F117 like stats maybe? Firing directly after them maybe?
Level 7 Bio Mechs - Your standard Current Bio Mech


Yeh So basically a whole new "govt Route" which only the govt can use, and also possible, intergrate the dev mod into it, so the govt techs its route depending how much the dev mod has gone down... I dunno these are just idea's floating in my head and have been for a while, feedback please (or not i mean whatever)

[Turnip2k]

The binary nature of AR has always confused me - it either arrives and totally inhibits the attack, or doesnt show up and you get plastered to the wall in most cases. The fact there is potentially just a 1 gardie difference between these outcomes seems silly to me, if AR is to be redesigned the response needs to be more reasonable. The scale could go from 1x the score (probably a bit low - or somthing around there) with a very light feeble response and increace from there. This will be very hard to implement, but as it stands AR is too on/off - if the attacker knows what they are doing it hardly comes into play at all for most situations unless the AR mod is stupidly high.

Also, I am finding a problem with riots - see the my post in the below link for a full explaination.
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=825 (http://www.bushtarion.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=825)

[dafe]

im missing the part where its: player a attacks...player a triggers ar...player a dies to target a bit (about 10%) on first tick...ar recalls on 2nd tick and player a lands

which is kinda stupid if you ask me...specially when you get over 200mil police to defend you and because they lose like 15/160mil inns the ar recalls leaving me behind with not enough power to stop the guy...if this gonna happen then just dont give ar at all so i know i need to buy up on att for 3, or just leave the ar there as the guy triggered so he should be stopped by it, no matter what dmg he takes

[kyx]

I believe that the AR triggering multiple of the GV should be lowered slightly.

Yes, I am a pure solo player.

AR should just stun, like riot police, instead of kicking the ass out of anyone who forgets to spy or anything.

AR should also factor in the number of players attacking, because of a few reasons:

1. The poor guy may lose land twice.
2. Combos do much more damage than just troops of one route.

For example, two people attacked me, one using terrorists to clear all the INN while the other used puppet masters, which normally target ALL/LET, to bribe my lethals.

[vlad]

I believe that the AR triggering multiple of the GV should be lowered slightly.

Yes, I am a pure solo player.

AR should just stun, like riot police, instead of kicking the ass out of anyone who forgets to spy or anything.

AR should also factor in the number of players attacking, because of a few reasons:

1. The poor guy may lose land twice.
2. Combos do much more damage than just troops of one route.

For example, two people attacked me, one using terrorists to clear all the INN while the other used puppet masters, which normally target ALL/LET, to bribe my lethals.

That is clever playing, AR isnt there to stop clever playing, it is to aid the solos from bash bash bash ... there will ALWAYS be that part of the game when some route/player can be easily killed by another player. To stop this ... is experience, say better ratios, or you had an unlucky route etc ... just the way it works ... AR shouldnt fight that fight (unless they sent to much)

[kwyjibo]

I like the idea of the units not "dieing" but beeing injured for 12-18 ticks (ofc the units the sas do take), but make it like 90% injury rate so that you actully loose something and that not everybody stays to fight vs sas/bios all the time.


and yes I can see how this may be a problem with people waving.

[kyx]

It would be best if you increase injury rate of the attacking player to maybe 90%... getting AR when another player triggers and then getting zeroed for that is just.. mean. We are supposed to check for SAS, but there are always one or two cases when people lose track of time.

Another problem would be when one player sends lots of flak, and another player sends a few lethals.

In this case, the player with lethals may not check for SAS, as he wont trigger by himself. (For example, a few million bikers rushing against a PoM)

The player with flak may not check either, because he thinks that even if AR is triggered, it will be non-lethal riot police or police.

However, if AR is triggered, SAS will come and both players will take a significant amount of damage, although neither of them are entirely at fault.

Maybe making AR send two types of units, one that fires at the end of the first tick, and one that fires at the start of the middle tick.

The one that fires at the end of the first tick will hopefully scare the attacker off, and if the attacker does not recall, then he will take some damage from them. That way, both players take damage. Those firing at the start of the mid tick will sweep up the distracted and disabled units from the range tick.

Alternatively, AR could distract/disable on the range tick as a warning, with lethals firing only on the mid tick.

[vlad]

You are all looking at AR in the wrong way.
Anti Rape, thats what it is called. You sent WAY to much at a guy for his current condition to kill him, and when said player is in an alliance, he gets alliance aid. Anti-Rape is said Alliance Aid, thats all it is. It says like Alliances do "****, its only a few gardies, lets not waste a LET defence and Ticks, just bang in some Gurus (Police). Or, "Dam, that guy is heavy on the Robots, he is going to mullet our Terriost friend, Send in the RPGs/Strikers to kill him before he fires, saving the Terroist Guy". That is all AR is.
Now, you are in a way, saying that attacking a solo with lots of units, should have NO draw backs? Like, "AR only Stuns or 90% Injury." This is a war game, and war has risks, thats the risk you have. I do believe this thread is about something else.

AR units in them self, i see fine, yeah, SAS are abit OP, i must admit, but damn ive beaten them. Strikers and Apaches do wonders vs SAS. But, if you slightly trigger, the SAS just play the part of a Small alliance mate, with little or no extra men, maybe just enough to turn the tide of the battle. In that case, AR is fine.
The only time AR is wacked, is when you hit a guy above you, and you trigger, Dam AR mods, but they dont last long, and its there as the guy died, let him atleast play :D


Now, concerning the Multi targeting of triggers, if it is possible to do it like this.

Scenario 1
Attacker A send his Army, a Terroist vs a RPG, thus said mob looks like it isnt going to trigger, even with a medium AR mod, Attacker A will loose some Units, But Defender A will loose in general, giving land.
Attacker B is part of a solo group with Defender A, doing his rounds of Spying, and sees said target attacking, but is unable to defend (not enough time, or not a Pnap). Thus, he sends 5million Humvees to join the fight, matchign Attacker As Tick, in attempt to trigger Anti Rape.

Solution
Make AR targeting players, not units. The Anti-Rape program Calculates that Attacker A will not trigger on Defender A, but with Attacker B joining Attacker A , SAS will come. Anti-Rape then proceeds to Onlu target Attacker B as he sent After Defender A, thus letting Attacker A attack and continue on and be a completely legitimate attack.

Scenario 2
Same Attack but abit different, Attacker A sends less units than in Scenario 1, but invited a friend (Attacker C) to join same tick to make up the difference, to again muller Defender A. Now, attacker Attacker A sent 3minutes before Attacker C but sent on the same tick. No other attacker sends.

Solution
Use the Same principle, and lets call it First Come, First Serve. Attacker A will not trigger on the attack, but combined with the forces of Attacker C, he will. SAS is called, and will only target Attacker C forces, as he sent After Attacker A.

-------------------------------------

This doesn't realy open up for much abuse as i see it, bar the fact it will be hard to code, and i'm not sure if this is possible, unless Azzer would be to implement it in say, a new Age, as he said not for a few rounds. As for the warnings given,
Like:
Huge strange aircraft hovered above our company, then all of a sudden, strange lights flickered on our land and 2,583,601 bio-mechanical warriors appeared.
then I'd say keep it the same, thats a way the AR will work, not only as an aid, but as a deterant (spelt right?), its up to the players to figure out if the attack would of triggered or not.


Hope that makes sense :D

To make it easier to read, i will edit my post in response to a later post.

I'm not flaming or arguing. I just don't understand what hes trying to say.
What happens when A attacks B with enough troops to trigger AR, but does not send lethals. C attacks B also, without enough troops to trigger but sends a few lethals.
Then what happens?
Currently, A and C both will be victims of SAS.
According to your solution, C will get SAS and A will get Riot Police or Police.
This makes no difference for C, and because A is the one who sent enough for AR, ONLY Police or Riot Police should be sent, and they should target A only.
This problem is even more pronounced in the early game flak wars, when spies have not been developed.
The above post has been shrunk to make it more manageable, all content is the same.


To answer your Question, yeah, that is what i am getting at. Attacker A is the only legitimate attacker on Defender A and Attacker B is there, in the above Scenario (Scenario 1), to try and trigger SAS (by sending LETs to the attack. This system calculates Each Mob, and which one was sent first to send what and When. If Attacker A is going to trigger, but only sent INNs, then they will recieve the correct level of AR for that attack, be it Police/Riot Police. Now Attacker B was the LET Mob, so they recieve their correct mob being SAS/Bio-Mechs, as Attacker A has triggered.
The way it works, like i said is a First Come, First Serve. The first person who sends, is the "Legal/Legimate" sender, and the followers, for whatever reason, are classed otherwise (for the purpose of the example). Now, if three people send, the first two not triggering Anti-Rape will only be there for the Third, similar with 4 people sending, only be their for the Fourth, or if third would trigger and fourth not, for third and fourth. Does that make sense?

The type of AR that is sent is calculated on who sent what, and for each Mob. Like in the example above, thus not punishing a Legitimate attack based on a LET rush to trigger, but the tactic can still work as you wont have any idea what was sent, as it will not tell you who the Anti-Rape is for. So a scare tactic is used, rather than abuse of Anti-Rape system.

Hope that clears that up, as you didnt express yourself as clearly as i hoped, its hard to answer the question and its problems.

Anti-Rape Units

Currently, we have Four types of goverment units used for Anti-Rape. These are as follows;

* Rape level 1: Only "Police" are sent (Non-lethal).
* Rape level 2: Only "Riot Police" are sent (More powerful & ranged non-lethal).
* Rape level 3: "SAS" will go in with Riot Police. The SAS guys can kick arse in large quantities. The number of SAS and Riot Police sent is determined by the number of "Lethal" and "Non-Lethal" attackers present (with the SAS trying to cover the lethal attackers).
* Rape level 4: Bio-Mechanical Warriors go in. Basically, don't mess with these guys unless you want to be a melted puddle on the floor.

What i propose is another level of SAS, but weaker, and then SAS made slightly stronger. This will not, hopefully, need much changing unit wise in balancing as i can see.

The "new SAS" could be an old unit, MI5 Agent, and keep the SAS name aswell.

The General Idea.

You send enough army to do some damage, but you hit the "Rape Level 1" bracket, thus causing you to fight SAS, which is 2 levels higher. But because you sent Lethals, this is your punishment. Or, you send a big army, over compensating, hitting a hard AR Mod %, and you hit the "Rape Level 3" bracket, here this is your own fault, and again, you fight SAS.

Problem

There can be a huge different in army sizes and capabilites for these two brackets, but you suffer the same fate, for maybe what be 5mill score in Anti-Rape level, thus making it "not fair"

Solution

We add this new route, as the LET level 1+2. If, you send a Mob that will trigger on Levels 1+2, then you get SAS. These SAS are weaker, quite abit in fire power, but are as strong, maybe slightly stronger, and their "Value" is decreased slightly to bring a few more to the fight. Asking some VETs, i came up with ~£10 a unit for all AR. We then say Drop the SAS Value to £8 a unit, thus slightly increasing the amount given, but not effecting the battle as much as old, as their fire power could be 1/3'd or even 1/2'd.
Now, if by some strange reason you hit Level 3, be it AR Mod, or plane stupidity, you get the New unit, MI5 Agent. This is basically the same as old SAS, slightly better FirePower and HP/AD, as to compensate not being used on Level 1+2. Thats all for that unit. Same old realy.
The Only knock on again, would be a slight buff of Bio-Mechs. to continue with the MI5 Agent buff, and the SAS nerf.

New AR Levels.

* Rape level 1: Only "Police" are sent (Non-lethal).
* Rape level 2: Only "Riot Police" are sent (More powerful & ranged non-lethal).
* Rape level 3: "SAS" are sent in if the attacker decided to use a Lethal Mob on a weak target. These may be accompanied by Riots Police/Police. (This level is based on level 1+2 only, cannot be triggered on its own)
* Rape level 4: "MI5 Agent" is a quick and versatile goverment support unit. When the Mob is to powerful for the SAS, send in the Agents. <-- This Level takes over Levels 3 Triggering abilities score wise, ignoring the LET Mob rule.
* Rape level 5: Bio-Mechanical Warriors go in. Basically, don't mess with these guys unless you want to be a melted puddle on the floor.

Hope that makes sense, i ALT-Tabbed to IRC to get some information, and lost train of thought.

[kyx]

Alliance aid is different from AR, in the sense tt AR always attacks first.

You say that SAS can be beaten, but in case you have not noticed, not all routes are armor based.

As for the clever attacking, it allows for two players of about the same size to attack someone 40% of their size. The victim is 20% their combined size. So, we might as well remove the rule that we cannot attack people smaller than 30% our size, and even better, take away the additional eta.

[f0xx]

As for the clever attacking, it allows for two players of about the same size to attack someone 40% of their size. The victim is 20% their combined size. So, we might as well remove the rule that we cannot attack people smaller than 30% our size, and even better, take away the additional eta.

That is not a constructive post kyx because this same rule allows the resistance to bring 100 people in the same tick against lets say rank 1. Lets say rank 1 has 100mln score and each attacker has 10mln score. Rank 1 is 10 times bigger than each of them, but combined they are 10 times bigger than rank 1. Get my point? You are looking at this rule only from your point of view...

[vlad]

What i was saying was that SAS arent like Gods, they can be beaten, it was just an example. I gave my reasons.
And alliance AR isnt needed, honestly. That just sounds like a "we can't be bothered to defend".

I've been there in rank 20 alliances, rank 3 alliances and all between. Rank 20 alliances is more of a different game, but i never expected the Goverment to save me, if someone is online ... great! if not, o well. And the say rank 3-7 alliances that get attacked from the "Winners" get harder Inc, but if you ever notice, 9/10 times, the defence wins, so why need AR again? Even when they hit like 3 targets (which at a good stage in the round, their score is alot bigger than your alliances), you can still win... OR you take a land hit. The way it works, no need for goverment aid as you dont want to loose land and troops.

[kyx]

As for the clever attacking, it allows for two players of about the same size to attack someone 40% of their size. The victim is 20% their combined size. So, we might as well remove the rule that we cannot attack people smaller than 30% our size, and even better, take away the additional eta.

That is not a constructive post kyx because this same rule allows the resistance to bring 100 people in the same tick against lets say rank 1. Lets say rank 1 has 100mln score and each attacker has 10mln score. Rank 1 is 10 times bigger than each of them, but combined they are 10 times bigger than rank 1. Get my point? You are looking at this rule only from your point of view...

huh? If they attack rank 1 with troops 10 times his size, they are gonna trigger anyway. hes in an alliance, then in what way is it relevant?

[vlad]

Kyx, you cannot fix every possible way to attack in the game. Two people sending small armies as a combo to a guy, is the way the game should and does work. If they trigger, by all means read my post on the solution i have in mind, and if im not mistaken is similar to what azzer put.

I don't mean to be funny, but this Sticky thread is for Ideas and Suggestions, i would recommened moving the flaming and arguements to another. Unless you have something worth saying about what AR needs etc, and offer a valid solution or atleast an idea that people like me could build off, by all means. But we need Problems, Solutions, Weaknesses etc.

[kyx]

I'm not flaming or arguing. I just don't understand what hes trying to say.

What happens when A attacks B with enough troops to trigger AR, but does not send lethals. C attacks B also, without enough troops to trigger but sends a few lethals.

Then what happens?

Currently, A and C both will be victims of SAS.

According to your solution, C will get SAS and A will get Riot Police or Police.

This makes no difference for C, and because A is the one who sent enough for AR, ONLY Police or Riot Police should be sent, and they should target A only.

This problem is even more pronounced in the early game flak wars, when spies have not been developed.

[vlad]

Please View previous page for updated Post and answers to above post.

[f0xx]

Okay, that was a flame, so selfedited.

I'm not flaming or arguing. I just don't understand what hes trying to say.


Look at your post which I replied to, try to figure it out, its not that hard, I don't have time to explain atm, but you if still don't manage to understand what I mean, PM me and I will explain.

[D3CYPH3R]

tbh my feeling is that ar is pretty ok atm. As for the people saying they shouldn't get 1 ticked if they dont' spy to see they triggered, the same would happen if you didn't spy against an alliance who sent 2000x your troops to defend. To me its the same sort of deterrant as an alliance mass defending, if you don't like the look of the defence whether its and alliance or gov you should recall.

Suggestions of 'make it even' basically make it a vaible option to bash solos, the whole point that you triggered AR means you didn't want a fair fight sowhy should you expect one in return?

I've been victim on both ends i've forgotten to spy coz i've been distracted, lost a ton of troops and went ah sh!t... stupid game! but in the end it was my own fault and i learned not to do it again (tho i've done it a few times :D)

I've also been waved when i had 0%ar and been offline, got zeroed and was leeched by the attackers friends who all sent before my score dropped knowing i wasn't online to buy up so it is possible to hurt solos, the ar then gives them time to recover for the next 0%ar bash :D

A few ppl manage to maintain a high ar as ppl seem to send kill squads making it hard to ever land on them (i've seen pom player get bikers only rushes) no if this is a thug getting ez kills its a bit lame and if its a way to prop up the ar of a pom solo this also lame but it's one of those things you just put up with.

As for new units i thought there should be some new unit inbetween teh sas and riot police where the offending inc is basically arrested, they are then detained for a fixed period, but can also be bailed out of jail early, the cost dependent on time left and value of troops. This would punish ppl who send too much and stop them attacking for a while, whille giving to option to 'buy' back so that if they have inc they can still defend.

anyway my 2cent

[DR4545]

Making AR only target "responsible players"
(at least to a degree... eg make them fire at specific ranges)I completely agree with this concept. For a long long time I have despised intentional triggering of AR. You have been up-front with how it is too difficult to enforce, and I agree with that sentiment.

I think the obvious, consistent fix is to have AR fire at "range" only the first tick it is there, then "middle (and range?)" the second tick, then "Close (or All?)" the third tick. (Basically, what you said Azzer.)

This also helps deal with idiots sending behind you and messing up your steals with their LETs they didn't need to send. (Yeah it doesn't happen a lot but it's infuriating, especially when they won't recall after you explain it!)

Assuming that change happens, I think for now the wtfpwnage can basically continue for a while. I think people crapping themselves when they see SAS, and recalling almost every time is fine, that's what the mechanism is there for. Changing it to simply make the fights "even" seems like it could go wrong pretty easily, where some routes may trigger and not care whatsoever. Maybe tone it down a bit so SAS won't zero you in one tick but is still something nobody would really want to fight against unless they think it'll go away after the first tick.

I REALLY don't like the idea of making the AR limit 1.0 instead of 1.45 The thing is, people normally have an AR mod of at least 30% or more, so you end up sending their score anyway!

And I think making it 1.0 and doing away with the AR mod doesn't make sense, because the idea is that someone can have a little time to recover but then become relatively vulnerable again.

Personally, I have often thought AR mod should drop more quickly (like .2% instead of .1%) but, it would be hard to make it a nice round number that people can reasonably calculate to plan an attack.

[Sekishi]

Personaly i feel Anti Rape should be removed from the game completly. Solo is currently giving way to heavy burden on the Playerbase to keep supporting solo. Either turn the game into a Free for All without alliances or remove Pure solo at the very least. But if you are to keep Solo and therefore re-design Anti Rape it needs to tutch the elements about it thats important.


Point 1: No Player should at any given point be unkillable, Anti Rape sometimes are way to easy to optain and triggering it deliberatly have always been a huge problem. So any changes should be moved towards making the "Deliberate Triggering" impossible.


Point 2: Solo should not be so fragile that its easy to kill. That means that the new Anti Rape would need to be more deffensive oriented and not "Return or Die"


The Goal of Anti Rape has always been to "Make sure a Solo Player cant just be bashed to death like an alliance member can because of the deffence of his or her alliance mates. So by this defination alone its a deffensive aid given to the player for survival reasons. Many voice that Anti Rape should be more fair but stil be benefical to the deffender. For this reason i feel that the best way would be to make Anti Rape more unpredictable. Basicly meaning you wont be told what kind of Deffence you will be getting before the battle actualy happends. And you will only get anti rape if atlest a certain % of your troops are at your base. That means you cant just move out and get AR to deffend you, you will need to stay at home and deffend alongside it.

A good way to make it unpredictable would be to make it a even chance between 5 Types of Mobs. The "Return or Die Mob" of SAS, making it only a 20% chance that they are there and this would be like today the heavy one to avoid. Then there would be the "Briber Support" where the deffender might get a few of the units thats actualy attacking. There could also be the "Stunner Support" basicly everything gets stunned and your troops can fire as they like on the attackers. There can be the "Disable support" that would work as Police does now, basicly "we will save your land and disable alot of the attackers". Then the last should be a pure "Bluff" basicly "Sorry the Goverment had no chance to aid you in time." And will instead refund a set % of the losses you recive battling the attacker. This way the attackers must take a chance "There is a 20% we will die, there is a 20% there will be nothing there, there is a 20% We wont get to fire and be fired on instead, there is a 20% part of my troops will go to aid the deffender each tick. and then there is 20% that there will just be a party that will make the attack void by disabling everything."

This way Anti Rape would no longer be a sure thing. And attackers and deffenders must take a choice. For the attackers there is about a 50% Chance it will go bad and 50% Chance it might turn good. Depending on what troops your sending. For instance Bikers would be able to harm the Disabler Option quite alot, but the SAS would turn all the lets into bloody pits. And its no more "If you cross this limit its Police, this limit its SAS" the Limit only now would tell how many troops you would get to help deffend you. But the type of troops is purly random. This gives attackers and deffenders a good chance and the deffenders will always have the advantage in the battle.


As for how to target. I belive that No Mobs that are bellow 10% of your value CAN trigger anti rape. This means if 100 People send a smal mob at you, well your in trouble. Organising things like this take times aswell so moving out in this case should be done. However you can set like a Solo cant be hit by more then 15 Mobs at any given time. And if Abuse of this is reported the player will find his acount locked. This would mean that just sending some troops to help trigger wont help. And IF Anti Rape is triggered at some point, it will now send more troops to help support the first batch, but the first batch wont leave intil everything is over but cant stay more then 5 ticks total. That means a total of 1 wave. But at this point a new batch might be triggered. But a mob of under 10% of your value comming on say second tick. Wont give you more Protection.

[tobapopalos]

Good post, Sordes. I was having trouble sleeping, but not anymore!

[Augustus]

It would be best if you increase injury rate of the attacking player to maybe 90%... getting AR when another player triggers and then getting zeroed for that is just.. mean. We are supposed to check for SAS, but there are always one or two cases when people lose track of time.

That sounds great! Now when a solo has high AR we can send a wave of attacks, dropping the AR as SAS comes again and again with little cost to ourselves! Then when we finally zero him we can resend flak mobs with little chance of triggering as we've already drained his AR! I like...bu some might say this is an abusable system ;)

[DR4545]

It would be best if you increase injury rate of the attacking player to maybe 90%... getting AR when another player triggers and then getting zeroed for that is just.. mean. We are supposed to check for SAS, but there are always one or two cases when people lose track of time.@Augustus: Yes you are right that it would be abusable, but that is not how. AR showing up does not "use up" AR mod, it only drops tick by tick. It would be abusable to pump up the attacker's AR. That could be tweaked my making attackers get absolutely no AR off attacks rather than the tiny bit they get now, but I'm not sure what I think of that.

I do kind of like the idea of increased injuries against SAS, since sometimes people don't hear their timer (as I have in recent rounds). But, it's not really a *needed* change. It just pads people who screw up from really messing themselves up, and if it opens up any possibility of abuse at all I think it should not be implemented.

[Jimbo2189]

Anti rape should stay as it is in my opinion, as otherwise solo will never be able to keep land, and a i agree that a new AR unit unit is the answer however.....if it has a different type of attack that could be the answer:

Say the new AR unit steals the wepons of the attacker, I.E, Steals the wheelbarrowers wheelbarrows, takes the guns from officers etc, etc.

meaning that they dont fire. however this means that they are still on the Battle feild and can get killed by the Solos troops.

This stops the way in which with SAS its either 'Recall or Die', and it means that because these AR units won't steal all the wepons from the all of the attackers troops there is still a chance of a land grab and a fairer fight

[Bunion]

Say the new AR unit steals the wepons of the attacker, I.E, Steals the wheelbarrowers wheelbarrows, takes the guns from officers etc, etc.

meaning that they dont fire. however this means that they are still on the Battle feild and can get killed by the Solos troops.

So Stun, like riot police do?

[Jimbo2189]

Say the new AR unit steals the wepons of the attacker, I.E, Steals the wheelbarrowers wheelbarrows, takes the guns from officers etc, etc.

meaning that they dont fire. however this means that they are still on the Battle feild and can get killed by the Solos troops.

So Stun, like riot police do?


Sort of. but not just for that tick that the get their wepons stolen, once there wepons are stolen they get stolen until the AR Units leave, or until the Attacker recalls

[CLem]

AR+injury+active pnaps = too powerful combo, 3 active solos can be as annoying as 1 active alliance. So one thing for sure is that AR should take into account of defenders score as well in my opinion.