I want to remove the Retal when attacking from range (ranged troop vs ranged troop at range > 1)

Melee always has retal as that is hand-to-hand combat.

But ranged shouldnt get a free attack back. It should be up to the defender to decide whether to attack the ranged unit or target someone else.

This is how it will be in WoK, and I would like to do the same here to see how it plays out.

Any comments?

If I were in a group of archers and an enemy archer group snuck up and started taking out my lads, I'd leave the melee to take care of itself while I dealt with the instant threat, namely, the arrows in my nose. So, no, I would rather ranged still retaliate as usual, then also shoot the pants off the melee when they shoot the main volley.

ahh so you think ranged should be even more powerful than they already are?

removing retal also means lower level ranged troops become useful, even if only to take out enemy ranged. then the enemy has to decide whether to waste their attacks taking out your low-level ranged, or take out your primary melee forces.

unlike now, if you attack with a ranged unit with a weaker ranged unit, you're dead, making lower ranged units usesless.

Im split on this, Archers should get retal as they would be out in the open enmas, but a marksman as the name suggests would be hidden taking out troops by steath and therefor unseen, so no retail for those.

perhaps range could get a `negative bonus` (prob not the right word lol)when a players archers and arbs are in groups of two or more,so the more of a range typetogether deff is lost, which allows range retal, the troops could be like how coms give bonus if they are within 3 hex, range could work in reverse

Last Edited : Tuesday, 21 April 2009 - 17:14

My reply indicated that I thought it should remain as it is, not make them more powerful. Perhaps they might only retaliate a percentage of the time? Like some units only get bonuses 50% of the time?

Another thing to consider is that many players won't allow ranged retal, preferring to take out melee rather than suffer retal. They only used ranged on ranged when they have the advantage of being out of range of the target. Only in desperate times do they allow retal, and usually with a weak "soaker" unit striking first. So I think there is much less ranged retal going on than you might suspect.

If its rare it happens ,range retal might as well go then .

really, I think you're more likely to get ranged retal than significant melee retal... with melee, you can have a weak unit soak it up as well, so it's the same thing. the only difference is that melee can't retal the ranged units, so you can just pick them off that way.

with ranged, you'll always get an initial retal so long as they're in range.

but if you eliminated ranged retal, you'd give too much of an advantage to the person who strikes first. basically, if I hit your mark with my mark and take out like 3 for free, you can't possibly take out as many with those 7 marks you're left with, meaning my mark will always have more units (assuming no other units hit it) and always be doing more damage to you. I think there's less strategy in the game when you can just rush in and start letting loose without consequence.

I like the added element of out of range firing getting no retal. Seems realistic to me. I'd keep that.

I like it the way it is atm ....my2cents Thats aussie money lol
If it isnt broken why fix it?

Last Edited : Tuesday, 21 April 2009 - 05:41

I like it the way it is, but I also think it would be more realistic for the retal to be 50%. If you are having arrows raining down on you and men screaming and dieing around you. You're not going to get of as good a volley as the other guy.

I agree with removing retal on range units. The game now relys much more on range units, and less on the melee. And the truth is, the further a target is from a bow unit, the less effective the weapon is. It seems now it's all wall and tower building during a battle on the feild. Both sides have to throw up towers and walls to get extra fire power to their range units to combat the attackers range units. It becomes a stand off of arrows vs. arrows. So if one side has archers and the other has a couple bali units in towers, guess who wins on points and kills? Truthfully, a bali unit is more of a seige weapon with a slower rate of fire. Why would it have a higher retalion than a bow unit who has a higher rate of fire? And realistically, arrows vr.'s armoured troops, how much damage do they do? Minimal unless they find a open spot like pits, neck, face. Maybe give the arbs a bit more punch on armoured troops. That's what the weapon was developed for. Marks vs arbs on armoured troops? Who would really do more damage at closer range? The game is great, but their is too much power in the range area. All is needed now is a few blocking units and the rest of the army is range units. Too unbalanced.

I agree HOSA.

Thats why without ranged retal, you can actually use any ranged troop to take out enemy ranged. You could actually use archers to take out some Marks.

It also means its up to the defender to decide who to attack. Use your Marks to attack onrushing melee, or use them to counter-attack the enemy ranged troops.

WoK will have no ranged retal, so I thought it might be a good idea to try it here.

Deffinately.

I think retal in general needs an overhaul. I think retal is very important because it helps balance the game towards those players that aren't free to get online and play very often and away from those that seem to have no life outside WarOnline.

The "attack with a soaker unit to neutralize a unit's retal" problem needs some kind of fix. At the very least, only the minimum troops required to kill the attacking unit should use up their retal ability. The rest should be able to retal to subsequent attacks.

This would stop the "attack 10 Knights with a 1 pop spearman then with your Falchioneers" trick. (with ranged retal, attack 10 ballis with 1 pop archer). It would also reduce Maceman's superiority somewhat and improve the relative worth of the Knight's special ability without actually altering either.

With regard to ranged retal, I think on balance, either leave it as it is, or reduce it slightly by allowing the attacking unit "first strike" advantage (that is, defending ranged takes damage first, then only the surviving troops get their retal).

But fix the "retal soaker" problem first!

heh, funny you should say that Hambone, because I planned to change it for WoK for that very reason.

At the moment, I am looking at a first-strike system, with infinite retals. So the defending figure will always get to retal, but only after taking damage and possibly losing troops.

This way the attacker is rewarded for taking the initiative, and the defender always gets to retal removing any cheap tactics (assuming there are troops left to retal).

Troops like Macemen would have a new ability like "First Strike" which give them the first strike even when they are defending, since all troops have infinite retals.

if you guys want, I can always change WoL to this system as its not that hard to change. or we can just leave everything as is, and wait till later this year for WOK.
Up to you.

1. love that retal system idea and the macemen getting "First Strike" that's neat and interesting.

2. don't make any sudden changes to WoL though... you'll disorient people. if enough people DO want this, give a set date in the future that you will make the change so people have time to know about it and prepare their strategies for the change.

Yeah, I like that idea too. I think retal needs fixed ASAP, but for games started after the announcement date. After all, players that have invested a lot of gold in macemen in a particular game aren't gonna be happy if all units get infinite retal, even if they do get 1st strike as a consolation. So all games should run on a particular rule version, no rules changed half-way thru. Is this feasible Req?

Req - Could you make also sure all rule/scoring changes are anounnced on the General News page?

sorry, its not possible to have 2 different systems running at the same time.

so when any change is made, it effects all games, new or current.

yea, as soon as I make the scoring change, I'll post it in the notice board. just a matter of when now