Shouldnt it be possible to use cats on own walls too?

Wouldn't that be tricky with coding? You can't get exp from
destroying your own things. Still think towers should be able to be "taken-over-able"...is that a word?. walls,palisades,drawbridges...no,just destroyed. Seiges
are gonna be very tough, until cats get a huge boost and are more affordable with better production.

okay, i've read more replies and now see cats have the range of 9. Do they have the bonus range of +3 in towers, and +1 in outposts, barracks, military cademies, drawbridges,training guilds? I hope they do...it would reward the attacker, given the defended has additional defensive bonuses as well. With this change, i'd agree taking over of towers might be too much added strength to the attacker. It would be a good middle ground.

Side Note: Thanks Req for all you do. It's great to have many opinions from vets as well as new players in the games. Open dialogue to improve the game is great...that's what we all want. Waronline is fantastic....the tweaking of things just improves on a the product.

Does anyone know what the actual modifications were?

*Edited typo*

Last Edited : Friday, 23 July 2004 - 03:48

Wheres Req??

NC, the answer is yes...I happened to be training some cats (had two turns worth), when REQ made the changes...the range bonuses were given for barracks and tower placements...haven't moved them into an outpost yet...but I got one 6 spaces away, but since the ranged bonus was there for the barracks and tower, I'd expect it for the outpost as well. +1 barracks/+3 tower

Have you actually tested it to make sure it works sugar? I thought I recall quite some time back doing some testing with them in towers. While it said the tower was giving +3 it didn't actually work... So if the opportunity arises (if you haven't already done so) try and flatten something from 11 or 12 spaces.

edit: ignore this thread for answering sugar and use the suggestions forum thread.

(Fanatic holds aloft the SOS banner)

Last Edited : Friday, 23 July 2004 - 14:48

TEST RESULTS posted in Suggestion Box thread.
*reminds self about the SOS banner*

Accept our apologies, REQ, for taking this thread into a side comment/discussion.

Last Edited : Friday, 23 July 2004 - 16:32

Do not worry sugar, I was always tought that God was forgiving

I read some of this a few days ago. It seems to me that this change of being able to attack any kind of building is just not right when you really think about it. Any type of military unit could mobilize to destroy a building one way or another. If you want to make changes - do it right. Make it where certain types of meelee troops do more damge then others because of there strength (i.e. horses) for what they r in reality. Any kind of manpower can destroy a building if it wanted to...stone or not. I could I assure you if I wanted to. Hell, a group of any kind of unit could cut down trees and batter a building to the ground. I call for a readjustment of this or back to the way it was. More realistic and what you did is just not called for to make the game "better". Just another little comment, make sure you consider a "real" life situation when you make a change,as most changes seem to do. It's not about making things more balanced or whatever. Simulate reality. These kind of changes will never make the game more popular, but could actually do the reverse. Well my 2 cents...Mik

Troops can still....destroy....buildings...

I don't get what you're saying

now now mik, it seems your misunderstand something here

Last Edited : Thursday, 29 July 2004 - 21:12

i think our little friend is a tad confused, though zealous, mikalus the change was made so you can not COMMANDEER a wall (take it over so that the wall belongs to you now) and you can not commandeer towers or drawbridges, the only way to get these items out of the way is to destroy them. Military troops are STILL and always WIL be able to destroy buildings, there damage is limited to a max of 250 per attack though so they are not as efficiant as taking out a building as say a ram or catapult.

your thoughts were dead on about the troops destroying a building but i think you misunderstood the change.

just another tid bit, your thoughts were a tad hostile, and as you were showing good intentions, tone suggestions down a tad or they come off more as demands than suggestions, if a change is setup we can post in the suggestion forum that this change is not desired or whatnot. Good job though on the post, though now im sure its all in the clear.

Ya in the clear there bud(DoRW Empirez )! Don't call me your little freind because I'm not. Plus I'm sure I have many years and life experiences on you! Obvoiously I misunderstood the changes. No hostility in my message at all meant...if you perceived it that way then guess it was a concern beyond your limited scope of thinking. You're the one showing hostility! I'm not no newbie and a gold member and care about this game as it's the only online game I'm playing....love to meet you on the battle field chump! Let's make changes that attract peeps to the game...not crap that really does nothin to enhance the number of active players which has stayed about the same since I've been playing which is going on a 2 years....

WOAH!!!!come on keep it on topic...

Yikes! ... cool off ... both.

Mik I do concur that your statement sounded a bit "agressive" or "demanding" but no big problem. I think Dorw was actually complimenting you on caring for this game as you later state.

So please keep it in topic and peaceful, since war is ONLY for the games.

aye... i was complimenting him... =( now im just going to let that last statement roll off me back like water off a duck.