GET RID OF WALL QUEST

[DeletedUser54965]

so i was out here simming on the rim, and just happen to notice that EVERY city i attack has a wall of 10+ weather the city is 2k points or 6k, the only reason i can see everyone building WALLS IN A CONQUEST world would be because of that stupid 5 gold quest, we need CHANGE!!! END IT!! so we can enjoy our troops and not have to build cats in a conquest world

 

[Fluvisol]

If you'd build walls maybe you wouldn't get rimmed that easily since it would actually cost people troops
Just a little advice

 

[Silver Witch]

Personally my view is that if you build a wall in a conquest world you have to accept that if u don't notice a cs you may lose the city. Its just too easy to hold a siege with a wall. If the alliance is all no wall, everyone builds loads flyers and trips then pretty much any city can be saved. There are exceptions of course.

I agree that a quest telling you to build a wall is not appropriate in conquest these days unless the ramifications are properly explained and they aren't. Probably it was relevant in the past but with the ease of building flyer nukes from competitions the game has changed.

If you'd build walls maybe you wouldn't get rimmed that easily since it would actually cost people troops
Just a little advice

It will cost people far more troops lost in support if there is no wall. I don't see this as a logical comment Fluv.

 

[DeletedUser54192]

While walls are pretty risky and uncommon among experienced conquest players and most major teams enforce a 0 wall rule, they are a bit more useful for casual/new players, especially those on the rim (where pgezzy is complaining about seeing walls). If you build a 10+ wall and leave some DLU behind it, most players will think twice before attempting to farm you again. Favour farming isn't a good idea if the target kills off some of your fliers each time and uses up most of their favour as well so that you can't loot it. On a morale-active world like Byblos (the world that I believe pgezzy is commenting from), walls+DLU is even more effective at discouraging farming.

I agree that there should be some warning or note about the disadvantages of walls on conquest servers, but I think it is fine to keep the quest there. Think of it this way:
- A new player is unlikely to know the disadvantages of walls in conquest until taught by more experienced players.
- However a new player who hasn't had access to that guidance from more experienced players is likely to be running solo or in a team of other fairly new players, and therefore is unlikely to have flier siege break attempts from their teammates.
- They are also unlikely to be a large player with flier nukes, and probably also have no knowledge of sniping, meaning that their main plan would be to attempt to defend against the incoming attacks rather than let the CS land and then break the siege.

Perhaps it is easier to put it another way: 0 walls works best with sniping skills and/or committed teammates. If you have the experience to know about sniping, you will have heard about how 0 walls are best in conquest. If you know to build fliers for siege breaks, you will either have heard or have worked out that low walls are best. If you have teammates to send flier nukes at you, they should have told you about how low walls are best. If you don't have any of those factors in your favour, high walls and defensive stacking are probably your best chance until you can get into a good team or get some experience and skills.

Sorry if that's a little confusing. It's been a long day.

 

[Silver Witch]

Logical comment from Fluv???C'mon now have you talked to him before

While your correct. Knowing Fluv - I think the point he's was trying to get across was that PG gets rimmed... not any real debate about walls and which Is better if your being rimmed.

Lol - actually I think the original thread is also sarcastic and yes you are right Fluv is just off topic! I WANT A MOD!!!

However i think this does raise a serious point. When I play conquest and i find a wall I assume the player doesn't really know what he's doing. Yet we have a quest encouraging players to build one. Is this right?

and Kal - yes i agree with that generally. You have to learn to play before you understand the ramifications of different builds. I don't have the energy to reply with that much detail!

 

[Rachel.L]

guess i don't know what i'm doing
i think walls, even in conquest, have a purpose (kal mentioned some)
there are smart reasons to use them in some cities, even if you are good with a snipe

 

[DeletedUser54965]

If you'd build walls maybe you wouldn't get rimmed that easily since it would actually cost people troops
Just a little advice

you suck, i havnt been rimmed gtfo

 

[DeletedUser54965]

yes kal is right no one wants to fight walls and morale like wtf is that

 

[Silver Witch]

guess i don't know what i'm doing
i think walls, even in conquest, have a purpose (kal mentioned some)
there are smart reasons to use them in some cities, even if you are good with a snipe

For a decent alliance there are some situations where they are useful yes - however you have to accept that with a wall you probably can't break a siege - or that the break will be hugely costly (with either ls or flyers).

So deep enemy territory where you want to stack for example walls work well. I also put 1/2 walled cities on ww islands so that troops can be protected from all cities.

Other than that though its debatable - a well coordinated alliance should have plenty of flyer nukes and it just isn't efficient to have to build troop defence that isn't used. If u have a wall then u need troops behind it because of the siege risk so they are not available to support your own sieges.

If you are playing alone or with an inexperienced group maybe you do build them but then you risk being easy targets - however that is an easy target situation anyway so i guess whatever works for those players. The points kal makes are valid but he makes them based on lack of experience in players/alliances.

In a morale world low morale players also make a difference.

 

[Rachel.L]

so, i didn't want to give too much away, but let's just say that a) full walls waste of pop and troops (imo) but b) you've hit on sev scenarios in which i play where a certain lvl of wall become a nec factor

but kinda miss the old days where ls were a most necessary part of the game

 

[DeletedUser41523]

If you build a wall in conquest, assuming you're not BP leaching deep in an enemy core, you're either new, not very bright, or trying to be edgy and different to make some sort of point (yes these people exist).

 

[Rachel.L]

dan, when you reach the top of the board, then you can lecture ppl on how to play and call them names

 

[DeletedUser46395]

I did it a couple of years ago to see what happened - 25 wall and tower in all my cities, playing solo. Got called a lot of names, but didn't lose any cities until I had to quit the world for RL reasons. How the theory stands up to current levels of event-fuelled cheap myth units is another matter...
So as has been said, they can be if benefit to people not playing ìn a decent alliance, and they're the ones most likely to undertake the quest, so I don't see the problem.

 

[DeletedUser41523]

dan, when you reach the top of the board, then you can lecture ppl on how to play and call them names

Knock it if you want but my results tend to speak for themselves. I don't waste time on people who should know better and still wall on conq.

As for being on the top of the board, being the top player doesn't mean they're good. If it did, Jeremy would be schooling us all.

 

[Rachel.L]

Your results?
As rosy as your little story was in the olous thread, that crown you have is tainted. YOU brought in a guy that has been called out for questionable game play on 5 other servers and made him a founder. And when he struck again, what have YOU done to fulfill the promise you made to that "family" of yours? Oh yes, your time is spent on the next world.

I won't even mention other "results".

 

[DeletedUser54192]

So as has been said, they can be if benefit to people not playing ìn a decent alliance, and they're the ones most likely to undertake the quest, so I don't see the problem.

This is the point that I was trying to make earlier. Having a wall is actually a decent idea if you aren't in an alliance, or if you're alliance isn't good at teamwork for siege breaks. And once you get into a decent alliance that is willing and able to make siege breaks, they will teach you to demolish your walls anyways.

 

[Rachel.L]

i think kal, bear, and SW made my point without the name calling
ty
to the original post, i think this ties to another idea that the quests/ tutorial need to help new players understand what/ why they are doing things better
want to leave the wall quest in, fine but help players understand when a wall is/ isn't helpful

 

[DeletedUser55049]

so i was out here simming on the rim, and just happen to notice that EVERY city i attack has a wall of 10+ weather the city is 2k points or 6k, the only reason i can see everyone building WALLS IN A CONQUEST world would be because of that stupid 5 gold quest, we need CHANGE!!! END IT!! so we can enjoy our troops and not have to build cats in a conquest world

I don't want to wise-crack...but walls are ESSENTIAL for your defense. Check the wiki to get an idea of the multiplier...its remarkable!