Passed Receive reports for any spell cast on an attack

[DeletedUser54192]

Proposal:
- The attacker will receive a report in their inbox whenever any spell is cast on one of their attacks by the defender.

Reason:
- Many players find it frustrating to only realise that someone has cast a spell with a non-instantaneous effect on their attack, when said attack lands. This most commonly relates to desire, due to its negative effect.


Details:
- At the moment, the attacker only receives a report if one of the following spells is cast on one of their attacks: Purification, Wisdom, Zeus' Rage or Sea Storm. All these spells have an effect that happens at one moment, and doesn't last beyond that.
- The attacker does not receive a support if any of the following spells are cast on one of their attacks: Invisibility, Desire, Favourable Wind, Heroic Power, Aim of the Huntress, Return from the Underworld. All of these spells do not have an effect solely at the moment of casting. Invisibility has a longer active effect, while the other spells are only active when the attack lands, yet they also block the casting of other spells upon their attack. If the attacker clicks on the individual attack, or looks at the command overview that comes with the Administrator, then it is visible, but it can be easy to miss on the command overview, and not many players tend to check on the details of an individual attack after sending it, unless they receive a spell report for a spell that has hit an attack sent from that city.

- With this improvement, the attacker would receive a report when any spell is cast on their attack by the defender, no matter the type of spell. So Purification, Aim of the Huntress, Sea Storm, Favourable Wind, Zeus' Rage, Heroic Power, Wisdom, Invisibility and Return from the Underworld would all cause a report to be sent to the attacker if they were cast on an attack.

Visual Aids:
- Limited, partially due to my lack of skill with any image-editing software. However there aren't any huge changes in graphics with this improvement, anyways.
- In the inbox, you simply have the name of the spell as normal, but now it could be a larger variety of names. So the overall formatting is already there.
- The same applies to the spell report - each spell already has an icon and a brief description, so no extra work would be needed except for enabling the system to have access to those images and descriptions in the format of a spell report. The only 'new' part of the report would be in the bottom right corner, where it says "Espied troops" for Wisdom, or "Destroyed units" for Zeus' Rage or Sea Storm. Instead, the text would read "Affected units" or "Affected troops". The image would then show all the troops involved in the attack, in the same way as a wisdom report does.



Balance/Abuse Prevention:
- While this does have an impact on gameplay, in that it makes it easier to remove Desire from an attack (I believe Desire is the case where it would be most useful to have a report for, but in specific circumstances it may be useful for the other spells that don't currently trigger reports), it is my opinion that this wouldn't change the balance of the game in a major way. It is in theory a slight bias towards the attacker compared to how the system currently works, but I believe that it is better to have the same system across the board for any spell that is cast on an attack.
- I may have missed something, but I don't actually see a way in which this improvement could be abused. Please correct me if I am wrong on this.

Comments:
- My thanks to @Xenophontes for bringing up the idea in the first place, and to @Rachel.L for commenting that it would be useful to have reports for these spells.
- Happy to hear any constructive criticism, whether it be on the details, whether we need this, or my lack of pretty pictures.

P.S. Thanks for reading this far.

 

[Rachel.L]

thanks for the nod, kal, but i was just seconding your motion
will again

only thing i would add, and i can't think of an example atm but know there might be one, for balance, is to do the same for spells cast on defender waves

 

[DeletedUser54192]

I agree that it would be good to see reports for any spell cast on any wave. The only thing is, I am pretty sure that it is impossible to cast a spell on a support wave? I may be wrong though. If you could, it would definitely be good for balance.

 

[Rachel.L]

i'm pretty sure too but know that there's things i miss sometimes
OR the possibility inno changes mechanics in the future
so if they rework it all at once then it's in place and less work later
not that inno is smart like that

 

[DeletedUser54192]

I agree. It'd be good to have it all ready in case they do allow spells on support waves. (It wouldn't be so useful in revolt, but casting wisdom on the closest support after an incoming CS would be very useful, in my opinion).

 

[Rachel.L]

so true
otoh, purists will say knowing if you are sniping bir/ dlu and how many takes some of the only skill left in the game out
it's part of having good intel
but anyway... a solid idea and hope a mod or cm passes it along

 

[DeletedUser53365]

I disagree. This alert would almost eliminate the interest of Desire and the defender would be disadvantaged. Actually it's possible to launch this spell and hope that the noob who attacks you will not notice it or won't have enough favors to purify the attack and it's really fine like this.
Good players verify their attacks before the impact, when it's useful. The other ones sometimes have bad surprises.

I really would like to see the defense continue with the little advantage that Innogames gave. And it's an offensive player who talks

 

[DeletedUser54192]

so true
otoh, purists will say knowing if you are sniping bir/ dlu and how many takes some of the only skill left in the game out

Well, given that we also have the chance to frontsnipe a CS, and we can wisdom the CS attack, and the attacks before a CS, I would say that the purists would then need to be against the use of wisdom against any part of a conquest attempt.

Dolgarok - I can see what you mean, but I find that this game is actually biased in the favour of the defender more than some people think, especially on revolt worlds. (I'm mainly a revolt player, but playing Olous as well, which is slow conquest). Heroes like Leonidas are more useful than Deimos, for example. The attacker can only use any attack hero on one attack, whereas the defender gets Leonidas for all attacks. And the way in which numbers function in the combat calculator gives an advantage to stacking defence. Add that to same-city-snipes which can get perfect timing if you are lucky with little or no lag, and the defender has a decent advantage. I'd say that this isn't too much of an impact, but again that is only my opinion. For me, if the attacker purifies the desire that I put on his attack, that is 2 more Huntress spells that he can't use on slingers or OLU+cat nukes.

 

[DeletedUser53365]

I'm a conquest player, I have no idea of the revolt defense "problems"
For me the game is well balanced between attack and defense.
And yes you can stack defense and use the same hero in order to defend various attacks, but you can use spells only with your attacks, so... it's balanced.

 

[Rachel.L]

i think purist can argue anything, kal, lol
point taken
disagree with one argument on your heroes aspect
a defensive hero can be hit at anytime, no matter the stack, b/c luck decides if that hero is wounded
now, a larger stack means less chance of being hit and longer survival but still it is possible that he/ she could be hit on the first attack and be useless for the next 8-12 hrs

cq and revolt have difference but many similarities
to dolgarok's point, i think individual units are balanced, as are spells and heroes
but when you add gold and instant buy, i believe the balance is gone and favors attackers
without gold, perhaps the match is even

but that's just mwo

 

[DeletedUser54886]

I see the idea has some merit, but I can see the benefit in also having a spell which can be cast and is hidden from the attacker...

I think Dolgarok has a point, that keeping desire as a hidden spell is good... it also allows newbies who all worship Hera to begin with to be able to help tip the scales even further in their favour... as for the other spells, if someone wants to waste their favor on casting Huntress on an LS attack to block spells on it, so be it... it will have no positive or negative impact to the attack... so why bother with it... if you really wanted to cast favourable wind, you would need to purify it, but you would notice this when you went to cast anyway... a notice makes no difference...

 

[Rachel.L]

kreeos, i think you've missed the point of all this. ofc everyone wants their own spells to be hidden. the point of this argument is not which spell but if a spell has been cast to have it be known. should that happen, yes or no?

and making a rule that favors one group of players over another is not allowed.

perhaps you don't understand why you would cast huntress on the ls? casting it blocks a negative spell, like storm. yes you have no affect on the attack but you spend little favor to block the next casting. it will cost the defender for both purification AND storm to hit the ls. and if you are online, you may have time to recast huntress between those two, again blocking storm. it makes a huge difference, especially if you get that report.

 

[DeletedUser54886]

No Rachel, I see the point, and yes - I do understand the argument...

But the argument made in the original post is not YOU as attacker casting huntress on your LS attack, but THEY as defender casting it on your LS attack... hence my argument of "Who cares?" it has nil effect for you as the attacker except as you said to prevent another spell being cast on it... this leaves only one offensive spell which can really harm your attack as a spell they can cast discretely, that being the spell of "Desire" and I don't see an issue with having 1 spell that can cause a negative effect you don't know about if you are not paying attention...

Hence - my take is - leave it as is...

 

[Rachel.L]

again, even if you are paying attention, you don't know desire has been cast, or any spell in that list, because you DON'T get a report
that's kal's point
and there are actually reasons for a defensive player to cast an offensive spell, like aim or heroic on an incoming attack; i'm sure you have used this strategy before, being the vet you are
so knowing, or not knowing, that spell is there is a huge advantage

 

[DeletedUser54886]

Yes I see the point and understand exactly where he is coming from, and no cant say I ever bothered to cast an offensive spell to defend myself... but I can see the alternate view too, that having 1 spell which can be defensive and discrete is not a bad thing...

Yes - 100% agree if you don't play premium you have no idea a spell has been cast... unless you happen to check the attack... which would be rare... and yes the game is stacked toward the defender... always has been, but I still think its probably better to leave as it is, because having 1 spell that can be discrete and hurt you is not a bad thing... it encourages you to protect your attacks, especially critical ones with spells...

I can see some advantage in getting a report if they cast aim or whatever on your attack... but I would probably leave Desire alone... and while getting a report that someone cast aim on your LS attack is informative, what would you do about it... would you purify it? I would just leave it as is, unless I planned to boost it with wind... I wouldn't bother...hence yeah if you want the report fine... for all but desire...

 

[DeletedUser54192]

@Kreeos - I can see why you are saying some of these things, but there are some very simple answers.

- Why would I care if a defender casts aim on my LS? Well, because I want to cast favourable wind on the LS, but don't have enough favour to do so at the time I launched them. (I'm not going to screw up my timings or miss out on using some of my LS, purely because I didn't have quite enough favour at the time I needed to launch them.
- Defender casting an offensive spell on an incoming attack. Well, this is more limited to conquest in terms of what I can think of, but there is a very simple one. If someone screws up their timings for an LS nuke slightly, and doesn't realise that it is landing a few seconds after their friend's CS, then I would love to put favourable wind on it. Same for any enemy attack that is accidentally going to backsnipe the enemy CS.

- Also, on the subject of the Desire spell. I admit that I am mainly a browser player, and that I often run the administrator (but only with gold from trading) in order to get access to the overviews. So I am in one of the better positions to spot it. But what about that person who can only play on the app? I do play a bit on the app when I can't get on my laptop, and it is extremely hard to keep track of my attacks. (I have great respect for those who can time everything properly from the app, because I know I can't). It is extremely unlikely that I will ever spot desire on my attack if I am on the app. At least on the browser I may have more of a chance if I use the premiums. I think we can all agree that the game is already biased against app players in many ways, from lack of the simulator in the agora, to lack of ability to check travel times for units that you haven't built, etc. And this lack of spell reports is worse for app players than for browser players.

@Dolgarok:

- I don't think it is quite as balanced as all that. The attacker can use spells on their attacks, 1 hero per attack, and attack boost tokens on the cities that they are launching from. While the defender can't cast spells on their own defensive troops, they can cast spells on the attackers troops. Zeus' Rage and Sea Storm are both brutal spells. (I like them, except when someone uses them on me. ) But the defender gets an advantage in terms of heroes. They can use Leonidas or some other hero, and hopefully get that benefit for most of the battles. But the attacker has to have 1 hero per attack if they want to buff those attacks. So they can only buff up to 2 hoplite nukes, 1 horseman nuke, 1 slinger nuke, 1 LS nuke, 1 myth nuke, and then they can buff one more attack of any of those types, using Deimos. But that relies on the attacker having Agamemnon, Pelops, Hector, Themistokles, Zuretha, Urephon and Deimos. Meanwhile, the defender can just use 1 hero and with some luck, get that buff against all of those attacks, and any more unbuffed attacks. Then look at the combat buff tokens. The attacker needs to have separate tokens for every city that they are attacking from. So they can go through a tonne of tokens very easily. Meanwhile, the defender only needs tokens for one city. The maximum you will usually see a defender using is Improved Defence, Tyche defence, and Trojan defence. And with the new 24 hour duration for the improved attack/defence, the defender is rarely going to need to use more than 1 improved defence token over one enemy assault. So I would argue that, until you factor in gold, the defender has a definite advantage in this game. That's not a bad thing, and giving a report for desire isn't a major change in my opinion.

@Rachel.L :

- Yep. A purist will argue anything they feel like. Probably depending on what benefits them most at the time of the debate.
- True. I often forget that a hero can be wounded before the rest of the DLU is wiped out. Maybe I've been extremely lucky, but I find it rather rare for the hero to die if I have more than a couple of hundred DLU left. I can only think of 2 or 3 times that it has happened to Leonidas where he has been wiped out of any stack, even a small one, before the troops are almost gone. Maybe I am just extremely lucky, but it seems so rare to me that I tend to assume that if the stack is decent, then the hero will probably survive. Of course, if it is Zuretha aiding a bireme stack, and someone sends fliers or a few OLU slips through, then that's a very different story.


I think the arguments against this are all being nailed onto desire. Yes, desire is possibly the most common instance in when this improvement would be useful, but my aim with this improvement is to bring everything in line. At the moment, some spells trigger reports, and others don't. I would like to see a system where all spells trigger a report, just to streamline the game mechanics. It's all very well saying that we should have reports for every spell except for desire, but that negates the point of this improvement, which is to have it for all spells.

It is nice to see some good debate on here, rather than just people slinging mud at each other and at every suggestion.

 

[Rachel.L]

kal, you did a much better job explaining things to kreeos than i did
perhaps your arguments can persuade him

your point about premium and app users is well taken
i think anything that can help level the playing field for all players will be liked
you named a bunch of things that my app-only friends scream about
let's subtract not add to the list

side note: using admin and commands, have you actually seen when desire is cast on an attack of yours?
the whole paying attention question by kreeos...
we could do a test in game if you want

heroes are like everything else, depends on level, power, and luck
think you must have exceptional luck
but your overall assessment (one per defensive city, one for every attack wave) holds

personally, i agree this isn't an argument about desire vs. aim
it's about having all spells be treated equally, have reports for all
i've yet to see a reason why that shouldn't be done that doesn't favor one population over another

 

[DeletedUser54192]

Thanks.

Yeah. When I first came back to this game, for en94, I didn't realise quite how many things the app lacked. But several of the most-committed players in my alliance were either entirely on the app, or only able to use the browser very occasionally. That's how I realised how much of a disadvantage they have.

On that side note: I have actually spotted desire once or twice when it has been cast on my attack, but only by pure chance. I think in both cases, I was checking that I had definitely got buff spells on some of my attacks, in the last 10 minutes before they hit, and I realised that one of the attacks that I hadn't had favour to cast a spell on, had had desire cast on it by the defender. But it was pure luck, and there are a lot of times when I don't spot it.

Maybe I use up all my luck on those defensive heroes. When I attack with heroes, they don't have nearly such good luck. They seem to take delight in making sure that they die, no matter how few DLU I run into. I'm also one of those players who has the misfortune of having minimum luck when trying to farm cities, and ends up with annoying number of troops either falling off the wall, or getting killed by Andromeda.

 

[Rachel.L]

app has many downsides but when you have to do things fast, can come in handy

side note: okay, just checking that it actually does show up in the attacker's window
you do have notification
but, does no good for those not running admin

many, many moons ago ended up in a sun tzu alliance, one of the first
never had any luck on spells or attacks, 1/ 100 was above 0%
we always simmed at -30
it has stayed with us since then, following us from server to server so we call it tzu luck
totally bites but we all just take it as a given lol

 

[DeletedUser54192]

True. I would rather have the app than not have it, as it has proven useful a lot of times. But for those players who are limited to just the app, they do have a big disadvantage in some areas.

It shows up if you click on the attack, and the little desire icon also shows up in the same place as any other spell on the command overview panel, inset on the little square attack icon. So if you do select the attack, I believe that you can see if it has desire on it, even without admin, but unless you regularly check all your outgoing attacks individually, you are never going to spot it. Administrator is about the only way you even have a chance of being lucky enough to spot it.

Ouch. That's not good.