Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
   New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - King's Tourney #1
   FAQ FAQ   Forum Search    Register Register   Login Login

Forum LockedKing's Tourney #1

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 678910 42>
Author
Kumomoto View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jan 2011 at 21:07
I've figured out a way to make millions! We will feed the entire Illyriad world. H? is going into the sausage business...
 
Thousands of tons of inexpensive tasty sausage is soon to hit the market. Please enjoy!
 
The initial brand is named "Vicworst". Bon appetit!
Back to Top
The_Dude View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jan 2011 at 21:18

Big thanks for the battle report!

WarriorBunny attacked with 6,081 units - mostly Trueshots.  While her army was destroyed, Dlord lost 8,903 units...defender losses were 146% attacker losses.
 
But to me, the most important observation is that this attack killed about 45% of the defenders.  If VIC had 2 more armies of the 5K-6K size that followed closely behind, VIC would have captured this flag from Dlord.  This illustrates the importance of Attacker massing force on a single target.  And timing multiple armies closely together.
 
Looking at the Dlord defenses, I see a fair number of Cavalry defending in the Mountains which is putting the most expensive offensive unit on defense in the worst possible terrain for Cavalry.  But the spears and bows really showed their advantage in Mountains...despite facing Trueshots.
 
Good battle on both sides!
Back to Top
KillerPoodle View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jan 2011 at 21:53
I'm seeing a lot of kitchen sink attacks rather than using the right tools for the job - that result shows why those attacks are bad.
Back to Top
The_Dude View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jan 2011 at 23:49
I think KillerPoodle is seeing what I am seeing.
 
I also see the common "Point and yell 'Charge!'" tactic.  By this, I mean a war-boss tells his alliance to send everything at a target now (hence, charge!).  Which is why we often see a single army from an alliance hit a flag with many, many hours passing before the next army arrives from that same alliance.
 
Here are my thoughts...
For holding a flag (i.e., defense), Spears and Bows are the prime defensive units.
For clearing a flag (i.e., offense), Swords and Horse are the prime offensive units.
 
Now, let me add that the above is a general rule.  Terrain can alter this.  Bows don't do well in woods, for example.
 
Race can have an impact, too.  For example, while Bows are ordinarily defensive, Elven Trueshots can be very effective on offense.
 
Commander bonus can also have a signficant impact if properly matched to units and mission.
 
I think a lot of players combine all they have into a single army and send it with Occupy orders.  I suggest that the alliance will do better if players separate their units into separate Offensive and Defensive armies and send them separately.  Offensive armies using Attack order.  Defensive armies using Occupy order.
 
The alliance that makes the effort to gather army speeds and schedule out launch time across a group of members and armies such that arrival at flag by all armies is as close as possible will achieve the best possible results with the least possible cost.  A superbly executed assault would see several large Offensive armies all arrive at a flag within 1 hour or less.  And in the minutes following the last Offensive army, Defensive armies would arrive so that all defensive armies for that wave arrive within 1 hour.  This would then provide a large defensive stack of armies ready to absorb several offensive armies.  And overall, this tactic should result more total flag possession time with less overall unit losses for the alliance using the tactic.


Edited by The_Dude - 05 Jan 2011 at 23:52
Back to Top
Llyorn Of Jaensch View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 924
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jan 2011 at 23:54
I posted the following in game suggestions but look forward to feedback here:

Ive noticed on Global a number of smaller alliance leaders understandably stating their displeasure with the tournament. Due to their size they feel its pointless as they're unable to compete.

A possible solution to this would be for future tournaments the ability for alliances to confederate and work as one/in unison. This would allow all Illyriad players to compete. Realistically as it stands now only the top 5 or so alliances have any realistic chance of holding a flag.

Thoughts Gents?
Back to Top
HonoredMule View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 05 Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1650
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jan 2011 at 00:06
The hard limit of single alliances holding up to 100 players (and disabling NAPs and Confeds) is a key factor in making this tournament fair.  What would help more people participate is having more advance warning that a tournament of this nature will be upcoming.  In that preparation time, players can make temporary moves to competition-capable alliances that have room to spare.

Smaller alliances still could not compete, but many players within them could.  Of course there's no way that everyone can enjoy a fair chance, but that's life.  To an extent, the competitive advantages of the more advanced players is fair reward for effort already invested into the game.
Back to Top
The_Dude View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jan 2011 at 00:14
Switching alliances for competition is not an easy thing.
 
1) Player/Alliance loyalty/pride is very important.
 
2) Cooldown times
 
3) A record of the exit/rentry could be misinterpreted later as the player being "difficult" within an alliance
 
4) Not all members could exit an alliance and still preserve the alliance
 
5) The founder, likely an important military contributor, could not easily switch for the tourney.  Doing so requires moving the alliance capital.
 
6) Prize sharing is difficult - esp the special units.
 
7) No sharing of the glory to the unnamed alliances
 
8) Loss of Alliance chat, in-game forums to the swithcing alliance.  And exposure of temporary members to another alliance chat/in-game forum.
 
I think swithcing for the tourney is only practical for the large alliances with sister alliances.
Back to Top
Llyorn Of Jaensch View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 924
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jan 2011 at 00:19
Ive inadvertantly started a duel discussion (here and in Game enhancements) on evening the tournament playing field. For continuity of purpose please state all opinions/contributons in this thread as the game enhancement thread was placed for GM benefit.

My last stat on the issue :

In a confederation of alliances the rule would apply for a limited (maximum) number of players ie 100 (the current Alliance member max). This would obviously rule out larger alliance confederation and place the benefit with the smaller alliances ie the desired effect.

Small alliances could, for the duration of the tournament, act as large single bodies, enabling them to be competitive.
Back to Top
Brids17 View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jan 2011 at 00:21
Originally posted by Llyorn Of Jaensch Llyorn Of Jaensch wrote:

Realistically as it stands now only the top 5 or so alliances have any realistic chance of holding a flag.


I wouldn't say that. mCrow is rank 12 and we're doing quite well given our size. We're only 29 hours behind in total flag time and we're up against alliances twice our size and even if we don't win the overall I'm confident we can win the prize for holding one of the flags the longest. I think it's really the alliances from rank 15 and down that suffer.

I suppose one way you could potentially solve this problem is to host a tournament that only alliances below X rank can join but this could be difficult since players could drop out of the alliance temporarily so they'd fall within that rank grouping then join back in.
Back to Top
The_Dude View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jan 2011 at 00:59

Dateline: South Flag

 
It’s a ghastly sight here at the south flag.  The stench is sickening (yes…I was sick).  With deep sadness, I can tell you that more than 150,000 brave soldiers have perished at this flag.

 

I have interviewed survivors and this is what they have told me…each saying the same thing:

"Dead Orcs are the most horrible smell ever known!"

 

They also described berms built from corpses.   Attackers climb these corpse-berms to close on the defenders only to be shot down by archers and run-through by spearmen in a reverse-slope defense.  And the corpse-berm grows.  This cycle has been repeating itself for days now.   These corpse-berms can now be seen from nearly a mile away.  The most horrible aspect of the battlefield is the moans and cries from the dying buried within the corpse-berms.

Edited by The_Dude - 06 Jan 2011 at 01:01
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 678910 42>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.