PDA

View Full Version : Fortifications



Hupernikomen
05-22-2013, 06:31 AM
Why build them?

The rationale behind them has to be different for each tier that your faction is in. I am interested in hearing your rationale behind the benefits of building them.

Give your faction's rank, level of walls you typically build and why you think it is a good expenditure of resources.

Mine

Top 250. Level 7 walls. We spend 6 mil dollars to prevent our opponents from scoring maybe 4k points. It does slow them down some and use up a few hits from scouting. At our level, I could careless how many points our opponents scores.

SGT Rud
05-22-2013, 06:39 AM
Top 750

We build a single level 10 for the first battle. I helps us win that first one out the door. It is a morale booster. After that its pretty much level 7s the rest of the time. In some cases, the opposing wall decreased our normal ammount of points by up to 10K-15K. With us being a smaller faction, a lot of hits were made to tear the wall down.

Over all, having stronger walls helps in the outcome of keeping your enemy from gaining points in the battle and less points through the entire war. We were running short on concrete in Columbia, but were able to boost the number back up.

The fortifications would have more relevance in the battle if you got extra points of the battle win. I think that this aspect of the game could be adjusted for the better.

Golf4life
05-22-2013, 06:40 AM
because thats 4k less points for every faction that attacks you. as well they get 4k less points for every war they are in.

let's assume there are 30 wars you participate. thats 120kwd points. pretty sure that is plenty for a couple of positions.
Why build them?

The rationale behind them has to be different for each tier that your faction is in. I am interested in hearing your rationale behind the benefits of building them.

Give your faction's rank, level of walls you typically build and why you think it is a good expenditure of resources.

Mine

Top 250. Level 7 walls. We spend 6 mil dollars to prevent our opponents from scoring maybe 4k points. It does slow them down some and use up a few hits from scouting. At our level, I could careless how many points our opponents scores.

Arnaud
05-22-2013, 06:41 AM
I agree with Hupernikomen. The goal of the fortification is to make the enemy waist a few hits so they score less. But in the end:

1) if you're matched to a weak faction, you might actually get points for those hits if you win
2) if you're matched to a strong faction that uses gold, they will scout no matter what, wall or not (you will just cost them less but not necessarly make them score less)
3) even if they score a bit more points without the fortifications (for non gold factions for instance), it's not gonna make a real deference on the leader board
4) you don't give an advantage to 1 faction but to all the factions that you fight so the benefit is spread

So yes, I think you raise a good question. Plus, it's super annoying to buy LV10 walls!

I'm interested in having the forum's feedback about that...

Arnaud
05-22-2013, 06:46 AM
because thats 4k less points for every faction that attacks you. as well they get 4k less points for every war they are in.

let's assume there are 30 wars you participate. thats 120kwd points. pretty sure that is plenty for a couple of positions.

Sorry but I disagree: giving 4k to 30 different factions wont make a difference, at least no in my tier.

Plus if you consider the cost of 30 LV10 fortifications, you could actually get a bonus that would give you a real advantage during those 30 battles.
Personally, I'd rather get a benefit for the 30 battles than giving a tiny disadvantage that wont benefit me to 30 different factions...

TW Turtle55555
05-22-2013, 06:49 AM
Your math has one flaw. You have to divide that 120k over the number of factions you faced which is probably between 28-30. You are really only hurting each opponent 4000pts for the whole war.

Golf4life
05-22-2013, 06:52 AM
i guess i am confused at how you disagree.

every key position is sorted by a few thousand or hundred thousand WD points. If you had to go up against 0 walls, you would have all of those hits or gold to get actually WD points, saving you 4-6k worth of WD points per battle. If you do that for 30 wars...math is trivial.

There really isn't arguing the fact that the more level 10 walls you go up against, the less points you will receive.

Thus, the more walls you create, the better your chances are of squandering another faction's position.

This is quite important in the top100 as we come across many of the factions competing for the same spot we are.

again, i am just confused as to how you think it isn't beneficial.

That top 75 unit will give you way more stats than a 5 percent increase in attack bonus that you are looking for.
Sorry but I disagree: giving 4k to 30 different factions wont make a difference, at least no in my tier.

Plus if you consider the cost of 30 LV10 fortifications, you could actually get a bonus that would give you a real advantage during those 30 battles.
Personally, I'd rather get a benefit for the 30 battles than giving a tiny disadvantage that wont benefit me to 30 different factions...

Hupernikomen
05-22-2013, 06:53 AM
We gain considerable points by failed hits on us. If the opponent's small fries don't have a wall to bang then they go fishing and score me points. In that respect having walls may actually hurt me.

Golf4life
05-22-2013, 07:03 AM
i can understand how at first this would seem correct.

however, if there were no walls, the scouts would hit the exact same way they did even if there were walls.

so really the walls would have nothing to do with the failed hit gains, as they would happen anyways.

We gain considerable points by failed hits on us. If the opponent's small fries don't have a wall to bang then they go fishing and score me points. In that respect having walls may actually hurt me.

Hupernikomen
05-22-2013, 07:04 AM
I agree with you golf, in your Tier I think they are vital. I am just not convinced in mine they are. Interested in other people's view. Seems to me gree should make winning a war of some significance and the dynamics of this discussion changes completely. Of the twenty factions above and the twenty factions below, we might have fought two of them so i dont see that it would hurt my rank giving a couple factions i am actually battling 5k points while increasing my chances of scoring a few hundred per war more for 40 wars.

Golf4life
05-22-2013, 07:06 AM
what tier are you in.

I agree with you golf, in your Tier I think they are vital. I am just not convinced in mine they are. Interested in other people's view. Seems to me gree should make winning a war of some significance and the dynamics of this discussion changes completely. Of the twenty factions above and the twenty factions below, we might have fought two of them so i dont see that it would hurt my rank giving a couple factions i am actually battling 5k points while increasing my chances of scoring a few hundred per war more for 40 wars.

Hupernikomen
05-22-2013, 07:06 AM
i can understand how at first this would seem correct.

however, if there were no walls, the scouts would hit the exact same way they did even if there were walls.

so really the walls would have nothing to do with the failed hit gains, as they would happen anyways.

Agreed an organized top 100 faction would not be duped into fishing, but a top 1000 group with wall bangers would have to be tempted to finally get to hit someone instead of the wall.

Golf4life
05-22-2013, 07:07 AM
ah,

well yes, without organization i can see how it would work in your favor.

Agreed an organized top 100 faction would not be duped into fishing, but a top 1000 group with wall bangers would have to be tempted to finally get to hit someone instead of the wall.

cherlock
05-22-2013, 07:27 AM
Totally agree..


As long is you get the points even when losing a battle, forts are just a waste of money.
And you get more points for NOT having a fort, because opponents will strike
more often so lose more often.

use the cash for upgrades

Gree will never change the fact that you still get points when losing, simply because this will be the end of this game within 2 weeks.

SGT Rud
05-22-2013, 07:31 AM
Sorry but I disagree: giving 4k to 30 different factions wont make a difference, at least no in my tier.

Plus if you consider the cost of 30 LV10 fortifications, you could actually get a bonus that would give you a real advantage during those 30 battles.
Personally, I'd rather get a benefit for the 30 battles than giving a tiny disadvantage that wont benefit me to 30 different factions...

I have to agree with Golf - if every faction we fought had no wall, we could have easily scored 100K-200K more points and been in a much higher placing.

mgriss
05-22-2013, 07:43 AM
We're consistently ranked in the 400s... we get matched with factions ranked as high as 125 and as low as 1500.

Our wall strategy is based on the assumption that many of the factions we are up against use similar battle strategies.

Our battle strategy is to declare constantly, and either fight hard (take out wall and do lots of recon), fight medium (only take out DL), or regen (do nothing but earn points of failed atks, hit wall if you'll still be fully regen for the next battle, which will inevitably be a "fight hard" battle).

To maximize our points earned on rival's failed attacks while minimizing their total points earned (both are important, the former being more important), our wall strategy is aimed at maximizing the number of our rivals who "fight hard" against us, while not making it too easy for them. If we use all lvl 10 walls during daytime play... sometimes half of our rival's will regen on us. If we use all lvl 5 walls... every faction will "fight hard" against us and earn several thousand more points, presumably.

We find that using lvl 8 walls for daytime battles and lvl 6 walls for night battles keeps about 25% of our rivals from taking down the wall. More of our matches are with factions ranked much higher than us, most that were ranked lower or near are the ones that either don't take it down, or take their sweet time taking it down and don't earn many points.

Arnaud
05-22-2013, 07:55 AM
I have to agree with Golf - if every faction we fought had no wall, we could have easily scored 100K-200K more points and been in a much higher placing.

Ahah, of course, but that won't happen. That's the cool thing.

Once again, it's all a question about what your tier is and how far to each other factions are in it.

SGT Rud
05-22-2013, 08:05 AM
Absolutely. I completely agree. But every point counts.

Having a wall or not is all part of your battle strategy.

SevenO9
05-22-2013, 08:21 AM
Level 10 forts because we haven't found any other usefull purpose for concrete.

lightning strikes
05-22-2013, 10:47 AM
I think walls benefit Gree more then the factions. The most important thing of war is getting points. Walls does not generate points. The o ly benedit of walls is that you slow down the opponent in getting points as long as the wall is up. Thats only interesting when its a direct rival for your position.
Walls are only interesting when you get extra points if you win the battle.
Btw there is a post about a faction who uses lvl6 day and level8 night. How? I thought mw decides what wall and I assume always the strongest available. My faction is divided we are a 250- 500 faction.

mgriss
05-22-2013, 10:55 AM
Btw there is a post about a faction who uses lvl8 day and level6 night. How? I thought mw decides what wall and I assume always the strongest available.

It does use the strongest available. We build enough lvl 6 for the whole war, then upgrade what we'll need for the day first thing in the morning.

Hupernikomen
05-22-2013, 10:59 AM
Interesting to see a few others take on this. Good discussion.

TW Turtle55555
05-22-2013, 11:05 AM
I have to agree with Golf - if every faction we fought had no wall, we could have easily scored 100K-200K more points and been in a much higher placing.

Or more likely every other faction around you would have played against no walls too and you would have ended in the same position with just a higher score

nimby
05-22-2013, 11:18 AM
Here is what I wrote to our faction (ranked about 1000 at the time)
to reduce the concern about walls.


Why walls are not a big effect

Our opponents score on average 5000 points against us if they do not destroy our wall, so they get about another 5000 if they do destroy it. We fight 55 wars in a battle. If we had no walls, in the worse case, we would be granting 55 opponents another 5000 WD points. There is about 300K points between 1000th place and 500th place, so you need 600 more points for each rank a faction advances.

We fight opponents that are ultimately ranked between 200 ranks below and 350 ranks above us.

Here are few ways to think about the argument

1) on average we are giving 55*5000 points to the 550 factions we potentially fight, or 500 points each on average. This raises them all by about one rank, or equivalently lowers us by one rank.

2) we give up 5000 points to 55 factions among the 550 in our bracket. As a result, those factions each gain 5000/600 or 8 ranks - good for them. If one of these factions is ranked above us, it doesn’t matter at all to us, it just shuffles the factions ranked above us. If the faction is more than 8 ranks below us, then it doesn’t matter because the 5000 points will not allow them to move ahead of us. Only if the faction is in the 8 ranks right below us, will it change our ranking by promoting that faction from below us to above us. The odds that we fight a faction in the 8 ranks below us is 8/550 or 0.014. Or stated another way, the odds that giving all those points to those factions will change our ranking by even one is only 1 in 68.

Even given this calculation, we should provide walls as strong as we can easily build, just to harass our opponents and increase the chances we win each war, which is fun and good for morale, even if it does nothing directly for rank. Also this calculation may look quite different if you are ranked 50, where the bracket might be much tighter, and you are fighting the same 20 factions over and over for the whole battle.

mgriss
05-22-2013, 11:39 AM
Why walls are not a big effect


Totally agree, for the most part what lvl wall you have is trivial.

But correct me if I'm wrong... you say factions leaving your wall alone are scoring 5,000 points, factions taking it out are scoring 10,000 points... I would argue that if you had no wall, the factions that take it out could earn not only earn 15,000 points total, but the factions that normally leave your wall alone could also score 15,000 points, making the average benefit to each of those 55 factions more than 5,000 points (depending on the percentage that currently takes out your wall). Not sure how well coordinated factions around your ranking are, but I'd be willing to bet all the factions we get matched with would benefit enormously from us having no wall.

About 3/4 of the time, our enemies take out our lvl 8 walls... with a potential gain for them of nearly 10,000 extra points if we had no wall (depending how much damage they're able to do per hit). Moreover, it seems like those that choose not to take out our wall (and end up earning less than 10,000 WD total) are more likely to be the factions who are historically ranked lower than us, and would gain a great advantage if they were allowed to make 10,000 more than the 20-30,000 WD average that those who do take out our walls currently make, for a total of 10-20,000 extra WD for those that typically leave our walls alone.

That being said, your point about whether or not the factions you are matched with are actually competing for the same spot is a good one. What level of wall you have doesn't matter too much, but I'd argue that having no wall is a bad idea. And since they're pretty cheap and concrete isn't good for anything else... why not.

stealyourface
05-22-2013, 11:44 AM
Hehe, if it were up to me, I'd only by level 1 walls and put all of our cash toward upgrades, but my group might think I'm crazy :)

It's cool to see all you crunching numbers, my view is it's only about points you earn and walls have no influence on that. Points you earn is primary influenced by your teammates participating and the gold they spend. Walls have a no material influence in rankings IMO.

S&H Max
05-22-2013, 11:49 AM
Wall can change something in mid range faction cause if people attack wall they dont attack you so you save troops but when people start having 200k attack or more its 16hits to take down a level 10 wall, so 16 memebers use their first free hits reloading during the time the scouting is make, so to be honnest at a certain tier we all have them but it doesnt change anything!

I dont know if PUN, Ferr and SF buy forts, really useless when you always face top 10

BigBlueNationAWC
05-22-2013, 12:55 PM
Fortification is a darn nice way to keep the rival's faction's score low until you can regroup and attack again. Works nice especially when some squirts declare war when others are not ready and delete the alert.

nimby
05-22-2013, 01:39 PM
Totally agree, for the most part what lvl wall you have is trivial.

But correct me if I'm wrong... you say factions leaving your wall alone are scoring 5,000 points, factions taking it out are scoring 10,000 points... I would argue that if you had no wall, the factions that take it out could earn not only earn 15,000 points total, but the factions that normally leave your wall alone could also score 15,000 points, making the average benefit to each of those 55 factions more than 5,000 points (depending on the percentage that currently takes out your wall).

Hey, I'm a nerd from Chicago too - maybe I'll see you at the next meeting. I think I understand and agree with your points, which take it a bit further than I did, but the effect is so small, it remains small, even after tripling it. We have the same bottom line - it is pretty easy to build mid-to-high level walls, so go ahead and do it to get another rank or two, but don't sweat it.

Colonel Jessup
05-22-2013, 07:50 PM
We gain considerable points by failed hits on us. If the opponent's small fries don't have a wall to bang then they go fishing and score me points. In that respect having walls may actually hurt me.

I have been preaching this for 3 months. My faction still does not see the logic behind it

Colonel Jessup
05-22-2013, 07:52 PM
Totally agree..


As long is you get the points even when losing a battle, forts are just a waste of money.
And you get more points for NOT having a fort, because opponents will strike
more often so lose more often.

use the cash for upgrades

Gree will never change the fact that you still get points when losing, simply because this will be the end of this game within 2 weeks.

I agree, Good post

I am a cow
05-22-2013, 10:13 PM
level 8 and 9 walls with 10 level 10 walls waiting to kick your A$$ btw top 250

KFH
05-23-2013, 12:39 AM
Great feeling going into a war and seeing that the other faction has no wall. I agree more need to do the same :)

I am a cow
05-23-2013, 03:26 AM
Great feeling going into a war and seeing that the other faction has no wall. I agree more need to do the same :)

That no longer happens to us :( the opposition always has a level 7,8,9,or 10 wall which is annoying but surprisingly easy to take down

jb483
05-23-2013, 04:28 AM
Why build them?

The rationale behind them has to be different for each tier that your faction is in. I am interested in hearing your rationale behind the benefits of building them.

Give your faction's rank, level of walls you typically build and why you think it is a good expenditure of resources.

Mine

Top 250. Level 7 walls. We spend 6 mil dollars to prevent our opponents from scoring maybe 4k points. It does slow them down some and use up a few hits from scouting. At our level, I could careless how many points our opponents scores.

I think the only real advantages to the walls are that for every hit an opponent puts on a wall that's not a hit being put on one of your own faction members. Points aside the walls benefit the faction by drawing the attention of the attackers and reducing the number of casualties your own faction members take and thus helps keep their stats as high as possible. Even in the case of gold using factions, most of them aren't going to unload it all in one battle so what they spend on your wall they don't spend on you. I dunno that's just how I see it

GuyInLobsterSuit
05-23-2013, 05:03 AM
Top 10.
Level 10 walls.
Trying to get rid of all these bricks :(

rar
05-23-2013, 06:29 AM
You build all your walls at a level 6. You have cash and blocks in reserve. In the morning you figure out how many wall you are going to use that day. You build that many to a higher level. When those get used up the level 6 wall get used during the night. The next morning, you do the same thing. You have to have a active leader to do this.

My faction is Top 250 faction for the last 3 wars. We build all are walls to 10. Got to do something with all those blocks we have.




Btw there is a post about a faction who uses lvl6 day and level8 night. How? I thought mw decides what wall and I assume always the strongest available. My faction is divided we are a 250- 500 faction.

Colonel Jessup
05-23-2013, 06:49 AM
Building fortifications still makes no sense to me if you are a faction ranked 250th or below.

Level 10 walls protect you from about 25 hits. Even at 400 pts each, you give up at most 10k points extra. You will not play that team again if you are ranked in this range. Essentially, you give up 10k points to about 30 teams, one or two of which, at most, will be within 10k points of you at the end.

If even three out of those 25 attacks fail, you gain about 1000 points each battle for a total of 30k over 30 battles. That's net positive of 20k, assuming you lose 88% of the extra attacks. If even one out of 25 attacks fail, you break even by not having walls.

Forts are as pointless as the win loss record. Save your money, score more points, upgrade other bonuses a little faster.

Arj
05-23-2013, 07:00 AM
Read through this pretty fast so i may of missed this but

no ones going to mention that if you don't build any walls you willll take more hits on your players, and you still have casualties, surely no one enjoys taking 500+ loses each war right?

Also if everyone stops building walls there will be no benefit to anyone....no gold used reduction...the only effect will be every faction gaining more points.

I understand building walls doesn't increase your own or your factions points, but it lowers the relative average of points in factions in your zone(or the ones your fighting).

Walls wont ever be a crucial part of your own factions success or not, but they don't cost anything compared to other things, so I don't see the sense in not building them.....

Colonel Jessup
05-23-2013, 07:08 AM
Read through this pretty fast so i may of missed this but

no ones going to mention that if you don't build any walls you willll take more hits on your players, and you still have casualties, surely no one enjoys taking 500+ loses each war right?

Also if everyone stops building walls there will be no benefit to anyone....no gold used reduction...the only effect will be every faction gaining more points.

I understand building walls doesn't increase your own or your factions points, but it lowers the relative average of points in factions in your zone(or the ones your fighting).

Walls wont ever be a crucial part of your own factions success or not, but they don't cost anything compared to other things, so I don't see the sense in not building them.....

Not building walls does increase your points, which is the point of not buying them.

Your chances for points when your opponent is attacking the wall is exactly 0%. When they attack you instead, you can expect at least 5% defensive wins and as high as 50% depending on how disorganized the team attacking you is.

Bottom line is that you can't score defensive points while your wall is being attacked.

Also, many teams are told to start their regen timer by taking a hit on the wall. Most of these teams will have several of their lower level players Now attacking on an unknown target, instead of waiting for intel or hitting the command center.

Arj
05-23-2013, 07:27 AM
Not building walls does increase your points, which is the point of not buying them.

Your chances for points when your opponent is attacking the wall is exactly 0%. When they attack you instead, you can expect at least 5% defensive wins and as high as 50% depending on how disorganized the team attacking you is.

Bottom line is that you can't score defensive points while your wall is being attacked.


Ah i see, well that's definitely a interesting view and you are right that you may increase your point total by a small margin.

I still don't think its a smart play, most factions in my zone(place in either top 250 or 500 every event) don't go hard every battle, but its typically every other battle or whenever we get a soft target. We score 5k some battles, and up to 130k + in some battles.

Pretty much what I'm saying is even though you may increase you total points total by 5%(over estimated imo) is that really going to help you rank any higher? and is it worth the loses you and your faction will take.

The difference in WD points you will gain with/without wall will be so marginal compared to the loses you ll take, that's just my opinion though and if someone does attempt this, please do post the results:D

Colonel Jessup
05-23-2013, 07:41 AM
You are misunderstanding what I am saying. You don't gain 5% of your total points. You break even if you win 5% of the battles that they would have otherwise hit the wall with. You double your points at 10%, triple them at 15%, etc. so if you give up 10k by not having walls, then you gain 30k on that team and 40k all the teams you gave 0 pts to if you win 20% of their attacks that usually go towards the wall. The risk/reward makes not having walls a no brainer. 30k might be 10-12 places. If you never win an attack (which is near impossible) you will lose one or two places at most, and only if you faced a team within 10k of you.

Big John
05-23-2013, 08:25 AM
Gree should make the walls protect the players instead of the DL.

mgriss
05-23-2013, 08:39 AM
You are misunderstanding what I am saying. You don't gain 5% of your total points. You break even if you win 5% of the battles that they would have otherwise hit the wall with. You double your points at 10%, triple them at 15%, etc. so if you give up 10k by not having walls, then you gain 30k on that team and 40k all the teams you gave 0 pts to if you win 20% of their attacks that usually go towards the wall. The risk/reward makes not having walls a no brainer. 30k might be 10-12 places. If you never win an attack (which is near impossible) you will lose one or two places at most, and only if you faced a team within 10k of you.

There's a flaw in that logic. We're usually ranked in the 3-400's... and it seems like most teams accrue roughly the same amount of losses against us regardless if they ended up earning 10,000 WD or 60,000 WD in the battle. To assume that they will lose the same % of hits against you if they take 40 hits or 400 hits is to assume that they are hitting totally randomly. If they're not sharing the intel from their hits with each other (assuring no further losses) then they're not getting matched with us.

Dilligaf13
05-23-2013, 09:10 AM
I'm in a lvl 250 faction, without the lvl 10 walls we would never been able to stay there. Call it bad luck or whatever but most of our battles were again lvl 75 - lvl 100 factions. With the lvl 10 wall it made them use gold on the wall or hits from there players that they couldn't use against us. I understand that only means a few hits but that can make a difference. Look at it this way also, if someone hits your wall, (no gold), with 4 hits, they may only get 2 more hits against you during the battle. If that same person is getting info from others and find they can't hit someone they will not attack again and recoop til next battle so again you are gaining from not being attacked. Most of the scouting is done by the heavy hitters so they don't lose often in the first place so again, your not gaining any points.

I hear people talking about gaining points when being attack and winning the attack. That's good if you are winning most of them but when you are losing most of them then your losing, not gaining. For example there are 10 attacks against you and you win 5 of them, you break even or close to even, but when you start losing more then that you are losing points to them.

Another point, without a wall you give up double the points. Lets say you have a wall and they get 10k points, without the wall they would get 20k points. I'm not sure how many points every faction averaged during battles but we were defiantly higher then 20k each battle or we would have not stayed in top 250. A lot of people think it's all about the points you score and to a point it is but you also have to consider the amount of points you give up, if you are giving up 2 to 1 points or worse you are not gaining, your putting yourself further behind. Now if you are comfortable where your faction is in the rankings then continue to do what you have been doing but if you plan on gaining you need to change your strategy and think about both, gaining points and giving up fewer points.

At lower lvls it may be ok not to have walls but at higher lvls I feel it is mandatory. This just my opinion and trust me, I'm still learning the game and could be totally wrong on my thinking and willing to change my thoughts if others thoughts can be justified. Happy hunting all.

weedam
05-23-2013, 09:20 AM
The fortifications would have more relevance in the battle if you got extra points of the battle win. I think that this aspect of the game could be adjusted for the better.

Seconded. A bonus for wins would add some competitiveness and give significance to faction records. The problem would be determining how many points for a win (maybe make it a total % of points earned in the battle).

Colonel Jessup
05-23-2013, 11:35 AM
There's a flaw in that logic. We're usually ranked in the 3-400's... and it seems like most teams accrue roughly the same amount of losses against us regardless if they ended up earning 10,000 WD or 60,000 WD in the battle. To assume that they will lose the same % of hits against you if they take 40 hits or 400 hits is to assume that they are hitting totally randomly. If they're not sharing the intel from their hits with each other (assuring no further losses) then they're not getting matched with us.

There is not a flaw in the logic. What are your lowest level players instructions? Take out the DL and take out the wall? Now they are sitting there with no wall to take out. They have to attack someone or something. Some will take one shot to start a regen timer and many will attack someone they may not beat every time now. To expect 2 or 3 out of the initial 25 attacks to be errant is not flawed logic. Nor is it flawed to assume that the lowest level players will try to win points somehow going foward, when intel doesn't exactly matchup on the screen.

To all those saying that intel is perfect in the 400 range, lol.....it's not. I had the misfortune of spending time on a faction where they still did not know that the higher the level of the player you defeated, the more points you got. Sometimes intel for three or four players was posted, and that was it. Even if it only helped half their faction.

Colonel Jessup
05-23-2013, 11:41 AM
I'm in a lvl 250 faction, without the lvl 10 walls we would never been able to stay there. Call it bad luck or whatever but most of our battles were again lvl 75 - lvl 100 factions. With the lvl 10 wall it made them use gold on the wall or hits from there players that they couldn't use against us. I understand that only means a few hits but that can make a difference. Look at it this way also, if someone hits your wall, (no gold), with 4 hits, they may only get 2 more hits against you during the battle. If that same person is getting info from others and find they can't hit someone they will not attack again and recoop til next battle so again you are gaining from not being attacked. Most of the scouting is done by the heavy hitters so they don't lose often in the first place so again, your not gaining any points.

I hear people talking about gaining points when being attack and winning the attack. That's good if you are winning most of them but when you are losing most of them then your losing, not gaining. For example there are 10 attacks against you and you win 5 of them, you break even or close to even, but when you start losing more then that you are losing points to them.

Another point, without a wall you give up double the points. Lets say you have a wall and they get 10k points, without the wall they would get 20k points. I'm not sure how many points every faction averaged during battles but we were defiantly higher then 20k each battle or we would have not stayed in top 250. A lot of people think it's all about the points you score and to a point it is but you also have to consider the amount of points you give up, if you are giving up 2 to 1 points or worse you are not gaining, your putting yourself further behind. Now if you are comfortable where your faction is in the rankings then continue to do what you have been doing but if you plan on gaining you need to change your strategy and think about both, gaining points and giving up fewer points.

At lower lvls it may be ok not to have walls but at higher lvls I feel it is mandatory. This just my opinion and trust me, I'm still learning the game and could be totally wrong on my thinking and willing to change my thoughts if others thoughts can be justified. Happy hunting all.

There are so many misconceptions here I don't know where to begin. If you are being matched up with top 75-100 factions as top 250, then walls are totally irrevalant, and you don't want them. Why? Because even if they gave off a million more points it would have no change in your final ranking because you aren't passing that team anyways. 25 more attacks on players instead of walls is 25 more chances to win a fight.

If you give up 10k extra to every team you face they don't gain 300k if you fight 30 battles, they still each only get 10k. If you gain 1k through those 25 attacks through 30 battles, you don't gain 1k, you gain 30k. You move up the rankings not down.

Colonel Jessup
05-23-2013, 11:44 AM
Like a couple other people have noted, until gree gives a bonus for a win.....walls are counterproductive.

Some Random Clown
05-23-2013, 02:07 PM
The game is all about points and nothing else. I wish all the teams I faced had no wall. I have good scouts and set rules of engagement. I'll give you a thousand points if you give me double points worth 5000 more in return. If you are in a different class from me it doesnt matter right? in the 750-1500 range point ranges are tight and 5000 points can move you 15 places or more. Im all about slowing the other guys down and maybe making you spend some gold. I'm giving you at least a level 6 wall to chew on every fight though.

Saint Anger
05-23-2013, 02:20 PM
There is not a flaw in the logic. What are your lowest level players instructions? Take out the DL and take out the wall? Now they are sitting there with no wall to take out. They have to attack someone or something. Some will take one shot to start a regen timer and many will attack someone they may not beat every time now. To expect 2 or 3 out of the initial 25 attacks to be errant is not flawed logic. Nor is it flawed to assume that the lowest level players will try to win points somehow going foward, when intel doesn't exactly matchup on the screen.

It's barely worth mentioning, but there is always the option of the Command Center...

mikeb1975
05-23-2013, 02:58 PM
I definitely see your point and agree with your logic. Your thoughts on the net effect of lower levels blindly attacking targets is certainly intriguing. Is the amount of points won calculated differently when being awarded to a defender?

What i'd also like to know is how the damage is calculated when attacking a wall so that I can more accurately calculate how many hits are necessary to take down a wall. I assume it has something to do with the attacker's level or attack stat but I have no way to verify this.

My faction is top 250 and we use level 8 walls. I'm going to be conservative here and say that on average it takes 30 hits for our opponents to take down our walls. Lets say that our opponents average 300 points per hit against us so 30 hits x 300 points = 9000 points. This means that one level 8 wall is reducing the total number of points scored by each opponent by 9000 points. Assuming that the above is true and we decide to abandon walls all together, all we would need to do to keep pace with our opponents is simply increase our total output FOR THE ENTIRE WAR by only 9000 points. Worth noting is the fact that we rarely fight a faction more than one time per war so this 9000 point increase is not cumulative. We fought in 48 battles in Columbia, so 48 x $6.375m (the cost of a level 8 wall) = $300m. Is there a bonus out there that we could buy with this $300m that would net an increase of 9000 points PER WAR? I would think that 2 additional guild mates could easily generate more than 9000 points per battle and the neat thing about the bonuses is that they last forever - walls do not.

An interesting topic indeed.

Now I need to figure out what exactty is the downside of not having a wall. The way I see it is that anyone we are competing against is going to take down our wall no matter what so the above logic is sound. Not having a wall is only giving them 30 extra attacks per battle and given that we scored 1.9m+ points last war, 9000 is merely a drop in the bucket.

Colonel Jessup
05-23-2013, 06:55 PM
I definitely see your point and agree with your logic. Your thoughts on the net effect of lower levels blindly attacking targets is certainly intriguing. Is the amount of points won calculated differently when being awarded to a defender?

What i'd also like to know is how the damage is calculated when attacking a wall so that I can more accurately calculate how many hits are necessary to take down a wall. I assume it has something to do with the attacker's level or attack stat but I have no way to verify this.

My faction is top 250 and we use level 8 walls. I'm going to be conservative here and say that on average it takes 30 hits for our opponents to take down our walls. Lets say that our opponents average 300 points per hit against us so 30 hits x 300 points = 9000 points. This means that one level 8 wall is reducing the total number of points scored by each opponent by 9000 points. Assuming that the above is true and we decide to abandon walls all together, all we would need to do to keep pace with our opponents is simply increase our total output FOR THE ENTIRE WAR by only 9000 points. Worth noting is the fact that we rarely fight a faction more than one time per war so this 9000 point increase is not cumulative. We fought in 48 battles in Columbia, so 48 x $6.375m (the cost of a level 8 wall) = $300m. Is there a bonus out there that we could buy with this $300m that would net an increase of 9000 points PER WAR? I would think that 2 additional guild mates could easily generate more than 9000 points per battle and the neat thing about the bonuses is that they last forever - walls do not.

An interesting topic indeed.

Now I need to figure out what exactty is the downside of not having a wall. The way I see it is that anyone we are competing against is going to take down our wall no matter what so the above logic is sound. Not having a wall is only giving them 30 extra attacks per battle and given that we scored 1.9m+ points last war, 9000 is merely a drop in the bucket.

Not sure what your attack is, but I'm around 50k at level 48, and am one of the weakest players in my faction of 42 members. I do almost 2k damage on a wall. On average a level 8 wall will take our faction about 15-20 hits to take down. That's 5k to 6k non cumulative points you give up using 300pts. So if in all 30 of your battles you win just one of those 20 attacks, you break even or even come out ahead a 2-3k. If you win 5 of 20 attacks, you score significantly more cumulative points. Walls are a waste of resources.

Colonel Jessup
05-23-2013, 07:00 PM
It's barely worth mentioning, but there is always the option of the Command Center...
There is always the command center, but I don't believe there is anyone in a top 750 faction who would choose that option. It is more beneficial to scout with a low level player to find a great target for the rest of your team. This is another benefit to not having walls. It turns everyone into a scout for a few minutes

Colonel Jessup
05-23-2013, 07:05 PM
Once gree gives a bonus to winning a match, level 10 walls become necessary. 5k WD for winning would be nice. Even 1k bonus would bring back the necessity for having walls. A tiered bonus, depending on the ranking of the team you faced, would be the best. It would earn greed more money as well. More battles would be fought.
1k for 1000+
2.5k for 750+
5k for 500+
7.5k for 250+
Etc

bostoncard
05-23-2013, 09:52 PM
i guess i am confused at how you disagree.

every key position is sorted by a few thousand or hundred thousand WD points. If you had to go up against 0 walls, you would have all of those hits or gold to get actually WD points, saving you 4-6k worth of WD points per battle. If you do that for 30 wars...math is trivial.

There really isn't arguing the fact that the more level 10 walls you go up against, the less points you will receive.

Thus, the more walls you create, the better your chances are of squandering another faction's position.

This is quite important in the top100 as we come across many of the factions competing for the same spot we are.

again, i am just confused as to how you think it isn't beneficial.

That top 75 unit will give you way more stats than a 5 percent increase in attack bonus that you are looking for.

But every position doesn't matter. The only positions that matter are the threshold ones that get you to the next reward tier. So it is only going to matter in a VERY limited set of circumstances... If you are competing for the 75 spot, then this only matters if it is the difference between between you winding up 75th or 76th, and the difference in points is smaller than the hits they sacrificed going up against your wall. It doesn't matter if it is the difference between you winding up 80th and 81st, or even the difference between ending up 74th or 75th.

Logically it makes no sense to invest in walls. Emotionally, though, it might.

BC

Slick50
05-23-2013, 11:18 PM
In the top 100 and especially top 50, level 10 fortification are toppled within 5 minutes of battle. Everyone has them and taking them down is just part of the warm up. Drop the D-leader, crush the wall, probe and report best targets. Then the real battle begins, especially if a you find Moby ****.

MoD
05-24-2013, 12:39 AM
we build level 10 walls, whole war (lv 250 faction). imo walls don't make much of a difference. gree should reward wins with lots of wd points. it's like in sports. wins should count more than the result.

Giedrybe
05-24-2013, 05:19 AM
I'm in a lvl 250 faction, without the lvl 10 walls we would never been able to stay there. Call it bad luck or whatever but most of our battles were again lvl 75 - lvl 100 factions.

So you wanted to say that walls 10lvl were completely useless for you, right?

Important to understand that your rivals are those who compete vs for the place in the ranking. You don't actually compete vs those who are in top100, right? Do you care if they will score double points on you? What you should care is wasted 10.5 M cash + bricks for such battle.

We should care about points we give up only if we are matched vs our direct competitor.


If that same person is getting info from others and find they can't hit someone they will not attack again and recoop til next battle so again you are gaining from not being attacked.

What you actually get from not being attacked? The only tiny positive thing is somewhat lower casualties. In the end everybody tries to play the game in that way, which leads to 2000 indestructables units, collected from various events.



I hear people talking about gaining points when being attack and winning the attack. That's good if you are winning most of them but when you are losing most of them then your losing, not gaining. For example there are 10 attacks against you and you win 5 of them, you break even or close to even, but when you start losing more then that you are losing points to them.

Everybody needs to realize that your competitor is not a faction you face now. It is another ~50 factions or so. Getting zero is not gaining. Gaining 1k wdp while giving up like 10k or so - is gaining 1k wdp in comparison to other 49 factions. Also - as you have experienced by yourself - it is not such a common thing that you are being matched against your DIRECT competitor. Remember - don't care how much scores the faction which is clearly stronger or weaker than you.


Another point, without a wall you give up double the points. Lets say you have a wall and they get 10k points, without the wall they would get 20k points.

Sorry, that's incorrect.


A lot of people think it's all about the points you score and to a point it is but you also have to consider the amount of points you give up, if you are giving up 2 to 1 points or worse you are not gaining, your putting yourself further behind.

That's a common myth/belief, my friend, we have had it as well. However, only MONITORING has showed and proved that forts are actually kind of useles. Trust me, we are veterans from Brazil battle. I don't want you to blindly follow me. All I am saying is don't believe in something blindly. Put monitoring in place for Madagascar. See how many times you have been matched against your direct rivals, track the results. Take the final rating, deduct from all the rivals you have faced some X amounts of wdp (55 000 level 10 fort strength, say the average hit would be 2250, so 25 hits. They have earned around 850 wdp while destroying it. Say the average value of hit vs player without wall would be 300 and that they would win it all (which they would not), so you give up 25 hits x 300 wdp - 850 = 6650 wdp on the rival) - and now check how your rating has been affected. If you will meet some faction twice, deduct from them 6650 x2. How much do you estimate now you would gain in the ranking with forts?

The forts can be only a moral booster, also have some impact on casualties. But casualties should not be put on the podium. Even 10th fort consumes around ~4 players of rival faction, when normal faction has at least 40 or so players. So fort has maximum effect of -10% on casualties.

And I have not mentioned that part, which is actively promoted by Colonel Jessup.

Arj
05-24-2013, 06:36 AM
If they do add a reward for winning a battle, it should be a percentage increase of WD points in your next battle IMO such as 10%. Having set amounts for different rankings will make it harder for people to close in on those above them. But if they did add a percentage increase it would more fair and would add another interesting strategic tool in gaining more points.


Also wanted to add that even if this whole not building walls thing is substantially beneficial(not sure it is), if everyone starts doing it I believe it would just balance out again and there will be no benefit lol.....

You guys haven't considered too many factors imo, you ve taken a statistical approach to the points calculations, what about people who wake up in the middle of the night, find that the walls half broken 30 mins in, and just hit the wall and go to sleep for a hour. What about the battles that you dont have enough players, and you barely make it through the wall, or you cant take down the DL. IF you have no wall then I would wake up, check stats and hit someone, and I wouldn't lose those hits. We re talking about 250 and below factions here.....it happens a lot specially when people are sleeping. How often do you go to your chat log(whatever your using) and see there's only 5 stats posted and non are big enough for you. If there's no wall all these problems go away.
You guys argue having no wall induces more hits onto your players, which is most likely true. But that doesn't mean there blind hits...I could argue that having no wall allows factions to gather more intel on your players, and have less offensive losses against you....

mgriss
05-24-2013, 06:39 AM
There is not a flaw in the logic. What are your lowest level players instructions? Take out the DL and take out the wall? Now they are sitting there with no wall to take out. They have to attack someone or something. Some will take one shot to start a regen timer and many will attack someone they may not beat every time now. To expect 2 or 3 out of the initial 25 attacks to be errant is not flawed logic. Nor is it flawed to assume that the lowest level players will try to win points somehow going foward, when intel doesn't exactly matchup on the screen.

To all those saying that intel is perfect in the 400 range, lol.....it's not. I had the misfortune of spending time on a faction where they still did not know that the higher the level of the player you defeated, the more points you got. Sometimes intel for three or four players was posted, and that was it. Even if it only helped half their faction.

Sorry, to say there was a flaw was pretty harsh. And you are probably right to point out that factions at our level are not always that tight. I suppose all I can say with certainty is if we get matched and you have no wall, don't expect to earn more points from our failed attacks.

Colonel Jessup
05-24-2013, 10:37 AM
Mgriss, what would your low level players do? I assume they usually Start their regen timers as soon as possible. Would they wait three minutes for intel and possibly lose a free attack, hit the command center, or make a quick attack on a lower ally or random player?

This is debatable, but I would guess that most would choose to make an attack, a large percentage would wait and possibly lose a free attack, and pretty much no one would attack the command center.

Worst case scenario is we give you 10k free points. The chances of us of not gaining 10k free points over the course of 30 battles from errant attacks that would have went to a wall are zero.

To whoever said if everyone starts not building walls until bonuses are given then no one gains much, that is correct. We have went about the last 200 battles and possibly seen one or two teams without walls. It's not going to change. The majority of factions in the 250-1000 range don't follow the forums.

The percentage based bonus is a great idea. 5% or 10% for a win would be about right and also make walls meaningful.

13Stalker
05-24-2013, 10:59 AM
Level 10 forts because we haven't found any other usefull purpose for concrete.

True, but the cash can be used to buy a better bonus! You get nothing if you go undefeated and end up outside the top 4000 in points. You get prizes if you lose every battle and end up in the top whatever level. The name of the game is points. Winning a battle is only good for morale and in keeping some members motivated to fight. I want to get as many points as possible to raise my tier and couldn't care less how many battles I win. If it were up to me I would rather have the points for failed hits on my player and the additional bonuses. I dont think it makes alot of difference on the leader board in most tiers. If you only fought people in your tier it would be different.

Saint Anger
05-24-2013, 11:11 AM
There is always the command center, but I don't believe there is anyone in a top 750 faction who would choose that option.

Not true - I am in a Top 50 faction and found myself hitting the CC on occasion in Colombia, for lack of a "better" target. Granted, that is a disappointing option to take, but points are points. At a certain point, in my opinion, you can overkill on scouting. Scout until proper targets are found for most players, but not necessarily every player; otherwise, I think you can scout your way right into less points.

Zedsdead
05-24-2013, 11:51 AM
A very informative thread with a lot of thoughtful discussion and information exchange. Thanks to all for your insights.

Hupernikomen
05-25-2013, 08:29 AM
Thanks again for all the input. Col. Jessup and I have exactly the same logic. The only nuance that i am considering in my no fort strategy is to build walls at night to prevent giving up more than the 6k extra. At night people often battle and don't hit the wall; therefore, having the wall will not decrease my point total as they will be hitting me and not the wall anyways.

Some talk about casualties on here. Casualties are pretty much obsolete with the stats of units that gree is giving away these days. And that guy on your team that take 4k losses, you know the one, that is the one everyone is looking for and they are going to chew him alive with or without a wall if they find him.

Thanks again.

jchow69
05-25-2013, 08:31 AM
That's why we have a strong defense leader, but it won't work with power attacks.

SteveJobs
05-25-2013, 07:13 PM
I wanted to know the total cost of each level fortification, but couldn't find it anywhere. Here is what I came up with.

See Attached Image:

3546

PS... Looking for 3 more in our growing top 500 faction.

Apply at http://samurais-sword.enjin.com/recruitment or PM me.

Dilligaf13
05-29-2013, 12:11 PM
There are so many misconceptions here I don't know where to begin. If you are being matched up with top 75-100 factions as top 250, then walls are totally irrevalant, and you don't want them. Why? Because even if they gave off a million more points it would have no change in your final ranking because you aren't passing that team anyways. 25 more attacks on players instead of walls is 25 more chances to win a fight.

If you give up 10k extra to every team you face they don't gain 300k if you fight 30 battles, they still each only get 10k. If you gain 1k through those 25 attacks through 30 battles, you don't gain 1k, you gain 30k. You move up the rankings not down.

Colonel Jessup you are correct somewhat, because we don't know who we will be facing we will always have the walls, if it's one of the top 75-100 factions like we faced this last battle you are correct, it's not going to make a difference but if it's one of the lower or equal to us factions it may. You never know who your going to face. This last battle we faced a lot of the top 75-100 factions, the last battle we faced just a few so you never know who your going to face.

I think your wrong about weather it makes a difference on how many points you give up on changing your final ranking. If you are giving points up to factions higher than you it makes that magic number to get to next level higher so you have to gain more points to get there. One faction is not going to make a difference but if your fighting multiple factions it can. We finished 132 this last one, starting the last day, I got online at 4 AM, we were at 111, every faction we faced except one until the end was a lvl 75-100 and we dropped 21 positions so you can't tell me that the points you give up doesn't make a difference. I understand that the factions that we faced didn't make us fall in rankings, it kept us from getting closer to the lvl 100 mark. Our bad luck of facing higher ranked factions and not getting the points we needed and others getting the points they needed to pass us made us drop in rank. But when the number that we are trying to get to to break that lvl 100 mark keeps increasing that means that others are making more points, so the fewer points that you are giving up to those above you keeps that number from increasing. You still have to make the points to get there though.

Zedsdead
05-29-2013, 01:12 PM
I think your wrong about weather it makes a difference on how many points you give up on changing your final ranking. If you are giving points up to factions higher than you it makes that magic number to get to next level higher so you have to gain more points to get there. One faction is not going to make a difference but if your fighting multiple factions it can. We finished 132 this last one, starting the last day, I got online at 4 AM, we were at 111, every faction we faced except one until the end was a lvl 75-100 and we dropped 21 positions so you can't tell me that the points you give up doesn't make a difference. I understand that the factions that we faced didn't make us fall in rankings, it kept us from getting closer to the lvl 100 mark. Our bad luck of facing higher ranked factions and not getting the points we needed and others getting the points they needed to pass us made us drop in rank. But when the number that we are trying to get to to break that lvl 100 mark keeps increasing that means that others are making more points, so the fewer points that you are giving up to those above you keeps that number from increasing. You still have to make the points to get there though.

I think you didn't drop because those top factions were making points against you. They were all going to finish above you anyway. What hurt you is that you couldn't score points against them like you would against a lower level faction.

Gnorax
05-29-2013, 02:39 PM
For my lower faction group we get them to make it harder for other lower to beat us

John 719166364
07-16-2013, 04:43 PM
Has anyone figured out the strength value of each wall? So for example a Level 1 wall is worth 1000 hit points, Level 2 is etc.

War lord
07-16-2013, 06:43 PM
We have discussed this in our faction (top 250-750) and we have never came across a faction with no walls.

SpikeyKit
07-16-2013, 07:22 PM
Came across a faction in the top 250-750 without a wall, saved sending in a fee gjys to break it down before scouting.
Personal preference is to have quite a few walls the bigger the better. If they dont fall great, if they do its points anlther faction hasnt earnt, therefor slowing their progress through the ranks.

Wai
07-16-2013, 10:19 PM
Came across a faction in the top 250-750 without a wall, saved sending in a fee gjys to break it down before scouting.
Personal preference is to have quite a few walls the bigger the better. If they dont fall great, if they do its points anlther faction hasnt earnt, therefor slowing their progress through the ranks.

Their progress through the ranks is irrelevant, therefore walls become irrelevant.

ProCision
07-17-2013, 06:41 AM
we only roll with level 10 walls. We take down level 10 walls in seconds. Walls are pointless.