Port Blockades (Large)

[sXs]

So, an incentive for the defenders to actually, well, defend?

How about this : if the blockade attempt fails, the attackers fleets marked as 'sunk' ( those with 99% damage) are sold off and the funds go to the defenders : we can call it 'abandoned and taken as prizes at battles end'. Further, the initiator loses their MOW fleet : it is sold off and the funds go to the defenders.

Now, we start to see some incentive for both sides to win this tussle.

So you propose that as a counter to traders simply stopping their fleets? An all or none scenario that favors defenders 100% is not the answer either. I agree the defenders need some incentive to defend as well, but that makes the upgrade irrelevant and one that is never used.

The way it is proposed now the attackers already bear all the risks for what you yourself have said is little to no reward. So your reaction now is to completely make the upgrade untenable?

[Most Lee Harmless]

I propose giving the defenders an incentive to defend : currently, there is none, except maybe an ego-driven desire to save 'face'.
I just felt that the discussions about how much the attackers may gain if successful needed to be balanced with how much the defenders may gain if successful. Right now the balance is that the defenders gain nothing if successful and lose little if not. Others may lose lots, but for the port-owner themselves... there is little incentive to fight over it.

Harons suggestion of tweaking tax incomes may well reward the attacker, but again, the game pays that, the defenders stay as they were... no incentive save to preserve a status which wont actually change regardless of the outcome..

[Sebena]

So, an incentive for the defenders to actually, well, defend?

How about this : if the blockade attempt fails, the attackers fleets marked as 'sunk' ( those with 99% damage) are sold off and the funds go to the defenders : we can call it 'abandoned and taken as prizes at battles end'. Further, the initiator loses their MOW fleet : it is sold off and the funds go to the defenders.

Now, we start to see some incentive for both sides to win this tussle.

So you propose that as a counter to traders simply stopping their fleets? An all or none scenario that favors defenders 100% is not the answer either. I agree the defenders need some incentive to defend as well, but that makes the upgrade irrelevant and one that is never used.

The way it is proposed now the attackers already bear all the risks for what you yourself have said is little to no reward. So your reaction now is to completely make the upgrade untenable?

So you would like that attacker gets all the rewards without any consequences? If my memory serves me in the past whenever pirate was defeated his ship was taken and he was hanged. Since we can't hang pirate here why would they get their ships back? You tried you failed now bear consequences it sure would make people willingly to defend hey I beat them they lose ships its a win win I can see a lot of people eager to defend if somwthing lime this is included

[sXs]

I propose giving the defenders an incentive to defend : currently, there is none, except maybe an ego-driven desire to save 'face'.

I agree 100% with that. All should have some "skin in the game" so to speak.

Maybe not only a MoW required, but say initiator needs to put up some amount of gold coins as permitting fee or some mechanism. If blockade fails it could go to defenders and be split using the same percentage based payouts as a successful blockade. If blockade is successful it is returned.

[sXs]

So, an incentive for the defenders to actually, well, defend?

How about this : if the blockade attempt fails, the attackers fleets marked as 'sunk' ( those with 99% damage) are sold off and the funds go to the defenders : we can call it 'abandoned and taken as prizes at battles end'. Further, the initiator loses their MOW fleet : it is sold off and the funds go to the defenders.

Now, we start to see some incentive for both sides to win this tussle.

So you propose that as a counter to traders simply stopping their fleets? An all or none scenario that favors defenders 100% is not the answer either. I agree the defenders need some incentive to defend as well, but that makes the upgrade irrelevant and one that is never used.

The way it is proposed now the attackers already bear all the risks for what you yourself have said is little to no reward. So your reaction now is to completely make the upgrade untenable?

So you would like that attacker gets all the rewards without any consequences? If my memory serves me in the past whenever pirate was defeated his ship was taken and he was hanged. Since we can't hang pirate here why would they get their ships back? You tried you failed now bear consequences it sure would make people willingly to defend hey I beat them they lose ships its a win win I can see a lot of people eager to defend if somwthing lime this is included

Initiator is already taking the risk. A Mow is required to initiate and 180 danger is given to that fleet. The attacker is already risking 50 million plus based on current market rates.

[Sebena]

How come it is only 10/20 attacks possible on that fleet and I am sure every initator will make sure that he can take that much attacks and keep ships intact so I would say 5M max lose without worry of having ships taken... so that risk is something i will not consider risk...

With possible gain of couple hundreds of millions I see it as not risk at all or very small risk...

You all want more tactics in this game here is one initate blockade and risk losing all ships if you fail.

In those times fail meant death

[Most Lee Harmless]

And the defenders must also risk their power fleets to beat that fleet, and whatever else comes at them : their fleets will also gain DP at battles end. They will also fall prey to the hunters who will wait to pick off the carcasses. Again, why should they? they gain nothing by winning. Others may gain : merchants freely trading, hunters scavenging the battle field... but the defender risk much for nothing. In which case, as a port-owner, if you attempt to blockade my port, I would say, 'Crack on!' . the potential gain for me would be picking off your lit fleets at battles end, not fighting them in the blockade. And if the blockade wins and some traders get plundered? Not my purse, not my problem.

So, what would Blockade become? An exercise in farming merchants unopposed because its not in anyones interest to contest one.. BUT, let me sniff a chance of the monetary rewards that drive the blockader, well, then you might get a fight, which is what you want, isnt it?

[sXs]

And the defenders must also risk their power fleets to beat that fleet, and whatever else comes at them : their fleets will also gain DP at battles end. They will also fall prey to the hunters who will wait to pick off the carcasses. Again, why should they? they gain nothing by winning. Others may gain : merchants freely trading, hunters scavenging the battle field... but the defender risk much for nothing. In which case, as a port-owner, if you attempt to blockade my port, I would say, 'Crack on!' . the potential gain for me would be picking off your lit fleets at battles end, not fighting them in the blockade. And if the blockade wins and some traders get plundered? Not my purse, not my problem.

So, what would Blockade become? An exercise in farming merchants unopposed because its not in anyones interest to contest one.. BUT, let me sniff a chance of the monetary rewards that drive the blockader, well, then you might get a fight, which is what you want, isnt it?

Then simply choose not to defend. Park or re-route your fleets until blockade is complete. That is actually the best defense.

Traders can simply keep loading their warehouses, setting their auto trade routes, casting a few cards every day or so and bank the money. Sorry for the inconvenience to traders that may have to sign in once in awhile and reroute their fleets.

[Haron]

Harons suggestion of tweaking tax incomes may well reward the attacker, but again, the game pays that, the defenders stay as they were... no incentive save to preserve a status which wont actually change regardless of the outcome..

I suggested giving the defenders extra income EVERY DAY they are not blockaded. Extra income based on trade. And if a blockade takes place, this income goes to the Blockaders instead. Thus, the defenders incentive is in not losing this income for the blocking period.

Surely, this is better for port holders than potential attackers, as they get this income every day, whereas attackers have to win a blockade to get it - and even then only for a limited period?

[Most Lee Harmless]

I see, so those who want to run a blockade need the incentive of big money rewards to do so, but defenders must do it for the love of battle, or a few million in trade taxes... or am I misreading this entire thread?