Mid Flight Disband of Fleet 2.0

[kris]

Soundwave people wont just disband before moving because before moving they dont know that they are about to get trapped. Thats what makes it a trap.

If people knew they were going to get trapped then theyd take another route and not get trapped, not disband before moving.

[Khamul Nazgul]

It will stop ppl from moving around it will make ppl disband before start to move to get 25% or 50% of lost fleets and i just spit on ppl who support this idea.

Just Woah at your whole statement.
So you would disband before you move your fleet, before you even know if you are re-call trapped or whatever? LOL WHAT

Why don't you just disband your account so I can't gain any profit off you EVER. Sounds great right?


It would also encourage movement actually.

If someones re-call trapped they just disband and the enemy go home empty handed but with 1 less fleet to handle.

- Disable Disband button Mid Flight
If someones re-call trapped and can no longer disband, they have to try fight or move some of their fleet before it's all shot.
If they are shot in time, there are derbs, a pile.

The other guild would most likely want that pile instead, so they sneak in to take it.

See?
All tactical movements.

No disband feature mid flight.


But..admit it, it forces people to move to protect profit
Cause who doesn't like profit?

[Ferdoc]

No agreement was made on Ferdocs splash damage thread,

in fact every poster in there was against it. So dont assume that just because some people disagree that this isnt the place for this idea.

The difference is that my suggestion in splash damage did not remove a game mechanic based upon irrational use of logic and impossible to backup 'logic'. Additionally if you have an issue with a DIFFERENT thread, please post there and stop derailing other threads.

As for this idea in itself its a great idea. Fleets shouldn't magically disappear in the middle of space. If they are disbanded there should be some form of debris.

Gameplay trumps realism. Besides this realism logic has been shown to have its own issues, ones you ignored.

Also to add to this they shouldn't magically disappear once they land on a players base with an occupying fleet and be turned into credits. The occupying fleet should be able to shoot it down.

Again, we fall back to the trite realism argument in which you cry about something and then proceed to ignore EVERY SINGLE GOD DAMN ISSUE WE BRING TO THE TABLE. Your lack of response to cutting down of the most used effort to support this concept is telling in your ability to defend the concept. If you demand realism deal with the counters. If you don't demand realism, stop using it to validate the concept.

Maybe when disbanding fleet thats landed on a base it should take some time to do. Not instantly. For example x amount per hour could be disbanded based on prod cap.

More realism being included for what reason exactly?

[kris]

The difference is that my suggestion in splash damage did not remove a game mechanic based upon irrational use of logic and impossible to backup 'logic'. Additionally if you have an issue with a DIFFERENT thread, please post there and stop derailing other threads.

Your idea caused a big problem, but thats another thread.

Gameplay trumps realism. Besides this realism logic has been shown to have its own issues, ones you ignored.[]

lol, fleets disbanding into thin air is not gameplay,

however if those fleets turned into debris and maybe the debris was even spread out a bit that would cause more gameplay as people whould have to find the debris.

Again, we fall back to the trite realism argument in which you cry about something and then proceed to ignore EVERY SINGLE GOD DAMN ISSUE WE BRING TO THE TABLE. Your lack of response to cutting down of the most used effort to support this concept is telling in your ability to defend the concept. If you demand realism deal with the counters. If you don't demand realism, stop using it to validate the concept.

Counters to realism?

I really got no clue what you mean here.

More realism being included for what reason exactly?

To make things better

[Ferdoc]

Gameplay trumps realism. Besides this realism logic has been shown to have its own issues, ones you ignored.[]

lol, fleets disbanding into thin air is not gameplay[/quote]

Its the definition of gameplay. You see within the game the ability to disband fleet exists, therefore its apart of gameplay.

however if those fleets turned into debris and maybe the debris was even spread out a bit that would cause more gameplay as people whould have to find the debris.

Which requires the application of realism, in the last thread issues with this realism was brought up that you, and others, conviently ignored.

Counters to realism?

I really got no clue what you mean here.

I'm honestly not surprised, I seriously doubt you read most posts or at the very least you pretend to not read the counter arguments and instead ignore them and pretend they never happened.

Mini-black holes.

The fragments that can survive travelling 1,972,318,803 meters per second (ty pylinaer) WILL make an impact they just won't show up and slow down. Meaning the planet, moon, or aseriod will have some serious damage inflicted in it. This will happen if you ignore gravity. If you don't then debris likely wouldn't even land anywhere. As its speed is so great and no counter force that is likely significant enough to reduce the speed.

The realism argument you support so whole heartily doesn't pan out.

To make things better

That's a matter of opinion not a fact. Inb4noustyleargument.

[Pylinaer]

Gameplay trumps realism. Besides this realism logic has been shown to have its own issues, ones you ignored.

lol, fleets disbanding into thin air is not gameplay,

First of all Space doesn't have air.

Secondly, do tell how something you can do in the game is not gameplay.

[Sandcastle Smasher]

Right, If you really want this to be a fair system its easy.

Make the Recall and Disband buttons mutually exclusive, ie you cant disband your fleet once you have recalled it.

Then your whole theory of effort/time spent/"tactics" a little more tangible but still gives people a choice.

You have launched from A to B
There is a hostile fleet parked at both A and B

You have a choice:
1) Keep going and try to bounce
2) Disband so they cant kill you (maybe you cant be online as your fleet lands?)
3) Recall back to point A and hope that you can either bounce from there or have a friend help you.

Once you recall, you cannot disband anymore. Thus your chance to deny the profits to the enemy are gone and a successful recall trap is still an artful thing to do.
For a perfect recall trap, you should force your opponent to recall before you send any fleet near his launch point. If he see's you at both locations, he is more likely to try his luck on bouncing away at point B, giving you a chance to shoot him or a chance to escape. If he recalls you can then "close the trap" at point A and he is powerless to do anything but move away on landing.

However I have to say im not a huge fan of the insta disband on landing tactic. I dont see why they cant add the same time delay for making hits as for disbanding your fleet once landed.

These things together make a balancedish proposal no?

[Khamul Nazgul]

Right, If you really want this to be a fair system its easy.

Make the Recall and Disband buttons mutually exclusive, ie you cant disband your fleet once you have recalled it.

Then your whole theory of effort/time spent/"tactics" a little more tangible but still gives people a choice.

You have launched from A to B
There is a hostile fleet parked at both A and B

You have a choice:
1) Keep going and try to bounce
2) Disband so they cant kill you (maybe you cant be online as your fleet lands?)
3) Recall back to point A and hope that you can either bounce from there or have a friend help you.

Once you recall, you cannot disband anymore. Thus your chance to deny the profits to the enemy are gone and a successful recall trap is still an artful thing to do.
For a perfect recall trap, you should force your opponent to recall before you send any fleet near his launch point. If he see's you at both locations, he is more likely to try his luck on bouncing away at point B, giving you a chance to shoot him or a chance to escape. If he recalls you can then "close the trap" at point A and he is powerless to do anything but move away on landing.

However I have to say im not a huge fan of the insta disband on landing tactic. I dont see why they cant add the same time delay for making hits as for disbanding your fleet once landed.

These things together make a balancedish proposal no?

I like this, Compromise to both sides of the Argument.




If someone wants to move off a blob they will do so regardless if the disband button is there, it's ridiculous to say that suddenly people won't move their fleets because the Disband button disappeared.

Many people do not even disband, I don't or have.
I take it as a lesson to improve my game and learn from it if I know I am going to be shot.

You are only taking away the feature "Disbanding Mid flight" or "Disbanding in a re-call" Not the entire feature.

Once their landed they can disband if they want.

This game is a strategy game and when it all comes down to one person deciding you make profit or not regardless of how much planning, thought, strategy into it, it gets fustrating.

It makes people those want to fight say why bother.
They then turn to UCs, Inactive players and Offline players because they have no other choice, many disband, some don't, even if it was someone I know would disband on me, I wouldn't even for them, I would congratulate them on the success of their Operation to catch me and let them have their win which includes profit, Why? Because I have good sportsmanship.
This should be encouraged.

Not the other way around with a big *beep* you disband, don't cater for a player base like that.
It will ruin the game eventually.

[WhiteKnight]

I didn't read much of this thread way to many WoT that is just a few players repeating what that said over and over again yet my two cents, While I never personal have used the disband button except to maybe disband a few scouts, also being on the end of recalling trapping a player and he just disbands many many times ( 6 1/2 years and playing pretty much every server I see it alot ). I would never wish the recall button removed, to me yeah I loose potential credits yet its part of the game, players should have the option of disbanding think about it from their perspective they are disbanding say 100 mill fleet they now lost 100 mill fleet with nothing to show for it and nothing gained players talk about wasting a few hours or few days getting fleet in place to recall trap a player well that player who just disbanded wasted months maybe even years of time with now nothing to show for it, yet guess what you still have your fleet to wave in their face and laugh at them, and even better if your at war with their guild you just got a 0/100 mill ratio against them and what's better than that.

[Sard]

I fully agree with the fact that Disband is now used too much to deny legitimate play, however dont agree that disband should be removed while in flight

Why - because there is a real need to disband due to requirements or functionality of the game. Someone with negative fleet campaigns left due to occupations that may disband, and would rather disband a scout in flight than an occupational force, so he can move other fleet from a base.

and would like to put forward an alternative argument to fix the problem.

Give Disband a lag period while in flight based on the size of the fleet. (yes I did mention something similar in feedback)

So for example a fleet size of 1,000 disbands in 10 secs, 2,000 in 20 sec's, 3,000 in 30 sec's, etc, so we get this.

Code: Select all

Size of fleet	Time to disband while in flight		
		Sec	Min	Hours
<100	instant		
100		1 sec		
1,000	10 sec		
2,000	20		
3,000	30		
4,000	40		
5,000	50		
6,000	60	1 min	
12,000		2 min	
24,000		4	
48,000		8	
96,000		16	
192,000		32	
384,000		64	1.07 hours
768,000				2.13 hours
1,536,000			4.27
3,072,000			8.53
6,144,000			17.07
12,288,000			34.13
24,576,000			68.27

As can be seen by above, the larger the fleet, the longer it takes to disband while in flight.

Therefore
a) The ability to disband smaller mobile fleets is not seriously hindered.
b) The ability to avoid recall traps is harder.

[Dr Rush]

Still doesn't change the fact that disbanding mid-flight is a valid Tactic.

[Sard]

Still doesn't change the fact that disbanding mid-flight is a valid Tactic.

Its not a tactic at all

Who jumps into flight with the intention of disbanding?

No disbanding is just a way to say Stuff You. If you have caught me, then I will make sure you have wasted your time by disbanding my fleet so you get nothing.

A tactic is something that is planned. This is just a reaction to circumstances that the player no longer controls, and is now the norm. Just something else that makes the player base get angry after putting in valid strategy, time and effort to recall trap someone.

And I personally do not think that the developers added disbanding as a valid method to avoid recall traps. The ability to disband in a strategic war game to avoid an attack, does not make sense.

[Ferdoc]

I'm still waiting for someone to explain why avoiding a recall trap by a last resort NEEDS to be limited and/or removed.

[Ron Burgandy]

Does it suck to work on trapping an opponent, stay up all night to hit them as they land, and watch that fleet disappear one second before landing? Of course.

But we've all done it (figuratively speaking) and we deal with it.

Personally I would land (combat units) and suicide, thereby making the enemy have to rebuild and be out until they do. But everyone plays the game their own way and we have to just deal with it.

Perhaps there is a reason the original wasn't moved to the workshop? Maybe all the holes shot through it then?

[Winchester]

Still doesn't change the fact that disbanding mid-flight is a valid Tactic.

Its not a tactic at all

Who jumps into flight with the intention of disbanding?

I have, actually. Tactics, and all that.