Cannon Units For Barracks?

[DwarfTank]

**FEEDBACK WANTED**It's time again to think of the lower level players that want to build clan bases but don't have high enough lvls to defend them.


My proposal, how about adding Cannon Units to the barracks that will defend against siege attackers by targeting their sieges.

Cannon Units and how....

Cannon Units will be added to the barracks, clans will have to craft cannon balls for these units.

Three Types of Cannon Balls

1) Ice Cannon Balls- these cannon balls will freeze sieges in place, while also causing a small amount of damage.

Ice Cannon Ball Crafting

1 block of ice(new resource to mine)

2) Meteor Cannon Balls- these cannon balls will burn siges for large amounts of damage.

Meteor Cannon Ball Crafting

1 Meteor Rock
1 Torch

3) Tar Cannon Balls- these cannon balls will stop sieges from attacking for some time.

Tar Cannon Ball Crafting

(Suggest your ideas in comments)

[_NICKPAN_]

if the graphics and coding can be made without bugs, then +1

crafting chance should also have a 50%ish


but how we will be giving the cannon balls to the cannon?
maybe adding them to barracks storage?

also there should be a limit for cannons guards. and ballanced leveling when upgrading barracks stats

[Leone]

It seems that there is an imbalance where those attacking bases tend to have an advantage over those defending them- in part at least because of the near invulnerability of sieges. I think this idea sounds promising in order to try and address the issue.

[DwarfTank]

if the graphics and coding can be made without bugs, then +1

crafting chance should also have a 50%ish


but how we will be giving the cannon balls to the cannon?
maybe adding them to barracks storage?

also there should be a limit for cannons guards. and ballanced leveling when upgrading barracks stats

Yes, all cannon balls will be stored inside the barracks.

[DwarfTank]

It seems that there is an imbalance where those attacking bases tend to have an advantage over those defending them- in part at least because of the near invulnerability of sieges. I think this idea sounds promising in order to try and address the issue.

Leone thanks for supporting this idea.

[WARBRINGER]

It seems that there is an imbalance where those attacking bases tend to have an advantage over those defending them- in part at least because of the near invulnerability of sieges. I think this idea sounds promising in order to try and address the issue.

I agree, Leone - As of now, a siege party against a building is a definite loss, no matter how many builders you have.

[ryaca_]

I remember the last time that I seiged with like 12 other players it took us 2 days to destroy a level 2850 tower. In my opinion it takes way too long to destroy a building.

[madmaniacal1]

I remember the last time that I seiged with like 12 other players it took us 2 days to destroy a level 2850 tower. In my opinion it takes way too long to destroy a building.

2 days of steady sieging for 12 players, or a few hours here and there? Were the defenders rebuilding while the siege occurred? How many man-hours of labor did it take for such a building to be erected?
I'm not voting for or against this idea. I'm only looking for the most balanced answer. If such units are implemented, what would the damage be in order to be useful, but not OP?

[_NICKPAN_]

I remember the last time that I seiged with like 12 other players it took us 2 days to destroy a level 2850 tower. In my opinion it takes way too long to destroy a building.

Please also note the time that it takes to build that 2850 with 12 builders.
If im right it should be built in 4 days (since u destroyed it in 2 days) with 12 builders working (same time)

[ryaca_]

I just know that in my opinion, it takes way too long to destroy clan structures. There are many new players that would love to be able to build but because of many inactive clans, they will never be able to build, and because it takes so long to even destroy one structure, there is no hope for newer players.I believe that something needs to change as newer players should be able to enjoy the clan experience. I have believed this for many years.

I also do not believe that clan bases should be allowed to stay standing if the clan only has 1 or 2 acrive members that only log on every once in awhile. That space could be used for newer more active players and or would help FT grow.

Dead clan bases only hurt FT and turn newer players away from the game. This is a fact. I can think of at least 4 clan maps that I patrol regularly as a GM that never have any players on them. And yes I know about different time zones and I log in at different times for this reason. What is the purpose for these clan bases that have little to no activity? Decorations? These abandoned structures are one of the reasons that contribute to the dwindling FT population.

I apologize for going off topic.