Why pretend the game mechanic is a “glith” in some attempt to butcher the game even more when it’s already pretty much a mangled corpse. If you want to change this don’t pretend it’s under the pretense of some bugfixing when it’s not something which would classify as a bug. You could also keep doing it, it may be despicable but such strategies have certainly proven themselves to be quite effective as ascertained by the consulate unit stat changes for example. At least you posted it in discussion rather than bug report as some other people have done to gain influence for their complaints backed up by falsitudes and that should be respected.
It’s so obvious that this mechanic is an exploit/glith that I won’t even argue about whether or not it is.
The only question here is how it must be resolved.
3 Likes
Go ahead and claim deleting an unbuilt building foundation is an “exploit/glith”. I guess when you block India agra fort from getting built you think India shouldn’t get their resources back when they try to replace the wonder. ■■■■■■■ ridiculous.
Ok, you not understood me. As the walls are now, it havent any sense that some people build them without towers. For this i proposed that whe walls work differently.
My initial proposal was to build walls without towers directly by joining segments in a row and building towers only at the corners in such a way that it was not necessary to go around destroying the pillars.
The other option would be that the game does not allow you to build without pillars in such a way that removing them also removes the adjacent wall segments
3 Likes
Or we could just keep it the same and have people who spend the time on properly building pillarless walls get the wood pack from the pillars they deleted, the people who don’t delete get to waste more res but less time and the people who do delete without taking the time to properly space the walls out so there are no gaps will have gaps but save wood and time. There’s no need for a change.
Sorry but pillarless walls are dumb and unnecessary.
10 Likes
Pillarless is not a strategy, its an exploit. I play without pillarless and I can say that most games I dont lost any layer of wall playing as aztecs. Also I think that games would be more funny without millions of walls around the map
3 Likes
Do you play treaty or supremacy?
It is an exploit regardless of game mode.
also walls have been creeping into supremacy, making the game mode pretty similar to treaty.
That was not going to be my point. Also is deleting buildings an exploit? I will say this again, the old devs did nothing to change the mechanics of pillars and neither have the new ones. Either it is not a concern for them or it is not an exploit and a fully intended mechanic. I do not mind if they change how walls work but it needs to be done correctly.
Your point is moot.
No. This is not comparable. Other buildings aren’t easily spammable with 7500 hp for 5 wood and 5 seconds build time.
This is because they had deadlines, and when they could finally get to deal with balance and exploits, they got disbanded. Stop nit picking on this, what the old devs did or didn’t do is no longer relevant. By this logic we shouldn’t get new balance changes on old civs because the old devs didn’t do them.
I wasn’t aware we just had the last patch and the game will be forever in this state. By this logic, the devs shouldn’t touch anything that wasn’t changed so far cause you want it that way.
It is not an intended mechanic. If it was, they would have removed pillars from the game. There are just bigger fish to catch right now.
You surely seem to oppose changing any of this.
1 Like
It is fine if people enjoy treaty but let’s be real here: Treaty is not the way the game was meant to be played and the game isn’t (and shouldn’t be) balanced to accommodate it.
1 Like
“I wasn’t aware we just had the last patch and the game will be forever in this state. By this logic, the devs shouldn’t touch anything that wasn’t changed so far cause you want it that way.”
I did not say the game was not being updated, nor did I say I want it a certain way. Maybe actually read what I said before commenting. Maybe do not put words in peoples mouths because you come off as arrogant when you do.
“If it was, they would have removed pillars from the game. There are just bigger fish to catch right now.”
This is not necessarily true, pillars can be in the game as well as pillarless walls. One could be for people who want to micro to make better walls and one could be for fast wall placement. Bigger fish? They could have changed this before the DE version came about, they had asked the community what their wishes for the biggest changes were and walls were not one of them. This is the first time I have ever seen anyone complain about pillarless walls.
“You surely seem to oppose changing any of this.”
I am not, do not assume things for me. I can be of the mindset that the current state of pillarless walls is not an exploit or bug but rather a mechanic and also be open to it being changed. These two opinions are not mutually exclusive.
Considering that there are clearly treaty cards as well as the Industrial and Imperial ages (you rarely ever get to these in supremacy games) it does seem like treaty was at the very least a highly thought of mode. And considering the new devs have even balanced treaty decks and civs for it I would say that the game was at least partially designed with it in mind.
1 Like
Treaty.
All we need are fixed aztec walls. They dont work.
2 Likes
I would like to see the Devs make it so that you cannot make pillar-less walls. This would help decrease wall spam and would let walls be used properly. Pillars should probably not cost the same as a wall segment (same for build time), which is why people do this.
I would also like to wall over trade routes but I guess this would be bad because people would wall off to win the Trade Monopoly Victory.
5 Likes
pillarless walls do not belong in the game.
Walls as are one of the best investments in the game.
Pillar less, and only pillars is game exploiting and ruins it.
Walls can be one of the most toxic things in the game.
They should have that extra cost from pillars.
PS- unless they changed it for DE, all wall segments will damage touching wall segments next to them, so its possible to make even bigger holes in walls be hitting 1 segment… if you start a wall segment, and get it down low, can use units to spread that damage even with a single unit down the line to a whole wall.
1 Like
I would like the exploit/glitch changed, it just does not really seem part of the game, more of an oversight be the devs. Also for walls i think there needs to be a mechanism to prevent spamming too many walls. Maybe either a max build limit or the more walls you make the higher the cost.
2 Likes
reduce the wood cost of the pillars to 1 and increas the build time of pillars by 50%. keep the long segments at 5 wood and longer buildtime.
This reduces the advanatage of pillarless walls significnatly. you still can benefit from using this explit but you pay by it in extra attention needed when putting down the walls. should be balanced
alternatively make is so that when deleting a pillat the not compeltely finished wall segements connected to the pillar are also deleted. but that would invovle more coding, and more windows for bugs, and not needed
or you guys just stop sieging walls with skirms while theres more important things to be done instead. honestly, if you feel like it increase the cost to 20 wood per segment/pillar but keep the pillar delete option.
i cant see how so many players struggle with it, select pillar, select all hotkey pres delete. 3 clicks, if youre too bad for that your problem arent pillarless walls.
pillarless walls are used because units suck at pathing, without the pillars units pass to adjacent gates much more fluent.
removing that just because a handful players spent 10 mins sieging walls with goon/skirm instead of investing in mortars or actual siege units is mindblowing