We had 15 people just afk at banner, no conflict, no strategy, no fun.

The opposite side had pre-printed infinite tanks meaning no matter how many we printed, how much strategy and skill we used, there was no chance of winning.

With Rome refusing to leave their tanks, and us having run out of time to print, the last 20 minutes of the session was spent WITH EVERYONE AFK ON BANNER, both sides.....

The only way this can be fixed is to prevent capping while in movecraft. Why can there be 15 people ready to fight at a banner, but none of them can attack each other, while all of them try and gain points.

Why can an invincible (to players) shell be used to cap banner? Why can movecraft attack players but players can't attack movecraft?

This is a fundamentally unbalanced system that has reached its breaking point in a meta where simply printing more tanks all but guarantees victory.

Despite this all we don't ask for nerfs or fundamental changes, we only ask that it be made impossible to cap in movecraft.

-you can ifv spam skilled pvpers (cant be damaged by sword)
-you can gun spam skilled pvpers (cant be damaged by sword bcs youre in a fort)
-you can bow spam skilled pvpers (cant be damaged by sword if ur on speed horse or in fort)
-you counter skilled pvpers with other skilled pvpers
if theres no enemy pvpers on nothing happend, if theres enemies on thats what hapens
-you can kill movecraft with movecraft
-no other way to counter it
if theres no allied movecrafters on, sit and get spammed by players with /vanish in tanks that just damage you from 40 blocks away
balance this bs

also yes make it impossible to cap while piloting and add the panzerfaust, make that rocket launcher 1 time use, i tolerate horse bows and guns but this is bs

While I do understand that you guys have an issue with fighting against movecraft, I wouldnt quite agree that a 2 day siege base should be able to insta win against a fort that took like a month at minimum to prepare with a group of people. Their tactic of going full movecraft is limited to few small scenarios like this one. Your side dont contest to movecraft at all so they can abuse the fact that pvpers cant damage it at all. After few tank fights the land should get quite messed up and remains of tanks will be here and there which would make it quite hard for tanks to move around limiting the amount of movecraft that can be used at once.

While I dont dislike teamfight strategy (I love them), it can only be strategy if the fight is equal. If you overpower the enemy it can hardly be called anything other than a dunking. A strategy would be something that requires more work and complications than straight up win a melee fight. That would be too little elements in a war like game.

Given that a siege on a large nation gives quite a bit of occupation money and other benefits, winning it should be hard but not impossible. Even if anti tank weapons do get added you would still get quite dunked on before sinking them with players only (5-10 inventories of pot worth of damage).

Basically overall Melee should be important, but so should other parts such as artillery work to disable the fort cannons and other bs such as support. As long as all those are balanced it should be fine

Your just typed a huge nothing burger, we want a way to counter invincible players in concrete structures that can damage from 40 block away

If theres multiple ways to counter skill there should be multiple ways to counter bs

If this gets added, i suggest somekind of ERA (explosive reactive armor) which can block panzerfausts, not sure what the ERA block will be but we would not like to kill tank battles and movecraft

You dont play sieges you dont get to type here, and thats a horrendeous bad idea

> Your just typed a huge nothing burger

I wrote that pulling up with just pvpers wont win a siege and isnt strategy. I also wrote that even if anti tank gun is added and you want to combat tanks via that, it would only be fair if you lose like 5-10 lives or inventories of pots doing so since its not an intended counter to them (if its too low no one will use tanks if it sinks too fast to players). Theres also a part where it said that winning an attack gives huge rewards while losing an attack loses you nothing (apart from the spent resources) meaning the struggle should be there to some point (which point exactly is debatable).

> You dont play sieges you dont get to type here

His point of view was still valid. He was concerned that if anti tank player weapons are too strong that it would ruin tanks fully

Tanks are part of the gameplay too. Rome is abusing the fact that your siege base can not contest with tanks so they have the full ability to come out with every vehicle they have. Might be better to see if the same results happen in a siege where both sides can contest to movecraft and then do a suggestion if the same problem is still there. Though I do agree that some kind of hand held anti movecraft weapon should be added to create the possibility to combat them, however to what degree it should be strong is another thing. By my standards I feel like it should be able to kill or do damage equal to 5-10 players (with healing). But even then the handheld anti tank weapon will still be last resort if you can not do anything else. Doing cannons and tanks to combat them will always be a better way to do it

The argument you are making is the one made by movecrafters too, and it's completely false.

We again spent truly a majority of the siege either in tanks or printing them. On top of this we also utilized wilderness cannons, AA trucks and printed IFVs.

The point is we aren't ignoring movecraft, in fact I had tons of fun playing with a heavy tank earlier today. But I simply cannot understand why this does not so obviously ring as a fundamentally unbalanced mechanic.

Everybody including pvpers and movecrafters knows that if you print more tanks and have the same or even slightly less people **you just win by default** if you are sunk, you just come back in another tank and there is little skill involved. Therefore since you can cap in a tank, **the only logical conclusion is that whoever prints more tanks will just win the siege by default**.

This is on top of the fact that this whole system forces every time of player not just to a balanced style of combat, **but every player must be a full on movecrafter to contend in this meta**, using pvp is useless in this meta.

I love how the argument of this being a "special case" still persists, please refer to my arguments on this exact same topic **last year** and also see how this meta has dominated two weeks in a row.

I want to stress this one last time, we had movecrafters, we had almost everyone in a tank at one point, **we won pushes with movecraft**, we tried every method movecrafters tell us to counter with, **but nothing counters simply printing more tanks** and printing tanks **should not be the only deciding factor of an entire siege**. The best way to fix that is not with an AT gun, although I'm not opposed to one, but capping while in movecraft must be removed.

The reason why I called it a special case is because so far in the siege there has been only 1 craft that was sunk on Roman side and the area around the fort is still somewhat intact. Normally, yes, whoever has more tanks out wins, but at the same time whenever there is tank combat land gets blown up, and leftovers of tanks are added to the area. Which means there is less space for tanks to move freely meaning less people can shoot with tanks at once. High contested areas like shimazu or vanghun back in the day get the land so messed up that its hard to get just one vehicle out let alone 5-10 at once.

Though yes, maybe there needs to be an addition where you can not cap the banner while inside vehicles, but their damage towards players will still somewhat be there (and not taking damage from players) and how many can be used at the siege at the same time might not be easy to balance.

I don't quite remember but does anyone have info of a siege where people went full tank mode both sides for a full session? And what happened after that, were they able to use tanks (all of them) on next sessions when the land got messed up

Again, I approve of the anti tank player hand held weapons its just the issue with how much hull damage to specific crafts X people will do over X time.

Though going off topic something that came to me just now, in case it becomes a bit hard to make melee pvp more impactful on fort attacks, what if a new town type is added that can be sieged where you cant use movecraft near it (along with no explosions near the area)? Those towns can maybe give nearby towns some benefits like less upkeep, more claim bonus, maybe increase in towny resource production or just that town giving you resource production. Given how they might work they shouldnt be allowed near forts. Or just server placed towns or "nodes" around the world which you can control only via koth infantry pvp

by the time I wrote it there were additional 1 sinks on each side for a total of 3 sinks I think over the whole siege?

''by the time I wrote it there were additional 1 sinks on each side for a total of 3 sinks I think over the whole siege?''

what?

we have lost 5 tanks.
and you lost 3 tanks.
the total is 8

and i still do not see how this information is relevent to the topic.
we are trying to make it so that theres a counter for tanks (panzerfaust)
and that pilots in tanks are not allowed to cap.

I agree with the craft pilots can't cap part please do that it is very annoying

You guys are so in incredibly isolated in your minds.

I personally was there and thought it was the most hilarious thing.

Now.

You spend 3 days on your siege base.

Incendium is months old.

You have the numbers if you actually worked to recruit and/or tell your log ons to get on.

We literally taught lots of y'all movecraft, just hop in tanks and counter.

Don't say it's not fun

It's not fun for me when I PvP against people more skilled.

Now. You guys have massive egos.

Expecting to take down Rome in 2 days worth of prep? And PvP? Did you think the Romans would play into your gambit?

It makes 0 sense why they would PvP when they could movecraft, you could use some air craft or naval or tanks or anything, don't act like you do not have money because you guys have alot of cash from occupation, I know NORDIC conquerors make minimum 1k a day off of Britain alone.

Your 18x reversal was in your favour anyway.

If you actually provided context and explained to people that the previous battle session you guys had come over and got outskilled, NOT outnumbered because I myself know I was fighting 2 tanks at all time. "We don't have time to train movecrafters" wafflers....

You guys should stop sieging random nations and maybe you will have time.

So....

Let's see

We have covered the reasons

You have enough money to print and produce...

You have enough time to train people movecraft.


And you have enough time to make an actual siege base instead of relying completely on pvp.


So...

Maybe you just don't like movecraft or your pvpers who play once a month only log on for PvP.

Tough luck.

Hop in your own heavies and do something you don't enjoy as the others say "cope".


Because YOU guys sieged Rome so don't expect them to play into you.


Good day.

just add panzerfausts

Well aliitsme I respect you for actually responding, however all of your points are common misunderstandings that have been answered extensively before, however I'll try in brief.

> just hop in tanks and counter.
We have been **constantly**using and printing movecraft, we have made many movecraft pushes and we have devoted almost all of our time grinding at the siege for movecraft. Despite this, as I said, it is number of tanks printed that matter, not really number of of players or skill. Every fight so far, whoever has had more tanks on the field wins by default. This will always be the defender who wins because printing on home turf is 100x easier.

> It's not fun for me when I PvP against people more skilled.
This is a fair point, and very important to understand. **If you are a movecrafter, beyond this change, you will continue to be a movecrafter** movecraft will suffer no nerfs due to this change, and will continue to be **as oppressive against players as always**. We do not want to force movecrafters to be PvPers, but in the same light, movecrafters are forcing PvPers to be movecrafters, which is not fun for any side.

> got outskilled, NOT outnumbered
This is impossible to be true, seeing as we have had a maximum of 4 printed at once, and konigsberg has at least 20 tanks printed with players on at all times for them to be piloted. There has been 3 significant movecraft fights so far: 2 heavies vs 2 heavies (EPF/NC victory), 4 EPF heavies vs 7 roman crafts (EPF/NC loss) and 2 EPF heavies vs 5 heavies (EPF/NC loss).

> Maybe you just don't like movecraft or your pvpers who play once a month only log on for PvP
We all actually love movecraft, and want to spend **half** our time doing movecraft combat, I would also like half my time to be PvP, but this is impossible and useless.

just add panzerfausts

Ezo just say how much % hull damage a person should do over X time to something like a heavy tank. Panzerfaust wont magically make all tanks disappear it will just allow you to damage them slightly to force them to pull back to their garage for repairs and a person swapping to a new vehicle

GIVE ME A WAY TO DAMAGE THESE IDIOTIC FEATURES IFVS SHOULD JUST BE REMOVED THIS IS BS I LEGIT CANT STAND THIS ANYMORE

Thank you neboogles.

You are the first and only person to ever respond to a comment without losing your head.

I understand that printing on home turf is easier.

However I think if you had prepared the siegebase more and claimed more land for tanks it would have worked.

Mind you your base Is closer to banner so you can move movecraft their very quickly.

I understand how fustrating it is coming to a siege to have fun and this happens.

If they remove capping in movecraft It would get people to play even more annoying by circling banner with heavies and ifvs whilst someone is in. Little 3x3 box capping and they would alternate.

In one of your pushes you guys got pretty close to overpowering our movecraft I think if 2 more of your players were online you could have done it.


I think it's a balanced because pvpers get their PvP when the player falls out of the tank when it sinks.

But I understand how you think otherwise.

cannoneer that 18 x reversal lasted around 5 minutes

stop coping cause your tanks are so bad you cant sink us. have you tried to get good and get decent tanks to fight with? movecraft is balanced as its meant to be sunk with other craft panzefaust is unbalanced as its a hand held weapon used to kill tanks when the tanks cant fight the pvpers lmao. start losing and start coping. normal coalition move

Movecraft is far easier than sword pvping so you could put pretty much anyone onto movecraft, sahara region is a good example of this as you see loads of voyagers that have been taught how to use tanks fighting. Your side prepared 5 tanks for this huge siege. You had barely any movecraft so we abused that lack of perpetration.

I agree with carb and pj156, panzerfausts are really unbalanced and is hard to balance them, if some1 remembers the T-gehewer anti tank gun it could be added back, i cant rl see what bad does a anti tank gun do exept if you start sniping with it, the dmg should be 1 terracotta per hit and 2 concrete per hit, but also only 2-3 hp per shot against a player, its not realistic but i cant think of any way to balance the T-gehewer.

Also ezo, cry about it that you cant make good movecraft.

Are you [redacted]? Have i ever made movecraft? Do i care about it?

Egoteric this is a suggestion page, not a coping page, please go cope somewhere else.

Thanks for proving how dumb you are

T-gehewers were pretty buggy back then, sometimes they just dont do damage, maybe if we rework a new anti tank rifle then sure, also about the amount of movecraft that was spammed by rome was not fun for either side's pvpers. And as for pji you cant really say other people's tanks are bad when you 1. dont even have a design you made at the siege 2. got 7 tanks out to fight our 5 tanks. And for the the attackers side yes there was a lack of movecraft and materials because the base was not prep properly because its made by 2 pvp nations.

Legit is unfair the point of movecraft is the risk of the points being lost to sunk the movecraft. The panzerdaust will remove movecraft from sieges cause one side doesn’t have decent pilots. The only way to make it balanced is to make ir expensive which then means big nations have it and little nations don’t making it unfair. So you can’t balance the panzerfaust. Might aswell just say remove movecraft instead.

Ruleblocks my box tank design beats the Russian tanks lol we just use the Saharan one because it’s better.

Me when 8paunzerfausts are incoming towards my movecraft veichles (they are now destroyed beyond human eyesight to the point where molten lava would freeze at the touch of something so icy cold because of it's extreme qualities due to the absolute inability to comprehend an object as so much as a singular redstone block on my movecraft veichles.)

TEAM! WATCH OUT! ITS THE EPF 2nd KEYBOARD DIVISION AND SAHARA'S 1st KEYBOARD DIVISION!

lmao box tank design when have you ever tested it

Just use movecraft omg stop coping use movecraft use movecraft

Its a common knowledge in CCNet you need both to win a siege ure blatantly ignoring the movecraft department and getting blasted away

Which side printed most tanks? Lol just use a tank counter (air) just think outside the box people

Panzerfaust will remove movecraft from sieges, it's basically "make pvpers invincible and kill all nations that don't have a giant clan they can bring on", I'm not reading any arguments as this is what happened when antitank guns were on ccnet, which were probably less stupid than the panzerfaust.

All of you are dumb what make CCNet special is the Movecraft culture you should not be able to have a nation of only pvpers or a nation of only movecrafters balance is nessisary