Adjust the System for Placing Revolt Banners in Wars • CCNet

Adjust the System for Placing Revolt Banners in Wars Back

Sqnky_ 1 day ago

Currently, the war mechanics allow the revolt banner to be placed randomly on any exterior part of the fort during a revolt. While this system adds an element of unpredictability, it also introduces unnecessary complications, bugs, and potential unfairness. I propose a change to this mechanism: the revolt banner should only be allowed to be placed within the same chunk where the initial conquest siege was started.

Why This Change Is Necessary?

- Eliminating Plugin Errors and Unintended Consequences
Random banner placement can sometimes lead to technical glitches or plugin errors that disrupt the flow of the siege or give one side an unintended advantage. Restricting banner placement to the same chunk would reduce the likelihood of these errors.

- Avoiding Confusion and Unnecessary Complexity
The current system can create unnecessary confusion for both players and staff. Defenders might scramble to find the banner, only to discover it placed in an unexpected or obscure location, while attackers might struggle with explaining or defending their banner placement. By fixing the banner location to the original siege chunk, both sides would know exactly where to expect the revolt banner, leading to smoother gameplay and fewer disputes.

- Addressing Time Zone Disadvantages
Not everyone is in the same time zone or able to compete effectively at 24:00 PM UTC, the typical time when banners are placed. This timing can disproportionately favor players in certain regions while leaving others unable to participate due to late or inconvenient hours. Restricting the banner to the same chunk where the first conquest siege occurred ensures that the focus remains on strategy and preparedness, rather than who happens to be online at a specific hour. This adjustment would make the system more inclusive for players from all time zones.

- Reducing Staff Workload
As it stands, staff members often need to step in to resolve disputes or address issues related to incorrect banner placement or glitches. By streamlining the system and fixing the banner to a specific chunk, staff intervention would be needed far less often, freeing up their time for other important tasks.

- Ensuring Fairness for Both Sides
The randomness of the current system can inadvertently create unfair advantages or disadvantages. For example, a banner placed on a highly defensible exterior wall may heavily favor the defenders, while a banner positioned on the opposite side of the attackers siege base may make it nearly impossible for the attackers to succeed. Restricting the banner to the original siege chunk ensures that both sides are working within a consistent and fair framework, making the outcome of the war more skill-based rather than luck-dependent.

In conclusiton, I think this change would make the war system more predictable, balanced, and manageable for players and staff alike. It would eliminate bugs, simplify gameplay, and foster a fairer experience for both attackers and defenders. Additionally, it would address the issue of time zone disadvantages, ensuring that all players have a more equal opportunity to participate in revolts, regardless of their region.

I hope this suggestion is considered, as it has the potential to improve the war mechanics significantly while addressing current issues with the system.

Comments

Fqrtex 1 day ago

Actual good suggestion with good argumentations.

Nxva 1 day ago

Here’s my comment on it. Though I do think revolt banner is unfair because of the distances it can be placed. I don’t think I really agree with it having to be placed within the same chunk that the siege started originally. Here’s why,

Why Not,

1. So if the banner is like that then the nations who aren’t as strong has 0 chance of winning because they can’t compete with the numbers of Thracia or Rome. Though a counter argument is that if a nation is being sieged by them then it’s likely they are sided with alliance or coa.

Why Yes,

Though I don’t think this is the solution Nor do i know what is, I do think that this also could work on the other hand since they can place very close to ganks which makes it very hard to play for the opps

Boxxyy 1 day ago

This would make sieges be cancerous to fight as defenders, and make it much harder for smaller nations to be able to put up a defense. Not only that, But in effect, you are rendering a forts movecraft base much more useless. If they will never have the chance to defend from their movecraft side (Which who in their right mind would place banner on THEIR side?), It becomes much less effective.

If anything were to be implemented like this, it should coincide with the diplomatic stance of a nation, going as follows:

Non-Interventionalist - Defending town (fort) designates 4 chunks in which banner can be placed, Chunks must be separated by at least 2 chunks, and any attacking nation can only place on one of those 4 chunks.

Balanced - Current system, who ever places first gets banner where they place it.

Imperialist/Expansionist - Revolt banner on their fort (The fort of the imperialist/expansionist nation) will always be fought where the attackers placed it.

Makes diplomatic stances have more weight, gives a choice to players if they dont want to have to be on for banner placement, and still keeps the fairness of if they do chose that, they have national debuffs.

Falkom 1 day ago

Back when this was suggested by Csipok (suggestion #2983), it got mass downvoted by Coping Coalition members. Now that the coalition is fighting some offensives, where they all of a sudden have to get a suppression banner placement, this has to change? Just admit that youre mad over the Wanraq and Valor placement and re-siege in 2 weeks where you are able to place banners wherever you want.

The only good thing about this suggestion is the "Addressing Time Zone Disadvantages
" part

Falkom out.

greymesa 21 hours ago

this gets rid of the one advantage for an occupied nation, placement. just makes all sieges attacker-sided.

Stoodsumo657621 20 hours ago

Couldn’t it just be made that the banner always gets placed in the same place. No one chooses where it goes and it is random every time or in between all of the siege bases every time. I understand this would be annoying on square forts but I think it could work.

Illyt 19 hours ago

This is a terrible suggestion.

A lot of offensives are done by bully nations against smaller ones. The issue is the only advantage the smaller nations have on revolt is banner balancement.

A lot of Dunlace sieged when Alliance was pretty small were won due to superior banner placement allowing us to make the revolts movecraft oriented.

By removing this feature we are selling out small nations to the bully ones.

This has to be the worst thing I've ever read on ccnet period. Revolts are meant to be difficult for the suppressing nation to win, they are meant to give a little hope to the often weaker native nation and they act as way to simulate the defenders advantage irl.