Dogs of War Online

maybe it is just me being a slowpoke but when you have to downgrade your 800 AP army to face a 200 AP one i might need more than 40 (or 30?) seconds. I think i faced at least 5-6 times the issue of not having enough time to choose my army and ending up with something totally silly chosen by the IA (which takes the most expensive units by default...lol). I think extending the time to one minute is mandatory especially if the AP difference is very high (of course removing 1 or 2 units is faster and 40 sec are enough...but when you have TWELVE units or more in queue it is a different matter!). Lot of "time" gets wasted by clicking and unclicking. What sucks more of not being able to choose your army is when the IA chooses your army. I am fairly sure nobody will complain if they have to wait 20 second more than the original time (maximum) as this would allow a more enjoyable game (from both sides). I wish you could squeeze these extra 20 seconds in the next patch ( shouldn't be too difficult, right?) because i really find it borderline infuriating when it happens.

Am i the only one facing this?

Actually, I am against having to downgrade your army in the 1st place as it leads to people making low AP warbands with a perfect synergy in order to force their opponent to screw over their warband leading to low AP unsatisfying battle...

In other warband-based TBS, they give an "underdog bonus" to the warband with the lowest score/AP at the end of the match. Like bonus XP (XP/Renown), Cash (Ducats) and or Gear (maybe better injury protection ?). That encourage players making the warband they want/can make and would lead to more enjoyable battles.

Naturally, the rsk/reward needs to be tweaked in my opinion. A lost match should give roughly 50% or a win in order for making playing a match really worth it. Would decrease the need for using "hacks" for those who really cant deal with loosing a match at the moment.

Sylmaril wrote:Actually, I am against having to downgrade your army in the 1st place as it leads to people making low AP warbands with a perfect synergy in order to force their opponent to screw over their warband leading to low AP unsatisfying battle...

In other warband-based TBS, they give an "underdog bonus" to the warband with the lowest score/AP at the end of the match. Like bonus XP (XP/Renown), Cash (Ducats) and or Gear (maybe better injury protection ?). That encourage players making the warband they want/can make and would lead to more enjoyable battles.

Naturally, the rsk/reward needs to be tweaked in my opinion. A lost match should give roughly 50% or a win in order for making playing a match really worth it. Would decrease the need for using "hacks" for those who really cant deal with loosing a match at the moment.

yeah of course it would simplify things to reduce your AP on purpose and this is a well known (abused) strategy...however I think that 40 sec is way too low at the moment to rebalance your army (unless it is 1 or 2 units).

Bonuses might be a good idea but i doubt they could implement them effectively...especially at low AP levels having 1 more unit is a big difference in my opinion. I think the key to hold players is not making them feel frustrated...i could care less about having a bonus if i get smashed with 0 chances to win just because the system allows my opponent to play 200 AP more than me in exchange of a bonus.

I think that 40 sec is way too low at the moment to rebalance your army

so true

+20 sec would be ok.

Deep Blue wrote:yeah of course it would simplify things to reduce your AP on purpose and this is a well known (abused) strategy...however I think that 40 sec is way too low at the moment to rebalance your army (unless it is 1 or 2 units).

Indeed its kinda short, as is the 40s to play a turn lol... I would agree to a 60s per turn anytime of day lol.

Deep Blue wrote:Bonuses might be a good idea but i doubt they could implement them effectively...especially at low AP levels having 1 more unit is a big difference in my opinion. I think the key to hold players is not making them feel frustrated...i could care less about having a bonus if i get smashed with 0 chances to win just because the system allows my opponent to play 200 AP more than me in exchange of a bonus.

And what if your gain (renown / XP / Ducats) is almost the same, when you loose to a stronger opponent compare to a win vs an opponent your own "size" ? Those curious about what the hell im talking about, look at the GW (Games Workshop) games like; Mordheim, Necromunda, Inquisitor and friends...

Sylmaril wrote:And what if your gain (renown / XP / Ducats) is almost the same, when you loose to a stronger opponent compare to a win vs an opponent your own "size" ? Those curious about what the hell im talking about, look at the GW (Games Workshop) games like; Mordheim, Necromunda, Inquisitor and friends...

While you guys are at it, look at Bloodbowl too... You know that Bloodbowl has been made by Cyanide Studios too right ?!?
Well they have some sort of "Underdog Bonus" also. Which makes it "not too bad" playing vs a stronger opponent.

I mean, personally I would prefer playing vs a Stronger opponent than wasting my time waiting in Q or loosing a fight because I had 40s to get rid of a unit to face someone who cant/wont field over 300pts

But realy - not everyone wants to play 1000 or more ap 2 hours or more...

I played few games Vs Deep Blue or Skydancer Necro teams on 400-500 points and it was hell long already - i like quite hard chalanges but something that forces me to think hard more than a hour makes me raly tired - so i would definetly not want to play 1000 ap Vs Blue or Sky becouse it would be harder than work ;P

I definetly prefere to play 300-500 games... Becouse current mechanic is quite complicated and i played games 3 Vs 3 wolfens that they were interesting and chalenging.

look at the GW (Games Workshop) games like; Mordheim

No, No and no
its why i played Confrontation at first place, ane after its fall started to make my own setings - becouse i like the concept of mianiature/turn based games that need to be played a smart way

Dragon_Warrior wrote:

look at the GW (Games Workshop) games like; Mordheim

No, No and no
its why i played Confrontation at first place, ane after its fall started to make my own setings - becouse i like the concept of mianiature/turn based games that need to be played a smart way

To the Troll with a really bad english I say:

Sylmaril wrote:...they give an "underdog bonus" to the warband with the lowest score/AP at the end of the match. Like bonus XP (XP/Renown), Cash (Ducats) and or Gear (maybe better injury protection ?)...

Sylmaril wrote:...Those curious about what the hell im talking about, look at the GW (Games Workshop) games like; Mordheim, Necromunda, Inquisitor and friends...

Sylmaril wrote:...look at Bloodbowl too... "Underdog Bonus"...

Also, I would like to add that the amount of players waiting in Q at peek hours (NA East Coast) is a pretty good sign that the game needs improvements or end up like other games I wont name here.

P.S.: I would really like for this game to succeed...

Man, do I feel sleepy or what... lol

Anyway, while were into "Timer", maybe that 10s Timer to accept a match could be increased to 30s so that the ONE time a day it pops we actually have time to click it