TB/move priority revamp

I don't usually come to the forums to complain, but I just couldn't hold back. TB/ and movement priority need a huge revamp. It has become so bad, that it deters players from playing.

Now, i'm not going to bore you with explaining TB chances, and movement priority as there have been many posts explaining how each work. But.. what should be known is that in the battle logs after every turn, each move is listed in order (From top-down) First move - second move - so on and so forth...




In the above image, I am playing as spain, with an enemy france/uk. My moves for the turn goes as follows:
Move #1 - Move out Cagliari transport
Move #2 - Move Two ATS in Spain
Move #3 - TB bomber near Italy

Now for my opponents moves..
Move #1 - TB ATS
Move #2 - Move gen stack into Madrid
Move #3 - Valencia to Palma to Cagliari

Now that we have the first 3 moves laid out of France and I, lets look back to the SS and see what followed.

My two ATS get tbd/killed. Ok, I didn't move them for my first move, since getting my gen from rome back to madrid was higher priority. Fine so far.
UK/France hit Madrid.. Ok that's fine... My gen stack should be in madrid, easy defend.
Wait... Cagliari was still tbd.. It was my first move, and it was his 3rd.. well that just ruined the entire game for me..

So, this lucky turnblock 'chance' (atwar bingo) got me capped. Worst of all, it was my first move, and he tbd on his 3rd... UGH! Now this isn't the first time something like this has happened. In fact, it happens more then you would think. Most people probably don't even see it happening because they skip over the battle logs. But it is starting to get very annoying, and is losing me lots of games.

So, what do you all think. Should we improve the TB sytstem, or change it all together? Please post your thoughts and ideas.

No flame wars, or senseless arguing please. Thanks

Support, I like Goblin's idea to lower the TB chances. Game should'be less luck and more tactic!

@It was actually a 5th priority vs 1 priority, even worsen!

Update: Valenica to palma is one move. Palma to cagliari another move, and undocking units to hit cagliari is a 3rd move.

I didnt read a shit at this topic but i just want a constant thing not luck scums

Yes, sometimes these tb's are crazy and it would be nice if they made more sense or were constant.

Dude, your transport had to take units that got TBed by him, what would you do with that transport? Learn how to wallfuck sea and not go full retard on Rome next time.

Kirjutas clovis1122, 19.02.2016 at 09:02

Turnblocking is a tactic that crybabies want to remove.

Edit: people always whine about TBs saying their enemy is a haxor or this game sucks while they didn't even think about TBs when they were making their autistic moves.

I've always fancied favoring priority more than army capacity, however I won't complain about the current system.

Loading inside transport is one move. Moving transport is 2nd move. Landing and unloading to the city is 3rd move

Support. I was just talking to Clovis about this actually, so many games it seems are determined by TB, even with making moves in "correct" priority. such as a player first move getting TB by another players 4th move. I like the idea of simply lowering TB chances, because 50% TB chance as a base is just insanely high. Lowering TB chance would not remove the aspect of TB, but would lower the "luck" factor.

Kirjutas Prometheus, 19.02.2016 at 10:45

Support. I was just talking to Clovis about this actually, so many games it seems are determined by TB, even with making moves in "correct" priority. such as a player first move getting TB by another players 4th move. I like the idea of simply lowering TB chances, because 50% TB chance as a base is just insanely high. Lowering TB chance would not remove the aspect of TB, but would lower the "luck" factor.

You can't lower a TB chance, it's part of how unit move.

Already made a suggestion in this regard.

http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=23443

Today u get 50% chances for half the troops, I would suggest to make 50% for equal amount of troops, which seems more logical to me
Cheers

Kirjutas Permamuted, 19.02.2016 at 11:25

Already made a suggestion in this regard.

http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=23443

So noone is allowed to make a thread because some forgotten suggestion inside a thread has been made? Atwar logic

Kirjutas Waffel, 19.02.2016 at 13:24

Kirjutas Permamuted, 19.02.2016 at 11:25

Already made a suggestion in this regard.

http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=23443

So noone is allowed to make a thread because some forgotten suggestion inside a thread has been made? Atwar logic

exactly!

Kirjutas Permamuted, 19.02.2016 at 11:25

Already made a suggestion in this regard.

http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=23443

Kirjutas Permamuted, 20.12.2015 at 08:40

The tb situation i am not too concerned about, i would like to see the stabilisation on the rolls though.

Kirjutas W4R_MaChINE, 19.02.2016 at 13:46

Kirjutas Permamuted, 19.02.2016 at 11:25

Already made a suggestion in this regard.

http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=23443

Kirjutas Permamuted, 20.12.2015 at 08:40

The tb situation i am not too concerned about, i would like to see the stabilisation on the rolls though.

that was in the context of when i posted it, ie admins have a huge todo list atm with the editor and various important bugfixes. I mentioned the tb situation because i would like to see it fixed. But i dont see it happening anytime soon even if we do convince them to do it.

Kirjutas clovis1122, 19.02.2016 at 09:02

Support, I like Goblin's idea to lower the TB chances. Game should'be less luck and more tactic!

@It was actually a 5th priority vs 1 priority, even worsen!

you would have 2 elo like chill if they revamped it 2 months ago :d

I would like to see it go back to the old TB that made this game 1000% more challenging and strategy based.

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 20.02.2016 at 22:25

I would like to see it go back to the old TB that made this game 1000% more challenging and strategy based.

What was the old TB system? Would anyone mind explaining what is was and why it changed to what we have now?

I enjoy learning about the history and progression of the game, also if the old system had less of a "luck" factor it would certainly be worth considering.

Kirjutas Prometheus, 20.02.2016 at 22:56

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 20.02.2016 at 22:25

I would like to see it go back to the old TB that made this game 1000% more challenging and strategy based.

What was the old TB system?

Tbs worked 100% of the time, unless of course they Tbed the units u used to Tb.....

Kirjutas Prometheus, 20.02.2016 at 22:56

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 20.02.2016 at 22:25

I would like to see it go back to the old TB that made this game 1000% more challenging and strategy based.

What was the old TB system? Would anyone mind explaining what is was and why it changed to what we have now?

I enjoy learning about the history and progression of the game, also if the old system had less of a "luck" factor it would certainly be worth considering.

The old TB system was simple to learn: move priorities. If your first move hit a unit of the enemy second move, it became TB'd. This made the game much more difficult to master. People used to wall their stacks as they moved (atleast the good players did).

Kirjutas clovis1122, 19.02.2016 at 09:02

Support, I like Goblin's idea to lower the TB chances. Game should'be less luck and more tactic!

@It was actually a 5th priority vs 1 priority, even worsen!

looks more like 9 at least to me. Either way the way it works now made it 50%, chance probably. I'd support making the chance 50% with equal amount of units instead of half. But numbers shouldn't be excluded altogether in favour of prio.

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 21.02.2016 at 05:51

Kirjutas Prometheus, 20.02.2016 at 22:56

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 20.02.2016 at 22:25

I would like to see it go back to the old TB that made this game 1000% more challenging and strategy based.

What was the old TB system? Would anyone mind explaining what is was and why it changed to what we have now?

I enjoy learning about the history and progression of the game, also if the old system had less of a "luck" factor it would certainly be worth considering.

The old TB system was simple to learn: move priorities. If your first move hit a unit of the enemy second move, it became TB'd. This made the game much more difficult to master. People used to wall their stacks as they moved (atleast the good players did).

when tbs of tbing tbing units get tbed.... and 1 unit tbs 100 units..... please no.

Kirjutas Guest, 19.02.2016 at 09:20

Dude, your transport had to take units that got TBed by him, what would you do with that transport? Learn how to wallfuck sea and not go full retard on Rome next time.

Kirjutas clovis1122, 19.02.2016 at 09:02

Turnblocking is a tactic that crybabies want to remove.

Edit: people always whine about TBs saying their enemy is a haxor or this game sucks while they didn't even think about TBs when they were making their autistic moves.

we dont all play IF/blitz/ra and do 1stack and keep walling it and just rush depending on 1stack and when fail we rage quit so stfu... it costed me many cws the autist tbs... once i got tbed in like 6places and capped by 1unit as turky in a cw and lost lols... i complained too much back there and nothing happened also the tbs and the shit rolls are the reason i quitted competitive playing for 7month

This was just very very unlucky. The chance of tb in that case should have been like 3% or something if I understand the system correctly. Personally I don't find things like this happen regularly (maybe once every few games), but we can all have bad luck sometimes.

I still think the current system overpowers spam strats though. It just seems inelegant that so much of AW gameplay is about efficiently spamming units.

You have my support here and also that tb when it makes your general and any kind of transport go alone without stack and attack/defend by themselves because they have lower defence.Well I think if you get tbed at least have all your units tbed.

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 21.02.2016 at 05:51

Kirjutas Prometheus, 20.02.2016 at 22:56

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 20.02.2016 at 22:25

I would like to see it go back to the old TB that made this game 1000% more challenging and strategy based.

What was the old TB system? Would anyone mind explaining what is was and why it changed to what we have now?

I enjoy learning about the history and progression of the game, also if the old system had less of a "luck" factor it would certainly be worth considering.

The old TB system was simple to learn: move priorities. If your first move hit a unit of the enemy second move, it became TB'd. This made the game much more difficult to master. People used to wall their stacks as they moved (atleast the good players did).

Sorry to say but 100% chance tbing 100 units with 1 unit sounds like really bad gameplay, I m glad they changed it before I started playing...
TB should be one skill and aspect among others not the only one
It simply makes sense to me that u need a somehow comparable force to prevent an army from moving.

Kirjutas Kraigg, 21.02.2016 at 16:17

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 21.02.2016 at 05:51

Kirjutas Prometheus, 20.02.2016 at 22:56

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 20.02.2016 at 22:25

I would like to see it go back to the old TB that made this game 1000% more challenging and strategy based.

What was the old TB system? Would anyone mind explaining what is was and why it changed to what we have now?

I enjoy learning about the history and progression of the game, also if the old system had less of a "luck" factor it would certainly be worth considering.

The old TB system was simple to learn: move priorities. If your first move hit a unit of the enemy second move, it became TB'd. This made the game much more difficult to master. People used to wall their stacks as they moved (atleast the good players did).

Sorry to say but 100% chance tbing 100 units with 1 unit sounds like really bad gameplay, I m glad they changed it before I started playing...
TB should be one skill and aspect among others not the only one
It simply makes sense to me that u need a somehow comparable force to prevent an army from moving.

Well, its okay. That game was much harder and not everyone was able to compete well. It just made it more fun, because it was more difficult in my opinion. Also, I guess the 300 spartans TB'ed on the persian shouldnt have happened huh?

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 21.02.2016 at 20:50

Kirjutas Kraigg, 21.02.2016 at 16:17

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 21.02.2016 at 05:51

Kirjutas Prometheus, 20.02.2016 at 22:56

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 20.02.2016 at 22:25

I would like to see it go back to the old TB that made this game 1000% more challenging and strategy based.

What was the old TB system? Would anyone mind explaining what is was and why it changed to what we have now?

I enjoy learning about the history and progression of the game, also if the old system had less of a "luck" factor it would certainly be worth considering.

The old TB system was simple to learn: move priorities. If your first move hit a unit of the enemy second move, it became TB'd. This made the game much more difficult to master. People used to wall their stacks as they moved (atleast the good players did).

Sorry to say but 100% chance tbing 100 units with 1 unit sounds like really bad gameplay, I m glad they changed it before I started playing...
TB should be one skill and aspect among others not the only one
It simply makes sense to me that u need a somehow comparable force to prevent an army from moving.

Well, its okay. That game was much harder and not everyone was able to compete well. It just made it more fun, because it was more difficult in my opinion. Also, I guess the 300 spartans TB'ed on the persian shouldnt have happened huh?

300 spartans, irrelevant exemple as they were defending a position they did not attack to block... they slowed down an advancing army by occupying a narrow pass, so definitely not a "TB"

Kirjutas Kraigg, 22.02.2016 at 01:03

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 21.02.2016 at 20:50

Kirjutas Kraigg, 21.02.2016 at 16:17

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 21.02.2016 at 05:51

Kirjutas Prometheus, 20.02.2016 at 22:56

Kirjutas Cthulhu, 20.02.2016 at 22:25

I would like to see it go back to the old TB that made this game 1000% more challenging and strategy based.

What was the old TB system? Would anyone mind explaining what is was and why it changed to what we have now?

I enjoy learning about the history and progression of the game, also if the old system had less of a "luck" factor it would certainly be worth considering.

The old TB system was simple to learn: move priorities. If your first move hit a unit of the enemy second move, it became TB'd. This made the game much more difficult to master. People used to wall their stacks as they moved (atleast the good players did).

Sorry to say but 100% chance tbing 100 units with 1 unit sounds like really bad gameplay, I m glad they changed it before I started playing...
TB should be one skill and aspect among others not the only one
It simply makes sense to me that u need a somehow comparable force to prevent an army from moving.

Well, its okay. That game was much harder and not everyone was able to compete well. It just made it more fun, because it was more difficult in my opinion. Also, I guess the 300 spartans TB'ed on the persian shouldnt have happened huh?

300 spartans, irrelevant exemple as they were defending a position they did not attack to block... they slowed down an advancing army by occupying a narrow pass, so definitely not a "TB"

Maybe you forgot that they actually traveled from sparta to block the persians -.-