Defense damage

[e76]

Try this on for size. Let's say we attack a settlement with defense equal to our weaponry, say 30/30, we still have a certain probability that we will take it. Obviously if we take it, we have it. Let's say though that we don't take it, that settlement would have it's defenses degraded a certain amount. This would make it more likely that the next 30 weapon would take it, then if that one didn't take it, even more likely for the next, etc. In the unlikely event that it was not taken by any 30s after a certain number of attacks, it would degrade to the point that a lesser power might be able to take it, on down to the point where the defenses are so weak that even the least powerful weapons would be sure to take it. It would not be known to any attacker whether defenses at that settlement had been reduced or not. We would still have the limit of one attack per person per day.

[korndog]

Cool concept. How would you tie it in with the scouting aspect of the game?

[e76]

Scouting would not need to change. Just puts a slight twist on attacks.

[korndog]

Sorry I should have picked that up in your original post..

 But how then would the lower level opportunist attacker take advantage of the weakened setts? It might get expensive for them if they have to attack each one to find out if they have a hope.

Maybe the scout could give an unspecific hint that the sett's defences are worn down or something? Not how worn down they are, but just if they are or not. That way even if the scout is not high enough to get through security it could tempt the player to try an attack no matter how out matched.


Also would there be a way for players to repair this effect on their setts?

[e76]

It generally would be very unlikely for it to affect lower level players, just potentially more than now. I know that some lower level players attack first and ask questions second, some just because they hit the button wrong. Occasionally I have attacked a player who has used the force card to get the 31 level without thinking about it.

There would not be any way for a player to repair their levels except that it would reset at each day and if taken, would automatically revert to whatever level the new player was at. As far as a 29 or 28 taking a 30, their best bet would probably be to stay in an area where there is a lot of activity where  a settlement has more likely to have been attacked several times and held. I think that if any info was given about whether damage was inflicted, would probably defeat the spirit of this proposal. Obviously it is more likely that a low level player, such as less than 10, will be taken by a more powerful attacker than be worn down enough to be attacked by a lower level than themselves but that wouldn't detrimentally affect the way the game is played for them at all. Another twist on this that just came to me would that a lower level attack would still wear down defenses, just not as much as an attack of equal strength.

[benh7777]

As a player that owns many settlements, I need more convincing about this. I have spent alot of mars dollars and moves to get them and am not sure if I like the idea of players that have spent less money, mars dollars, moves, and time being able to take my settlements.

I kinda like the idea itself and maybe you have something here, but I would have to vote no on it at this time.

If it were to be placed in the game, it would only be fair to be offensive damage on lost attacks.

[e76]

Sorry, sounds it would just be a big hassle to get it right. I withdraw my suggestion.