Suffering damage by attacking

[Joker007cronic]

Perhaps units should take some reduced damage just from attacking an opponent. As things stand now, a goldfish on one side of a bubble tile can hold that tile indefinitely because once a turtle from the opposing side moves onto the bubble tile, the goldfish has free reign to kill it and never be pushed back.

[emilkris33]

I totally agree, but how should this be calculated? Should it there be equal damage on both side(Well not "equal exactly but so both fish attack as theirs stats permit it.)? Or should fish do half normal damage in return? Or should they attack back equal to their defence value? Or something completely different?

[Demonac]

My suggestion during the competition (though it was very low priority - needed to get the game playable first) was that the attacking unit should do damage first, then IF the defender survives, it would hit back for 50% of its normal damage. It's important that attacking still be highly advantageous to avoid 'turtling' (no relation to the unit), and this way it would remain so. But survivors hitting back for half would create a tendency for battles to be a little less one-sided. This would also increase the value of units with defense (like turtles), as the flat damage-reduction from defense would be effectively twice as strong against the half-damage counterattacks, allowing the 'tanky' units to attack with far less risk/cost to themselves.

[emilkris33]

@Demonac That actually sound kinda perfect for the game.

[Joker007cronic]

I agree. Suffering half damage, assuming the enemy unit survives your initial attack, would cause the game to be fairly more strategic.

[CompanionOfMacedon]

Joker007cronic you bring up a great point in this issue, it is annoying to know that the attacking or more aggressive player in a battlefield will usually lose. And you start asking the question, "Why should I be punished for engaging the enemy?" Much of what Demonac has stated above is a great way of putting the game in a more balanced gameplay. I think this could easily be referred to as 'charging', in history charging was almost essential in order to engage an opponent. The unit that was supreme in the Ancient era through the late Medieval era was the cavalry which used the charging ability to get flanking shots on opponents. So the idea of a particular fish warrior :D getting charging bonus is great and will allow for players to be more comfortable playing aggressively an offensively.

[Joker007cronic]

Are you sure you had the right idea, Alexander? It sounds like you're talking about the attacking player getting even more of an advantage, when this idea is meant to take some of that advantage (specifically, of giving damage and not taking any back) away from the attacking player to give the defensive player a slightly better stand.

That is a nice idea for another fish, though. I'm going to submit an issue citing you on it.