The Castle Doctrine Forums

Another thing, Jason wants the experience of being robbed without a wife to hold onto some of your money to be crushing and difficult. For one, it makes sure the wife is actually useful and secondly it fits in with the theme of violation. The ability to lose everything is an important part of the game.

What if the robber could bring fewer stacks of tools? Say.. 6.

Then trap diversity would become much more punishing to wealthy robbers, but houses that pile tons of resources onto the same mechanic would be just as vulnerable as before.

I know the rich should never be invincible. I'm totally cool with that. But I feel that brute forcing is currently way too powerful. The practical limit of tools you need to brute force even the best house is easily below $200k. And if your house approaches those kinds of values, it's a no risk, no brainer to take you out.

jwg thinks it's too easy to get to the very top. I think part of that is how easy it is to take out the mid/top players with brute forcing. The entire first page of houses has been wiped out by a single player almost every day recently. That's evidence enough for me.

Here's a thought on how to handle that: what if you pay a surcharge (i.e. fuel) for stacking multiple tools. It could be something really minor like 5% per extra tool. This would not hamper new players, but it would protect all players somewhat from ridiculous brute forcing.

So here would be the total cost to buy and carry:

Current:
1 saw - $400
2 saws - $800
10 saws - $4,000
20 saws - $8,000
30 saws - $12,000
40 saws - $16,000

Proposed:
1 saw - $400
2 saws - $840
10 saws - $6,205
20 saws - $20,215
30 saws - $49,393
40 saws - $107,276

It changes the equation. $16k is a drop in the bucket for a rich player aiming to get a payout. But $100k+ will make you think twice.