Alright, I didn't really get the point of this idea, since the way it is presented, there are more drawbacks than advantages.
And on my end, I didn't really like that because it's limiting the hours of gameplay, and restricting.
But this first line is very very convincing for players to adopt the new concept. At the moment, an attacker is fighting 24/7 with minimal fame taken when they finish their attack.
(You should put more emphasis on that, it's a good selling point)
Your proposed solutions partly solve that for the attacker, but the fact that there will be only 1 window of the takeover, means that it is still impossible for an attacker to gain much fame. Because Defender would outnumber attackers every 24 hour, to the point that attacker gives up very easily.
Here's the simple solution presented by
@OrionZG
Having multiple attack windows is infinitely better than 1 attack window. It is not that restricting and as a player I actually love it. It will be like a burst of open attacks on every building in the game, the motivating factor being, the big amount of fame awaiting the ones who take the tower.
Here's the advantage if we go with this idea.
- Huge amounts of rewards are being generated every 3 hours, so players will be more motivated to drain a tower.
- The player activity would remain more or less the same since there's a constant fight going on and it's not as limiting or restrictive.
- An attacker will keep attacking until the alliance (defender) is tired of defending. Their role would switch due to constant attacks, and the alliance would eventually break and become the new attackers. This will create an endless loop of new attackers and defenders every 3 hours.
There should be more than 2 takeover windows of 4 hours in 24 hours. The more takeover window, the less restrictive the gameplay.
I think that's a good middle ground between the people who find the 1-hour takeover phase too limiting and restricting and the people who say that 24 hours war is too long and less rewarding.