Debauchery...

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

08-05-2013, 14:28
Kestrel038

Quote:

Originally Posted by yamibone

bishop why have the developers decided to make this age so long?!

a cynical person "might" suggest that the wrong kingdom was on the top of the chart and needed more time to feed their way back to a crown.. good jo I'm not a cynical person isn't it :)
08-05-2013, 14:31
Palem

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kestrel038

Thank you for helping to prove my point.

"War begins when a kingdom declares war. A kingdom may only declare war if its target has more than 75% of its nw, and less than 133% of its nw or if the maximum hostility level is reached by both kingdoms."

So.. surely based on a combination of the "spirit" of the game, together with the gamemechanics listed above.. attacking a tiny kingdom that is unable to actually declare war until at least 100 hits have been traded on either side.. is ALSO manipulating a quirk of the game in a way not obviously intended? And yet that is considered acceptable by ALL the top kingdoms whilst mid-war CF agreements are deemed illegal. I DO love how the guys at the top constantly contradict themselves :)

This is a strategy game, not a war game. Everyone is free to hit everyone, whether you intend to war their kd or not.
Keep trying though. I'm sure you'll find an actual contraction eventually.
08-05-2013, 14:32
Bishop

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kestrel038

a cynical person "might" suggest that the wrong kingdom was on the top of the chart and needed more time to feed their way back to a crown.. good jo I'm not a cynical person isn't it :)

Kestrel038, If you continue to post this bull**** you will be banned. Knock it off.
08-05-2013, 15:05
Persain

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kestrel038

Personally i don't care if it's unspoken or not... but if developers are going to penalise people for breaking a rule, then that rule should be clear to all, and not some "unspoken gentlemans agreement". I will put it in simple terms so that your tiny brain can understand.

its not an unspoken gentlemans agreement. its been clearly stated that

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://wiki.utopia-game.com/index.php?title=Age_51

As you can see below we heavily modified the meter and the stances, because of this we feel that we have gone a long way to addressing the need for fake wars. In light of these changes we will now be taking punitive action on Fake Wars.

is against the spirit of the rules.
08-05-2013, 15:10
Osaze

Oh you right Palem, I'm an idiot
08-05-2013, 15:27
LameBeaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kestrel038

a cynical person "might" suggest that the wrong kingdom was on the top of the chart and needed more time to feed their way back to a crown.. good jo I'm not a cynical person isn't it :)

at least vines was occasionally entertaining as a troll. you're just plain annoying now.
08-05-2013, 15:32
Sheister

Seriously though, this age mechanics and race changes (to me) have been the suckiest I Can recall. I am eager for this age to be over. I really did not enjoy this age in the least.
08-05-2013, 15:41
Bishop

What's that got to do with debauchery? Make a thread with your suggestions if you want to discuss age changes.
08-05-2013, 15:58
Sheister

I did, but got no input, I was just following the lead of an earlier poster. ah well.
08-05-2013, 16:00
khronosschoty

I would like to see a general outline of what is a fake WAR! I disagree with the reasons why this should not happen. I can truthfully say that, I'm not looking for loopholes. Furthermore, strategy often times includes pushing things to their max; this could be interpreted as "looking for loopholes"; but, any one saying that is what I'm after is a liar!
08-05-2013, 16:03
Palem

Quote:

Originally Posted by khronosschoty

I would like to see, a general outline of what is a fake WAR!

Using the war status for some reason outside of warring a kd.
08-05-2013, 16:37
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

Using the war status for some reason outside of warring a kd.

Thank you Palem! This is actually makes the most sense I've seen (so far). I can actually live with this suggestion; even tho, its not exactly what I had in mind. Please put that in the rules -- as a redundant example of abusing game mechanics.
08-05-2013, 16:55
DHaran

/me sighs

It's already in the rules. There is absolutely no possible way to include all game mechanic abuse possibilities in a set of specific rules.
08-05-2013, 16:59
alan03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

This is a strategy game, not a war game. Everyone is free to hit everyone, whether you intend to war their kd or not.
Keep trying though. I'm sure you'll find an actual contraction eventually.

this is a strategy game, everyone is free to steal in eowcf too, whether you intend to war their kd or not

this is a strategy game, everyone is free to garner mutual benefits for both kingdoms during war, whether you intend to war or not

this applies to so much. Yet your bias creates certain acceptable cases and non-acceptable cases based on kingdoms you like or dislike.
08-05-2013, 17:04
DHaran

It has nothing to do with who we like or don't like, it has to do with following the rules. War interference is policed by the players because it isn't against the rules, mechanic abuse is policed by Support because it is. Are you not able to understand the issue with this "mutual benefit" crap? If you guys had it your way, it would be legal for a warring kingdom and land kingdom to war all age trading acres for wins so both win their respective crowns. Can we try using a little common sense please?

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page