AMA vs sanct round 2

[fwordz]

Weird 2 ages ago we tried opping into fort and we got **** NS gains, robs, etc. Same for opping from Fort, I've done both and am pretty sure there was some form of protection because the moment Fort dropped we got normal gains back.

?? gains are moddified, but not effectivness (tpa).. please read next time before makeing a troll reply?

[Soul_Hunter]

So you are saying fort mechanics were changed last age? Maybe Bishop plays with AMA and he changed it so they can abuse it and win over sanc?

[fwordz]

Yea anyone with half a brain should know that there's a huge bug in the game concerning fortified? News to me.
Not having the -50% effectiveness when opping offensively makes no sense at all.

you want -50% MO hitting into fort aswell?

** edit**

In case your wondering, thats the reason people wanted the change. People wanted simmilar protection from ops (like protection from TFC sitting in fort oping at 100% gains) as ther was for hitting into fort.

[csarmi]

Weird 2 ages ago we tried opping into fort and we got **** NS gains, robs, etc. Same for opping from Fort, I've done both and am pretty sure there was some form of protection because the moment Fort dropped we got normal gains back.

Gains ARE affected, success rate (offensive tpa) isn't. Which makes no sense ofc. Sanc thought (as anyone with a brains would) that 18tpa at -75% effectiveness wouldn't get through 11tpa. Except, there was no -75% effectiveness.

[csarmi]

you want -50% MO hitting into fort aswell?

(a) -50% tpa when opping into (or out of) fortified does make a lot of sense.
(b) The wording of the fortified penalty (when it was implemented) made it completely clear that you also face a penalty on your tpa.

As (a) makes sense, you wouldn't have any reason to doubt (b).

[jamin]

HoH staying out of it, we're used to have craplumped on us. We aren't perfect and we've done some dodgy things too, most top kd's have...and we made up for every time. We fess up and nut up. I'm happy to just sit and watch from a distance and have fun little fights with Cats. We had a kd steal into our hostile and another throw a couple hits into our hostile while our armies are out, we never forget. Anyway since this is now AMA vs Havoc and we've gone around in 1000 circles we should pretty much just let sleeping dogs lie or forever be caught in the same circle of bs.

[fwordz]

It's been like this for 2 ages, and if you followed the reason this got implemented (TFC retalwarring in fort opping at 100% gains). 50% tpa boost in (it's actually more as people robbing usually have much more tpa than the once beeing robbed) fortified is WAY to big. and as I said before, you can't come complaining about something thats been in the game for almost 10 months that anyone doing 5ops could check is not right. I get that boring kd's want to sit and pump alone for half an age in a nice and safe fort. But it really is not reasonable to be prettyuch immune to ops in fort. Nevermind the ways you could abuse this...

[brado]

It's been like this for 2 ages, and if you followed the reason this got implemented (TFC retalwarring in fort opping at 100% gains). 50% tpa boost in (it's actually more as people robbing usually have much more tpa than the once beeing robbed) fortified is WAY to big. and as I said before, you can't come complaining about something thats been in the game for almost 10 months that anyone doing 5ops could check is not right. I get that boring kd's want to sit and pump alone for half an age in a nice and safe fort. But it really is not reasonable to be prettyuch immune to ops in fort. Nevermind the ways you could abuse this...

Im pretty impressed that you backwards calculated the thief success rate modifier from fort in 5 ops.

[csarmi]

Yea he's 1337 :)

[fwordz]

Im pretty impressed that you backwards calculated the thief success rate modifier from fort in 5 ops.

5 gives you a good reason to doubt it, by the 10th op you should be prettymuch 100% sure. All you need is to know your targets tpa and that they have 0 wts. If the (mod) tpa is around half of your own. If there was a -50% on your mod you would fail around half, if not you will get close to 0 fails. Obviously you might get freak rng but over the course of 2 ages, it should be pretty easy to come to the conclution there is no modifiers. But hey, thinking for yourself isn't always easy?

[Nick_mi]

Still waiting for elitBG to teach me how to run 0 thieves on a province and then say it's not my fault when the gc gets stolen!

[fwordz]

Still waiting for elitBG to teach me how to run 0 thieves on a province and then say it's not my fault when the gc gets stolen!

Did he actually say that? afaik he just said (and did) you would get retalled for stealing. Now was this a smart move by AMA? Probably not. But you should not rob gc (even from a thiefless prov) unless you are prepared to get retalled for it. And when sanc in turn retals those retals, thats an active hostile, and Havoc is in turn put in a bad situation by their allies (if they want to act honorably)

So: Havoc should blaim Sanc for putting them in a bad situation, and Elit should blame him self for putting himself in a bad situation. =) Sanc also have themself to blaim for beeing in a bad(?) spot vs pewpew.

[csarmi]

5 gives you a good reason to doubt it, by the 10th op you should be prettymuch 100% sure. All you need is to know your targets tpa and that they have 0 wts. If the (mod) tpa is around half of your own. If there was a -50% on your mod you would fail around half, if not you will get close to 0 fails. Obviously you might get freak rng but over the course of 2 ages, it should be pretty easy to come to the conclution there is no modifiers. But hey, thinking for yourself isn't always easy?

We've warred a lot last two ages.
We haven't had to op into/op out of fortified often (why would we?), still, we've never noticed this bug. It's quite hard to overlook, considering that usually it's T/M's vs attackers (where 1/2 doesn't matter too much) and that you wouldn't even try in the first place.

[fwordz]

We've warred a lot last two ages.
We haven't had to op into/op out of fortified often (why would we?), still, we've never noticed this bug. It's quite hard to overlook, considering that usually it's T/M's vs attackers (where 1/2 doesn't matter too much) and that you wouldn't even try in the first place.

You never have your rob with halfer (if you play with them) from fort onto fat juicy FA's? then my friend I'm telling you, your missing out on alot of gold =)

** edit **
Also, if there was a 50% decrease in tpa robbing from/into fort even your TM's would have noticed it. as teh 50% affects TM's (half of 20 tpa is 10, half of 10 is 5)so someone with 20 tpa would have a hard time robbing someone with 10tpa. did you just think that you never ran into a hitter with high tpa?

It's really besides the point though, djorge posted about this back in dec. (The magic part) only reply he got was that it was not a bug. so clearly he was aware of it, I really don't belive that this resulted in abs testing if this applied to tpa aswell. (especially considering the wording was something compleetly different than what he first assumed it was.

[Ezzerland]

This looks about right, now. The losing kd being waved by a kd that WON the war will always be in a worse position with all the ww bonuses and being larger which Sanc was what 60% of MA size when they waved them?

The initiator into this was Elit's targetsharing, bug abuse aside(assuming he had no knowledge of it) If he didn't target share the majority of the blame would fall on abs.

Yet, even so he could have attempted a CF bearing in mind that he target shared AND gained advantage of 0 penalty opping/spelling from fort into fort again with 0 penalties. He should have known that he had sown bad blood with his shady moves early on but my assumption is that he wanted to stall Havoc and vulture more of Sanc's acres when they explored, hence the no CF. Any logical sane person would CF especially after pulling shady moves beforehand.

If you're going to alter a quote, make clear in it what you altered. Don't try and pretend it was coming from me.