Intra raze land drop is not only frowned on by the playerbase it is actively discouraged by ingame mechanics.Originally Posted by Sheister
Intra raze land drop is not only frowned on by the playerbase it is actively discouraged by ingame mechanics.
Support email: utopiasupport@utopia-game.com <- please use this and don't just PM me| Account Deleted/Inactive | Utopia Facebook Page | #tactics <-- click to join IRC|PM DavidC for test server access
I proposed this change numerous times when I was playing in mah warring KD. Often I would hit kingdoms and they would land drop to unsustainable draft rates. Removing my ability to gain honor or land from then and kinda making the war a waste of my time!
Divinity still calls me cowardly to this day for not warring them after they dropped a ton of land prior to an agreed war.
It can't be done now for honor purposes which I suppose is good :). Honor system though still has no real place in game :P. Should remove topfeed/bottomfeed honor bonuses and make honor only exchanged in war or something at same rate as land or such... but that is a different story :) Like war wins should give you 5% honor and 5% land (2.5 from each kd. Min 5k land, 3k honor)
Indeed +1 to Goodz comments as a whole...
BTW if all u want to do is rape a kd of their honor in exchange for a war win let them know prior to asking for war (u asked us) i'd turn that down, but if u want to war then war or set better pre-war terms...coward ;). No but seriously that was annoying, and not sure i'd trust u in a deal again but i cant blame u for backing out we outplayed u in the 24 hour war prep you saw it and changed your mind, those things happen. Game mechanic change was the right move, just like removing the ability to bounce wave w/out moving the meter....it was stupid that u got rewarded for staying small when u win wars and gain honor. the EASIEST solution was remove honor when u remove land via intra kd hits.
You are dead wrong. There have been many ages when monument (who are relatively competative in the 8-18 size range) stayed small and land-dropped and the rest and we went 3/5 or whatever in the sub 50's because there are many decent kingdoms down there and we all end up warring each other anyway. The difference is we don't have to play diplomacy or deal with all the garbage of the "ethics" of the top when we are down there. Less time in irc, more time using our skills.
Yea, keep telling yourself that. Then again you dont even have the balls to war a decent kd when they challenge appears. You used the interesting tactic of first opping and retalling then "OMG WE DONT WANNA WARAR!!" then after several days of pummeling you finally agree to war.
We have warred cats in the past. We were prepared to war you even though you were going to cream us because it was remotely feasible. Once we got waved and it was no longer remotely feasible to war cats (who were going to destroy us anyway) we warred the people who hit into us. I did not want to avoid the war, I know you all don't believe that, but its true. I have been talking to elurin for four ages about working out a time to rematch our one war that we had. It sucks that it worked out at a bad time, with mishandled results and it did not happen. I am really sorry there is annoyance and bad feelings about it, but it was really NOT my first choice that things worked out how they did.
We have warred ghetto cats, mercy, sanc, BiO, etc etc etc......
We lost a close one cats, we beat mercy, we lost the one war to sanc and we let them go without a war on another occasion, we beat BiO because we caught them at a very very bad time for them and honestly, I did not expect them to war us. You don't know the first thing about us, you have never warred us. We have also lost to a lot of other KD's for a variety of reasons from the "they were just better" to the "stupidity on our part" to the "bad timing".
/me shrugs.
stuff happens. Not everyone is up for warring cats every day. Accept that fact that you are in a kd with superior activity, a terrific history of success, an excellent reputation, a fun KD to war, and therefore people don't want to war you when they can't bring their best game. Boo hoo Korp.
additionally, I did say moderately competitive, not competitive, or highly competative.
So if you never intended to war us why promise a war then? I understand why you dont like ethics cause you lack them.stuff happens. Not everyone is up for warring cats every day. Accept that fact that you are in a kd with superior activity, a terrific history of success, an excellent reputation, a fun KD to war, and therefore people don't want to war you when they can't bring their best game. Boo hoo Korp.
We did intend to war you. But when we got waved in a big way while we were trying to muster what we needed to try to give some fight to you, it made it so we no longer could fight you. Why is that so hard for you to understand? This has nothing to do with ethics, it has to do with practicability. In any agreement, when the agreement is made effectively unperformable based upon impracticability, it is voidable. That is law that goes back as long as there has been law in agreements (almost).
In such cases it is appropriate to seek modification (I did that, by comming to your leadership to try to discuss what had happened and look to more suitable resolutions.) It was made clear that a modification would not occur. Thus, we have classic impracticablity with refusal of modification that has been used as justified excuse from performance under an agreement.
as I said, stuff happens.
Losing wars doesn't mean that that's not why you're dropping.
Dropping -> getting in range to fight worse kds, removing risk from the game. You don't have to pump because you're still only 500 acres, woo! It is lame, and it is unethical. Do you know why there are fewer kds to war the larger you grow? Because half the ones that get to that size drop down.
Sheister: Early common law didn't allow for any deviance from the terms of the contract. The promisor assumed all risk. (See Paradine V Jane 82 Eng. Rep. 897 (K.B. 1647)). There may be some cases dating back to the 1500s that also support it. In Paradine, a renter was made to pay rent to a landlord for property that was being occupied by an invading army. It's not until 1863 that the doctrine of impossibility -- which would later be replaced with impracticability -- appears. If you were curious, that means that the absolute liability of the promisor (you, who promised the war) was true for longer than the inverse.
I'm not a lawyer, but I suspect that 'neither kd getting waved within that 36h' was not a basic assumption of the deal. Performance of the contract is still possible. There is no reason why the conclusion of the new situation would be 'welp, it is impossible for us to fulfill this deal'. Beyond that, the question is whether a reasonable person would have foreseen the possibility of getting hit during that 36h period. I would say they would have.
p.s. utopia isn't law. Don't try to act like it is.
And all of this is irrelevant to the fundamental, underlying thing here:
land dropping is unethical, and the game itself discourages intra-kingdom dropping.
We had a difference of opinion of what was acceptable behaviour and what wasn't.
yes I overstated the age of the doctrine. Its fine...... Earliest cases I can find date tot he 1950's (which means it likely goes earlier, but I am being lazy.)
Why is it unethical to do what gets wars faster and does not involve the entirely unfun time it takes to explore everyone up (now that we can't do it in eowcf?) My preference is to grow up the highly beat up provinces, but now it takes a LONG time to do. So, fewer wars, less fun. Why is it more ethical to have less fun. You are still completely wrong in your basic premise, btw, that all these kingdoms staying smaller are worse kingdoms and looking for easy prey. generally speaking, kingdoms staying small get 2 or more war wins by year 4 and then we all recognize each other and war each other. So we are dealing with similarly skilled kingdoms. Last time monument stayed small we warred ex nihilo as our first war. Please tell me how I am picking on unskilled kingdoms............. I believe our next war was Legacy.....so tell Boss that he has no idea what he is doing. Our third war was not against a pushover at 3/3 though I don't know their names, but from the forum comments clearly not new to the game.
three ages ago when we stayed small we warred similar kingdoms to the list above. You are incredibly offensive to a lot of KDs to insult their skill by suggesting that staying small means they are nub or they are just trying to bash. They typically just don't want to spend an age having to put in the time it takes to deal with all the crap of the holier than thou "ethical" top kingdoms who do everything in their power to control the game in such a way that it naturally protects their positions.
yeah. So you are wrong and stop trying to inject ethics into a game that is on its last legs as every game that starts having that is basically out faster than if the player base stopped trying to put themselves and others into little boxes of what is "proper" play. (I am lookin at you Team Fortress Classic, RIP). People do what they want to have fun. Ultimately that is what will keep people playing at all. That will keep the base ad revenues high enough so the server can still run so you can play your top level game that YOU enjoy. Stop criticizing what is fun for the more casual player. Let them stay around and support your self-styled superior moral butt.
Last edited by Sheister; 22-03-2013 at 22:40.
Landdropping is uncessary for having wars or interesting wars for that matter, we had 6-7 wars last age for example. Thats plenty imo and not a single landdrop!
Korp,
it seems to be unnecessary for you and ghetto cats. I agree. For kingdoms that lack the activity and/or the skill to get provinces up to par after a hard war, it gets them back in the action faster and they have more fun. This is, and I think you would agree, largely another example a problem of the skill/activity curve involved in this game.
Land dropping is not only lame, its a disturbance to the natural balance. If the top is self sanitizing with kd's growing 'out of their league' being hit down, all is good. If a kd drops down to bash ghettos, you get a game that is not very newbie friendly and will get problems with new recruits losing interest quickly. So its not only a lame way to cheat your way into a higher ranking then you deserve, its also bad for regrowth of player base.
This used to be handled by the community back in the day, by razing the filthy droppers to their deaths...but the top is too weak and the land droppers too many now days.
I can proudly say that Evil Dragons will help contributing to reinstating this system. In fact, we have already this age razekilled a dropper and we are no strangers to doing it again. Should such a project be underway, hit us up and we will assist if we have the time (be sure to provide SN of the drop).
To sum things up, this post is in favour of Zauper.
how is land-dropping and warring ex nihilo lame? how is that beating on newbies or KD's out of their league. Can one of you people first explain that to me.
Please tell me how choosing to war quality kingdoms smaller is lame.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote