Suggestion: since raze attacks from outside ignore war protection, then why don't the devs just up the hitting into war penalty to like 95% or something?
Then this sort of active/constant hitting into wars would be impractical and a waste of time, but people would still be able to raze into war to hand out community punishment if it was deserved?
So if we look at two examples from this age:
1) SWEA's gains would be so bad that TMing into Pew's war would be more trouble than it was worth
2) People could still effectively raze Debauchery for dealbreaking if they felt it was deserved
Just spitballing here. What are the problems with this idea?
Moving on,
<3Originally Posted by Farore
To respond to the rest of your post... if people think what SWEA did was messed up, then they will act. But I think it would be because they messed up Pew, not cause they hurt Debauch - because the bar is lowered on how Debauch deserves to be treated imo.
In regards to something Palem said: yeah I think there is some point after which people can no longer be punished for a past event... EoA seems appropriate. If people were hitting into Debauchery's wars NEXT age because they dealbroke this age, well that would probably be problematic, but until then... what goes around comes around.
Reply With Quote