| Author | Sion and cantbstopped deliberately ruin ambushes!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|---|
U mean that unwritten vulagar PM after fight
no, I mean you taught me delaying fight on purpose is punishable (5k, 1st occurence)
I wrote that PM promptly after our fight,in anger, without even noticing first fine.
dont put your dirty stuff on public please
I still have my doubts about second fine both "vulgarity" and "threat" part.
but keeper cantbestopped's definition of vulgarity is what counts.
So, I was guilty and paid the price. not afraid if public knows.
I keep that PM for later discussion with arctic, not to claim back 5k - who cares 5k- but just removal of that 2nd black writing from my log.
enuf answering latawica, losing thread's main purpose.
all I'm saying, those who create very easy fighting conditions for themselves are definetely good players - reading, understanding and using rules being their strong suit.
Personaly I admire and respect other type of good player : where fighting conditions are almost same and they find a way to turn unpredictable odds to his/her side.
since thread started about Sion & CBS, please do not infer that I mean they are strictly on 1st group. Actualy once I lost one of them with 25 AP vs his 10.
still, what they did to ziu and some others - as described by latawica's words If something isn't prohibited it is aloved. wont bring them much respect.
I'm done with this thread. |
I fail to see how pairing up could destroy thieving, destroy donations, destroy admin's income, destroy the server... My, oh my...
Probability to get player is 10%. So even if you loose all ambushes against player(s), that's 10% from all ambushes.
I already loose all ambushes against player(s). Why would I care if it's against one or two???
For Pantheon: Go check the dictionary. After you learn reading, you'll notice that 'hurt' and 'destroy' are not synonyms.
And besides, I don't defend either thief nor traveler. Only common sense. |
for naviron:
Stop nit-picking at the words. You could have responded to both players with a
I don't defend either thief nor traveler. Only common sense.
and be done with it.
Instead you chose to antagonize them on purpose. Maybe you were even looking thru a dictionary to better stir up trouble. People are already putting too much emotion on this issue and you who claims to be neutral, plays both sides as if they destroy each other, then you would win.
Other than that, the rest of things you say I agree. Admins can tweak the thief mechanics, but with how it currently is, there shouldn't be any major problems to destroy the server. |
@60
I wish that happened. At least players would be more active . . . =P |
Inutile thread...
Remember lvl 6-8. I fight a lot against 2 players in ambush. I'm sure all thives do the same.
Why now this topic? Is setting of game: thief can "catch" 2 players. You not agree? Don't be thief. |
ambushing double players are in this game to have fun, not to cause trouble.
if people use these kinds of things to cause trouble, i dont know wer this gonna end.
for 65:
there is a difference between accidentally happening and intentionally happening.
intentionally joining a min art battle with full arts or intentionally afk-ing or intentionally stalling a combat or .....
plenty of things are there.
but there is no rules for everything, just need to use commonsense and sought what is right and what is wrong. |
What cbs and sion are doing is within the rules and VERY ingenious ‘applause’. PvP is GREAT (since I believe this game should be PvP-oriented…)
But I believe they are exploiting a not-so-well-designed game mechanics. In brief:
Problem one:
Thief wearing min ap. Why? For cheap thief points. Occasionally, they get devastated by well-equipped anti-thief players.
SO wear max ap then? Max ap is a waste of money and will eventually make ambush impossible. Also if they ambush min-ap players, the reward is quite pitiful. If they ambush well-equipped anti-thief players, victory is not guaranteed. If they ambush 2 well-equipped players, defeat is almost certain.
So NO real incentive to wear max ap in thief. And thus at the mercy of anti-thief players.
Problem two:
Definition of ‘ambush’: group of troops concealed or lying in wait for their prey.
Would an ambusher attack a prey withOUT scouting it? Would an ambusher spring its trap on a well-guarded, well-equipped convoy as well as being OUT-numbered?
If the need is dire, possibly yes to above. But is the ambusher COMPELLED to do it? Definitely NO. But guess what, thieves have no control on WHO to ambush… which is bad-game design.
Ok it would be terribly annoying (and over-powered) if thieves could ALWAYS choose their targets. So why not introduce better thief mechanisms, e.g
3 thief stances (gained at certain TG levels):
No thief stance (default): Can not choose prey. Current mechanisms.
Stance 1 - 50% chance for ambush to be against 1 player, 40% to be against 2 players (or 1 player and 1 AI) and 10% against AI.
Stance 2 - 60% chance for ambush to be against 2 players (or 1 player and 1 AI), 20% to be against 1 player and 20% against AI. Troops have +50% initiative on first 2 rounds.
This way thief can either be convoy-ambusher or anti-thief-ambusher.
This will allow the thief to target a type of prey and be equipped accordingly. |
I can understand players who are ambushed by thiefs. They complain, but don't you think it's too much for a thief to complain that his prey is trying to retaliate?
In that case i would advise such "thief-for-nothing" to quit this "unfair, cruel type of battles" and go into the forests and hunt poor animals. But soon they will complain that they cannot defeat the "poor animals" because there is too many of them. In this case just quit the game if you are afraid of PvP. The game will only win from that. |
for Gyver:
I like your idea; but admins would have to completely change the current thief mechanisms to implement your idea for stances 1 and 2, which of course would make
No thief stance (default): Can not choose prey. Current mechanisms.
impossible. |
66+1
nothing else to say. |
Let there be emotion, war and antagonism.
Otherwise maybe we should change the game's name into something like "Lords of Hugs and Kisses"... |
"Lords of Hugs and Kisses"...
:D where we could change unit clothes and use some new arts, like lipstick +2morale, pink underwear +2luck or makeup +3def :D |
why more people would like to try it out?at lvl 15 probably everyone is thief and thieving is the main source of their fsp and exp.Most people won't prefer to wander here and there on a map to catch a thief instead of just thieving and having fun.
thieves lost many ambushes what's a big deal if they lose one more? majority of lvl 15 players won't go for such practices. |
So it is unfair when, a) 2 people try and catch a thief who is not expecting them.
but
it is fair when, b) a higher AP thief tries to catch a specific player in min AP by watching where they are travelling and tries to ambush them on their own.
I am pretty sure that:
• b) is a lot more common than a).
• The results in both cases will be one side with a massive advantage and high probability of a win.
• The majority of players on the losing side for both will accept it as part of the game and not publically complain
This is not a "big deal". |
@74 Thieves cannot choosen the target so how exactly can pick some one to fight...
Also it's more easy you get 2 players afk than 1 thieves speding time to find some one with same level online traveling at same time, and by a miracle be more faster than him to reach a location and set a trap before he reach a location and finnaly ambush him.
It's sounds more easy to happen theoretically than in pratice, if it can happen? surely.
But for players, just need have one thieve like a target, and travel where he is with a friend, have a good chance he already set a ambush, so he cannot just leave the area, and cannot control every player in this game.
Now i have a question for you, which is better, everyone start taking advantage on the system and every thief start using full ap to ambush players, and all players start doing 2v1 all the times...
Sounds paranoic, ins't better just do a 1v1 and win or lose with own skills. |
@74 Thieves cannot choosen the target so how exactly can pick some one to fight...
Strange, many times i picked up my victims.
Btw, you can check darkelf84 combat log from lvl 13 :P |
#74, #76
Stop reminding people of this. I had hoped that people would stop targeting others. Through most of this topic players have only been talking about how unfair thieves and victims are being to each other, but they haven't been discussing how it's possible to actually stalk and target individual players.
I don't want to watch out for more losers who would stalk me every single time I travel or try to ambush. |
| make peace and leave war for dwarfs !!! we are all on the same side |
#77
Next unwritten rule of "fair game"...stop reminding...
It is a part of the game. Deal with it or write manifest to admins to change it. |
@76 True, like i said it's hard to happen but not impossible.
I agree with pantheon we should try do a fair combats, not a thing like that.
Take easy guys, everyone have a strong opinion, but ins't a reason to try prove youre right and others are wrong or take for personal side.
I'm leaving this topic, i already said all i have to said. |
