| Author | removing the Fled from combat of TG |
|---|
| As with the new rule which is in favor of the Thief guild (for artifacts not wasted); I suggest that the ambushed player feld from combat also being removed so the ambusher has the chance to get the full exp and FSP. (most use of his ambush and artifacts) |
As with the new rule which is in favor of the Thief guild (for artifacts not wasted);
which rule?
I suggest that the ambushed player feld from combat also being removed so the ambusher has the chance to get the full exp and FSP. (most use of his ambush and artifacts)
if you could please explain what you mean again. you want to remove the time out feature? I don't understand. |
The rule #3.16. :
https://www.lordswm.com/forum_messages.php?tid=1923447
Actually no. i am suggesting that the player can not flee from combat. meaning that the timer is there but the ambushed players troop does not flee and stay until the ambusher finish them. |
As with the new rule which is in favor of the Thief guild (for artifacts not wasted);
Durability does go, even on losing an ambush. |
Actually no. i am suggesting that the player can not flee from combat. meaning that the timer is there but the ambushed players troop does not flee and stay until the ambusher finish them.
+1
but the timer duration should be lowered so that ambusher's time isn't wasted... |
Lowering timer has been proposed before. thats why i have not talked about it.
for post #4: if you get a good exp and fsp then there is no issues but for example for the high initiative characters you will get lower exp and fsp than hunts when they are AFK. |
I see. You want to kill AFKer's troops yourself instead of watching them disappear after a while. thanks for clarifying.
As for the rule 3.16 I think those rules are not in their final 'shape' yet. There is still hope :) |
| I think it would be weird to get good exp/fsp for defeating a waiting army. |
| For post#8 :It would actually show a great ambush too. it is like the real world where the person moving does not even know that he is ambushed until it is too late. the actual player who is AFK is also not thinking about it and it is like a leaderless army being ambushed. |
+1 for the idea of solving the low fsp from afkers problem.
I think that after ambushed player loose chances for movement, instead of automatically loosing the combat, control of his troops should be taken over by AI. |
I think we should just get the Fsp and exp we would, while defeating a non-afk player :)
+1 to your idea (#1) |
I was thinking about what Brownbear said and that is good too since that is what happens in the real world too. if the leader is not doing anything the troops will start to do something for their own lives so :
I think that after ambushed player loose chances for movement, instead of automatically loosing the combat, control of his troops should be taken over by AI. |
-1 as it would make such combats take far to long. Specially slow factions like necro v's high ini factions who with waiting would get turns every half ini.
I guess you could give ambusher adjusted xp & fsp but this would be easy to abuse. |
Sorry for double post. I could not think of a working solution but on reflection maybe system could give an additional penalty just for people who flee from ambushes, make them also be unable to travel again for 2 hours.
As most people travel for a reason and in general do a number of trips this would be a serious incentive to check for combat. |
I think the change of the rule concerning 1 unit travel makes it clear that administration sees the imbalance in responsibilty concerning thief player who actively set up an ambush and victim who passively is forced into an unwanted pvp situation. Travelling is needed in order to play this game (while thiefing is not) and since pvp ambush only occurs with a verly low probability it is somewhat unfair to make players check for battles each and every time. Especially since you can't do anything useful while traveling.
An afk player is an easy TG point and another ambush can be set up immedeately therfore no need for further boosting of the thief player. Who knows maybe he would even have lost if the player would have been active.
so -1 |
