Page 2 of 9
Re: Town Siege - Mechanisms
Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:29 am
by Glarundis
you mean a delay on the religion and not the town stone?
or you mean tekstone cast siege instead, BUT 12 hours later?
i still think the religion that failed (imperial in that hypothetical case) should have cooldown for every town to prevent the sieging for trolling
Re: Town Siege - Mechanisms
Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:30 am
by Cruxis Bane
I think he means on town stone so if someone fails to siege say Occlo, then no one else can siege Occlo for 12 hours.
Re: Town Siege - Mechanisms
Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:00 am
by Akkarrin
id add in a delay of 4 hours fro seige on all vils after a failed seige attempt
e.g. law seige at maginica, imperial break seige, law cannot seige again for 4 hours
cause i think someone said earlier that the delay on single vils was there to stop it being a constant running seige battle of seige, break seige, seige etc. but whats the point in that if they can just go to a dif vil
Re: Town Siege - Mechanisms
Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:08 pm
by Johnny Walac
Cruxis Bane wrote:I think he means on town stone so if someone fails to siege say Occlo, then no one else can siege Occlo for 12 hours.
Re: Town Siege - Mechanisms
Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:36 pm
by Jyrgen
Cruxis Bane wrote:Issue with a timer delay on fails is people will troll and just siege a quick town to stop others from sieging any more towns with it being a global thing.
True that, didn't think of that before.
Re: Town Siege - Mechanisms
Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 1:03 am
by Jyrgen
The timezone difference still seems to favour one side. But I have no clue how to fix it or if it's even fixable by other things than "get more people from different timezones".
Sieging a town at 2 AM monday morning doesn't really give Europeans (who have a life) a chance even.
Re: Town Siege - Mechanisms
Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 1:33 am
by Maximilian Lhoth
also.
impstone s**ks. why the gamemasters let them have that bull****. we were just comparatively harmless lawture that was formed, when they were going to pwn all. if they never started attacking stuff like trinsic and almost get it, there would be no lawture now. WHEN we formed lawture, definitely we weren't waiting for impstone. traditionally gm's have been blue-friendly, letting blues have advantage to avoid red takeover. don't the gm's understand that most pvp lovin' people go tekstone etc. definitely not law and nature.
why? nature, traditionally a hunting religion. law, cannot have robber or red alts.
Re: Town Siege - Mechanisms
Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 1:36 am
by Mike
Maximilian Lhoth wrote:also.
impstone s**ks. why the gamemasters let them have that bull****. we were just comparatively harmless lawture that was formed, when they were going to pwn all. if they never started attacking stuff like trinsic and almost get it, there would be no lawture now. WHEN we formed lawture, definitely we weren't waiting for impstone. traditionally gm's have been blue-friendly, letting blues have advantage to avoid red takeover. don't the gm's understand that most pvp lovin' people go tekstone etc. definitely not law and nature.
why? nature, traditionally a hunting religion. law, cannot have robber or red alts.
There's been page after page of rational arguments about this, try to search the forums before asking.
Re: Town Siege - Mechanisms
Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 1:38 am
by Maximilian Lhoth
Mike wrote:There's been page after page of rational arguments about this, try to search the forums before asking.
Not asking, I'm telling.
Re: Town Siege - Mechanisms
Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 1:43 am
by Johnny Walac
Maximilian Lhoth wrote:also.
impstone s**ks. why the gamemasters let them have that bull****. we were just comparatively harmless lawture that was formed, when they were going to pwn all. if they never started attacking stuff like trinsic and almost get it, there would be no lawture now. WHEN we formed lawture, definitely we weren't waiting for impstone. traditionally gm's have been blue-friendly, letting blues have advantage to avoid red takeover. don't the gm's understand that most pvp lovin' people go tekstone etc. definitely not law and nature.
why? nature, traditionally a hunting religion. law, cannot have robber or red alts.
I could have accepted Lawture if it wasn't for the fact that you kept raping Tekstone altar with 2 religions against one. If you would have used Lawture for defending purpose against Imperial taking cities, it would have been something different. Lawture is the most PvP hungry players on the Shard. Why else would you keep attacking our Temple when you had the upper hand of 2 religions?