newest updates

[Monad]

Hang on we just lost our ability to cast guards in any location we want on mainland... this is a huge nerf for law (not all law thought so in exchange for dispellable, but i do think so)! and you were one of the people who supported it most?! and your idea is to nerf them even more? so that the majority of priests can only cast two guards at 60% strength which will be nowhere near to eachother and have 40 min break between the time they can summon guards that have worn out... your arrogance is astounding.

I accept the new change seems a bit daft as i said on multiple occassions so how about, changing them back to how they were?!

There is no turning back because as you well know that being able to cast guards in enemy town while your enemy can't doesn't make sense. Either we go with this system or go to the plan which I had to replace the guard ritual with something else more useful and leave the guards only to the static positions. That would put you on the same line with Nature and Tekstone when sieging towns though, right now you and Imperial have edge over others because you can still cast guards during sieges to defend your towns.

[Glarundis]

as far as RP goes, i'd rather see law and imperial with this advantage when it comes to sieging. but please, make the guards dispellable again or nerf them or whatever. something

however, what would be your suggestion of a new rite?an rp rite to suit law and imperial?pvp rite that would also help them in sieges but not like this?if it's more interesting, then i think we could all agree to have it instead of guards?

[Ricardus]

If you are going to make some restrictions to siege, here's a usefull one:

NO guild should be alowed to siege, since they can't start a siege or defend a city that is being sieged.
Only religons should siege, that way is fair and fun, since only religion leaders can start a siege and only religion members can stop a siege wih the proper ritual.

So guilds should have nothing to do with this, since guild members can't cast rites.

[KrondorZuula]

If you are going to make some restrictions to siege, here's a usefull one:

NO guild should be alowed to siege, since they can't start a siege or defend a city that is being sieged.
Only religons should siege, that way is fair and fun, since only religion leaders can start a siege and only religion members can stop a siege wih the proper ritual.

So guilds should have nothing to do with this, since guild members can't cast rites.

So basically what your saying is, anyone that isn't in a religion cant join in or participate in that part of the fun, that the rest of everyone else gets to have?

[Cruxis Bane]

I am against guilds and non religions not helping because they have a right to say who protects their city. You think some awesome druid guild wants tekstone to take over their town? Same with necros would they want law or nature having their towns? Everyone deserves a say in the towns especially if they have houses in them.

[Boris]

Sieges should be specifically made with guilds. Religion alliances are the no-no part... not guilds.

- Boirs

[Cruxis Bane]

Its not a bad idea to have religions not ally because it does kind of take away from each of their roleplay I feel like when they are allied.

[Quintoz]

I'm like a child on christmas about the day that I read this update.

-You're no longer allowed to ally religions
-You're no longer allowed to have characters in 2 religions (any religions)

[Cruxis Bane]

The character in opposing religion isnt that big of a thing aslong as it is fair for everyone and there arnt restrictions to where it will be left more up to the HP and the religion to decide if thats what they want.

[Ricardus]

So if the main idea is having guilds participating on sieges, why only religiosn can sart/stop a siege with specific rite then?
Remove it and let's all have fun dude!