Town Siege

[Talerco Pious]

If law takes a town from Imps, will they be able to cast guards there?

[Jaskier Huntley]

If law takes a town from Imps, will they be able to cast guards there?

Good question.
On another note imo there should be possibility for another religion to break a siege.For instance when tek decide to take over laws town,nature should have an option to break it.Afterall that's great way to punish your archenemy.
I also share DD opinion that 60 piety to break a siege is way to low.80 or 120 sounds more reasonable,becaouse then one single man can't destroy many hours spent on countless reblessing waiting to defend city stone during the siege.

[Ares]

If law takes a town from Imps, will they be able to cast guards there?

The town stones don't affect order yet. We've talked about it, and it will probably be in version 0.2.

Jaskier, your opinion is subjective. Get some experience with it, and then I'll listen to your opinion.

[Cruxis Bane]

You got to also realize that towards the end most all the guards of a town will be turned to the attacks side and with the amount of people that will be siegeing it will be really hard for one person to come in and use an 8 chant rite by themselves without being tracked first or having to stay alive through so many people attacking them.

[Vaux27]

Tek's RP has never been a town takeover looking for a kingdom mentality, and all I see is a pre-whine before a test. I'm just saying let's have a test run and see what happens, then come back.

Prepare your bodies

(couldn't resist)


All other towns are up for grabs? Shat is about to get real. I'm loving the activity this may bring, GMs are doing an amazing job right now.

[Glarundis]

so far i think the system is looking fine, and no, i'm not tekstone, and no, i haven't tested it, but even before darian posted that veritas stuff i said the same in imperial uoam, tekstone would have the hardest time in resisting near the stone..but apart from that the system is fine

[Darian Darkmind]

It is true that sieging relies almost exclusively on holding a small piece territory (the area around the stone), and nothing can hold territory like veritas/guards.

Few thoughts.
- Make the immediate area around the stone a no-cast zone.

This should be implemented asap. And yes, I haven't tested this exact siege system, but due to my years of experience fighting against veritas and guard spam, I know how the fights will end. It doesn't matter if the object of the spam is a stone, a corpse or an altar, the outcome is and have always been the same. The rush cannot be beaten, it has to be avoided. Asking us to waste close to 10 hours just to test it when some of us already have years of experience on the matter is foolish. Therefore, I'm with Harlequin on this and restricting casting within 30 tiles of the stone will make sure it has to be "won" by a fair fight... not by a rush tactic.

I hope Ares will change this before we have to waste many hours on it.

[Ares]

It is true that sieging relies almost exclusively on holding a small piece territory (the area around the stone), and nothing can hold territory like veritas/guards.

Few thoughts.
- Make the immediate area around the stone a no-cast zone.

This should be implemented asap. And yes, I haven't tested this exact siege system, but due to my years of experience fighting against veritas and guard spam, I know how the fights will end. It doesn't matter if the object of the spam is a stone, a corpse or an altar, the outcome is and have always been the same. The rush cannot be beaten, it has to be avoided. Asking us to waste close to 10 hours just to test it when some of us already have years of experience on the matter is foolish. Therefore, I'm with Harlequin on this and restricting casting within 30 tiles of the stone will make sure it has to be "won" by a fair fight... not by a rush tactic.

I hope Ares will change this before we have to waste many hours on it.

Why would I change it? The staff is a democracy, and we agree on all changes. You should instead hope for Boris or Monad being in favour of this as they are the ones that makes most things happen.

In my humble opinion, and I know you'll be pissed about this, I think Law and/or Imp should have a little advantage when it comes to taking and defending towns. If tekstone goes and takes Magincia for example, everyone who lives there are screwed. If Imp, Law or Nature has the town they are not. Consider the rest of the playerbase. No, it's not completely fair towards Tekstone, but it's a necessity (again, just my personal opinion).
Secondly, taking a town is a pretty big deal, and should be pretty damned hard. Consider the previous rules: http://pangaea-world.dk/pangaea/rules/town-under-siege
Hold a town for 14 days, killing all guards, and it's yours.

Making a non-cast zone within 30 steps of the stone could be considered actually. I'd like to see an attack and a defence though, before implementing stuff.

[Glarundis]

but how would you cast the siege rite then?or all other rites but that would be blocked?
what about all rites able to cast except religious specific rites?

[Jyrgen]

Making a non-cast zone within 30 steps of the stone could be considered actually. I'd like to see an attack and a defence though, before implementing stuff.

If ya make my house into a non-casting zone..........