Real Covert Ops

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

         Calico Jack, 

I cant help but feel (especially after your jab about others not listening to you, and you having to repeat yourself) that you are not listening as well.  I know that we all hear what we want to hear (I am not above this), but I am trying to make this as clear as I can. 

            Calico_Jack wrote:

 did you forget about GC and the existence of Alliances, which helps new players?

         In my 
        hypothetical situation, any player (especially the ones with larger population...because the bigger they are, the quicker they fall to siege) who: 

         (1) is away for four days
         (2) has a siege sneak up on them
         (3) has no sitter
         (4) is not in an alliance
         (5) and Global is not informed about siege activity (as you proposed)
         (btw, this described me two months ago - no sitter, not in an alliance)

        would have one less city when they got back...after being away for only four days - THIS IS STUPIDITY.  I have been away for more than four days in the past - this game doesn't control my life.  Furthermore, what if a siege was launched to each one of their cities while away - they could come back after only four days to have NO cities left.  
        This is not the spirit of Illyriad.  I am not saying this to discourage someone from attacking another - I am simply pointing out that what is being proposed is a recipe for the complete and utter downfall of the very game we have all come to know and love.  

            Calico_Jack wrote:

 why do people worry about new players? hell if i attack a player with 30k pop and he/she goes running to GC i will be in trouble because im 20k bigger...

        This is not always the case.  The players who get in trouble are the ones that are going out of their way to be a jerk to another.  If you are simply attacking someone to get a rise out of them or get a little action, that is great as long as they are willing to fight with you.  But the ones that go running to Global are the ones that are:

         (1) not wanting to fight
         (2) not set up to handle fighting (perhaps they are playing for the trade aspect of the game)
         (3) or completely too small to fight for themselves
        When the player continues aggressions against another who falls into one of the three (and there could very well be more reasons why they are not willing or unable to agree to any dueling initiated by the instigator), then others 
        who can and will meet the challenge step in.  Then all of a sudden, the hunter becomes the hunted and accuses others of being a big bully.  (>.<)  History repeats itself.  

             Calico_Jack wrote:

              oh AND NO FREAKING FUSSING DUAL SYSTEM, open world PvP is why we are here, anyone who tries to undermine this gets my spears in painful places...

         Open world PvP is part of the game, yes - 
         but not the only part of the game.  You speak for yourself, but you project your own reasons for playing upon others.  Some are here to develop and become masters of trade . . . others are more inclined to secrets, misinformation, and deception . . . others lean towards the diplomatic aspect . . . some like the strategy . . . some wish to become masters of a territory, but have no interest in total domination . . . while still others are happy and content with "medieval farmville."  
         War and PvP is one of many ways to play. 

Now, with that being said - If two consensual players wish to engage in a PvP battle / duel without anyone from the outside interfering, then I 100% support this and wish them luck.  Likewise, if two alliances wish the same, I applaud them and will happily stand on the sidelines cheering them both on...  I only hope their playing isn't to completely remove the other from the game...

             Calico_Jack wrote:

i said in a previous post that they should in this case add a occupy ability to scouts, so that you can plan them around your borders and by so they will keep an eye on that area for as long as you say before sending them out

         I couldn't agree more with being able to set scouts to occupy a space!  I would love to see a whole thread on this!  Imagine occupying 50k thieves into one city to ensure it could NEVER be thieved!  Imagine sending scouts to occupy a spot with troops and the opponent not being able to scout unless they have a greater number.  There are so many possibilities!  (please start a thread about this if you feel it's worth discussing further)  However, I would not want to have to ship out 50+ every few weeks just to know if I am about to be sieged.  Whats more, new players who are not in an alliance have no way to set up any detection for an incoming attack - and this is unfair to those who are just starting out in the game.