Messages

Why not increase the mercenary's stocks of food? That'll balance out the running-out-of-food dilemma at least. And I beg to differ on your NW ranges; $400m is none too difficult so long as you time your runs well. That's somewhat a point of skill, however. But realize this; on 100,000 land, a leader will take longer to reach the same networth as an indier. Multiple times as many turns. Just as resources are typically consumed slower than they're produced (useful for net gain), it'll still take a good bit longer to either Goldmine or Feast your way to the same $400m or so NW achievable on that much land.

Oooh nice. What did the losses look like and how many did it take to break? Maybe I should join up and help out... one run a week is helping out, right?

It's not working again? [darn]. Mind sharing some of these... colorful... messages? You've got my email. Oh and if memory serves the unclanned aid limit thing happened almost a year ago as well.

I remember talking to Windy about this a few months ago. If memory serves, active players were being marked as either vacation or inactive in a rather random bug. Earlier players were more susceptible to being marked too.

I think vacation is exactly how it should be. Vacation is so that you can hit "pause" on your account and not having it absolutely obliterated while you're away doing something much more important. Vacation was built to save networth and land and that's exactly what it does. If it took 72 hours to go into vacation in the first place, what's the point?? Might as well send your enemies all your NW in that case, because nothing is going to stop them from getting to it. The problem with "fixing" it is you're looking to harm the vacation-goer, and as I just tried to point out, vacation is to save the player. Oh--and abuse of vacation to crown a super-emperor is a lot easier than given credit for. A few people and a few Rats, you can vacation one person at a time with, say, $3-5b NW each. So long as they have a few turns, they can come back and aid the same person up to #1 with let's say $10b NW. Whatever's left should go towards troop suicides and then sold to market-theft a few people. But that's not really abuse or anything. If I remember what I did a few months ago with a poo of land and relatively a lot of networth had me out of vacation for what? Four times as long as required? I was out of the game for 2, maybe 2 1/2 weeks, and came back still to no major competitive advantage. Hell, in that time I was surpassed a few times even, so had anyone with half a cerebral cortex could have taken all that juicy land that I had out in the open for a good long while.

You switched networth brackets.

I'm almost tempted to just have you guys send in the answers to me every week instead of making it automatic....I'm getting some interesting answers. =p

Yer welcome. ;)

Yeah I noticed this last round too...its kinda annoying for leaderers, but I guess it was put in place to stop people using the illegal 'explorer strat'.

Why don't they just ban people who use the explorer strat and let people drop? So annoying haha

Because it's a real dog to remove 2m land by hand. ::)

Umm... That's my playing style when I'm active and not working with a team. lol

So like I said, when was the last time anyone played like that here at RWL? LOL.

How seriously afflicted are you with memory loss? Last time someone played like that, if I do recall correctly, was last round. That was Shadow.

Btw: if you're being sarcastic, I probably missed it because you forgot [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags.

A better thought--include leaders in the lost-troops-equation for high-NW targets when failing attacks. That would destroy any benefits except in the most extreme circumstances.

No--I saw exactly what you saw on that page. It seemed more like +/- 10% to me, but then again I probably shouldn't have been messing around with abnormal networths.


Actual Cash: $19,794,553,783

Refresh...
1: $18,210,989,480
2: $18,210,989,480
3: $18,408,935,018
4: $19,002,771,632
5: $20,190,444,859
6: $19,794,553,783
7: $19,794,553,783
8: $18,804,826,094
9: $18,210,989,480
10: $21,576,063,623
&c

Same type of thing happens with food, networth, rats, weasels, stoats, skiffs, leaders, AND breaks compatibility with Custom Fields. I get three possibilities. The first is a flat out Error. The second is a random nonstandard symbol of some sort, and the third is (when drawing on a "good enough" equation) whatever is somewhat valid. I have a feeling that the entire Fox race is screwed up, and not just Cloak or Warlord Info.

Just a side note--this is not my normal account. It's using the same code though.

Yeah, I see exactly what you mean. I'm baffled as to why I didn't notice this before. In addition, custom equations are not working (and it's impossible to tell the exact number of leaders, for example, that you have). Anyways: you're going to have to rely on Mercenaries and Market for troop counts and the Generals Hut for your ratio. I don't need to remind you that everything still exists, so demolishing more huts than necessary WILL destroy actual leaders and not faux-leaders, and the like. Your header/footer ribbon with resource info is also accurate.


EDIT: By the way--what you're seeing, I presume, is the way cloak was supposed to work... in addition to hiding NW, it would display flawed espionage reports iirc. Odd that you're seeing it that way.

Here's a thought on how to stop intentional maxing... why not have troops or leaders desert based on ratios of OP to DP and defensive ratios? Don't include it when the target is clanned or the attacker is clanned. And what is the rule exactly for intentional maxing? If memory serves, there ARE valid reasons to max someone intentionally.

EDIT: What I mean is that they desert in addition to the NW-difference. And do it based on attack type. If you attack and fail with Rats, you have deserting Weasels, Stoats, and Skiffs. If you attack with Standard, you don't have any troops desert. If you use Sack, you lose a bit of money and food. If you use Capture, you lose leaders. &c--give reverse effects. And maybe even keep it possible to intentionally max, but make the reasoning clear...

[kicked out]

Hey Blankshot, ever consider the possibility that they were kicked out of their clan??  .

And I really don't think they brought it on themselves.  From what I could tell, they were responsible for ONE kill.  That was it.

Zulu was the first kill, and myself the second, guess you may need to go back and read before you talk, only makes you look silly.  I'm sorry but in my opinion a clan is held responsible for it's actions as whole, so yes I thought about that possibilty, I highly doubt they were kicked, rather, they left knowing they were going to be be killed, sorry but that's cowardly use the clan to kill and then leave before you yourself are killed...

I didn't protect any recent killer: I protected a student of mine and myself. Oh well: I'm back in command now so whatever happened in my absence will be considered but likely ignored.

Quite true, but also quite unfair with constant takedowns. The thing is that no matter what, Firetooth speaks big against us in these forums. The problem with that is he aligned himself with Answer and Shadow. So yes, just talking bit justifies action. We're also quite open to playing your rules to teach a lesson. Our long-term objective was not to become emperors, but to dominate as 4+ players. Land locking in a clan is stupid. Making a clanned emp is stupid. Having now 4-5 of 6 players be at similar networths and holding the top spots? That's a bit more difficult that locking, emping, or takedowns. However, even playing the more-skillful game, that just means we upped the ante for those that were jealous of efficiency, effectiveness, skill, or even brute strength if you really think that way. Nobody but Firetooth would dare rise to the challenge of out-netting us, and in part the response to your rules placed him as the one and only targetable warlord. If Shadow or Answer was with networth, they'd have been target #1.

Now then: please direct all complaints to Windhound for the time being. I'm on holiday in Montreal.