Are you people for real????

[Octavia]

So, if you log in and are being attacked, you are not allowed to attack back until that person is done running turns??  Are you for real?  I mean, nothing like sitting back with your gun and letting the robber take all they can just because their time robbing you was not done yet!!!  Did any of you play back in the day, or this just poo you make up as you go along and get annoyed when someone beats your butt?? 

Who am I, a newbie, trying to figure out how messed up this game got along the way.  Wow, no wonder there is only 13 players in here, I've heard, I'm the best, you can't hit me while I'm running turns, ect.  really????  Play with 1000 plus, then you will be true players. 

[Gen. Volkov]

Its not that you are not allowed too, its just that online-attacking another player is generally seen as a very aggressive act, and is frowned upon. This is because while land is a resource that is fairly easy to get and tends to flow around the game, turns are a limited resource that only get replenished with time. Attack someone while they are running turns is essentially wasting the one resource they cannot easily get back, so as a courtesy to each other, players tend not to attack each other when they are online. Not hitting people when they are online has been part of RWL for as long as I can remember, except for maybe very early in the first era, back in 2002 or 2003, when no one knew what they were doing.

Welcome to RWL Octavia.

[Shadow]

There's no rule against it, but it makes people mad when you do.

That said, online attacking is a useful tool sometimes. Just use it for a purpose.

Good luck!

[windhound]

Play with 1000 plus, then you will be true players.

Are there any 1000 player promis left?  ...was there ever one?

Bravado (and pigheadedness) are part of the game as well
Welcome!

[Octavia]

back in 2002 or 2003, when no one knew what they were doing.  Lol, now that would have got you killed back in the day.
Are there any 1000 player promis left?  ...was there ever one? EZ clan, yes, way back when I guess no one knew what they were doing!!

Now, I am not saying attacking someone who is running turns, is the right thing, just when they are attacking your empire you should have the right to stop them, in anyway possible.

Back in the early days, most knew not to hit someone more than 4 times, if they did, they would then be brought to their knees.  Here, people hit 10-20 times on a single empire.

The old code use to allow the surprise attack to generate more buildings, this causing more land in the game, which made a little known thing called land gen possible, which helped players to not over hit constantly, taking land and frustrating other players.  That way, you were not over hitting people. 

Just saying, if you are going to over attack all the time, expect to be hit when you are hitting the person.

:)

[Holby]

Oh look, a gameplay related post!

RWL has always been different to other Promisance games in terms of playstyle. The vast majority of the membership are from the Redwall Online Community, not from a gaming or Promisance background. We evolved in our own little pond, so to speak.

So while attacking someone more than a handful of times will get you killed anywhere else, it's par for the course here.

Our two most important customs:

1) Online attack at your own peril.
2) Praise Holby for his wisdom, insight, and charm.

[Gen. Volkov]

back in 2002 or 2003, when no one knew what they were doing.  Lol, now that would have got you killed back in the day.

Yeah, that would have made people quite mad, I agree, but looking back, can you honestly say its not the truth?

[Disl]

You should use your turns as you wish. As a resource management game, turns are valuable and the most effective way to hurt the opponent is during the time they run turns. The issue with online attacking is that it leads to players camping all day long just to one up their opponent; whether to snipe their enemy's empire mid-run or safely use turns without getting wrecked. Camping isn't skillful, it is more about who has the most free time to increase their chances for that perfect moment.

Granted for every action there is a reaction. Someone over hit you and you responded with online attacking I presume? Nothing wrong with them over hitting you, nothing wrong with you online attacking. Just that there are consequences for each action for both sides. I would suggest messaging the aggressor letting them know the situation, giving them an ultimatum if they ignore/continue on. Diplomacy is a big part of any of these games.

I have played at earthempires, which has over 1000 players at times. Generally a clan will not allow any harm towards their members, likewise they will enforce their members to not attack other clans. These unspoken rules do exist and dictate the very way an empire plays in a server, you are correct. But players are not banned if they decide to mess someone's empire up or go against clan policies set by other players. These unspoken rules only have clout if the individual(s) or clan(s) can enforce their views on the server. This means doing kill runs, online attacking all that good stuff to hand out their judgment to each offender.

I can say "do not sack me! do not hit me below 10k!" but I cannot realistically expect the entire server, let alone any empire to heed my words. Instead I will do something about it. That is how these games have done things. I remember passive empires getting robbed and yeah they get pretty mad, but if they continue to stay passive they are just blowing steam with indignant words. If some super clan dictates a land grab limit of say, 4 hits then that is just them talking. But if you hit them 5 times and if they do a kill run on your empire then you face the choice of either restarting a new empire to fight back or follow their policy to play in peace. Hey, that kind of sounds like the real world right? 

The notion of being the best is silly in these games. Every reset is different. Winning the last set does not affect your  current empire. You play anew and navigate your turns as the challenge comes all over again. Even if you thrash your enemies last round, you have to do it again the next round. and you get no reward for doing so. Nothing carries over. So the stakes are usually the month or so investment and the payoff is what bragging rights for the day? "Hey man I beat you 10 years ago I am the best!" Is really no different from: "Hey I beat you 5 months ago, you are a scrub!". They both sound equally silly to me. After all in the next round you could play as perfectly that is humanly possible only to get your sandcastle kicked by a really sub-par group of players. I have seen it happen many times the years I have played these games. Truly variance is more important for success from my perspective. If some troll randomly chooses someone to mess up it will hurt their final standings but also their targets. some players play to ruin other empires. That is also a valid way to play however annoying. In real life not everyone wishes to see prosperity of their fellow man, humans are not so uniform!

[Sevah]

See if Volkov can gather up a clan to crush us properly?

As far as I know we'll be giving the server of redwall a very special present next year.

[Disl]

See if Volkov can gather up a clan to crush us properly?

As far as I know we'll be giving the server of redwall a very special present next year.

This is not a sentiment I agree with at all. For the first month and half I ran 0 defense solo because it was supplementary to net-gaining. Running defense has and always will be contradictory for high level networth rounds in any of these games due to the insane costs in holding troops. It is completely unnecessary in Redwall as a leader player thanks to the hit limit. At least until you reach a certain threshold which comes in the public market limit.

Eventually the public market holds less and less food stock while my empire becomes an easy target to sack to oblivion. Early on I was losing maybe $5 bil per 22 hitlimit of sacks, but making $80 billion in profit. This is acceptable. Once I had 30 billion food on public market, I started to take $20 billion in damages from sacks and the food could not be stored on public faster than it was being sacked. It made little sense to leave my empire defenseless as each run was being wasted essentially. Locking out the land was not ever the intended goal. The sacks continued to carry on even with massive defensive lines (150 mil rats/50 mil stoats). Sacks take far less land than normal, and when an empire has 90% of the land it is not smart to use your 22 hits with sacks because then you make locking for the opponent much easier. Hitlimits keep the land walled from the rest of the server, it is tactically important to free as much land possible with drives for example. It was clear these players did not have any incentive of just wanting to run their turns and play the game in their own lane, but they maliciously targeted player's food supplies. That is completely fine. Made an agreement to protect the land and pulled all of our resources to adapt.

What is interesting is that once the lockdown became finalized, those aggressors (all 3 of them) disappeared from the grid. Their empires have stopped running turns, while the rest of the server by proxy is locked down due to their actions. Nobody wants to play in a server with no chance of coming back where the advantage is overwhelming. That can be due to current player activity, pooled skill level of possible allies etc.  The point being beating down a server that does not want to fight is not fun. An element of the game is anyone can harass another empire if they can break. Sacks aren't very powerful unless the empire you target has hit a certain threshold of success.

I learned how to mage in Redwall over the past 3 months which is something I did not get to try in the past. For the most part it was very simple and playing with the 22 hitlimit managing ratio/loyalty was a pretty cool experience than the typical promisance maging of stack food>stack mana>cash spells. The sacks began to obliterate my empire so I adapted to meet the challenge. When the main aggressors were utterly eviscerated they dropped off the server. Land locking is not fun when there is no semblance of challenge aka BIG fish SMALL pond.

Next set I hope to play a far more peaceful round with a new strategy to hit absurd levels of networth, like when we destroyed the networth record at valhall, Sevz. I like to build my sandcastles that is the reason I played this set, but I hate when someone kicks them down. I won't cry when it happens. I will fight back. But I found "warring" to be the least desirable aspect of these games nowadays.

tldr: I would hate to have another round of this crap again next year

[Shadow]

That's usually how it goes these days.  Only ~3 people at any given time are running turns regularly, so locks are pretty common since nobody is around to try to stop it.

It wouldn't happen with a large player base, but what can you do.

[Wolf Snare]

I beg to differ. We've successfully locked the land hundreds of times. Feel free to grab your buddy Snowy Fir and sign up for an butt whooping next set, same thing will happen.

[Gen. Volkov]

Nah, Shads is right, its a numbers deal. I've never seen Sevz and you successfully lock land when the game has more than 15-20 people. Its always low numbers sets like this when you two are the most active players in the game. Right now its essentially 3v2, and while the two can generate enough rats to occasionally break, there are no experienced players waiting in the wings to exploit the freed up land to permanently break the lock. It just gets locked up again the next time one of you runs.