Should taek get his immort took away?

Started by Firetooth, August 17, 2008, 03:27:47 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Should taek get his immort took away?

definetly
6 (35.3%)
yes
1 (5.9%)
maybe
1 (5.9%)
no
6 (35.3%)
definetly not
3 (17.6%)

Total Members Voted: 16

Shadow

but then people can troop suicide and leader suicide indefinietly without maxxing
<=holbs-.. ..-holbs=> <=holbs-..

bjornredtail

And, that's a VERY COSTLY way to kill enemy troops. You could increase turn costs for attacking, you could increase losses for the attacker for a failed attack.

Ideally the attack limit would be a per-warlord limit. But, then implementation becomes nontrivial. I'd do it with a separate table joined to the players table...

(man, I really ought to make a /dev for FAF)
0==={=B=J=O=R=N=R=E=D=T=A=I=L==>
AKA, Nevadacow
First person to ever play RWL

"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence!"-Edsger W. Dijkstra

Visit http://frostnflame.org today!

Shadow

what about defended leader attacks? unlimited suicides?
<=holbs-.. ..-holbs=> <=holbs-..

bjornredtail

Leader attacks can be limited by the same factors. Additionally, they are limited by the amount of mana/scrolls/loyalty they have.
0==={=B=J=O=R=N=R=E=D=T=A=I=L==>
AKA, Nevadacow
First person to ever play RWL

"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence!"-Edsger W. Dijkstra

Visit http://frostnflame.org today!

Shadow

that's no limit, a billion scrolls aren't hard to come up with in the full swing of the game.
<=holbs-.. ..-holbs=> <=holbs-..