The Almighty Power of WAR Clan

[Kilkenne]

Conventional troop stacking hasn't been viable to break an emperor since about 2005. I don't know why anyone would expect to ~not~ be suicided.

[Gen. Volkov]

Since when am I a cronie?

Since you started working with Sevah?

[Shoot]

I'm going to have to agree with Sevah about the tactic. It's cheap, it takes no skill, and worst of all, there is no possible way to defend against it no matter what you do or how good you are at the game. How on earth is anyone ever going to sit in first for 10 days to become emperor when all that needs to be done to prevent it is leader suicides, then someone spams murder/poison to knock them out of the lead and ruin all their work in the process?

Incidentally, this is entirely untrue. There have been many, many emps of reg, and all of them had to deal with suicides. In fact, there was a time when it was a well-accepted tactic (pretty much Sevs is the only person who complains about them, he just does it really loudly).

I admit I haven't been here that long, but I really don't see how that tactic can even be defended against viably given how the game is set up. From what I've observed, missions and failed hits do not count on the hit limit here so the hit limit is not even a limiting factor there.

I assume the leader attack is similar to the stock promisance wizard fight which requires a leader/hut ratio to suicide rather than a leader/land ratio on your opponent to be able to kill leaders, which is trivial by demolishing huts as you suicide your leaders into them to maintain that ratio. Seeing as Shadow did a good deal of suicides on Sevah before his vacation triggered, I suspect this is the case.

Leaders are limited by how much land is in the game - no matter how much of anything else you have, and no matter how much time you spend on building yourself up, there are only so many leaders one can have at a given time. With enough suicides, you'll eventually drop their leader count low enough to where another person can murder/poison all the networth away, and I don't think there is a way to stop suicides from occuring unless you outnet everyone else severely resulting in the 'warlord too large' message, which is not practical. If the leader loss formula in failed leader attack is the same as the stock promisance code, then both sides lose a set percentage of their leaders, without even taking ratios into consideration, which effectively allows for somebody to suicide with a single hut with 100 leaders for full damage.

In any case, to me, it is a deal breaker and makes reg unplayable. Why would a rational person want to spend the time to hoard up enough military and resources to try to get into the lead or help a friend get into the lead when all that needs to be done is 1 person of any size throws a bunch of leader suicides and the next follows up with murder/poison spam to ruin everything? Sitting in the lead for 10 full days is a hard enough achievement as it is even without having to worry about a terribly faulty game mechanic being exploited to ruin your efforts. I really haven't seen a good reason as to why this mechanic exists in its current form other than "everyone else does it" or "it's the only [read: easy] way".

Just my 2 cents. Maybe it's just better to agree to disagree at this point.

[Gen. Volkov]

I admit I haven't been here that long, but I really don't see how that tactic can even be defended against viably given how the game is set up. From what I've observed, missions and failed hits do not count on the hit limit here so the hit limit is not even a limiting factor there.

Incorrect. That's Turbo. In reg, failed attacks count towards the hit limit. Also, we do not have the stock wizard fight setup most promisance games have. Essentially you are basing your entire chain of reasoning on a false premise. Reg is not unplayable, and leader suicides can be defended against. You are completely and absolutely wrong, and you should ask questions about the game, so you know what you are talking about, before you weigh in uninformed like this and make yourself look foolish.

[Shadow]

None of what you posted is true:

I admit I haven't been here that long, but I really don't see how that tactic can even be defended against viably given how the game is set up. From what I've observed, missions and failed hits do not count on the hit limit here so the hit limit is not even a limiting factor there.

Suicides count toward hitlimit. You can only do 21 in a row. This typically kills on average 30% of the defending leaders, IF you have a substantial number (eg, comparable to the number the defender has) of leaders of your own.

I assume the leader attack is similar to the stock promisance wizard fight which requires a leader/hut ratio to suicide rather than a leader/land ratio on your opponent to be able to kill leaders, which is trivial by demolishing huts as you suicide your leaders into them to maintain that ratio. Seeing as Shadow did a good deal of suicides on Sevah before his vacation triggered, I suspect this is the case.

RWL is slightly different - you can only kill up to 5x what you lose, but the way it checks it means that you typically do less leader damage than your own losses. So you need at least 20% of your opponent's leaders - an indy player cannot effectively do suicides.

Leaders are limited by how much land is in the game - no matter how much of anything else you have, and no matter how much time you spend on building yourself up, there are only so many leaders one can have at a given time. With enough suicides, you'll eventually drop their leader count low enough to where another person can murder/poison all the networth away, and I don't think there is a way to stop suicides from occuring unless you outnet everyone else severely resulting in the 'warlord too large' message, which is not practical. If the leader loss formula in failed leader attack is the same as the stock promisance code, then both sides lose a set percentage of their leaders, without even taking ratios into consideration, which effectively allows for somebody to suicide with a single hut with 100 leaders for full damage.

No, you can't suicide with 100 leaders (try it and see.... You'll only kill 1 leader at a time).

In any case, to me, it is a deal breaker and makes reg unplayable. Why would a rational person want to spend the time to hoard up enough military and resources to try to get into the lead or help a friend get into the lead when all that needs to be done is 1 person of any size throws a bunch of leader suicides and the next follows up with murder/poison spam to ruin everything? Sitting in the lead for 10 full days is a hard enough achievement as it is even without having to worry about a terribly faulty game mechanic being exploited to ruin your efforts. I really haven't seen a good reason as to why this mechanic exists in its current form other than "everyone else does it" or "it's the only [read: easy] way".

Maybe you should actually try the tactic and see how it works before assuming with no evidence that it behaves like you imagine it will?

[Death]

I don't really think a failed attack should ever be considered an accepted okay viable tactic. I mean, it's a failed attack, the person doing it failed to use it properly, it should not do anything noteworthy.

[Shadow]

How do you propose damaging a leader player massing resources otherwise? Much less one storing food on the market? (Reg code is deeply broken).

How do other proms you've played at deal with that? Just nerf food net into the ground? Still leaves the problem of cash massing with impunity.

Of course, we could always move 3.0 to reg and make the entire debate academic.

[Gen. Volkov]

I don't really think a failed attack should ever be considered an accepted okay viable tactic. I mean, it's a failed attack, the person doing it failed to use it properly, it should not do anything noteworthy.

Yes, lets just make leader players completely invulnerable. I'm sure that will work out great.

[Death]

Or you could have just fixed the problem instead of using another problem to combat it lol

But yeah, every single other Promisance totally eliminated massing food for networth a really long time ago since it's pretty stupid. It's food, you use it to do stuff, like cash. It isn't intended to be a net source.

[Gen. Volkov]

Doesn't eliminate the problem. People can still mass food or cash and then use it to generate a high NW. I gather from your statements that this is the strategy in every other round-based prom game. Why this should be accepted as viable or denoting skill is beyond me, but whatever, it's irrelevant. Reg isn't round based. Reg never ends, so one could do as Holby and Shadow and Marell did awhile back, and mass up a gigantic amount of cash, and then take over the game. They needed the support of a clan to it, because of suicides, but without suicides, a leader player could do it solo or with a very small team.

[Shadow]

Or you could have just fixed the problem instead of using another problem to combat it lol

But yeah, every single other Promisance totally eliminated massing food for networth a really long time ago since it's pretty stupid. It's food, you use it to do stuff, like cash. It isn't intended to be a net source.

Well, 3.0 was the solution to literally all of this. You can still get food net there, but massing it just isn't viable. I don't really plan on putting in major changes to reg code except to close obvious holes in the game; balance issues are addressed in 3.0.

[Death]

Doesn't eliminate the problem. People can still mass food or cash and then use it to generate a high NW.

Lowering the net food gives you does actually address that problem pretty well, it's why everyone else has done it, haha. I mean this is a problem from before the time QMT was even a thing, it's a Prom 1.0 issue. As for people making cash to get a high net... that's Prom. People should be kept in check so that they can't mass a lot of cash in the first place. And I mean, the real screwup here was taking a normal code that was made for storers and putting it up with no resets, that type of thing requires massive changes to the way the game is played and it's never going to work perfectly anyways because nobody plays forever.

[Gen. Volkov]

Lowering the net food gives you does actually address that problem pretty well, it's why everyone else has done it, haha.

We've actually nerfed food net, twice. The answer always seems to be: MAEK MOAR FOOD.

[Kilkenne]

nobody plays forever.

General Volkov

[Death]

Lowering the net food gives you does actually address that problem pretty well, it's why everyone else has done it, haha.

We've actually nerfed food net, twice. The answer always seems to be: MAEK MOAR FOOD.

That... like... uh... wat. Yeah I don't know what to do with that, if you make something not work and people respond by just doing it for longer... god darn.