Welcome to our Forums!
Type /register while in-game to register for a forum account.
Suggestion placing cooldown
- Thread starter DevvyVR
- Start date
Just looking at this entire thread makes me think of cheese placing
I would like to add a
every single forum post you make scares me
I am laying down in bed reading through genuinely one of the most cope suggestions I've ever seen anyone make
Tbh literally a lot of the points being made defending double placing were the same ones that people coping made defending cheese placing
It's not a downside when the alliance is losing even more strength from a town and an alliance placing than just the same alliance placing twice. Plus they can do it twice meaning if they lose all 4 fights they lose not only 50 strength from the town but the equivalent of 44 strength from the alliance causing a 94 strength gap in just 1 day of placing. How can anyone justify that a gap of 94 strength in one day is reasonable? There's no strategy involved in this and there's nothing an alliance can do to stop it from happening unlike cheeseplaces which someone mentioned earlier in the thread which can be easily avoided by choosing a vuln that actually works for you. There's no strategy involved in telling someone to place at the same time as you, there's no communication other than "hey go place at that tile at 1:59 est" which is incredibly easy to do.
Big difference between strategic tool and an unfair advantage that you literally cannot counter other than by recruiting 50 extra players which makes it even harder for the server
The strategic counter is to split your army up in a way which is able to counter the other two alliances. It's not an impossible task it's just something that's never been done before with success.
You are destined to lose nothing else
wait a moment,..
the main issue for me with double placing is that with the new strength calculation an alliance needs to win both fights at all costs since usually you will have a large alliance with a good amount of strength double place with a small town with little to no strength and that basically creates a scenario where if you lose the main fight you lose strength and your enemy gains it but if you lose the second place you will take a massive hit in strength due to the difference between your strength and the town that placed on you (towns that can warp up to 20 people can still keep themselves on low strength sometimes on purpose since it maximizes the hit in strength the alliance they place on lose and since they are placing and playing with the interests of another alliance in mind rather than their own) but again depending on who you ask it's either strategy or an unfair meta
It's possible like I've said before by recruiting stupid amounts of players so that you can warp and outnumber both. Is that what Loka really is? A recruitment task for something that you can't fight otherwise? If so, what's really the point in playing for fun and to win at the same time? It's either have fun and lose or sweat and not enjoy your time on Loka but win...
The current version of conquest is largely a numbers game. This is why people can far prefer Rivinia opposed to continental fights.
Some people do have fun and win, and some people don't have fun losing for what it's worth.
CUS YOU HAVE NEVER DONE IT SHUSH
What did this reply have anything to do with the entire discussion?? My point was that it was a broken feature that shouldn't exist overall no matter who does it and that was clear from the start?? If you're going to reply to this discussion at least have a point at hand that you'd like to make instead of trying to make this a shouting match.