No Plans to Implement Remove double placing

[Asynchronized]

IT SUCKS!!!! AND ITS MAKING CONQUEST REALLY BORING!!!!!!! DOUBLE PLACE THIS, DOUBLE PLACE THAT, DOUBLE TAKE A DAMN HIKE!!!!!!!!!!!

(rage part of the suggestion over)


It absolutely ruins conquest for all parties, even if you win a double place, whats the point? Theres no game to play at the end of the day, one fight is just like a neutral!!! There is no point for it to exist except from a cheesy strategy standpoint, and even at that, its already viewed as bad conquest etiquette.

 

[Hamadeau]

nuh uh

 

[K4ppah]

+1 i never needed to double place

 

[Eyvah]

U tell ‘em

 

[scotrian]

+1 i never needed to double place

O_O

 

[Facilee]

-1 without it we still up

 

[Obstinance]

remove all cheese strats and see who's actually the winner please. let things be played the way they're supposed to and either legitimize or remove commonly used cheese strats. take firm stances.

 

[daqniel]

agreed

 

[LightAndDqrk]

-1

 

[mintqy]

I agree

 

[crackersarecool_]

huge +1 losing pots over this

 

[Lampp_]

The thing that sucks about this is you’ll always have some greasy loser in their basement who abuses any game mechanic they can to get a BS fight off. say you can only have one inhib down at a time, then you just have people who place just for the invulnerability like kappah has done this entire month double placing sucks but no fight is worse

 

[Eyvah]

you’ll always have some greasy loser in their basement who abuses any game mechanic they can to get a BS fight off.

You’re literally describing your entire friend group here?

 

[BIGSIZZLEE]

IT SUCKS!!!! AND ITS MAKING CONQUEST REALLY BORING!!!!!!! DOUBLE PLACE THIS, DOUBLE PLACE THAT, DOUBLE TAKE A DAMN HIKE!!!!!!!!!!!

(rage part of the suggestion over)


It absolutely ruins conquest for all parties, even if you win a double place, whats the point? Theres no game to play at the end of the day, one fight is just like a neutral!!! There is no point for it to exist except from a cheesy strategy standpoint, and even at that, its already viewed as bad conquest etiquette.

I AGREE

 

[Lampp_]

You’re literally describing your entire friend group here?

We only started double placing after kappah made us literally unable to place by blatantly win trading on balak

 

[Asynchronized]

The thing that sucks about this is you’ll always have some greasy loser in their basement who abuses any game mechanic they can to get a BS fight off. say you can only have one inhib down at a time, then you just have people who place just for the invulnerability like kappah has done this entire month double placing sucks but no fight is worse

we need a coalition against bad conquest etiquette

 

[Obstinance]

we need a coalition against bad conquest etiquette

or they can implement solid rules and mechanics into conquest so bad etiquette doesn't have a chance to take place

 

[Cryptite]

We're fine with double placing, that's why it exists. If an attacker(s) wish to band together to try to take down a competing alliance they are free to do so with a double place.

The idea that the best alliances need to be "protected" even further from being attacked by others is not something we're on board with. The current ruleset exists to prevent a lot of cheese. Adding protections from double placing would introduce even more cheese that players would no doubt use to prevent getting attacked.

War is hell, not etiquette.

 

[Obstinance]

We're fine with double placing, that's why it exists. If an attacker(s) wish to band together to try to take down a competing alliance they are free to do so with a double place.

The idea that the best alliances need to be "protected" even further from being attacked by others is not something we're on board with. The current ruleset exists to prevent a lot of cheese. Adding protections from double placing would introduce even more cheese that players would no doubt use to prevent getting attacked.

War is hell, not etiquette.

if a town has been placed on twice within like 20min by two separate entities then the defenders should get a shorter warp time for each fight AT LEAST...

 

[Asynchronized]

We're fine with double placing, that's why it exists. If an attacker(s) wish to band together to try to take down a competing alliance they are free to do so with a double place.

The idea that the best alliances need to be "protected" even further from being attacked by others is not something we're on board with. The current ruleset exists to prevent a lot of cheese. Adding protections from double placing would introduce even more cheese that players would no doubt use to prevent getting attacked.

War is hell, not etiquette.

the Geneva convention begs to differ

you're always gonna have this happen over and over again, its just really boring.