Pages: << prev 1, 2, 3 next >>

pvp question?

Mad Mike the mad mad crushers Darkwind Guru Anarchists Faction Group: Subscribers Posts: 2,900 Joined: Aug 1, 2007 everyone missed my point entirely. anyway what we basically have is terrorism at this point. Only way we can fight cry havoc is go after its members and destroy them since we cannot attack the camp directly and ever win the war. The war will now go on defiantly unless cry havoc builds buildings and opens. and if that is the way sam envisioned this I'd have to say I am disappointed that this exploit is allowed to continue. this war was declared not to attack the camp it was declared merely to open PvP squad attacks. Darth is after people other than rorkes. by having cry havoc declare war he got what he wanted, a way to attack others through a hold in the system. anyone saying I dont want PvP and get the bonuses is wrong. If cry havoc built buildings and opened my argument would go away ......................... vet wv Posted May 13, 2009, 10:54 pm

Marrkos 88 MPH Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 3,711 Joined: Mar 28, 2006 Mad Mike said: everyone missed my point entirely. I don't think so.  Your point is that you think PvP should be focused on the Camp Attack/Defense, and PvP between camp members is secondary to that, so if you can't have the former (no open hours) there shouldn't be the latter. I don't think that was the original intent behind Camp War, and it seems like most other players don't think so either. Quote: The war will now go on defiantly unless cry havoc builds buildings and opens. This is funnier than you probably intended. Quote: this war was declared not to attack the camp it was declared merely to open PvP squad attacks. Correct, because the main driver to this system was to implement a consensual PvP system.  So, that's what we have.  Camps can declare consensual 'war' on each other and thereby allow their members the option of playing PvP against players who also want to play PvP. Having said all that, isn't stopping a 'war' as simple as unchecking a box someplace 'Not at war'? I was under the impression that starting a war required both parties consent (and 'Open PvP' granted it automagically), but that stopping a war only required one party to opt out. Is that not the case? ......................... vet wv community Posted May 13, 2009, 11:12 pm

ISHOULDCOCO COCO and the BURPERS Darkwind Guru Civs Faction Group: Storytellers Posts: 1,440 Joined: Jul 5, 2007 Camps are a device to clearly segragate PVP camp attack or no camp attack (Ooo! Ducky I could slap you silly!) If you dont want to PVP close the camp. Darth fulfilled theminimum requirement to be allowed to PVP end of. COCO ......................... vet wv Posted May 13, 2009, 11:43 pm

Mad Mike the mad mad crushers Darkwind Guru Anarchists Faction Group: Subscribers Posts: 2,900 Joined: Aug 1, 2007 again, my point is missed entirely. cry havoc is CLOSED and cannot be attacked. Cry Havoc has declared war on rorkes and tombstone. doesnt anyone see that exploit? cry havoc CANNOT be attacked yet DECLARED WAR on other camps but cannot be attacked itself????? every response has not answered that question at all. ......................... vet wv Posted May 13, 2009, 11:55 pm

darthspanky McSPANKYS LOLLIPOP GANSTAS Darkwind Guru Anarchists Faction Group: Subscribers Posts: 4,009 Joined: Jul 29, 2007 hehe and you guys thought i was bad ......................... vet paintball wv1,0,1 Posted May 13, 2009, 11:58 pm

Marrkos 88 MPH Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 3,711 Joined: Mar 28, 2006 Mad Mike said: again, my point is missed entirely.  cry havoc is CLOSED and cannot be attacked.  Cry Havoc has declared war on rorkes and tombstone.  doesnt anyone see that exploit? And Cry Havoc can't attack your camp, so what's the problem? People have tried to explain why it isn't an exploit, and why the system is the way it is.  You don't seem to want to accept that so I suppose the only thing left to do is answer your question directly. No, I (and it seems many others) don't see that exploit. ......................... vet wv community Posted May 14, 2009, 12:02 am

*jimmylogan* MADHAT Darkwind Guru Civs Faction Group: Marshals + Rule Council Posts: 5,587 Joined: Jun 11, 2008 Okay Mike - let me try then. Quote: cry havoc is CLOSED and cannot be attacked Correct. Quote: Cry Havoc has declared war on rorkes and tombstone. Correct. Cry Havoc can also not attack either camp. They can attack the members though. You can't attack Cry Havoc, but you CAN attack the members. This would be an exploit IF - IF - they could attack you and you not attack back. The playing field is level though as that is not the case. You obviously don't understand the difference between a camp attack and a squad attack... JL ......................... vet marshal deathrceL1 wv community combatL1 Posted May 14, 2009, 12:04 am

Mad Mike the mad mad crushers Darkwind Guru Anarchists Faction Group: Subscribers Posts: 2,900 Joined: Aug 1, 2007 lets try this again. cry hovac is closed and cannot be attacked cry havoc declares war the members of cry hovac have done this so they can PvP ONLY and at this point do not plan to open as far as I can tell a camp declaring war against another camp means what? war against the camp not just its membership. sam made earlier changes to not allow a closed camp to wage war on any other camp. I think it is the intention was that a camp that is closed cannot even declare war at all unless it is open. all sam needs to say is the way it is is the way he wants it or the rules council make a ruling. ......................... vet wv Posted May 14, 2009, 1:10 am

darthspanky McSPANKYS LOLLIPOP GANSTAS Darkwind Guru Anarchists Faction Group: Subscribers Posts: 4,009 Joined: Jul 29, 2007 yer right mike we should open for 1 hour then on that hour we attack you and you attack us we wont even show up so feel free to loot some stone we have there and a 50 percent raccoon chassie with no tires you can loot that too if ya want then we will close again, meanwhile well attack yer camp and i we win well steal yer lorrys well let ya know when were gunna attack. lol before ya spazz out mike that plan wouldnt work cause we have no mr we wouldnt have any cr for the car battle on yer camp anyway hehe so we couldnt even pvp yer camp even if we were open ......................... vet paintball wv1,0,1 Posted May 14, 2009, 2:11 am Last edited May 14, 2009, 2:39 am by darthspanky

Marrkos 88 MPH Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 3,711 Joined: Mar 28, 2006 Mad Mike said: sam made earlier changes to not allow a closed camp to wage war on any other camp. I don't think this is the case.  My understanding is that he made changes so that a camp with no Open Hours can't attack, in order to close the actual exploit of a closed camp being safe from retaliatory attacks. 'wage war' is not synonymous with 'attack a camp' As things stand now, the playing field is level. A closed camp can't attack other camps, and can't be attacked by other camps.  Equal opportunity. A closed camp's members can attack other camp's members and can be attacked by other camp's members.  Equal opportunity. IMO he's stated as such in other threads. ......................... vet wv community Posted May 14, 2009, 2:45 am Last edited May 14, 2009, 2:46 am by Marrkos

Mad Mike the mad mad crushers Darkwind Guru Anarchists Faction Group: Subscribers Posts: 2,900 Joined: Aug 1, 2007 so we can introduce terrorism into the game. not a bad thing it is a valid tactic. a small group of people cannot possibly attack a large group head on so they terrorize its population. if thats waht sam declares is going on and allows it id be a bit disappointed however it is a valid war tactic and would be somehting a firelight camp would do. i would still rather a camp that doesnt have a high enough mr or max cr be able to even declare war ......................... vet wv Posted May 14, 2009, 2:51 am

darthspanky McSPANKYS LOLLIPOP GANSTAS Darkwind Guru Anarchists Faction Group: Subscribers Posts: 4,009 Joined: Jul 29, 2007 we could be al spankia ......................... vet paintball wv1,0,1 Posted May 14, 2009, 6:04 am

*sam* The Salthill Sluggerz Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Lead Developer Posts: 16,780 Joined: Jan 19, 2006 Seems to be a disagreement about what should be possible, rather than what is possible under the current rules as implemented. The current system is as I intended it: 1. A camp with no opening hours cannot initiate a camp-attack nor can it receive a camp-attack. 2. However, a camp with no opening hours can both initiate and receive away-from-camp PvP battles with enemy camp squads. Which is precisely how PvP used to work before camps were thrown into the mix. So for a closed camp, the only change between how this worked a month ago and how it works now, is that its members need to have consentual pvp before doing squad-v-squad attacks. Previously they could do it non-consentually as long as they weren't at Somerset. I think everyone understands the above. ------------------ What's at issue is whether a closed camp should be allowed to have its members do any form of pvp or not. I think the answer is yes, but I could easily change that. It could come down to a vote if necessary. I can understand how mike brands this strategy as 'terrorism' (or more correctly perhaps, guerrila warfare -- a type of warfare where the enemy knows of no 'home base' to attack you at, but rather has to engage in random pitched battles). However, is this really a bad thing? Why is this strategy good for the guys in 'Cry Havoc' and bad for its enemies? ......................... marshal vet deathrce1 paintladder combat1 wv ped1 cont slay2013 Posted May 14, 2009, 2:56 pm Last edited May 14, 2009, 3:01 pm by *sam*

Marrkos 88 MPH Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 3,711 Joined: Mar 28, 2006 *sam* said: I can understand how mike brands this strategy as 'terrorism' (or more correctly perhaps, guerrila warfare -- a type of warfare where the enemy knows of no 'home base' to attack you at, but rather has to engage in random pitched battles). However, is this really a bad thing? Why is this strategy good for the guys in 'Cry Havoc' and bad for its enemies? It doesn't seem any different from how the NPCs operate, so if it comes down to a vote I'd say keep it. ......................... vet wv community Posted May 14, 2009, 3:50 pm

*goat starer* Special Circumstances Darkwind Guru Evan Reds Faction Group: Contributors Posts: 10,907 Joined: Oct 29, 2007 me too. sounds like a valid tactic. ......................... vet wv zom pvp4 cont community deathrceL1 marshal pvp3 pvp2 Posted May 14, 2009, 4:46 pm

Marrkos 88 MPH Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 3,711 Joined: Mar 28, 2006 Marrkos said: I'd say keep it. then goat starer said: me too Methinks it might be a bit chilly in Hell right about now.  ......................... vet wv community Posted May 14, 2009, 5:00 pm

Mad Mike the mad mad crushers Darkwind Guru Anarchists Faction Group: Subscribers Posts: 2,900 Joined: Aug 1, 2007 pretty much the only way to end the war is to wipe out the terrorist gangs till they give up. guerrilla warfare is a bit different then terrorism because I thing guerrilla warfare doesnt target civilians. so the members of firelight are guerrillas against all other camps in an attempt to destabilize evan to turn it into a pirate run territory. There is a difference between cry havoc and the NPCs. we do not know where the NPCs bases are, in fact we can surmise they are mobile camps that move closest to what ever road the traders change to when a particular road gets t0o hot with pirates. but with that comparison, we know where cry havoc is and it just seems a little strange that we cannot attack it. I would think an outsider would think that strange that a camp is used as a base for pirates, yet it cannot be attacked because it is closed. Could we make cry havoc mobile while it is closed? that would solve that problem. After all, with no buildings it can be mobile when its location is discovered. Would it be possible for it to randomly move between BL and FL? That would be actually kinda cool and add to the game. Only the members are told where it is at any particular time. ......................... vet wv Posted May 14, 2009, 5:53 pm

*sam* The Salthill Sluggerz Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Lead Developer Posts: 16,780 Joined: Jan 19, 2006 Quote: I would think an outsider would think that strange that a camp is used as a base for pirates, yet it cannot be attacked because it is closed. Yes, it is strange. The whole open/closed mechanism is very artificial, only existing for gameplay/scheduling purposes. ......................... marshal vet deathrce1 paintladder combat1 wv ped1 cont slay2013 Posted May 14, 2009, 6:06 pm

Mad Mike the mad mad crushers Darkwind Guru Anarchists Faction Group: Subscribers Posts: 2,900 Joined: Aug 1, 2007 how about it goes invisible except for the owner when it has no open hours. the owner could then tell prospective members where it is with a password... maybe... the owners and members camp page has it listed but not the exact location. the location is listed as approximately X number of miles from Badlands, exact location unknown. whoever wants to be a member has to apply for membership just as we do now. then it is explained the location is secret, therefore there is a meeting place to meet at, whoever wants to go to the camp location is screened, questioned, etc... BUT the exact location is only known by the owner... then this later on could be a dynamic where people can attack the meeting place and attempt to get the location by interrogation... sounds like another mission but anyway, this could be a good explanation to why the camp is unattackable and has closed hours. of course when the camp opens for a certain number of hours the location then gets made available. ......................... vet wv Posted May 14, 2009, 6:20 pm Last edited May 14, 2009, 6:32 pm by Mad Mike

*jimmylogan* MADHAT Darkwind Guru Civs Faction Group: Marshals + Rule Council Posts: 5,587 Joined: Jun 11, 2008 Mad Mike said: how about it goes invisible except for the owner when it has no open hours.  the owner could then tell prospective members where it is with a password...  maybe... That's a good RP explanation for why you can't attack it. For that matter, no one knows exactly where ANY other camp is unless they're a member, so this is kinda in place already. I know - it's not 100% factual, but again it's a good RP explanation for an existing game mechanic. JL ......................... vet marshal deathrceL1 wv community combatL1 Posted May 14, 2009, 6:40 pm

Pages: << prev 1, 2, 3 next >>

Powered by MercuryBoard [v1.1.4]
© 2001-2005 The Mercury Development Team

0.1241 seconds - 30 queries - 0.76 load