iambligh wrote:beating-a-dead-horse

But it doesn't change the legitimit points made about the bombardment loophole.

Moderator: Community Team
iambligh wrote:beating-a-dead-horse
GenuineEarlGrey wrote:iambligh wrote:beating-a-dead-horse
Nice one!!
But it doesn't change the legitimit points made about the bombardment loophole.
blakebowling wrote:GenuineEarlGrey wrote:iambligh wrote:beating-a-dead-horse
Nice one!!
But it doesn't change the legitimit points made about the bombardment loophole.
ITS NOT A LOOPHOLE... IT WAS INTENTIONALLY CODED INTO THE GAME
ronin56003 wrote:Would it improve the game to change the rules on bombardment so that successfully bombarding a neutral territory does NOT qualify a player for spoils?
Bombarding Neutrals for spoils:
Strategic or Exploitive? Does it need to be modified?
Artimis wrote:ronin56003 wrote:Would it improve the game to change the rules on bombardment so that successfully bombarding a neutral territory does NOT qualify a player for spoils?
Bombarding Neutrals for spoils:
Strategic or Exploitive? Does it need to be modified?
Why?
You assault a region whether it's player controlled or neutral controlled with the expectation of getting a spoil(subject to game settings), so why not bombard a neutral region for the same benefit as bombarding a player controlled region? If you don't like it, don't play on bombardment maps or play with the No Spoils setting.
GenuineEarlGrey wrote:I'll try and summarise the last 180 posts in two lines:
1. The rules say you only get a spoil for conquering not bombardment.
2. Spoils in war are associated with the pilage and finding what the enemy has left behind. You don't pick up any spoils unless you are there!
Artimis wrote:So on the basis of a technicality with the terms in use you want bombardment to grant no spoils, ever, regardless of the game settings?
GenuineEarlGrey wrote:Artimis wrote:So on the basis of a technicality with the terms in use you want bombardment to grant no spoils, ever, regardless of the game settings?
You can get an answer to your question be reading some of the above messages.
Whether you agree or disagee with the original question, Change the rules on bombardment?, there's no "technicality" about it*. The rules on and the idea behind bombardment don't add up.
E.G.
*mind you I prefer the term "loophole".
Timminz wrote:I have posted an alternative suggestion that makes a lot more sense.
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=83040
GenuineEarlGrey wrote:The rules on and the idea behind bombardment don't add up.
GenuineEarlGrey wrote:Tim, thank you for
Change the wording of the instructions it covers some but not all of the bases covered here
Artimis wrote:ronin56003 wrote:Would it improve the game to change the rules on bombardment so that successfully bombarding a neutral territory does NOT qualify a player for spoils?
Bombarding Neutrals for spoils:
Strategic or Exploitive? Does it need to be modified?
Why?
You assault a region whether it's player controlled or neutral controlled with the expectation of getting a spoil(subject to game settings), so why not bombard a neutral region for the same benefit as bombarding a player controlled region? If you don't like it, don't play on bombardment maps or play with the No Spoils setting.
neanderpaul14 wrote:For people who understand the rules of this it does become a part of the strategy on certain maps.
neanderpaul14 wrote:...[bombardment] does become a part of the strategy on certain maps.
neanderpaul14 wrote:For people who understand the rules...
GenuineEarlGrey wrote:neanderpaul14 wrote:For people who understand the rules...
But the "understanding" that you can get a card for bombardment doesn't come from the rules!!!!!
Timminz wrote:GenuineEarlGrey wrote:Tim, thank you for
Change the wording of the instructions it covers some but not all of the bases covered here
It covers the necessary base.
GenuineEarlGrey wrote:Timminz wrote:GenuineEarlGrey wrote:Tim, thank you for
Change the wording of the instructions it covers some but not all of the bases covered here
It covers the necessary base.
It covers the easiest base. You want to stay at home rather than making a home run
GenuineEarlGrey wrote:Spoils in war are associated with the pilage and finding what the enemy has left behind. You don't pick up any spoils unless you are there!
GenuineEarlGrey wrote:Artimis wrote:ronin56003 wrote:2. Spoils in war are associated with the pilage and finding what the enemy has left behind. You don't pick up any spoils unless you are there!
clangfield wrote:Concise description:
- Spoils should not be awarded for simply bombarding the same territory if it's already down to 1 neutral troop
Specifics/Details:
- I can appreciate that this may be tricky to implement, however: I'm currently playing in an Feudal Epic assassin game where two of the players are just sitting in their realm and bombarding the same territory every turn, and just accumulating troops and spoils. I feel that this is contrary to the spirit of the game.
How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
- It would encourage more active participation and more aggressive strategy. It's up to them if they don't want to conquer territories but they shouldn't be rewarded with spoils, especially in an escalating game.
Roussallier wrote:That's why I don't have the self-control for Feudal maps; I always lose to these guys. However, I don't think it's an underhanded strategy. No need to complicate gameplay by having conditions on when you can and can't draw cards.
Kill something > get a spoil. Let's keep it straightforward.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users