Nature
Follow This Easy Process To Get Started Playing Alamaze
Step #1 - Register for Forum Account      Step #2 - Create New Player Account      Step #3 - Sign In  (to issue turn orders and join games)
ATTENTION: After Creating Player Account and Signing In, select the GAME QUEUE link in the Order System screen to Create or Join games.
Alamaze Website                 Search Forum              Contact Support@Alamaze.net


Player Aids             Rulebook             Spellbook             Help Guides             Kingdom Set-Ups             Kingdom Abbreviations             Valhalla             Discord

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Lothe, Despise, HATE this new rule change!!!
#51
I am not sure how much time double checking order is expected to take. My error rate is pretty darn low as it is. I decided to take a look and I have issued order for 60 kingdoms over this last week and this was the one wrong move order. I am sure I made a ton of move orders. If I spend an extra 10 mins per turn that would be 10 extra hours a week, for a relatively low failure rate already.

But because I do so many orders I also will see this happen more than most anyone else.

Btw just got 3 more orders back Smile. Still love to play.

Why not remove the annoying parts of this effect and come up with something that still helps prevent or makes it not economical. Remove all the % chance crap. Remove the capture crap unless listed as a back story. Make it 0.2 influence loss if you move an Emmy to an invalid location maybe 0.3 for ambassador or agent level 1/2.
This would make it so you do not loose orders at the end of your turn from ransoms and would keep emmies from getting killed. Is there anyone that would actually want to loose 0.2 Or 0.3 influence just to purposely move an Emmy to find a PC.

I am not saying this must be the fix. I just would like a fix that does not create so many random problems for a mistake. If you look clearly I was not scouting for PCs. Both my Barron's were going to the same location.
Reply

#52
Damn Jon, you make to much sense, you could never run for a political  office.
Reply

#53
(03-29-2017, 12:03 AM)JonDoe Wrote: I am not sure how much time double checking order is expected to take.  My error rate is pretty darn low as it is.   I decided to take a look and I have issued order for 60 kingdoms over this last week and this was the one wrong move order.   I am sure I made a ton of move orders.   If I spend an extra 10 mins per turn that would be 10 extra hours a week, for a relatively low failure rate already.

But because I do so many orders I also will see this happen more than most anyone else.

Btw just got 3 more orders back Smile.  Still love to play.  

Why not remove the annoying parts of this effect and come up with something that still helps prevent or makes it not economical.   Remove all the % chance crap.  Remove the capture crap unless listed as a back story.   Make it 0.2 influence loss if you move an Emmy to an invalid location maybe 0.3 for ambassador or agent level 1/2.    
This would make it so you do not loose orders at the end of your turn from ransoms and would keep emmies from getting killed.  Is there anyone that would actually want to loose 0.2 Or 0.3 influence just to purposely move an Emmy to find a PC.

I am not saying this must be the fix.  I just would like a fix that does not create so many random problems for a mistake.   If you look clearly I was not scouting for PCs.  Both my Barron's were going to the same location.
So you are certainly one of the top players, if not the top player.   That's pretty big in my book.   And you recognize the problem, and that we have about endlessly explored how to fix it. 

Just check your orders.  Don't move to non PC's.  That's the whole point.   I'm sure I have lots of problems, this just doesn't seem to be one of them.  Only move emissaries to actual PC locations.   Its really not the game that's at fault.  This was like saying trying to argue that moving emissaries to non PC areas was the fault of hidden PC's, not an exploit to find hidden PC's.
Reply

#54
The issue isn't moving to pcs I own. The issue is moving to PCs my groups have crossed, I have divined, or PCs my allies have divined/located etc in a non exploit way.
Reply

#55
(03-29-2017, 02:04 AM)Atuan Wrote: The issue isn't moving to pcs I own.  The issue is moving to PCs my groups have crossed, I have divined, or PCs my allies have divined/located etc in a non exploit way.

Well then they are actual PC's.  The only problem in the transition would be a PC destroyed by pillage or Meteor Strike in the last few turns.

Come on folks.
Reply

#56
I don't really have a dog in this fight but it does seem like a few players have a pretty strong opinion. I will say that I am not sure I've heard a cogent reason against keeping this as a penalty but lessening the consequence as some have suggested. What is the problem with that? Seems to fix the exploit and keep players from what they feel is an unduly harsh penalty for an input error. Input errors do happen and they happen to anyone who plays enough.
-This Khal Drogo, it's said he has a hundred thousand men in his horde
Reply

#57
(03-29-2017, 02:36 AM)Drogo Wrote: I don't really have a dog in this fight but it does seem like a few players have a pretty strong opinion.  I will say that I am not sure I've heard a cogent reason against keeping this as a penalty but lessening the consequence as some have suggested.  What is the problem with that?  Seems to fix the exploit and keep players from what they feel is an unduly harsh penalty for an input error.  Input errors do happen and they happen to anyone who plays enough.

Well, it was just reduced about 50%. 


Does anyone think my goal is to irritate players?
Reply

#58
(03-29-2017, 03:00 AM)Ry Vor Wrote:
(03-29-2017, 02:36 AM)Drogo Wrote: I don't really have a dog in this fight but it does seem like a few players have a pretty strong opinion.  I will say that I am not sure I've heard a cogent reason against keeping this as a penalty but lessening the consequence as some have suggested.  What is the problem with that?  Seems to fix the exploit and keep players from what they feel is an unduly harsh penalty for an input error.  Input errors do happen and they happen to anyone who plays enough.

Well, it was just reduced about 50%. 


Does anyone think my goal is to irritate players?
I would have never given this another go if I thought that was your goal in the slightest.   

Thinking it was reduced 50% is far off as well.

before every one had a 50% chance of being killed.   Now ambassadors/ low level agents 50% plus 0.3 influence.  and they loose 5k gold if you have it. (This is a huge killer because it causes you miss end of turn orders).   This part is more than 2x as harsh as it was originally 

Everyone else only 25% but also cost 0.3 influence. You also will loose 5k gold and likely miss and end of turn order to keep your Emmy.  If not they can die and cost you even more effluence 0.3 which is basically 4500 gold. This does not seem even close to 50% less at lowest I would say 3/4 the old rule.

The biggest issue I have from a game stand point is the gold loss because it causes you to miss other unrealated orders.  Influence loss can be handled easily enough since you feel it the following turn.  Likely the only person that saves the gold would be someone specifically using this for an exploit to make sure they do not loose there emmies/agents.  The gold sounds good for the write up but game wise causes more issues and really only punishes the person making an honest effect.

Anyway I am sure your done with this topic like 20 posts ago.  So I am done too, which make me sad actually.
Reply

#59
Keep a buffer of gold if you make this mistake often.
Reply

#60
How about this as a possible solution: create a new priestess spell called Resurrection that can bring back the dead!

That way, those who wish a strong penalty to prevent the exploit may remain in effect while the Resurrection spell can help those who honestly make a mistake recover from it. This new spell will also coincide with Ry Vor's goal to encourage more hostage taking (and rescues) rather than just executing prisoners.

If you ask me though, I would still prefer my original solution to this problem mentioned earlier in this thread. What I proposed is the only assured way of preventing the exploit from ever happening again and does so without penalty: http://kingdomsofarcania.net/forum/showt...5#pid44985

But since that idea was turned down, having a high priestess Resurrection spell would help solve the current situation:

Spell #776 Resurrection
This powerful High Priestess spell may bring a dead figure back to life. Only those figures listed under the In Memorium section (towards the end of the kingdom turn report) may be brought back to life. Figures that are missing or held captive will have no effect but the gold cost will still incur. The Resurrection spell is very powerful and as a result will kill the priestess due to the effort of performing the ceremony. The process of being returned to the corporal realm also has an effect on the raised figure: political emissaries lose one rank and agents lose half their levels (rounded down). Fools may not be raised in this manner. The effected figure will not be able to perform an action the turn they are brought back to life.

Column A: Priestess initials
Column B: Dead figure's initials to be raised (own kingdom only)
Resource Cost: 10,000 gold + life of the priestess

The raised figure will be returned to the capital.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 Melroy van den Berg.