Remove tbs

Napisano od Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 09:27

Napisano od The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 09:14

Hey if you wanna go down this road I'm all for it. Realistically the few seconds it takes for you to choose and drag the unit's to its destination is somewhat of a similar time if you multiply the 4 minutes to the week (turn). I'd imagine it'd take at least a good few hours walking. Now let's get past this realism thing.

"Order of movements is not based on time, so if one player made his first move within first 10 seconds, and the other player made his first move at the end of the turn, these will still have the same priority" - admins

You wanted that road.... time is no factor for anything.

Not even responding to that crap about tb chances...

I know it's not, but you wanted a realistic situation where range is accounted for. There it is. Not directly related to priority but it balances the range factor WHILE dragging that adds realism of how far troops travel, which excuses priority not taking range into account.

You call it crap but you were the one who wanted to know specific numbers, so I just drafted some that seemed reasonable.

edit: instead of calling it crap you could've gave an argument of why theyre bad, and proposed counter numbers, but you obviously want to end this as much as I do.

Now let's stop shitting on each other because neither of us is clearly changing positions. <3

Napisano od The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 09:36

edit: instead of calling it crap you could've gave an argument of why theyre bad, and proposed counter numbers, but you obviously want to end this as much as I do.

If you want to turn block a stack.. you would need to send at least 1/4 of the stack units and this is where the tb chance even start rolling.
Maximum tb chance no matter how much you send would always be limited to 50/50 chance roll.... like it is now. 100% tb chance tact? wtf you talking about?

No TB chance - 1/4 - TB chance with determined percentage of successful roll according to how much you sent above the necessary units .MAX 50/50

Napisano od Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 10:05

Napisano od The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 09:36

edit: instead of calling it crap you could've gave an argument of why theyre bad, and proposed counter numbers, but you obviously want to end this as much as I do.

If you want to turn block a stack.. you would need to send at least 1/4 of the stack units and this is where the tb chance even start rolling.
Maximum tb chance no matter how much you send would always be limited to 50/50 chance roll.... like it is now. 100% tb chance tact? wtf you talking about?

No TB chance - 1/4 - TB chance with determined percentage of successful roll according to how much you sent above the necessary units .MAX 50/50

It's your proposal of a new system, in which you asked for my proposal of numbers in this new system. I'm for 100% TB if the move has significantly higher priority.

Napisano od The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 10:19

It's your proposal of a new system, in which you asked for my proposal of numbers in this new system. I'm for 100% TB if the move has significantly higher priority.

So why the fuck did you mash my proposal with yours and then claim mine would have issues?

Define the signficantly higher priority?...how much moves? Average based on number of moves between 3k 1v1 turn 1 and world game 20 players turn 47?

Its funny however that you would like a 100% TB chance... considering your resent for AW being a stacking game...


gtfo bitch i'm off topic forum veteran xD

OMG TACT FIGHTING WITH GOBLIN GG. I WIN.

Napisano od Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 10:24

Napisano od The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 10:19

It's your proposal of a new system, in which you asked for my proposal of numbers in this new system. I'm for 100% TB if the move has significantly higher priority.

So why the fuck did you mash my proposal with yours and then claim mine would have issues?

Define the signficantly higher priority?...how much moves? Average based on number of moves between 3k 1v1 turn 1 and world game 20 players turn 47?

Its funny however that you would like a 100% TB chance... considering your resent for AW being a stacking game...


gtfo bitch i'm off topic forum veteran xD

I didn't say it'd have issues, I said it could work by significantly increasing TB chance with priority, which is what I gave the numbers for, my proposal of an adjustment for yours.

And I'm not sure on numbers that would define significance in this case, but I've proposed it for 5 moves higher. I realize this would be bad for world games as you have pointed out, so maybe the numbers need to be adjusted, but I still stand by the principle of adding chance with higher priority.

My proposal for 100% TB is when there's higher priority not a bigger number of units.

This ain't off topic homeboi ima take u out back n rek u

Napisano od The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 06:13

Yes it's realistic for militia to throw molotov cocktails inside a fort and hold them up for the week (if they hit the right targets, which is very unlikely, so is the TB instance).

XAXAXAXAXAXA

I like what tunder said.. Make it always a solid, written in stone percentage for anything to be tbed

Napisano od The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 10:31

my proposal of an adjustment for yours.

This ain't off topic homeboi ima take u out back n rek u

Man delete that post you made with numbers... someone might see the shit you wrote xD


bitch i had 1000 posts of arguing on general topic while you were a rank 2 xD

Napisano od Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 05:52

Napisano od jimmynow, 29.07.2015 at 05:28

heroic stories of a small band of soldiers who held up a massive army so that reinforcements could get there to save the city.

Let us read your sentence one more time... small bands, protecting cities from huge armies

• turn blocking is not a defensive action, but attacking one
• in that case, huge army with several divisions diverting all their resources to fend off a squad, while forgetting they have a vital mission would mean a pretty bad general

That's why i say... the attack must be substantial for it to be considered a threat to an army

See that's where we disagree. I think you can use tbs strategically as a defensive move. And I've read people say things like that on the forum before. So if you don't play that way that's ok but many do.

Napisano od jimmynow, 29.07.2015 at 12:00

See that's where we disagree. I think you can use tbs strategically as a defensive move. And I've read people say things like that on the forum before. So if you don't play that way that's ok but many do.

I said turn blocking move is always an attacking one even when used as a defensive measure.

For fuck sake its not really a masonic secret you can tb to save your cap or something xD

Napisano od Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 10:05

Napisano od The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 09:36

edit: instead of calling it crap you could've gave an argument of why theyre bad, and proposed counter numbers, but you obviously want to end this as much as I do.

If you want to turn block a stack.. you would need to send at least 1/4 of the stack units and this is where the tb chance even start rolling.
Maximum tb chance no matter how much you send would always be limited to 50/50 chance roll.... like it is now. 100% tb chance tact? wtf you talking about?

No TB chance - 1/4 - TB chance with determined percentage of successful roll according to how much you sent above the necessary units .MAX 50/50

Uh Isn't the tb chance max 50% but then can be 100% if multiplied by two cos earlier prio? Or has it been changed?

Napisano od Xenosapien, 29.07.2015 at 12:13

Uh Isn't the tb chance max 50% but then can be 100% if multiplied by two cos earlier prio? Or has it been changed?

If my 200 stack fails 4 times in a row attacking stack of 50... i'm pretty sure there is no such thing as 100% chance.

Or bugs? Hax?

Napisano od Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 12:19

Napisano od Xenosapien, 29.07.2015 at 12:13

Uh Isn't the tb chance max 50% but then can be 100% if multiplied by two cos earlier prio? Or has it been changed?

If my 200 stack fails 4 times in a row attacking stack of 50... i'm pretty sure there is no such thing as 100% chance.

Or bugs? Hax?

idk maybe prio was the same or I'm wrong.

Napisano od Xenosapien, 29.07.2015 at 12:23

idk maybe prio was the same or I'm wrong.

Ah yes ...old tb system. First move had 100% chance.