» List all forums
» » Forum: Piratical Parley and Politics
» » » Thread: Blockades of Attrition: Yes or No?
» » » » Post: Re: Blockades of Attrition: Yes or No?
Print at Feb 24, 2020 10:39:27 PM
|Posted by wrs1864b at Jan 28, 2010 6:05:40 AM|
Re: Blockades of Attrition: Yes or No?
From what I can tell, OOO's philosophy for blockades is:
Contested blockades are good fun.
The reward for being good at the blockade puzzle is an island-trinket. Owning an island-trinket means that your flag, which clearly likes blockades, is reward with being able to create more fun via event blockades and BK scuttles. Obviously, island owning flags all jumped for joy when they were given the chance to have more blockades!
A good faith attempt at taking an island is not griefing. If it is a clueless flag that can only field 2 sloops and a cutter blockades, that is OK the first time. If it really isn't a clueless flag, but backed by another, larger flag, well, that might not be ok.
To give a fairly recent example of something the OMs did *not* object to, even though apparently several players /complained, was Cobalt's Eleventy's The Seven Deadly Sins series of blockades on Tigerleaf Mountain. What Eleventy was doing was not spelled out in their blockade posts. The first blockade sin was sloth, where they took in a single sloop and did nothing. Other "silly" blockades/events followed until in the sixth week, they had "wrath" and took the island.
I'm not sure where this example leads, but to the best of my knowledge, the OMs did not punish anyone in Eleventy for their actions.
Edit: Maybe the thing that should be asked is: What if everyone did <x> repeatedly, would most of the players of the game find it fun? In the case of no-show blockades, the answer is no. In the case of pay wars, the answer is yes.
Algol can not assert the truth of all statements in this post and still be consistent.
Powered by mvnForum
mvnForum copyright © 2002-2006 by MyVietnam.net