» 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 22, 2020 5:57:32 PM
|Posted by Jutecloth at Jan 28, 2010 4:36:28 PM|
Re: Blockades of Attrition: Yes or No?
If owning an island provided a bigger material advantage, Puzzle Pirates would be even worse than it is. The material attrition in sinking blockades is already a huge boon for established alliances of island-holders. It means smaller attacks don't happen and without the cost and effort of fending these off, alliances grow ever larger and more formidable, free from any physical constraints of geography and logistics, free of any financial cost for constant, instant readiness.
There is no way for flags to get good blockade experience without unlimited risk and that's really bad. There's nothing like the defender's prerogative on sinking for the attacker and that means that the biggest, most powerful flags get their power magnified. The major bugbear I have affecting defenders is that they cannot risk losing if they value the aesthetics of their island. It's poor that the additions from an occupation of a week can be impervious to a occupation of months or years.
The minimum expected of an attacker should never be raised by who the defender is, the island itself should determine the most that can be expected. Even then, the idea of a "good faith" attempt is insane. New attackers can hardly ever go into a blockade with any expectation of seriously contesting because blockades are rare and a mass of experience and wealth will be focused on them.
Yeah? How does that work? The only way you can do that outnumbered is if your opponent is trying to control more of the board than he needs or if the navigators do not know how to fight.
Seeing efforts smashed by players with an advantage they don't deserve isn't fun. No, the problem is that most players aren't idiots.
Powered by mvnForum
mvnForum copyright © 2002-2006 by MyVietnam.net