• Play
  • About
  • News
  • Forums
  • Yppedia
  • Help
Welcome Guest   | Login
  Index  | Recent Threads  | Register  | Search  | Help  | RSS feeds  | View Unanswered Threads  
  Search  


Quick Go »
Thread Status: Normal
Total posts in this thread: 49
Posts: 49   Pages: 2   [ First Page | Previous Page | 1 2 | Last Page]
[Add To My Favorites] [Watch this Thread] [Post new Thread]
Author
Previous Thread This topic has been viewed 7536 times and has 48 replies Next Thread
warp11

Member's Avatar


Joined: Nov 21, 2007
Posts: 2837
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

 
The sinking option is for one side only,

Thank you for commenting on that, I intentionally left that statement half-finished just so someone would.

As a flag that's going to drop on an island, it's usually very clear whether the defense is going to be sinking or not. You can always pick targets that will stay nonsinking if you prefer it that way, or even better ask the defenders whether they can/will keep it nonsinking for you.

It basically leads to the point that perhaps new flags shouldn't be swinging for the old, seasoned blockading flags until they get some experience. Luckily the blockading game is divided so that you can "pick on people your own size" and then when that grows dull, take a step up.

Furthermore, I haven't said too much about the effects of sinking blockades simply because your examples of demonizing them is related to events in the past where you've been heavily outjobbed, and to some extent outnaved as well. These are poor situations indeed, but there are still plenty of sinking blockades that are kept even, competitive and all in all very enjoyable.

This whole "Attrition" discussion seems like a road we've walked like a million times now. I don't see how getting your opponent out of bed at 3am for 4 weeks in a row without an intention of actually trying to win the blockade can be anything but griefing. Dalnoth used to have a thread about this in this very parley but I can't seem to find it. Nevertheless that one quite accurately displays the same discussion we're about to have here.
http://forums.puzzlepirates.com/community/mvnforum/viewthread?p=2101422#2101422
----------------------------------------
Dahl "I have higher moral standards" gren
----------------------------------------
[Edit 1 times, last edit by warp11 at Oct 8, 2012 3:04:19 AM]
[Oct 8, 2012 2:59:38 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Ezder

Member's Avatar


Joined: Oct 28, 2006
Posts: 1000
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

Another example of how people tend to reply too fast, without even attempting to understand what they're replying to:
Dahlgren, on page three, wrote: 
As a flag that's going to drop on an island, it's usually very clear whether the defense is going to be sinking or not. You can always pick targets that will stay nonsinking if you prefer it that way, or even better ask the defenders whether they can/will keep it nonsinking for you.

Avienda, on page one, wrote: 
When a flag chooses a target to blockade, it is more likely to choose a flag that doesn't make sinking defenses. Therefore, if flag A and B have a habit of sinking defenses, and flag C doesn't make sinking, flag C will get a lot more drops than flag A and B. Don't think for a second that flag A and B aren't aware of this little "side effect" of their "fun" sinking defenses! And sure, it works, but is it really fair to claim to love blockades, while taking measures to make sure you don't have to do any?

This was also pretty well worded by Wend in the thread that you, Dahlgren, linked to:
Wend wrote: 
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.

You can keep glorifying fortified powerhouses, who secure stagnation to their own advantage by pushing attackers off the board (or completely deterring attacks, if they can), and condemning every attempt to counter such behaviour. It just shows where you stand.

You can keep glorifying game play, that engourages the use of the same old navers in every blockade at the expense of developing new talent. You can also combine it with making fun of free training environment, such as Whirled blockade sim, to discourage new people learning. It just shows how scared you are to lose your position, maybe knowing that you're just an ungrateful parasite and that the funders you despise so much would be better off replacing you with others, if they thought they had the option. (Yes, that's a personal attack, but it's both mild and relatively classy compared to what you try to throw at me every chance you get.)

And the rest of you, you can keep grabbing at straws to find something to accuse me of, instead of discussing the topic of what sinking blockades are used for, and the contradictions that exist around them. It just shows that you have no real arguments to add to the discussion, and that your only option is to try to take attention away from it by putting me on the defense over totally irrelevant matters.

You can keep doing that. Have fun. My point has been made, and there is no reason to repeat it over and over in new words. I've gotten countless tells and PMs from people who agree with me, and that is enough for me - not everyone wants to put themselves in the forum crossfire for something that they believe in. I will answer again (if I have the time) the next time I see a post that is actually thought through, and provides any real points for me to reply to.
----------------------------------------
Avienda
Nightmare/Legacy

Naggy avatar

Qvintvs flag royalty chats, "I won't play for that much longer and when I quit, my pirate's dead body will be sent out at sea on a burning ship and let's face it, you will be on that ship as well.
----------------------------------------
[Edit 1 times, last edit by Ezder at Oct 8, 2012 4:46:39 AM]
[Oct 8, 2012 4:45:34 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Ezder

Member's Avatar


Joined: Oct 28, 2006
Posts: 1000
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

Doublepost for clarification and honesty:

To Dahlgren, yes, I know that you've more or less quit the game for real life reasons, and that you don't nav as many blockades as you used to. I think that you'd like to still be considered when you do have the time, though, so my point in the previous post still stands.

And to those of you, who are trying to get me to get personal and defensive, I'll partly give you what you want, mostly because honesty about change is so rare.

I have never forgotten what it was like, to be a new and eager flag almost alone outside of a massive and ruthless SMA, before we had the fleet and poe we have today. I have never forgotten what it was like, to not be able to get a non sinking blockade no matter how nicely we asked every single island holder on the ocean. Never forgetting what it was like to be in that situation, I have always done my best to help other flags get started, and trying hard to never be the islandholding bully, that holds the new blood back. And while I don't have final say in my flag, I have usually gotten my will in those matters.

Nonetheless, we are only human, and it's easy to get partially blinded by the situation you're in. We didn't remain the noob flag that repeatedly got pushed off the board, everyone here knows that. And while we mostly did non-sinking defenses (when getting dropped on at all, lord knows it didn't happen often...), there were exceptions, we didn't have a strict non-sinking policy, and that was one of the reasons why Wend left us, I think. We didn't quite see the damage that it would do to the morale of others. (Not saying that I regret all those exceptions, Viridis for example was very well deserved, just that I didn't see the long term consequences they had.) I even seriously believed that attacker's advantage of oceanside access and choosing the time was worth more than the defender's advantage of island income and the choice of sinking - while cashing in 10 mil/month from islands. Oh well. Like I said, I'm only human. I have seen it from other perspectives now, and realised that I was wrong. And I'd say that either way, Legacy has always been one of the "nicest" islandholders out there for a newish flag to attack, as long as they don't do their very best to insult/provoke/harass us before the blockade. I think that that will be the case in the future as well, when we decide to hold islands again. But we might still do the odd sinking defense, I guess, if we have strong reasons for it - don't want to be locked to a strict policy, that is too easy to exploit.

End of egocentric novel, and back to topic, if anyone has any more input to add.
----------------------------------------
Avienda
Nightmare/Legacy

Naggy avatar

Qvintvs flag royalty chats, "I won't play for that much longer and when I quit, my pirate's dead body will be sent out at sea on a burning ship and let's face it, you will be on that ship as well.
----------------------------------------
[Edit 1 times, last edit by Ezder at Oct 8, 2012 10:21:09 AM]
[Oct 8, 2012 10:18:27 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
fransalle

Member's Avatar


Joined: Mar 4, 2009
Posts: 381
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

 
You can keep glorifying fortified powerhouses, who secure stagnation to their own advantage by pushing attackers off the board (or completely deterring attacks, if they can), and condemning every attempt to counter such behaviour.


Exactly what legacy did for several months.

 
And the rest of you, you can keep grabbing at straws to find something to accuse me of, instead of discussing the topic of what sinking blockades are used for, and the contradictions that exist around them. It just shows that you have no real arguments to add to the discussion, and that your only option is to try to take attention away from it by putting me on the defense over totally irrelevant matters.


Sure, its no real argument to say that you are fighting against something that you were doing before to secure your "island stagnation" and multiple shoppe dropping (not that it has anything to do)

 
You can keep doing that. Have fun. My point has been made, and there is no reason to repeat it over and over in new words. I've gotten countless tells and PMs from people who agree with me, and that is enough for me - not everyone wants to put themselves in the forum crossfire for something that they believe in. I will answer again (if I have the time) the next time I see a post that is actually thought through, and provides any real points for me to reply to.


Still waiting for you to reply to my post about you guys back to back cading/pay warring PM while trying to set a good impression on the ocean and encouraging blockades with ideas such as the cade pond on Dendrite and other things yet contradicting your words with your actions once again.

Goodstuff.
----------------------------------------
Viridian
-----------
Iwnabeu
[Oct 8, 2012 10:22:55 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
warp11

Member's Avatar


Joined: Nov 21, 2007
Posts: 2837
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

 
You can keep glorifying fortified powerhouses, who secure stagnation to their own advantage by pushing attackers off the board (or completely deterring attacks, if they can), and condemning every attempt to counter such behaviour. It just shows where you stand.

Firstly, you're looking at the part you've quoted me the wrong way. You consider it as "a flag can escape being blockaded by declaring it will always be sinking" while I look at it like "a flag can escape sinking by picking another target". It's essentially the same thing, the difference being that just because a blockade is nonsinking doesn't mean it has to be cheap or friendly. You can bully people off the board with funds without declaring it sinking just as easily.

Let's for a minute pretend that you got your little rant through and sinking as we know it was removed from the game (god forbid). Club Ksb and Requisition or whatever you're aiming this at could still push pay to 9.999 and you would be just as screwed.

The sinking blockades does not these powerhouses. Nor would removing a sinking enviroment mean the end of fortified powerhouses as we know them. I don't know if you've payed 10k/round for an island, but when you do, you'll understand that the cost of ships is neglible compared to what it actually costs to pay your jobbers. Instead, you add up more fun dimensions for both your boardstaff and your jobbers like sink-counts, injuries and trophies, for a sum that's usually not even 1/10th of what you're paying in jobbingpay.

Clearly though, the perspective here differs from that of a single individual and that of a flag, and therefore so does the interests.

Now before I leave, I must call BS on this little "we always tried to do yada yada". I still recall your husband in an open housechat declaring that he would "crush" me and everyone that participated in RAF because we had the guts to drop on all your islands. I still recall that you went to all of your allied flags that had me naving for them, and threatened to drop support unless they put me in the cold, because I walked out on you during Fintan and called you out for it later on. Nobody did. Man it was so cool having people come up to me and be like "Hey Dahl, Legacy told us they're dropping support if we let you nav for us, what time can you make this weekend?". Doesn't it sting that people considered me more valuable than your entire flag put together? Tss, the burn.
----------------------------------------
Dahl "I have higher moral standards" gren
----------------------------------------
[Edit 1 times, last edit by warp11 at Oct 8, 2012 11:52:11 AM]
[Oct 8, 2012 11:43:09 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Setsusa

Member's Avatar


Joined: Dec 29, 2007
Posts: 3808
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

You know, this thread has a decent discussion topic. Unfortunately, the two people discussing it most strongly dislike each other, easily viewed as hypocritical and of course, egoistic.

Page one was interested the rest is tl;dr because it's more or less "I'm right you're wrong" than a discussion.

Tips for both of you. It's hard to argue something you were so far against in the past without looking like an idiot.

And really Dahlgren? Sigh, women =! logic? Idiot.
----------------------------------------
Cremate on Emerald.
Motou on Meridian.
Avatar by Elfeesh.
[Oct 8, 2012 1:14:26 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Lilcracker

Member's Avatar


Joined: Aug 24, 2009
Posts: 243
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

There's a certain economic theory which suggests that it's best for everyone when everyone acts in their own best interest... this may be a bit hard to grasp at first but when ye think about it it makes a lot of sence. given this, sould continue what they would naturally do.. as long as its not cheating or making eachother disconnect since there are other variables involved with online than real life. blockades are meant to be treated as full out wars...

some of you may have turned it into a "fun time" thing but the way they are constructed by the game developers clearly shows that it is meant for true war... so all these criticisms of people lieng about their intent and whatnot is pointless... since that is how they should behave anyway and a wartime environment.

the only thing that would truly make the game better or worse is what the developers do... we are all just mice going about our buisness in this game... we do not have the power to change anything unless at least 50% of the population does it... and that would be too difficult to bring together, since i think around 80% of people in this game only care about poe
----------------------------------------
Meridian - Minigun

Emerald - Nightbear
[Oct 8, 2012 3:03:51 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Ezder

Member's Avatar


Joined: Oct 28, 2006
Posts: 1000
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

Wow, a Dahlgren post that is actually worth replying to!
Dahlgren wrote: 
Firstly, you're looking at the part you've quoted me the wrong way. You consider it as "a flag can escape being blockaded by declaring it will always be sinking" while I look at it like "a flag can escape sinking by picking another target". It's essentially the same thing, the difference being that just because a blockade is nonsinking doesn't mean it has to be cheap or friendly. You can bully people off the board with funds without declaring it sinking just as easily.

Let's for a minute pretend that you got your little rant through and sinking as we know it was removed from the game (god forbid). Club Ksb and Requisition or whatever you're aiming this at could still push pay to 9.999 and you would be just as screwed.

No, you can't. Well, maybe some flags would be pushed off by pay alone, but it's not as rational. Say that you drop a chest, and decide in advance that you won't pay more than, say, 4K/seg. You keep your raises sane, hold jobbing if you're ahead, all those things you can do to avoid a paywar. Maybe you manage to keep the entire blockade below 4K, then all good. Maybe your opponent decides to raise 1K every time you're up on points, and you reach 4K really fast. Then, if it's non-sinking, you can just stop raising/matching, and keep going. Let them outjob, let them outpay, but keep going. You might not win that way, but you'll get a highly challenging blockade, and you won't lose anything but the blockade. Next time you feel like dropping they may keep it more even, or you may get more 1v2 training at their expense. Now, if it's sinking... That's a different matter, right?
Dahlgren wrote: 
The sinking blockades does not these powerhouses. Nor would removing a sinking enviroment mean the end of fortified powerhouses as we know them. I don't know if you've payed 10k/round for an island, but when you do, you'll understand that the cost of ships is neglible compared to what it actually costs to pay your jobbers. Instead, you add up more fun dimensions for both your boardstaff and your jobbers like sink-counts, injuries and trophies, for a sum that's usually not even 1/10th of what you're paying in jobbingpay.

Maybe it doesn't, but it makes it easier for them, because most of the drops they could have had to deal with just don't happen.

And yes, I have, at Napi. And sure, the 11 WFs lost wasn't so much compared to the maybe 20 mil (30 mil according to a very greedy JC) that it cost before WoA pulled out. But like I've stated in the past, if I was limited to only doing that kind of blockades, I would have quit long ago. They just aren't worth it. And seriously, even in those blockades, what is a sink count worth if the jobbers on a WF for one segment costs 500K?
Dahlgren wrote: 
Clearly though, the perspective here differs from that of a single individual and that of a flag, and therefore so does the interests.

Yes, but whether or not the "individuals" get any blockades at all is up to the "flags". (Or the individuals in charge of the flags, rather, but same meaning.)
Dahlgren wrote: 
Now before I leave, I must call BS on this little "we always tried to do yada yada". I still recall your husband in an open housechat declaring that he would "crush" me and everyone that participated in RAF because we had the guts to drop on all your islands. I still recall that you went to all of your allied flags that had me naving for them, and threatened to drop support unless they put me in the cold, because I walked out on you during Fintan and called you out for it later on. Nobody did. Man it was so cool having people come up to me and be like "Hey Dahl, Legacy told us they're dropping support if we let you nav for us, what time can you make this weekend?". Doesn't it sting that people considered me more valuable than your entire flag put together? Tss, the burn.

I did that because of the way you treat your jobbers, and because I like my flaggies. I just wouldn't ask them to job on ships, where they might have to take verbal abuse from you. I let those flags know, because I prefer open cards and because I had to know for each blockade, to know if I could send them support or not. Of course they'd choose a naver over a few interocean jobbers, who wouldn't? Jobbers can be bought, and I guess that even though it's far beyond me to even begin to understand why, they somehow like you, so they'd rather keep you. Nothing strange in that. We might have lost out politically, but that was expected - I did it for the sake of protecting my flaggies, and that is more important, in my opinion.
----------------------------------------
Avienda
Nightmare/Legacy

Naggy avatar

Qvintvs flag royalty chats, "I won't play for that much longer and when I quit, my pirate's dead body will be sent out at sea on a burning ship and let's face it, you will be on that ship as well.
[Oct 8, 2012 3:04:17 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Ezder

Member's Avatar


Joined: Oct 28, 2006
Posts: 1000
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

 
You know, this thread has a decent discussion topic. Unfortunately, the two people discussing it most strongly dislike each other, easily viewed as hypocritical and of course, egoistic.

Page one was interested the rest is tl;dr because it's more or less "I'm right you're wrong" than a discussion.

Tips for both of you. It's hard to argue something you were so far against in the past without looking like an idiot.

And really Dahlgren? Sigh, women =! logic? Idiot.

I must admit that I hardly understand half of what you're saying, so I might be missing a point but I agree that the thread would be way better without the whole Dahlgren vs Avi personal attack derail. (And without Iwnabeu's solo campaign of making this a Legacy hate thread, for that matter.) But it is what it is... Try to focus on the interesting parts? I'm at least doing my best to read everything twice and make sure I understand and address the interesting points, rather than skim through them for something I can misunderstand and make fun of, which happens way too often in way too many different forums, including a few that I really thought would be above that...
----------------------------------------
Avienda
Nightmare/Legacy

Naggy avatar

Qvintvs flag royalty chats, "I won't play for that much longer and when I quit, my pirate's dead body will be sent out at sea on a burning ship and let's face it, you will be on that ship as well.
[Oct 8, 2012 3:16:30 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
riku743

Member's Avatar


Joined: Jan 19, 2009
Posts: 1812
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

warp11 wrote: 
Sigh, women =! logic.


----------------------------------------
Nil used to play Mala.
Lurking on the forums.
[Oct 8, 2012 6:31:02 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
muppman

Member's Avatar


Joined: Jun 21, 2006
Posts: 204
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

Avienda vs. Dahlgren

Logic:

None of the combatants is illogical, since they are not breaking the laws of logic or claiming something that, if true, would break the laws of logic.

Rationality:

This is the word Dahlgren would use, if he was smart/educated enough to understand the distinction.

Avienda'a arguments are rational, if she is honest and means what she says.

Dahlgren's arguments are rational, if he is honest and means what he says.

Avienda is, if I understand it correctly, trying to argue that love for (wanting more of) blockades and making them sinking is uncombinable from a funder's perspective. She is right.

Dahlgren is, if I understand him correctly, trying to argue that he and navers like him enjoy a sinking blockade more, and therefore can claim to want more blockades and prefer them sinking. He is probably right but I can't be sure since his statement only applies to people, who resemble himself.

My conclusion is that both are rational, when one views their motivations and goals. My personal point of view is that as an observer, I find sinking bad since it consolidates the gap between stronger and weaker flags. As a naver, however, I prefer the sinking option, since then I am less likely to get ordered by my BA to let my damaged sink ship, an order that always hurts since no good naver likes to give up.

Regarding Dahlgren's very free quotation of me, ten flags vs one has nothing to do with guts. That I considered trying to crush all ten should rather be seen as a sign of bigger balls than brain than as trying to avoid blockades. And for the record, I tried to break all ten flags but I started with Knockout and being as strong as they are, they effectively stopped me in my tracks. Thereby, they shielded the remaining flags, who therefore benefited from their cowardly pack mentality.

Do, however, rest assured that that strategy has been re-evaluated. If I ever get in the position that I am simultaneously attacked by more than one flag, I will single out the weakest and if possible destroy it before moving on to the next weakest. But I won't claim to do that out of love for blockades.
----------------------------------------
/Qvintus, First mate of Nightmare and King of Legacy
[Oct 9, 2012 6:28:28 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Cnuofesd

Member's Avatar


Joined: Oct 1, 2007
Posts: 1809
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

blah blah blah semantics blah blah haven't read Wend's post but he's probably right blah
----------------------------------------
Capablanca on Emerald
My posts are not my own opinion.
[Oct 9, 2012 7:40:25 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
BobJanova

Member's Avatar


Joined: Oct 16, 2007
Posts: 5008
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

Whether Legacy did what Avienda is talking about now is actually irrelevant to whether she's right.

It's true that you can't limit your costs in the same way with a sinking blockade, and I think that does contribute to nobody wanting to drop on paywarring flags.
----------------------------------------
Bobjanova on Viridian and Malachite
Shops and stalls with fair and profitable wages for all: Jubilee, Napi, Chelydra
Stripped/Barely Dressed (Malachite)
Phantasm/Reign of Chaos (Viridian)
[Oct 9, 2012 4:15:45 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Whitehazed

Member's Avatar


Joined: Aug 22, 2009
Posts: 893
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

 


Do, however, rest assured that that strategy has been re-evaluated. If I ever get in the position that I am simultaneously attacked by more than one flag, I will single out the weakest and if possible destroy it before moving on to the next weakest. But I won't claim to do that out of love for blockades.


Now this would be highly entertaining.
----------------------------------------
Recruiting a 'Nagflar' character to hold my camel.
# Team Bacon Strips # SwagSauce # YOTO.
[Oct 9, 2012 4:23:59 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Hillsmen

Member's Avatar


Joined: Aug 5, 2010
Posts: 2809
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

 
 
 
Sinking defenses is a way to discourage attacks, or to be able to auto-win by outjobbing without having to pay extra for it. Any other reason is a lie. It may be a fair tactic to use if your only goal is to keep your islands as uncontested as possible but considering the downsides of sinking, it makes no sense to claim to love blockades at the same time as you make them sinking.

I still think the properties of "fun" out-trumphes whatever arguement can be made against sinking blockades. Of course it's not always fun to pay for one, but for us people who generally don't have to pay for the blockades we participate in, it's definately superior.

So to counter your argument, sinking blockades are more fun for the majority of the participants, which since you're playing a game surely has to be the main focus. And remember that every once in a while, people dislike each other, and then the sinking blockades become even more fun!

Why is it more fun if it's sinking?


There is a unique feature regarding pvp in MMOs. That unique feature, is people absolutely love to destroy other people's stuff.
----------------------------------------
Captainrich
----------------------------------------
[Edit 1 times, last edit by Hillsmen at Oct 10, 2012 10:04:07 PM]
[Oct 10, 2012 10:03:08 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
LunEnvoy

Member's Avatar


Joined: Apr 8, 2005
Posts: 2269
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

 
 
 
 
Sinking defenses is a way to discourage attacks, or to be able to auto-win by outjobbing without having to pay extra for it. Any other reason is a lie. It may be a fair tactic to use if your only goal is to keep your islands as uncontested as possible but considering the downsides of sinking, it makes no sense to claim to love blockades at the same time as you make them sinking.

I still think the properties of "fun" out-trumphes whatever arguement can be made against sinking blockades. Of course it's not always fun to pay for one, but for us people who generally don't have to pay for the blockades we participate in, it's definately superior.

So to counter your argument, sinking blockades are more fun for the majority of the participants, which since you're playing a game surely has to be the main focus. And remember that every once in a while, people dislike each other, and then the sinking blockades become even more fun!

Why is it more fun if it's sinking?

Its awesome how, after readin the OP, and then down to Dahls first post, then realizing there were 40 odd posts, then skimming to see who it was, and realizing the tl;dr was going to be insane, and simultaneously on the phone with my girlfriend (joo sees my priorities now?) I sent avi a message saying 'hey i didnt read everything yet but (and I pseudoparaphrase here):

 
There is a unique feature regarding pvp in MMOs. That unique feature, is people absolutely love to destroy other people's stuff.

And then I actually read and come down to the very end and was just amazed. Its like you read my mind before I even thought it. WTF
----------------------------------------
LoLune

I'm still just the guard dog. I bite. They shoot.
[Oct 16, 2012 5:05:18 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Jazzmania

Member's Avatar


Joined: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 317
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

We happened to have a reason to make a cade sinking yesterday. And I hadnt seen that reason here yet. Possible rerail not intended ;-)

Yesterday during a non-sinking cade some 3P showed up. Possibly they had lots of fun with themselves (ask Imrans for other ways to have fun with yerself), but it wasnt much fun for the cade itself. Both contending Flags were pretty even and it was a nice cade without the 3P. By making it sinky we tried to keep them 3P out. So in this case choosing for sinking had nothing to do with the attacking or defending Flag, but was aimed at 3P.
----------------------------------------
Viktorius on Emerald

Its the cadefun, not the island
[Nov 11, 2012 5:58:42 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Stroma1

Member's Avatar


Joined: Apr 27, 2012
Posts: 543
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

What about people who hate blockades (me, because you can't load anything during them) and only show up to sinking ones (for injuries)? Less blockades, in my opinion, is a good thing.
thats bcuz my flag was a failure LOL
----------------------------------------
forum banned
"I do not wish to give the mistaken impression that this is open for discussion." - prometheus
Stroma found Gold Nuggets while foraging but couldn't fit it in the vessel's hold!
[Dec 28, 2012 8:10:35 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Elliptic

Member's Avatar


Joined: Jun 1, 2007
Posts: 981
Status: Offline
Re: Regarding sinking blockades Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

What if partiality? and also whitetext?
----------------------------------------
"That is not how the question frames itself."

Wend, royal archophobe
[Dec 29, 2012 10:10:00 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
Posts: 49   Pages: 2   [ First Page | Previous Page | 1 2 | Last Page]
[Show Printable Version of Thread] [Post new Thread]

Puzzle Pirates™ © 2001-2016 Grey Havens, LLC All Rights Reserved.   Terms · Privacy · Affiliates