Remove tbs

.

Cri

Yes couse.. SOLDIER is just to...

Xaxaxaxaxaxxaxaxax
so cute when he is crying xD

No, but remove the chance for troops that don't even have 1/4 of attacked stack to even calculate chance of tb'ing.

This would make tb'ing more skill then luck based...

If i destroy a transport and enemy is trying to fill it in to use it . Will it sink those enemy passenger?
or just stop the enemy troop from moving and it just destoy the transport, would that be tb? and how would fix this problem, if u want to make it tb free.

Are you kidding me

I say TB are unfair but no remove.

I say they should fix the tb system, because its crazy when 1-3 units tb a stack of 30

Remove kebabs first though.

Pls yesh

Scris de Goblin, 27.07.2015 at 16:37

No, but remove the chance for troops that don't even have 1/4 of attacked stack to even calculate chance of tb'ing.

This would make tb'ing more skill then luck based...

Scris de Mauzer Panteri, 27.07.2015 at 16:34

im stupid

Scris de Croat, 28.07.2015 at 07:18

im more stupid

Scris de Goblin, 27.07.2015 at 16:37

no im more stupid

Scris de Khal.eesi, 28.07.2015 at 07:46

Scris de Mauzer Panteri, 27.07.2015 at 16:34

im stupid

Scris de Croat, 28.07.2015 at 07:18

im more stupid

Scris de Goblin, 27.07.2015 at 16:37

no im more stupid

So I posted on 27th, Croat posted on 28th and mauzer responded to him on 27th?

OWNED BITCH YOU DUMB!!!! ...pwned pwn subhuman xD

Just give units a 10% minimum chance of TB, regardless of the size and change the cap from 50% to 60%

Remove tbs and bugs.

... that's just my personal opinion, but as other had say the game wouldn't be fun without those TB's and those bugs...

So TB's and bug's makes the game interesting, kinda. Unexpected results are always emotive for good or bad.

Tbs are like real life. There have been heroic stories of a small band of soldiers who held up a massive army so that reinforcements could get there to save the city. That's the whole idea. Plus without turn blocks the game would be rediculous. You'd never be able to attack anyone's stack if they moved it. Or are you just suggesting that move priority is all that matters and even if their first move was attacking your stack so long as you moved it too then it would just be a miss? I don't think it would work. There's too much going on with all players taking their "turn" at the same time.

Scris de 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

You guys realize if you remove TB'ing the game wouldn't function? I can't believe you're debating this xa. Fix TB'ing yes, remove no. Yes it's realistic for a bomber to stop a transport. 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). Yes it's realistic for an army to flee the scene before a larger one destroys them. The extent of that happening should be the topic of debate.

Scris de Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 05:52

Scris de 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

turnblocking can be used as both defensive and attacking action, depends on how u use them,
Example N1= u rush enemy's cap and tb some of his ports so his army won't fully reinforce it
Example N2= it's obvious ur enemy wants to rush u so u tb some of his ports again and ur enemy ends up only sending part of his stack, and also starts to cry proud example of this = clovis

Scris de Croat, 28.07.2015 at 07:18

Scris de Goblin, 27.07.2015 at 16:37

No, but remove the chance for troops that don't even have 1/4 of attacked stack to even calculate chance of tb'ing.

This would make tb'ing more skill then luck based...

cri croat cri, as long as tb-s function u won't be able to beat me

Scris de Guest, 29.07.2015 at 06:15

turnblocking can be used as both defensive and attacking action, depends on how u use them,

In both cases turn block is still an attacking action no matter the purpose of it.

Scris de Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 06:47

Scris de The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 06:13

The extent of that happening should be the topic of debate.

Lowering luck in AW - improving tactical and strategic thinking should be the topic...

...not real life situations which can be argued and different examples found, on which we could debate until we die.
"There are real life situations" is a poor argument...

yea I'm just saying it's realistic for that to happen, and I agree lowering the luck in AW is important to discuss, which is why I said the EXTENT of it (ex. 3 militia tb'ing 20 units) happening. Having said that I think if a move is first priority for someone and say 5th for someone else is should have a very high chance no matter the number of the units. That's just out-prioritizing the other player, which is an important aspect of the game and it would increase tactical and strategical thinking if priority had higher value. Right now stacking strategies are favored in the TB system, and ideally we should strive for it to favor no strategy; increasing the value of priority should achieve that.

EDIT: 2000th post, you better make hella' good argument! xD

Citat:

Scris de The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 06:52

yea I'm just saying it's realistic for that to happen

Right now stacking strategies are favored in the TB system

How are stacking strategies favored in the tb system in which you can tb a huge stack with 1 unit? You make no sense Tact.

Realistic in a sense you people are talking about... doesn't mean probable! And mostly happens in movies, rarely in real life.

Citat:

Scris de Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 06:57

Scris de The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 06:52

yea I'm just saying it's realistic for that to happen

Right now stacking strategies are favored in the TB system

How are stacking strategies favored in the tb system in which you can tb a huge stack with 1 unit? You make no sense Tact.

Realistic in a sense you people are talking about... doesn't mean probable! And mostly happens in movies, rarely in real life.

Because even though 1 unit could TB a huge stack it's very unlikely. People make one or a few big stacks and move them around sure they won't get stopped. I'm talking about ground movement, not sea/port. That's another story where I think its pretty balanced because of priority, but when you're moving 20+ units from one country to another it's very hard to get TB'd unless you mess up priority greatly. Don't get me wrong the one unit TB's are very annoying and unlucky, and I think we should seek a way to balance the value of priority and value of stacks. tbh unless the system is completely changed to something better I don't think there's a possible fix that wouldn't create more unbalances.

Scris de The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 07:07

but when you're moving 20+ units from one country to another it's very hard to get TB'd unless you mess up priority greatly. Don't get me wrong the one unit TB's are very annoying and unlucky, and I think we should seek a way to balance the value of priority and value of stacks. tbh unless the system is completely changed to something better I don't think there's a possible fix that wouldn't create more unbalances.

My Belgium stack of 35 got blocked 4 turns in a row by 1 unit each time even tho i moved it first thing every time...

Priority please... prove to me the reliability of priority of movements in the game? P.S. like that shit is realistic?

We suggested a possible solution... substantial amount of tb units to even begin the blocking chance roll.

Make priority more important than the number of units, and allow us to have more than 50% chance of TB

Scris de Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 07:15

Scris de The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 07:07

but when you're moving 20+ units from one country to another it's very hard to get TB'd unless you mess up priority greatly. Don't get me wrong the one unit TB's are very annoying and unlucky, and I think we should seek a way to balance the value of priority and value of stacks. tbh unless the system is completely changed to something better I don't think there's a possible fix that wouldn't create more unbalances.

My Belgium stack of 35 got blocked 4 turns in a row by 1 unit each time even tho i moved it first thing every time...

Priority please... prove to me the reliability of priority of movements in the game? P.S. like that shit is realistic?

We suggested a possible solution... substantial amount of tb units to even begin the blocking chance roll.

Now that's just highly unlikely or hax. Aside from a bad game or two, moving stacks on ground is very hard to TB. Of course priority is important, its supposedly the basis of the whole TB system. It adds another layer of tactics to the game, and makes it a lot harder to master/play against good players. And yes its realistic. You have 4 (varies) minutes to make every move you need in a week's worth of battle. The earlier you do is the sooner the command is sent out. If you don't send it out early enough you might miss the troops you want to attack in a certain city.

Your idea might work, maybe 15% of units to just begin a chance, but depending on priority that chance may increase rapidly.

Scris de The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 07:46

Now that's just highly unlikely or hax. Aside from a bad game or two, moving stacks on ground is very hard to TB. Of course priority is important, its supposedly the basis of the whole TB system. It adds another layer of tactics to the game, and makes it a lot harder to master/play against good players. And yes its realistic. You have 4 (varies) minutes to make every move you need in a week's worth of battle. The earlier you do is the sooner the command is sent out. If you don't send it out early enough you might miss the troops you want to attack in a certain city.

Your idea might work, maybe 15% of units to just begin a chance, but depending on priority that chance may increase rapidly.

Highly unlikely doesn't mean impossible.

Priority is supposedly the basis of tb?... i see you answered my question, you cant prove the reliability of priority of movement, so if it gets bugged we wouldn't even know like we notice bad rolls.

Realistic?...does it take range into account? ...enough said and unimportant.


Why would it increase rapidly... what are you actually talking about when admins can determine the chance after you send the initial minimum and how it would increase if you send more accordingly, and what would be the limit?

Scris de Goblin, 29.07.2015 at 08:43

Scris de The Tactician, 29.07.2015 at 07:46

Highly unlikely doesn't mean impossible.

Priority is supposedly the basis of tb?... i see you answered my question, you cant prove the reliability of priority of movement, so if it gets bugged we wouldn't even know like we notice bad rolls.

Realistic?...does it take range into account? ...enough said and unimportant.


Why would it increase rapidly... what are you actually talking about when admins can determine the chance after you send the initial minimum and how it would increase if you send more accordingly, and what would be the limit?

No it doesn't mean impossible. It shouldn't be impossible. It should be highly unlikely, which it is.

And I see what you meant, I was answering to it's importance rather than reliability. No we'd notice if your first move keeps getting TB'd by someone's say 5th. I'm sure if the TB system was changes people would make thorough tests to interpret the change and understand the system.

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.

It would increase rapidly because as I mentioned before, priority is very important and the basis of the whole TB'ing system. Now I was just giving a general idea but if you want my own specifics then here is a thought: If this new system is applied of needing 15% units to have a chance (say anything less is 1% chance) and I try to TB your first move with my first move, with 15% units there is the 15% chance. If I'm attacking your second move with the same number of units this makes it 30% chance. Third move 60%, fourth 80(?), fifth 100%. I believe this way priority and number of units is both taken into account, and TB'ing requires a little less luck. Again, this would possibly create more unbalanced and aside from a whole new system which revolutionizes TB'ing I don't see it happening.

Scris de 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...