False Declarations? o.0

[final60]

Do people think it is fair for to neighbouring outposts to keep declaring war and canceling those declarations over and over, without the intension of actually taking each others outpost?

I don't think it's fair, plus cowardly, although very smart of course! But again not fair on other guilds who may want to fairly take the outpost.

I would like to suggest putting in the penalty of not letting a guild re-declare war for 24hrs after they have cancelled. What do others think?

[swe999]

The redeclaration penalty is bad because its common to want to change your declaration time, and there currently is no way to do so without canceling the attack.

The GMs and Guides are currently brainstorming ways to mitigate this practice

some ideas that are floating around (not necessarily from them) :

using guild fame to allow dignified guilds to declare over lesser guilds
charging 40 million for the attack instead of 400k
redeclaration penalty

but all have flaws as far as they see atm, ideas wanted

[ambika]

Kind of sad, I think. Oo; It should have been obvious this could be easily exploitable. Tsk tsk tsk.

[kostika]

Make the deal with several guilds. Sorted. Cycle through so you keep each other safe. That gets around pretty much all of those suggestions.

The money suggestion though would kill small guilds being able to ever declare. 40mil is alot to a small guild.


False declaring is a valid tactic. You keep each other safe from attacks. Yea others can't declare, but that's the point. Its not about fair. Its about keeping your outpost safe. Especially when they decide that they wanna declare war on christmas day or at 2am on christmas eve.

[final60]

It's a cowardly act im my opinion. Why should weak guilds be able to exploit and keep these outposts, instead of fighting for them fairly. If you can't defend your outpost properly then you shouldn't have the outpost, right?

[kostika]

If you can't defend your outpost properly then you shouldn't have the outpost, right?

Properly is a subjective word. Proper by your definition or mine? Since this whole setup with my guild was done with RP, its all proper to me.

Your view and mine are differant. Your opinion differs from mine. You view of proper is differant than mine. Same as during the temple event. Same as now. Proper is a point of view.

[ambika]

Of course the defending guild would see it as a valid tactic. A guild that wants to attack sees it as cowardly. But I do see the whole "attacking on a holiday" prettily cowardly also.

However, unless the devs/gms/guides say otherwise, I view it as an exploit. Oo; It might be different if multiple guilds could declare war so giulds wouldn't rely on this crutch to keep their OPs. Outposts were meant to be defended and attacked. Both sides have more than enough to defend, so I don't see why this tactic is needed (unless it's a holiday...I can understand that).

[final60]

Sure if it's a holiday they could perhaps not allow the option for declarations to be made. My definition of proper, is to defend your outpost against another guilds attack.

[catfud]

If it was the real world anyone could attack what ever they wanted when they saw fit, obviously this is a game so a few rules have to be implimented for 'fairness' the fact that another guild can have no chance to even attack let alone see if they can take the post is a LAME exploit that is 'unfair' and you can say lifes unfair but like i said this is a game not life

[catfud]

Of course the defending guild would see it as a valid tactic. A guild that wants to attack sees it as cowardly. But I do see the whole "attacking on a holiday" prettily cowardly also.

If the guild is that good enough to hold the post when its not the holidays they would be good enough to easily take it back after the holidays are over