{Suggestion(s)} -- Option to disable team-fortification &

Suggestions that have been archived.

Moderator: Community Team

Post Reply

Option to enable/disable Fortification & Deployment to Team-Mates.

Yes; enable/disable both as one single option (allow both or neither)
0
No votes
Yes; enable/disable each as two seperate options (so you could enable Fortification but disable Deployment to friendlies)
1
7%
Only enable toggling Friendly Fortification.
0
No votes
Only enable toggling Friendly Deployment.
0
No votes
No; allow none of this! You should ALWAYS be able to deploy and fortify your armies to your team-mates!
8
57%
Gnomes rule!
5
36%
 
Total votes: 14

User avatar
Gnome de Guerre
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:53 am

{Suggestion(s)} -- Option to disable team-fortification &

Post by Gnome de Guerre »

Just some ideas here; I realized disallowing attacks on team-mates would ruin the game, but I think an option to disallow fortifying team-mates is tenable.

_____________________________________________________________


This might be a bit radical, so please bear with me . . .

:idea: How about enabling an option for new games:

Allow Fortification/Deployment to team-mates? Y/N

This would make a slightly more difficult kind of game, and yet also pretty much "n00b-pr00f".


________________________________________________________________

This might be a bit radical, so please bear with me . . .

:idea: How about enabling an option for new games:

Allow Attacks against team-mates? Y/N

This would make a slightly more difficult kind of game, and yet also pretty much "n00b-pr00f".
User avatar
BeastofBurson
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 9:55 pm

why?

Post by BeastofBurson »

why would you want to do that?.....

If your teammate is weakened down...do you want to finish the game on your own against say 2 or 3 versus you?....

rarely do people win in team games when their teammate was defeated or deadbeated on them

So I voted no.....
vakEirn79
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 4:52 pm

Post by vakEirn79 »

Currently, I don't see a point to it at all. If you couldn't fortify your teammates, you're essentially playing a Standard game with alliances declared before the first turn. Sure, it's slightly different from all of the available options, but I just can't see anybody actually using it. Standard players like the free-for-all aspect, and form truces when strategically beneficial, so they probably wouldn't want to have a random person forced upon them as a partner. Team players like the team strategies, and taking that away seems illogical.

Could you give some reasons for why the option would be attractive to players?
User avatar
RobinJ
Posts: 1901
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:56 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Post by RobinJ »

Slightly takes away from the fact that team games are supposed to be played as a team. :roll:
nmhunate wrote:Speak English... It is the language that God wrote the bible in.
Highest Score: 2437
Highest Place: 84
User avatar
Evil Semp
Multi Hunter
Multi Hunter
Posts: 8473
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:50 pm
Gender: Male

Post by Evil Semp »

I like the idea of no forts or deployment to team metes. I have played several games that way here but most people aren't interested. That is the way team games are played on war zone, and the way they were played on MSN Zone.
Post Reply

Return to “Archived Suggestions”