1756057460
1756057460 Conquer Club • View topic - {Suggestion(s)} -- Option to disable team-fortification &
Conquer Club

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

Suggestions that have been archived.

Moderator: Community Team

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

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

Postby Gnome de Guerre on Wed Apr 11, 2007 12:35 pm

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

why?

Postby BeastofBurson on Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:57 pm

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.....
User avatar
Cadet BeastofBurson
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 9:55 pm

Postby vakEirn79 on Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:25 pm

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?
Corporal vakEirn79
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 4:52 pm

Postby RobinJ on Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:13 pm

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
Sergeant 1st Class RobinJ
 
Posts: 1901
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:56 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Postby Evil Semp on Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:50 pm

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.
User avatar
Lieutenant Evil Semp
Multi Hunter
Multi Hunter
 
Posts: 8446
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:50 pm


Return to Archived Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users