.com.unity Forums - Battlefield spell + retreating?

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Dominions 3: The Awakening (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=138)

- - Battlefield spell + retreating? (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=39603)

Re: Battlefield spell + retreating?

Quote:

DonCorazon said:
Did you include AndeanZorro in your numerical analysis?

Quote:

Omnirizon said:
Cheats: no using the cheap battlefield spell combos (can't recall them off the top of my head, but I will spell them out if necessary; most people should know what they are and know better any way.)

Yes.

Re: Battlefield spell + retreating?

So you knew he was talking about MoD / retreating?

Re: Battlefield spell + retreating?

A few points.

I dont maintain the sticky bug list on the forum. I think you mean Edi. I maintain the server list, the server commands wishlist, the map commands wishlist.

Importance isnt the best word when using the last 4 patches as evidence. What has been in the latest patches has been decided more by ease than importance.

I totally agree with you about hating unspoken rules. And I would be against any general decision that such unwritten rules carry much weight. It tends to require reading many different threads on a continual basis. I myself would be fairly likely to fail such unspoken rules.

Re: Battlefield spell + retreating?

If anyone does wish to compile a list of unspoken rules then we can put them somewhere they can be linked to in the first post of game-starting threads.

Re: Battlefield spell + retreating?

Quote:

DonCorazon said:
So you knew he was talking about MoD / retreating?

Yup. It was counted as part of the 7 out of 37.

Re: Battlefield spell + retreating?

So I guess the point I am trying to make is that most people who have played the game know that MoD is one of the cheap battlefield combos Omni outlawed in Andean, as evidenced by the fact K read it and included MoD / retreating in that category when he compiled his stats.

IMHO MoD is part of the community knowledge, just as Omni referenced in his guidelines for Andean. But I think it makes sense to point it out at the start of a game cuz you never know who knows what and an MP game is a big time investment.

Also, I don't think people get cheezed at every effective tactic. On the contrary, i am always delighted to get schooled by effective tactics. I may lose a battle but it adds an arrow to my quiver for future games.

But if I were in a game where MoD-retreat was allowed, I would design my entire strategy to focus on it, including having a hard to kill pretender designed to teleport around and use that move. I don't think it would be fun and I guess the other guy would eventually use the same strategy.

Anyway, I am not going to belabor the point but I still look forward to someone posting a turn where they show how they stopped an MoD-retreat.

Re: Battlefield spell + retreating?

I wasnt all that "ware" of MoD till this thread.

But wouldnt assassins be considered one answer for that?
Sure the same set of orders would kick in for the mage, but during an assassination isnt retreat equal to losing the battle?

Re: Battlefield spell + retreating?

Quote:

DonCorazon said:
So I guess the point I am trying to make is that most people who have played the game know that MoD is one of the cheap battlefield combos Omni outlawed in Andean, as evidenced by the fact K read it and included MoD / retreating in that category when he compiled his stats.

I included it because it specifically said "battlefield spells" and I count MoD as a battlefield spell (The criteria I use is any spell that gets an icon on the top right of the battle screen when cast).

I was also being generous. For example, I included one game that said "no tricky stuff."

For whatever reason, only a small percentage of the community has a problem with it.

Re: Battlefield spell + retreating?

K, It said "cheap battlefield" and I just don't understand how you can say only a small percentage of the community has a problem with it.
Most people who have been around the block know it is a game breaker.

Quote:

Baalz said:
Yeah, as you can see from the sample in this thread there's a pretty wide variety of opinions as to what's fair game around quirks in the game, but the Mist of Deception exploit is pretty much about the only thing virtually everybody agrees is essentially cheating. Breaks the game and theres not really anything you can do about it....

Quote:

Micah said:
The combo of Mists and a damaging battlefield enchant is pretty much just a flat-out bug exploit, and I wouldn't be keen on playing with someone that was abusing it as such.

Quote:

vfb said:
Even just casting a battle enchantment and retreating the caster is exploiting a bug in the shortlist:

CBT Battlefield Enchantments Battlefield enchantments that affect the whole battlefield for the duration of the battle (e.g. Wrathful Skies, Darkness, Solar Brilliance etc) do not end when the mage who cast them leaves battlefield, even though they should.

Using this in combo with Mists of Deception is abusive, and it's explicitly banned in some games for that reason.

Quote:

CUnknown said:
Yeah, cast and run is fine (even still I hope they change it), but it is fine for now.

But Mists of Deception is just plain sick and wrong!
It's just an exploit that needs to be fixed.

Quote:

Jazzepi said:
I do agree with Tuidjy that Mist + whatever is a clear exploit. Personally I think that BE spells not ending with mages retreating/returning is a general exploit.
Jazzepi

Re: Battlefield spell + retreating?

Quote:

K said:
For whatever reason, only a small percentage of the community has a problem with it.

You used a rhetorical trick earlier and seem to have confused it into fact by this point. Quoted from earlier in the thread:

Quote:

K said:

Quote:

calmon said:
Well K maybe you should count the games where this rule is in effect as a unwritten law!

How? Since it's not written, there is no way of knowing!

*snip*

Considering that it takes seconds to write the rules down, I think the fact that 30 out of 37 games on the front page (meaning the most current games) don't have rules like that is pretty devastating evidence.

The community has spoken.

Therefore:

Quote:

K said:
For whatever reason, only a small percentage of the community explicitly bans it, so I infer that only a small percentage of the community has a problem with it. But they could be like llamabeast and have an implicit ban--the only way to know is to poll the hosts of all 37 games.

Or would you prefer to continue begging the question?

-Max