Jean_Ney
Normal Member
A little less confused
Posts: 75
|
Post by Jean_Ney on Aug 21, 2005 15:56:19 GMT 1
This does not state, whether there are any adverse affects on players, who surrender their country.
I'm assuming that it means...
IF a country's HQ can get its act together and surrenders before it is eliminated... players will retain their soldiers and gold, plus no injuries.
IF a country's HQ does not agree in time... it will suffer the usual.
We can look forward to some interesting discussions between the "Surrender with Honor" guys and the "Bitter-Enders." ;D
|
|
|
Post by Vincent de Boer on Aug 21, 2005 17:04:46 GMT 1
All that is different is that there is no final battle for the city. WIth the limited army sizes it may not be possible for the attacker to take the last city, yet can easily prevent that country from doing something other than sitting in their city and being pvpd to death. In such case the country can vote for surrender to have it end quick.
They can only do it when they are down to 1 city (checked at the moment the vote starts and at the moment it's decided on)
|
|
|
Post by draco on Aug 21, 2005 17:09:23 GMT 1
majority vote required?
too bad i bet no one will use this option, even though it will be the smart thing to do
|
|
kgc
New Member
Posts: 4
|
Post by kgc on Aug 21, 2005 17:21:29 GMT 1
I'm not sure about that. Remember those Thais begging you to finish them off.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent de Boer on Aug 21, 2005 17:25:36 GMT 1
it'll depend on whether they have a fighting spirit left. As long as they have that they deserve to survive I think.
|
|
|
Post by rbis4rbb on Aug 21, 2005 17:28:40 GMT 1
What will happen to the neutral territory? Will it be like Switzerland?
|
|
|
Post by sshadow on Aug 21, 2005 17:32:32 GMT 1
Would likely be open for anyone to take I think?
|
|
|
Post by draco on Aug 21, 2005 17:38:08 GMT 1
"I'm not sure about that. Remember those Thais begging you to finish them off."
those were their midrankers... i doubt their HC would have been willing to give up so easily. I guess it depends on how big a vote it requires
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Everett on Aug 21, 2005 17:52:00 GMT 1
I think the neutral cities will be empty with only a garrison. Defeat the garrison and the city is yours.
|
|
|
Post by Diadem on Aug 21, 2005 21:28:08 GMT 1
You should be able to start the surrender vote before you reach 1 city. So only check at end of vote if condition applies.
Otherwise by the time the vote goes through you're down anyway...
|
|
|
Post by zalastra on Aug 21, 2005 21:50:06 GMT 1
i like this option a lot, but diadem brings up a good point there, the voting can take too long. but i'd like another solution to this: restrict the voting to just a few people. i think the people who lead the country at the time that this occurs could decide best to keep fighting or not as they may have information other's dont. and another argument to not make this vote done by CM, is that this doesnt actualy have anything to do with a "court" but with leading this country. best would be to make this option avaible at being down to 2 or 3 landpieces
|
|
|
Post by Diadem on Aug 21, 2005 22:10:42 GMT 1
In my experience a CM that everybody agrees with (bringing an obious rogue army leader back to level 3, or promoted a very active and valuable new player to level 1) usually takes about half a day. But a CM that has divided opinions, so perhaps 90% of the HQ has to vote before a majority is reached, can easily take 24 to 48 hours. Not many countries survive being on 1 city for so long. By that time many players will have gone inactive, and the majority will certainly have been hit hard by PvPs...
|
|
|
Post by quickstrike on Aug 22, 2005 7:10:30 GMT 1
I disagree with surrender ability as there is no point where you can draw the line. Look at India. We ended up with little land all the time and yet managed to remain allive... All surrender ability will do is give a way out and demoralise faster.
'Who cares if our country dies. Lets just surrender and we will survive. HQ just surrendered lets pick another country. Hurray'
|
|
|
Post by draco on Aug 22, 2005 7:44:04 GMT 1
The reason this is being implemented is because early on you can restrict a country to one city but not kill them because it'll be impossible to get a main army big enough. This way the people in it won't have to just sit there half an age until the enemy gets an emperor
|
|
|
Post by quickstrike on Aug 22, 2005 7:57:16 GMT 1
True, but then it should be disabled a after a certain period of time...
|
|