Printable View
I have been playing this game over weekend and have lost nearly 500 C because of a bug.
I successfully block camp 2 while attacking camp 3. It seems my general is about to enter camp 3 and all of a sudden he pops up fighting in camp 2
No message of general being intercepted or signs of him going back to camp 2 just appears there and loses. I tried it twice in case i made an error but exactly same thing happened. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Sorry for your losses... ;) This is one of the ugliest effects of the "new" lag (following the reprogramming of the servers autumn 2012).
Un(!)fortunately, said reprogramming had the desired effect, stilling the storm of complaints from people who got disconnected from the servers at the time. That it has rendered the game almost unplayable for people with mediocre connections, is indeed very annoying, but not something that bothers bb overly. They have bigger problems! :D
Also, since said reprogramming, any lag issues can be labelled a "local problem", so bb has effectively covered their backs with this one.
Anyway, bb doesn´t support blocking. They didn´t design for it, and officially warns against it, due to the many "situations" (like this one) that could arise. The fact that you can get the same problems without blocking, doesn´t bother them either, as these situations are quite rare...
As it stands, the blocks in Motherly Love are way too risky for my taste...
Hello rustybum,
As mentioned by Harald_Villraade, blocking isn't a legitimate feature.
I'm afraid not much can be done on this occasion.
Blue Byte are working on ways to counter lag issues :).
Best,
Sinister-King
hi,
one thing we have never had is an explanation as to why blocking is not a legitimate feature. It would be great if someone from BB would answer the following questions:
- is the game designed so that a camp's zone of influence is deactivated when it is being attacked?
- is the game designed so that when all leader camps in a single zone are defeated that any remaining normal camps are cleared?
- is the game designed so that every camp in a sector needs to be attacked to clear a sector?
- is the game designed so that more than one general can be sent out to attack at the same time?
Thanks
Actually, judging from the test server, what BB are doing is make adventures where blocking is not possible - anyone who has played the two new adventures will know what I'm talking about: single path adventures or camps spread too far apart to make blocking an option.
The only fun aspect of adventures is finding and developing blocking tactics. Remove that and you've got just mindless attack, rebuild, attack cycles with zero strategy whatsoever. If that's the future of the game, then I guess I'll be leaving.
Also, the official response that "blocking is not sanctioned" strikes me as just a lazy way of ending any arguments over compensating players for bugs caused by lag. I had this particular bug affect me for the first time recently - which implies that the lag is getting worse, not better!
And finally, Harald_Villraade's comment about reprogramming is revealing: the fault has been pushed onto the end user rather than on the developers where it belongs. Where have I seen that before?
I have the same problem!!
This is exactly the same way of handling interceptions that take place within your own friendly territory (when the agro zone of an enemy camp extends into your own zone). Absolutely no message about your general being intercepted, but the general simply just disappears from the map (till he appears in the blocked camp after that fight has ended). It has happened to me in EotW and DB, and I've heard of it happening in DP and SotV. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the case in ML as well. The agro zone of camp 2 does extend well into your own territory.Quote:
Originally Posted by rustybum
Yes indeed, PenguinStare, those questions are very valid and quite crucial, and I would also be very pleased if BB could answer them.Quote:
Originally Posted by PenguinStare
Since they probably won't, let me take this further and tell how I would interpret them:
YES, that is how it is designed, but WHY? What is the purpose with this feature?Quote:
Originally Posted by PenguinStare
They even go so far as to not showing the agro area of a camp being fought, if you at the same time track another general to attack through that area.
The only interpretation I can make from this, is that it is a design feature that we are able to march another general through the agro area of a camp that is being fought.
YES, that is how it is designed, and thus encourages us to skip camps.Quote:
Originally Posted by PenguinStare
BB has also never said that skipping camps is NOT sanctioned by them.
Instead, as Gerontius mentioned, they are now making adventures where both skipping and blocking becomes completely impossible.
NO, same reason as above. Skipping IS a feature. Just look at sector 9 (with Wild Mary) on the home island...Quote:
Originally Posted by PenguinStare
YES, that is a feature. Otherwise they wouldn't have enabled it...Quote:
Originally Posted by PenguinStare
All-in-all, by adhering to and following all above featuers, blocking becomes possible.
If they want to disable blocking, they need to disable one of the above features.
They cannot claim that blocking is not sanctioned, while at the same time keeping all above features unchanged.
If BB wants to stop blocking, then they really should remove the feature that disables the agro zone of camps being fought.
This feature has NO other purpose in the game. It's the thing that enables and encourages blocks.
As long as this feature remains, BB is effectively saying, that blocking is a supported feature.
And btw, the day they remove that feature, I'm also done playing... :)
iddQuote:
Originally Posted by Tage
Just sounds like excuses to me, don't want to be responsible for bad game design along with bad performance and limited development.
Hi Tage,
I don't think you would be the only one to quit if blocking goes!
I didn't put this in my earlier post as I wanted to give someone from BB a chance to answer my question but I have been told by support in the past that skipping camps is not design intent - the BB support actually said that all camps need to be cleared before attacking the target camp. This is clearly their official line but it's so obviously nonsense...
I've also just lost 330 cavs on ML. I watched the general enter the main leader camp and the fights begin.
Whether or not blocking is sanctioned or supported in game, clearly if the display shows one thing and something else is actually happening, this is a bug and a pretty big one at that. In my opinion if you get no warning of an intercept and no chance to retreat, BB should be accountable whether it was during a block or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinister-King
Ok, so we use the possibilities the game provides. Like sending generals at camps. And that is not legitimate? Really?
Are there other things we can do but are not legitimate? Like killing bandits? Seems like a disproportional action for people who just camp out there. Or is building a cokingplant in the middle of a town maybe not legitimate, not really good for the health of our settlers. Any other non-legitimate options we should know about?
Seriously, that's a really silly argument. It's not like the computer really needs a minute to calculate the outcome of a fight. That the fight does take that long seems has to have other reasons. To enable blocking perhaps?