Jelbegi Castle

[Noctivagant]

1. there is precedent to the kicking: http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,17415.msg298012.html#msg298012
2. all the spawns were taken already, the game was basically over. attackers running out of ladders and thus being unable to breach the walls can't be compared with all defender spawns already taken, with a few people hiding/delaying. It has long been established that in strat battles delaying and hiding isn't acceptable.
3. The defenders got up there using double ladders in the first place, moreover from the very start of the battle they did not make any attempt to defend the spawns in the castle or fight the enemy in any meaningful way.
4. stop getting mad over something stupid

Shik's reply you can check it on http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,36087.new.html

Cheers.

[HarunYahya]

the Spirit of the almighty P.anos took controll over me

Watch your steps then , you don't want to end up like him.

[Uumdi]

Until the dev team implements dying of starvation, a kick will have to do.

Stupid ass argument.

[Rhaelys]

EU drama over an NA castle?

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[rufio]

<04:56:39> "Shik": To make things more clear:
<04:56:51> "Shik": 1. if attackers run out of ladders and they can't breach the walls, they have lost
<04:57:08> "Shik": 2. if defenders have already lost all spawns and 3 guys are hiding in a place they can't get down from, they have already lost
<04:59:39> "rufioOO": seems solid, still our unease with the situation is not misplaced since this was not the argument at the start. would be nice to have a link to this ruleset, so i can link it to the threads i posted in , and appologize
<05:00:12> "Shik": unfortunately we are dumb and don't have a ruleset written down
<05:00:15> "Shik": but this has been the precedent
<05:00:17> "Shik": for a while
<05:00:31> "Shik": it's kinda like those weird societies where yo udon't have a written code of law
<05:00:44> "rufioOO": ok
<05:01:16> "rufioOO": can i quote: "Shik": To make things more clear:
<04:56:51> "Shik": 1. if attackers run out of ladders and they can't breach the walls, they have lost
<04:57:08> "Shik": 2. if defenders have already lost all spawns and 3 guys are hiding in a place they can't get down from, they have already lost ?
<05:01:22> "Shik": sure
<05:01:39> "Shik": I'll prolly have that added to the official rules at some point
<05:01:41> "rufioOO": ok, thanks for your time shik, and gj clearing it up like this, sorry for the troubles
<05:02:16> "Shik": and to clarify, the defenders are allowed to exist as long as they are in a position to get the flags back up
<05:02:22> "Shik": but if they're not even trying
<05:02:28> "Shik": or if they would die from fall damage
<05:02:32> "Shik": or if they can't even do it
<05:02:36> "Shik": then they've basically lost
<05:02:51> "rufioOO": solid. i concur

sorry for the drama guys, thanks for shik to do the right thing and clear it up. cya ingame.

[Tyr_]

Watch your steps then , you don't want to end up like him.

Actually Panos got banned for spamming wild accusations, so propably something like this?

Get your facts straight and grow some balls please.

Check out the link edited to my last reply, the facts are listed there.

[Tholgar]

<04:56:39> "Shik": To make things more clear:
<04:56:51> "Shik": 1. if attackers run out of ladders and they can't breach the walls, they have lost
<04:57:08> "Shik": 2. if defenders have already lost all spawns and 3 guys are hiding in a place they can't get down from, they have already lost
<04:59:39> "rufioOO": seems solid, still our unease with the situation is not misplaced since this was not the argument at the start. would be nice to have a link to this ruleset, so i can link it to the threads i posted in , and appologize
<05:00:12> "Shik": unfortunately we are dumb and don't have a ruleset written down
<05:00:15> "Shik": but this has been the precedent
<05:00:17> "Shik": for a while
<05:00:31> "Shik": it's kinda like those weird societies where yo udon't have a written code of law
<05:00:44> "rufioOO": ok
<05:01:16> "rufioOO": can i quote: "Shik": To make things more clear:
<04:56:51> "Shik": 1. if attackers run out of ladders and they can't breach the walls, they have lost
<04:57:08> "Shik": 2. if defenders have already lost all spawns and 3 guys are hiding in a place they can't get down from, they have already lost ?
<05:01:22> "Shik": sure
<05:01:39> "Shik": I'll prolly have that added to the official rules at some point
<05:01:41> "rufioOO": ok, thanks for your time shik, and gj clearing it up like this, sorry for the troubles
<05:02:16> "Shik": and to clarify, the defenders are allowed to exist as long as they are in a position to get the flags back up
<05:02:22> "Shik": but if they're not even trying
<05:02:28> "Shik": or if they would die from fall damage
<05:02:32> "Shik": or if they can't even do it
<05:02:36> "Shik": then they've basically lost
<05:02:51> "rufioOO": solid. i concur

sorry for the drama guys, thanks for shik to do the right thing and clear it up. cya ingame.

I think they have to add some kind of game mechanic for that kind of situations, that's all. That way there will be no arguments about admins kicking and abusing in the future.

[Rhaelys]

People just need to not be stupid.

[rufio]

that in itself is a stupid statement, leaves alot to interpetation and biased oppinion  if all thought like this, the world would be a bad place. oh im such a hypocritsometimes 

[Noctivagant]

I think they have to add some kind of game mechanic for that kind of situations, that's all. That way there will be no arguments about admins kicking and abusing in the future.

Nearest thing I could think of is "Sudden Death" and that would be harsh, maybe a count down timer but still. I think the best solution would be "common sense"

For people who could take sudden death literally here is some info :

(click to show/hide)

In a sport or game, sudden death (or a sudden-death round) is a form of competition where play ends as soon as one competitor is ahead of the others, with that competitor becoming the winner. Sudden death is typically used as a tiebreaker when a contest is tied at the end of the normal playing time or the completion of the normal playing task. An alternative tiebreaker method is to play a reduced version of the original; for example, in association football 30 minutes of extra time (overtime) after 90 minutes of normal time, or in golf one playoff round (18 holes) after four standard rounds (72 holes). Sudden-death playoffs typically end more quickly than these reduced replays. Reducing the variability of the event's duration assists those scheduling television time and team travel. Fans may see sudden death as exciting and suspenseful, or they may view the format as insufficiently related to the sport played during regulation time.

[Goretooth]

that in itself is a stupid statement, leaves alot to interpetation and biased oppinion  if all thought like this, the world would be a bad place. oh im such a hypocritsometimes 

nah just don't be stupid.

[rufio]

no you! 

(click to show/hide)

[Knute]

This is similar to what happened on the recent Grey Order vs Tevarin castle siege, some ladder art on the roof of the keep.  Should map improvement people start invisible walling these roofs up or is there any good reason to leave them open?

Pics here:
http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,222.msg531145.html#msg531145

[Cicero]

so funny =)

[Haboe]

In what way do 3 men on a roof  hold a castle if there is an army all around them and took the rest of the castle?

Then id say the army that controls the castle has won...