Siege Shields on the top of the skyladders

[CrazyCracka420]

Except none of those ladders are skyladders.

They all touch the ground at some point. Sky ladders are Ladders built on top of OTHER ladders, not ladders just really high up.

Though to the second point, I believe that the shields would constitute "sky laddering" as they are material built on top of another material(minus siege towers)

Thanks for clarifying.  I still think it's retarded to have ladders that have nothing holding them up in the air but the wonky warband physics, but I digress.  Ladders need something to hold them up besides the ground, you can't have a triangle with only one point of contact.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Lt_Anders]

Thanks for clarifying.  I still think it's retarded to have ladders that have nothing holding them up in the air but the wonky warband physics, but I digress.  Ladders need something to hold them up besides the ground, you can't have a triangle with only one point of contact.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Incorrect. You can't have a triangle(or in this case, i'd be a cantilever) being supported only by a roller connection(Engineer terms) otherwise the item will tip the other way, just like a seesaw. Also ladders have 2 points of contact. Even though you can't see them, the second point is very likely at the bottom of ladder as ladders "stop" the moment ANY part of it's model hits "solid" objects.

welcome to the wonkey ladder system. Goes through crenelations on walls, but not walls themselves.  And a host of other "wtf?" things.

[CrazyCracka420]

I think that's what I said, you can't have a triangle with only 1 point of contact, you'd need 2 points of contact...that's why the sky ladders wouldn't work (what I'm calling sky ladders: a ladder with only one points of contact).  A straight ladder needs to have 2 points of contact to support itself...unless you were to somehow balance it straight up

[oprah_winfrey]

Please add little giant ladder systems.

http://www.littlegiantladder.com/

[CrazyCracka420]

Please add little giant ladder systems.

http://www.littlegiantladder.com/

Yeah I just recently got one like this, that's why I was making sure to be clear about the type of ladder

[Le_Mikz]

 Soo .. How this will be judged??

[Shemaforash]

Old as fuck

[vipere]

Thanks for clarifying.  I still think it's retarded to have ladders that have nothing holding them up in the air but the wonky warband physics, but I digress.  Ladders need something to hold them up besides the ground, you can't have a triangle with only one point of contact.

Thanks for clarifying.  I still think it's retarded to have ladders that have nothing holding them up in the air but the wonky warband physics, but I digress.  Ladders need something to hold them up besides the ground, you can't have a triangle with only one point of contact.

Thanks for clarifying.  I still think it's retarded to have ladders that have nothing holding them up in the air but the wonky warband physics, but I digress.  Ladders need something to hold them up besides the ground, you can't have a triangle with only one point of contact.

Why people just can't get that and still abuse the game physics to have the best performance and k/d

I think we can stop abuse those ladders,  i don't understand why there is no strict ban for that, like 3 days, or more. Make it bannable and those skyladders will magicaly dissapear.

[KingBread]

 

Why people just can't get that and still abuse the game physics to have the best performance and k/d

I think we can stop abuse those ladders,  i don't understand why there is no strict ban for that, like 3 days, or more. Make it bannable and those skyladders will magicaly dissapear.

Mayby becouse those are not sky ladders ?

[Malaclypse]

I think we can stop abuse those ladders,  i don't understand why there is no strict ban for that, like 3 days, or more. Make it bannable and those skyladders will magicaly dissapear.

Mostly because, I guess, it's an issue of who to ban. Who threw said ladder and left it up? Do we ban them? Do we even know who they are? Who stood on it? Do we ban them? Do we even know who they are? Who's battle is it? Do we ban them?

[vipere]

Mostly because, I guess, it's an issue of who to ban. Who threw said ladder and left it up? Do we ban them? Do we even know who they are? Who stood on it? Do we ban them? Do we even know who they are? Who's battle is it? Do we ban them?

They can start with those who are standing on those unrealistic ladders, it's maybe not possible to stop this skyladdering, so lets stop those guys who like abusing it ( skyladdering is bannable, but magical ladders who stand on only one point of contact is not, why ? we all know it's retarded )

No punishment = Players don't care and still do it ( like the door glitch on siege )

if they need to ban 30 players, lets ban them, after that they will understand

[Mongolista]

Mostly because, I guess, it's an issue of who to ban. Who threw said ladder and left it up? Do we ban them? Do we even know who they are? Who stood on it? Do we ban them? Do we even know who they are? Who's battle is it? Do we ban them?

Banning the person leading the battle seems legit, for lets say a week for starters and a month for those who keep repeatedly doing that. The person who leads the battle is responsible for who they invite along their side as well as for their manners in the battle, also it should make the others learn not to do that otherwise the one who got banned thanks to these will join their battle next time and do the same shit to them to get them banned, so if you dont want others to do it in your battles, dont do it in theirs...and a bonus ban can go to those who get caught on the SS building such ladders or misusing them (archers, pikemen, xbows).

[Erasmas]

Banning the person leading the battle seems legit, for lets say a week for starters and a month for those who keep repeatedly doing that. The person who leads the battle is responsible for who they invite along their side as well as for their manners in the battle, also it should make the others learn not to do that otherwise the one who got banned thanks to these will join their battle next time and do the same shit to them to get them banned, so if you dont want others to do it in your battles, dont do it in theirs...and a bonus ban can go to those who get caught on the SS building such ladders or misusing them (archers, pikemen, xbows).

I do not agree.

1. It depends what the "person leading the battle" means. Is it a person who is "attacker" or "defender"? Does not make any sense. I made some attacks, or defended the fiefs and I did not even participate in some of these battles. Tactical movements on the map are made by specific persons who may have nothing to do with the battle itself. So, is it the commanding person? And who that may be? Do you want to check TS channels to find out who is really commanding? And sometimes you have more than one person commanding different classes.

2. Sometimes you have +50 people in the roster. The person who makes the attack may not be responsible for the roster, or even commanding officer may not be responsible for that (it happens quite often). You cannot control all players. Strat battle is just a roughly organized chaos. You even can not control what happens on the entire battlefield. Sometimes you invite random guys (we all hear that Strat is more or less closed to random guys who are not in clans, so opening up seem a good thing). Sometimes I can hear "do not do it, it is not allowed" and the guy is doing that anyway. Punishment for the person who actually did something wrong is OK, but if you start punishing persons who are commanding the battle seems to be as group punishment - you deprive the clan of the general who may be full of good intentions, (or you punish innocent guy appointed to attack on the map -  see point 1). Show me someone who after few such bans would like to take active part in Strategus.

[Zox_Fury]

One more point is important : Subjectivity. By definition everyone is subjective. You like or dislike some guys and your judgement is inevitably biased intentionnally or not.Everyone see that on football for example when you support a team you re blind to their errors or fault and you re leniant.

 I don't accuse noone but it's human and everyone knows how Grey are held responsible  . I don't say that they re white or dark (ofc they're grey) only that some admins could be a bit tougher against them.

Sky ladders is made by everyone not only one block as some guys tried to explain. Punishment of a team of 30 players in a server  as Crpg is an heresy and counterproductive .

I'm curious to know how you could accused  and on which facts .

That's my opinion and i don't blame anyone .

[Mongolista]

I do not agree.

1) The person leading the battle is the one written down on the roster, I do not mean any tactical leading, just the name on the roster, so he either personally makes sure everything is as it should be or trusts smbdy (from his clan who can invite people) enough to rely upon him even when still bearing the responsibility for the actions in the battle. Attacker/Defender does not matter, the side which builds intentional skyladders (and leaves them like that for the archers to misuse it) should be held responsible.

2) You may choose not to invite randomers in your team and get in only people you trust - hence you are liable for your team.

3) Even as a randomer, the person should try their very best not to breach the rules as if you get punished for their actions you will most likely make sure not to invite these for any of your future fights.

4) You may always break the ladders not to let the randomers build intentional skyladders, if the archers make a fucking skyladder nest with siege shields on its end and the whole team lets them doing so, it is only good that the leader of the team gets punished as he let them do it/did not stop them from doing so.

5) Id much rather take this responsibility for my team than seeing this shit happening every second battle because the "builders" of these skyladder nests can always hide in the crowd of 50 people who, by ignoring it, allow them to do so which in the end is almost the same as contributing to the exploit, aint it? I think the responsibility of the leader is still much better solution than banning the whole team of 50 people who did not do anything against their team building the (intentional) skyladders.