slasher

[gondor]

hmmmmmm it does not bother m e much but y did nuke kill slasher for no reson the set was doing well no kills but i think i no y i think it was because slasher was hawk battling japan so nuke though he woud kill him before he gets japans ration down

[Slasher]

hmm... you could have made the topic title and description better. The reason I didn't post before when I told you I got killed was because I couldn't be bothered as you probably noticed. I don't think there was a reason to kill me so I demand an explanation (sp?) from Nuke.

P.S. I think that was the first kill this set.

[Nuclear Raunch]

There were 2 kills last set, no idea about the first one though. May have even been an admin killing a multi for all I know.

Suicide Hawk User Battle is banned or modified on nearly every server I play. A couple weeks ago I asked Beatles if it was banned here as well, and he said it was not. I decided right then and there that I would have to kill anyone that tried it. I also knew I had to make sure Ohmyjapan was unclanned and with a high net so people would have to hold onto some net to be able to attack.

Due to a few miscommunication problems and inactivity on my part Japan's net was relatively low, which allowed small net empires to be able to hit him. Unfortunately one of them did and I was forced to make the kill.

I don't care if someone suicides with troops because the code is written so fewer troops attacking will kill fewer defending troops. Since suicide HUB eliminates a % of the defenders hawks regardless of the attackers hawks or hawk ratio I tend to frown on it.

[The Beatles]

Yes, perhaps that needs to be changed.

[Slasher]

What's wrong with suicide hawk battleing?

[Devari]

It is unreasonably unrealistic, due to the set % of hawks that die on either side.

I agree with Nuke - we need to change that.

[Slasher]

just reduce the percentage then

[Devari]

Let me elaborate:

When someone hawk attacks, there is a set % range of casualties on either side. So, if someone with 1,000 hawks attacks against someone with 100,000 hawks, the person with 1,000 hawks will lose, say, 7% of their hawks and the defender will lose, say, 6% of 100,000. That's more than the attacking force was, and certainly not realistic or fair! If troops attack like that, the attacker would be destroyed with minimal casualties for the defender. Hawks should probably work the same way.

Likewise, if someone with lots of hawks hawk attacks someone to get land, the attacker will lose, say, 7% of their hawks, even if the defender has none! That certainly is not fair, and forces hawk players to buy troops if they wish to attack.

[ohmyjapan16]

For instance; If Slasher hawk battles me 15 times and I lose 2 mil hawks.

[Nuclear Raunch]

just reduce the percentage then

The problem is not that the percentage is too high, it's that it is a percentage in the first place.

[gondor]

welll i think that it sould stary there and we are only having probs coz you now slasher was going to hit japan

[Slasher]

no no you missed the point gondor. I see what you people are saying... Something will most have to be done about that but still allow defence held thingy in hawk battle.

[gondor]

i know but this would not be being talked about if we slasher was not a topic so i dont

[Nuclear Raunch]

i know but this would not be being talked about if we slasher was not a topic so i dont

I never talked about it for 2 reasons, first I didn't realize it was legal here until a couple weeks ago, and the second is I never wanted to give anyone any ideas. I thought about it when I was planning on how many hawks Japan needed on how much land to have an invincible ratio. I checked with Beatles and when he said it was legal I talked to Japan about it quite a bit, but I never mentioned it to anyone else because I didn't want anyone to get the idea. Plus I don't want to try to force a bunch of code changes on you guys. There are many ways the game could be exploited but I think it's best for me to just keep quiet until someone does it, then just offer my opinion on the best method of fixing it.

i know but this would not be being talked about if we slasher was not a topic so i dont

You don't like it because it is being discussed in regards to Slasher? So if it was brought up because Kraken did it to you would you be against it? I dunno man, I think a good idea is a good idea regardless of who thought of it, who was the reason for the idea, etc.