| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
DeathDealer89 
Postmaster
Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 944
|
 Posted: 15 Mar 2013 at 18:46 |
 Rill wrote:
In response to Scorpain's question about marking armies to reserve a space for a Tenaril move: Because the move is instant, there should be little need for a marking army. In fact, you cannot Tenaril a city to a square that is occupied by an army. Putting a marking army on a square to which you want to Tenaril soon(tm) falls under the same category as putting a marking army on a square you want to settle or Exodus soon(tm).
Just my two cents. |
And then you raze the town, so your actual city can land on the sq. So yes there is significant time where it would need to be marked.
The rule is very simple the same way people mark cities they intend to siege with armies. I'm guessing if you don't accept one you don't accept the other.
Just be ready to fight for it, and don't cry bully when the person's marking army you just wiped out is actually 10x as big as you are and wipes you out. Because if I went found a nice spot marked it with an army, maybe made it better via teleport. Then someone else comes along wipes out my marking army and claims it as there own. You can bet i'll turn around and raze their city so I can settle whats rightfully mine.
|
 |
Kumomoto
Postmaster General
Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224
|
Posted: 15 Mar 2013 at 18:43 |
Darkwords wrote:
No Epi it works if someone moves within 10 squares radius of your city, where as you are referring to someone moving 10.5 squares from your city, in which case you did not need to be contacted. |
qft
|
|
Darkwords
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
|
Posted: 15 Mar 2013 at 18:16 |
|
No Epi it works if someone moves within 10 squares radius of your city, where as you are referring to someone moving 10.5 squares from your city, in which case you did not need to be contacted.
|
|
Epidemic
Postmaster
Joined: 03 Nov 2012
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 768
|
Posted: 15 Mar 2013 at 17:56 |
|
I've seen this technique used a few times and I agree that its a dumb move.
I've read of players saying you should notify your neighbors when you plan on placing a new town, but I've never gotten a message from any player invading my 10x10 spaces.
I guess it only works if you have a big alliance to back up your claims...
|
|
Brandmeister
Postmaster General
Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
|
Posted: 15 Mar 2013 at 16:39 |
|
I have seen several players use this technique when they are thousands of population away from their next settlement. To me, this technique is only valid if you will initiate exodus or settlement within a day or two. It's actually a courtesy to your new neighbors because it gives them a day to notify you of objections... and it's generally polite to IGM the nearest players prior to your departure.
I feel it's unreasonable to expect players to treat an army in the middle of an empty field the same as they would treat an established city with a 10 square radius. I also agree with Meagh--if you Tenaril to a spot, it's yours by definition. Possession is nine tenths the law, and the 10 square halo was obviously respected. Objecting to a teleport after the fact is a moot point, and if forcible removal is threatened, that's the same as initiating hostilities for other typical reasons (ownership of rare resources, etc.). Implying that people are responsible to scout armies is passive behavior--if you want a square, take ownership the traditional way. Or just sov a 5x5 area to block incoming settlements.
Generally I think if you want a location, then settle it. If you want to own a square, sov it. Then ownership is clear and cannot be disputed because it was implied but not established.
|
|
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
|
Posted: 15 Mar 2013 at 16:22 |
In response to Scorpain's question about marking armies to reserve a space for a Tenaril move: Because the move is instant, there should be little need for a marking army. In fact, you cannot Tenaril a city to a square that is occupied by an army. Putting a marking army on a square to which you want to Tenaril soon(tm) falls under the same category as putting a marking army on a square you want to settle or Exodus soon(tm).
Just my two cents.
|
|
The_Dude
Postmaster General
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
|
Posted: 15 Mar 2013 at 14:55 |
|
3f3 makes a good point about players "abusing" the marking system by marking far more than they can actually use in a reasonable period of time. But is that any different than "10 sqs rule"? After all, a key aspect to the 10 sqs claim is "future releases" _might_ make that area useful to a city.
|
|
threefoothree
Greenhorn
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Location: tampa, florida
Status: Offline
Points: 88
|
Posted: 15 Mar 2013 at 13:36 |
|
is there a time limit a army can hold a square?
if not, what stops a player or a alliance sending out lots of 1 troop army and commander to 20 spots all over the board and "reserving" 20 or 30 nice spots or a player with 4 cities tries to reserve the next 6 spots he wants his new cities to be. all he would have to do is send more 1 army troops before occupy before the other leaves.
i agree if you got all your cities in a area and you dont want someone to mess up your plans in your area your building out, but i dont believe in holding markers for long periods of time across the map that your hoping to spread into.
|
|
bansisdead
Postmaster
Joined: 08 Jan 2012
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 609
|
Posted: 15 Mar 2013 at 12:57 |
|
It's an acceptable method of claiming lands in Mal Motsha by Dominion members, and too not respect it in Mal Motsha is asking for trouble!!!
|
|
|
|
Meagh
Forum Warrior
Joined: 16 Jul 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 224
|
Posted: 15 Mar 2013 at 12:46 |
Scorpiain wrote:
In my opinion, if someone sees a marking army they should scout it, contact the player involved and ask their intentions. I agree, placing marking armies on squares you may or may not wish to settle is ridiculous but in the cases of complicated moves (e.g. terraforming) where a player is actively seeking to improve the map by placing 7 food squares in strategic locations, respecting marking armies is imperative as these take a lot of preparation - especially if the siege army to destroy the 450 pop city has 1 week to travel to the newbie ring (which is usually the case) ... |
A marking army is a mute point for terraforming. When you terraform you port a seven food city in, instantly. As soon as your city gets there (the instant teleport) then it is yours. No one will get there before you as there is no travel time. After that, everyone can see the city and your siege taking that shiney new seven food city on a hill. If you are sending an army to a spot that looks good, then getting a city ready for terraforming to port into that spot then you are putting the cart in front of the horse. Make your terraform city, find a good location, port, then send siege to take it.. This avoids the confusion, is the natural way to do it and it avoids shifting the burden of your play to other players and the distress you're likely to get when they do not meet that expectation of verifying your reservation. This also btw is how I exodused seven of my eight cities. Without a problem. I accept that in very rare cases (when two people exodus to the same spot) it might cause confusion but that is the huge exception, not the rule. - M.
Edited by Meagh - 15 Mar 2013 at 13:00
|
|
|
|
Tweet
A new exodus marking "rule"?
