Units that Don't need to be Killed

[OpixMK]

I hope this thread hasn't been brought up before; I searched the suggestions and couldnt find anything about it.
Suggestion - that whenever the certain combonations appear on the field, there is an automatic win / draw. (This is of course considering that these units are the ONLy units left on the field.)
--- Mud Golem VS Furgon --- Mud Wins
--- Stone Golem VS Enchantress-- Chanty Wins
--- Stone Golem VS Frost --- Frost Wins
--- Cleric VS Scout --- Scout Wins
--- Wisp VS Wisp --- Draw
--- Cleric VS Cleric --- Draw
--- Frosty VS Cleric + Stone Golem + BW --- Draw
--- Barrier Ward + Stone Golem + Cleric VS Knight --- Knight Wins
--- Stone Golem + Barrier Ward VS Beast Rider -- BR wins
--- Stone Golem + Barrier Ward VS Assassin - Assassin Wins
--- Furgon VS Knight/Assassin - Knight/Assassin wins
--- Furgon VS Witch --- Furgon wins IF it is Furgon's turn and the Furgon CAN MOVE
--- Furgon VS Dragon -- Draw if Furgon has more than 28 HP

[Zander]

not neccesarily. the person could camp around a bw or two, and a lw, and ensure a draw or possibly even a win.
/Denied

[Forest_Archer]

zander, I actually like his idea because what you suggested happens a lot and it's cheap.

[AlabamaBoy]

Maybe its agreed about the cleric and stone, but a think furgy uses deserve some props for furgy ownage.

[Esko]

This happens a lot around dinner time. My mom gets angry at me for not coming when it's ready and it's hard to explain to here that i can't go because i just spent so long to win this dude and i'm not gonna let him win.

I don't like the idea though.

[steve12]

This happens a lot around dinner time. My mom gets angry at me for not coming when it's ready and it's hard to explain to here that i can't go because i just spent so long to win this dude and i'm not gonna let him win.

I don't like the idea though.

Why not? In my opinion, I feel its a pretty good idea to prevent end-game stallers from winning games they don't deserve to win. If the game is waited out so that the other player has to leave, then the stat change in this situation would would not be legit. I think this happens alot (it has to me), and this suggestion WOULD make gaining stats more legit (without having boosting in mind, that is).

[Zander]

zander, I actually like his idea because what you suggested happens a lot and it's cheap.
"cheap" is an opinion, and we do not change rules based on a fraction of the population's opinions when the current rule has no major flaws. if you are unable to take out a cleric furgon whatever, you do not deserve the win, plain and simple.

[Dresicos]

Ok lets say a your opponent has a 23 health knight, you have a cleric and a LW. Draw game or win.

DT vs DT lol Automatic draw or win :)

Idk where I am gettign at. I don't even think I am making a point

[steve12]

"cheap" is an opinion, and we do not change rules based on a fraction of the population's opinions when the current rule has no major flaws. if you are unable to take out a cleric furgon whatever, you do not deserve the win, plain and simple.

No, what we are trying to get at is a way to prevent people from stalling out. We are all human, and most of us have lives (okay, so this is questionable, but...), and have things to do at least every once in a while. The suggestion is an attempt to make it easier to reach the inevitable outcome of a match quicker, since some battles are far too long for people to retain a connection or stay at the computer.

[bullcat0]

zander, I actually like his idea because what you suggested happens a lot and it's cheap.
It is not cheap. It is a strategical part of the game, so maybe you should plan ahead to prevent this.
No, what we are trying to get at is a way to prevent people from stalling out. We are all human, and most of us have lives (okay, so this is questionable, but...), and have things to do at least every once in a while. The suggestion is an attempt to make it easier to reach the inevitable outcome of a match quicker, since some battles are far too long for people to retain a connection or stay at the computer.

If you dont have time. Dont play. You never know how long a game may last.

[steve12]

It is not cheap. It is a strategical part of the game, so maybe you should plan ahead to prevent this.


If you dont have time. Dont play. You never know how long a game may last.

Or... you can ignore the suggestion and continue to side with the fact that it doesn't matter how games will last, if one leaves they lose. As I said, this SUGGESTION is meant to help make the game easier, and maybe make stats more legit?

[OpixMK]

I took out Furgon, so its just Cleric and Stone Golem now.

[Dresicos]

Stone golem + LW beats or draws Knight with 23 health

[Terps rock]

if you have no damaging units you should lose...

[Dresicos]

if you have no damaging units you should lose...

So you're telling me a frosty can't beat a DT?

A enchantress can't beat a knight?

[Zander]

if you have no damaging units you should lose...
No, shut up.

This is a bad idea, anyone who believes otherwise is wrong.

[Wizzy`]

No, shut up.

This is a bad idea, anyone who believes otherwise is wrong.

I disagree!

:confused:

[steve12]

No, shut up.

This is a bad idea, anyone who believes otherwise is wrong.

Psh... you state that "a fraction of opinions" won't change a thing. Saying anyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong is an opinion of YOURS. You contradict yourself and don't have much to back it up. Why don't you keep your mouth shut for a change until you have legit reason for your "opinions".

[Terps rock]

So you're telling me a frosty can't beat a DT?

A enchantress can't beat a knight?

I realized this but was hoping you would understand what I was saying...
if you have a cleric.. a furgon... a stone... and a bw... you lose.

[Hellblazer]

zander, I actually like his idea because what you suggested happens a lot and it's cheap.

No, it's strategy. The opponent of the person with only a cleric or Staney has to think out how to kill the damn thing without getting killed himself. Simple.

[phoenixofflames]

LW's and furgys are very useful end game and this docks them

[Terps rock]

No, it's strategy. The opponent of the person with only a cleric or Staney has to think out how to kill the damn thing without getting killed himself. Simple.

if you can't damage or "freeze" your opponent the game should end... Also if you can't move the game should end. eg. lw and bw...

[Hellblazer]

if you can't damage or "freeze" your opponent the game should end... Also if you can't move the game should end. eg. lw and bw...

Yes. If the LW is your last unit, you've lost. However, if you have a cleric or a stoney, there's still that mevement and attack cpability that has a slight chance to defeat an opponent.
The game wouldn't be made that way if it wasn't strategic somehow.

[OpixMK]

Should I change it to "An opponent's Cleric and Stone Golem do not need to be killed for a win IF AND ONLY IF that person's lightning ward is dead."?

[Hellblazer]

Should I change it to "An opponent's Cleric and Stone Golem do not need to be killed for a win IF AND ONLY IF that person's lightning ward is dead."?

No, because then the opponent should definitely wander over to kill the leric and whatever happens, happens.

[Esko]

how about...just stoney. Because a cleric can move under a LW and make a draw or win. But stoney just sits there and makes me late for dinner.

[steve12]

A Stone Golem can move almost as far as a Cleric. You make no sense. Neither can attack, so the outcome is indeed the same (for most games, depending on hp).

[Terps rock]

Dude if you have a cleric a stone and LW you are still alive.... If you have a cleric a stone and a bw your not....
If you have two wards of any kind you aren't
If you can not win the game even with someone trying to lose... The game should end.

[Hellblazer]

If you can not win the game even with someone trying to lose... The game should end.

Okay, here's the run-down. If you have a Lightning Ward and a Cleric, for example, yuo still have the opportunity to attack. However, the three-turn passing surrender rule makes it impossible to win if your opponent is too smart for that.
If you have a Barrier Ward and a Cleric, that may be the only situation I'd say an auto-lose should occur. There's nothing to do.
You can interchange the Stone Golem for the Cleric in both those examples and get the same results. So, okay, 1 scenario(sp?) is down. The other should remain.
Again, do you really think the game would be set up that way if there wasn't a reason behind it, no matter how pointless it may seem?

[Terps rock]

dude that is what i said!

[OpixMK]

Clarified the Thread. Now the suggestion is that you automatically lose if:
- you have any number of BW's, a stone golem and any number of clerics left (with no LW)
- you have a cleric, stone golem, or any combo of both left on the field (with no LW)
- you have any number of BW's and any number of clerics left (with no LW)

[Hellblazer]

Clarified the Thread. Now the suggestion is that you automatically lose if:
- you have any number of BW's, a stone golem and any number of clerics left (with no LW)
- you have a cleric, stone golem, or any combo of both left on the field (with no LW)
- you have any number of BW's and any number of clerics left (with no LW)

And you're a mod since...? That "neg" was hilarious, by the way.

[Dresicos]

Clarified the Thread. Now the suggestion is that you automatically lose if:
- you have any number of BW's, a stone golem and any number of clerics left (with no LW)
- you have a cleric, stone golem, or any combo of both left on the field (with no LW)
- you have any number of BW's and any number of clerics left (with no LW)

1 frost vs any of those = draw

[Terps rock]

no one frost vs cleric and lw or stone and lw is a win for the frost.

[young cha]

not so good info it isnt to hard to retreat around the lw

[uniquinous]

This is a good idea, it just needs to be clarified. If one person has attacking units (damage or paralysis) and the other person does not, there's no reason the first person needs to take 20 turns to finish off his opponent. Units included as "non-lethal" are:
Cleric
Stone
Furgon

The wisp can produce a draw in the right hands, so it's on the fence.

But, as I said, the first person must be able to kill off the non-attacking units of his opponent to begin with for this to be good. There is NO strategy in running your cleric around wildly to stall.

[Zander]

This is a good idea, it just needs to be clarified. If one person has attacking units (damage or paralysis) and the other person does not, there's no reason the first person needs to take 20 turns to finish off his opponent. Units included as "non-lethal" are:
Cleric
Stone
Furgon

The wisp can produce a draw in the right hands, so it's on the fence.

But, as I said, the first person must be able to kill off the non-attacking units of his opponent to begin with for this to be good. There is NO strategy in running your cleric around wildly to stall.
while there's no strategy in it, if it can prevent a loss it should be done. you don't deserve a win unless you literally beat the other player. if you can't manage to get that cleric/stone/furgon whatever, you havent' defeated your opponent and you don't deserve the win.

[Dresicos]

This is a good idea, it just needs to be clarified. If one person has attacking units (damage or paralysis) and the other person does not, there's no reason the first person needs to take 20 turns to finish off his opponent. Units included as "non-lethal" are:
Cleric
Stone
Furgon

The wisp can produce a draw in the right hands, so it's on the fence.

But, as I said, the first person must be able to kill off the non-attacking units of his opponent to begin with for this to be good. There is NO strategy in running your cleric around wildly to stall.

Frost vs Furgon = Draw

[Realist]

The fact that there are so many reasonable objections to the idea in general shows how complicated the rule would have to be to make it work. Complex rules are inelegant and go against the spirit of the game. So, yeah, it would be nice sometimes to not have to deal with stallers, but in this case the cure is worse than the disease.

[VAMP7]

what about frost vs chanty?

[Magician]

Frost should win, it has longer range.

[Dresicos]

Yeah frost would win unless the person with it was incredibly stupid.

[Terps rock]

The fact that there are so many reasonable objections to the idea in general shows how complicated the rule would have to be to make it work. Complex rules are inelegant and go against the spirit of the game. So, yeah, it would be nice sometimes to not have to deal with stallers, but in this case the cure is worse than the disease.

No there is a perfect way to do it,a nd we are figuring it. This isn't a never ending argument. We are coming up with a system, and that needs debate.

It doesn't need to ensure every stalling just limit some. So the rules don't have to amazing just a little tighter like with you have to have a damaging or paralysis unit including wisp or no moveable pieces (wards). To have an auto-loss. Yes, there are other ways that could come up, but just doing that would help cut down the time wasted dramatically.

[Cross Punisher]

I really don't like this idea.

"Oh I have a knight that has 23 HP, and you have a cleric and LW. Oh no you moved your cleric in range of your LW, now when I go in for the win i'll lose. I know, I think there should be a rule that I win automatically in this situation..."

"There's no way I can lose the match now, but I'm lazy/busy and don't feel like/can't find the time to play anymore I should win automatically..."

*Next Month*

"I figured that I had the advantage at the beginning of the match, but I lost anyway. I propose a rule that I win automatically is such a situattion in which I get the advantage at any moment..."

Where does it end?

[Dresicos]

It doesn't :p

[Realist]

No there is a perfect way to do it,a nd we are figuring it. This isn't a never ending argument. We are coming up with a system, and that needs debate.

You obviously didn't understand my point, and the fact that you did not, proves that it is a good point.

[Dresicos]

=\ This isn't a never ending argument, its not even an argument. This is for players to have fun and share their ideas to think who would win or lose.

[Terps rock]

No, It can be settled on rules that make sure there is no way for the opponent, no it doesn't have to be all or even close, but some help in the area, would be quite nice... Killing bw and stone can take awhile with one unit...
And it definately should not.

[uniquinous]

while there's no strategy in it, if it can prevent a loss it should be done. you don't deserve a win unless you literally beat the other player. if you can't manage to get that cleric/stone/furgon whatever, you havent' defeated your opponent and you don't deserve the win.You literally beat the other player as soon as they have no units in which to attack, and you have one that can. For example, furgy vs knight. Game over. You've lost if you get down to that. The other person HAS beaten you. It's just a matter of time. There's neither skill, nor strategy, nor luck that determines the match at that point. The *only* thing you can produce from allowing the match to continue, is stalling. Think about these matches:

scout vs cleric
assasin vs furgon
knight vs stone golem




You obviously didn't understand my point, and the fact that you did not, proves that it is a good point.You do realize that is HORRIBLE logic, right? :huh:

[CRX687]

You literally beat the other player as soon as they have no units in which to attack, and you have one that can. For example, furgy vs knight. Game over. You've lost if you get down to that. The other person HAS beaten you. It's just a matter of time. There's neither skill, nor strategy, nor luck that determines the match at that point. The *only* thing you can produce from allowing the match to continue, is stalling. Think about these matches:

scout vs cleric
assasin vs furgon
knight vs stone golem


depends on the situation... a furgon against non-mud unit can = draw.

[uniquinous]

not entirely true...

furgon vs knight can not draw.
furgon vs... erm... dragon can.
clearly this rule would be active for the former situation, and not the latter.

[Terps rock]

not entirely true...

furgon vs knight can not draw.
furgon vs... erm... dragon can.
clearly this rule would be active for the former situation, and not the latter.

If played somewhat smart, you could maybe force a draw with the 30 turn no damage :p

[Dresicos]

Exactly

This isn't a good idea at all. Unless your opponent; surrenders, leaves, loses all movable units, or blows up, you still have a chance to win/draw.

[Sangro]

You obviously didn't understand my point, and the fact that you did not, proves that it is a good point.

hes saying that the fact that you have to debate so much makes it a bad suggestion

[OpixMK]

Maybe it should be implemented as whenever there is a certain combination of units left on the field, there is an auto win / draw. This could save some time at endgames.
Here are some examples (Considering the units stated are the ONLY units left on the field):
--- Mud Golem VS Furgon --- Mud Wins
--- Stone Golem VS Enchantress-- Chanty Wins
--- Stone Golem VS Frost --- Frost Wins
--- Cleric VS Scout --- Scout Wins
--- Wisp VS Wisp --- Draw
--- Cleric VS Cleric --- Draw
--- Frosty VS Cleric + Stone Golem + BW --- Draw
--- Barrier Ward + Stone Golem + Cleric VS Knight --- Knight Wins
--- Stone Golem + Barrier Ward VS Beast Rider -- BR wins
--- Stone Golem + Barrier Ward VS Assassin - Assassin Wins
--- Furgon VS Knight/Assassin - Knight/Assassin wins
--- Furgon VS Witch --- Draw IF it is Furgon's turn and the Furgon CAN MOVE
--- Furgon VS Dragon -- Draw if Furgon has more than 28 HP

[MicSpor]

With all the furgon ones that is wrong.

There could be a draw.

[OpixMK]

MicSpor, Furgon will lose to a Mud Golem because MudQuake will destroy any shrub defense that the Furgon has put up.
And Furgon will keep putting shrubs all around itself, forcing a drawed game against a Dragon.
The Furgon / Witch battle is harder to explain, but I'm definitely sure that a Furgon will always draw against a witch if it is the Furgon's turn.

[MicSpor]

Nice Edit. Wheres all the Furgon vrs other units? :( ;)

And btw, a furgon cannot beat a witch any way, any how.

[OpixMK]

I didn't say a furgon could beat a Witch. I only said it could draw against it.
(if it was Furgon's turn and the Furgon could move)

[Hellblazer]

MicSpor, Furgon will lose to a Mud Golem because MudQuake will destroy any shrub defense that the Furgon has put up.

Yeah, and you could keep up that same pattern until your opponent surrenders if you're good enough. Also, something like your analogy on the DT vs. Furgon could happen.

[bobo99]

Totally off topic but since mods are acually looking at this thread, what happens if your last unit an assassin blows up on the rest of your opponents remaining units? Is it a draw? or...?

[stryker]

That's a draw.

[MicSpor]

I didn't say a furgon could beat a Witch. I only said it could draw against it.
(if it was Furgon's turn and the Furgon could move)

Read your post above my first post. It ays furgon will win.

[bobo99]

Ok sryker, always wanted to know that never had a chance to acually do that so...

[me14k]

This is actually a good idea, although it shouldnt include paralizing units and furgons(can force draw).

[OpixMK]

It doesn't include paralysing units as a draw.

[Ninai]

This is good idea,but who will make it ..