It's about what will be more fun and fair in the game. Not that many guilds will just be full of rich alts, but most strong guild would definitely wardec every single weaker guild if they thought they'd get more money out of it. And smaller guilds are usually closer-knit, so if they get constantly killed by strong guilds, they're more likely to just leave rather than split up and reform or join other guilds.We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.
Except they won't in the context of a war. They'd only be dying over and over again losing nothing. Node citizens would be dying, but we don't know how often sieges will be declared, so those citizens would also just die w/o losing much.We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.
The wars should have a goal, which is different from just "the other side pays you in cash". The goal should obviously pay out more than you paid to wardec. Surrender =/= your win, it means their loss.We have not received permission from Veeshan to share the quoted post.
Siege is not a war, so they can't destroy anything in a war. And if you mean destroy everything in a siege, yes, that's the goal of the siege, but it still wouldn't be a surrender.We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.
Node wars are not node sieges. They are completely different things, even if related.We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.
Wars in Ashes are already goal-based. Bullying other guilds/nodes is not the point of wars. The bluffing can't work if you ask your guild/node-mates and they all say they haven't been killed by the enemy a single time. If anything, that would probably mean that this untouched side can just go and win the war by achieving the war's goal.We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.
False.We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.
Yes, they may. And if those people get attacked all the time and disagree with the war, they may vote to surrender. But strong nodes/guilds shouldn't be able to abuse this by constantly overwhelming the weaker side.We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.
Again, higher payout has nothing to do with diplomacy. Neither does bullying. The guilds/nodes may force someone to surrender, but they shouldn't be able to always benefit from this.We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.
Again though, we're talking about different things. The thread is called "g/n WARS", not sieges. Siege surrender costs would have to be huge, because the whole goal of the node siege is to destroy it and loot all the shit inside it. Sieges will also only last a couple of hours instead of potentially 20h at the least for wars.We have not received permission from Veeshan to share the quoted post.
Except we agree that there should be a diplomatic way out of a war (and even a siege). What we don't agree on is that this diplomatic outcome should be beneficial to the initiator.We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.
Wars in Ashes have goals that will reward you for a win, that's the point of the wars here, not just to kill the other side.We have not received permission from Veeshan to share the quoted post.
Yes, that's the whole point of a siege.We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.