Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Feud Cancellation

Caldeathe Baequiannia
Because it is counter to logic for one side of a battle to be able to say "the battle is over" because they have achieved their own objectives.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Mourn Blackhand
I believe that you should NOT be able to cancel a feud after engagement. BUT, once again GW mechanics allow it so…. Do as you will until otherwise restricted…. Nothing new here.

On a side note, welcome back to Tink, he was a force to be reckoned with today and will certainly make things more challenging for us.
Tink says Stab
Stab.

It does seem odd that a feud can be cancelled *after* it has been started. Personally, I believe that once a feud has started, it should run until the predetermined end time. Or it should require both parties to cancel it to remove it while it is still ongoing.
Tink quivers in sheer euphoria as the dank memes course through his fedora
Tigari
I view it as one of those "meaningful Choices" the game is supposed to be about. The aggressor CHOSE to have a fued be x long, they should not be able to change their mind afterwords. (part of that actions have reactions/consequences thing)
Midnight
I crowdforgingly agree with Caldeathe, Mourn, and Tigari.

But if the devs don't listen, I don't mind much. Like all things PvP… I can do everything the other guy can do, so it's usually fair.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Elsworth Sugarfoot
I was just under the impression that the only time you would be able to cancel a feud was the hour before it actually began. I thought the feud was kind of a double edged sword where you expose yourself for the length of the feud.
Baron Malthius
Based on what I recall hearing from the last dev chat, the idea post EE10 was to extend the default feud time to 24 hours with the clear intent to give the opposing side some time to get back. I understood it as a sort of risk-reward system and while you can feud whoever you wish it was a strategic decision that had to be made.

If that is accurate, wouldn't the ability to cancel a feud midway nullify that? I don't see what good it will do to have 24 hour feuds be the default if the feud can simply be turned off a few hours into it. The only thing I could see changing as a result is higher feud costs perhaps, but from a point of view of strategic warfare that kind of eliminates a lot of depth to feud-based PvP.

If that is how the devs intend for it to work then that's their decision, though I will say I would be puzzled if that was the case.
Edam
Tink says Stab
. Or it should require both parties to cancel it to remove it while it is still ongoing.

Having mutual agreed truces (because bored/payed-ransom-to-gnomes/more-important-stuff-came-up) mechanically cancelling a feud should definitely be a thing.

You could potentially even build the payment of the ransom into the mechanism to cancel the feud. A company that accepts a ransom to call off a feud should be unable to feud the same company for a reasonably long period.
Baron Malthius
Edam
Tink says Stab
. Or it should require both parties to cancel it to remove it while it is still ongoing.

Having mutual agreed truces (because bored/payed-ransom-to-gnomes/more-important-stuff-came-up) mechanically cancelling a feud should definitely be a thing.

You could potentially even build the payment of the ransom into the mechanism to cancel the feud. A company that accepts a ransom to call off a feud should be unable to feud the same company for a reasonably long period.

I like the ransom idea. It gives a mechanic in game to essentially surrender. I like this smile
Quijenoth
Probably not worth investigating now until towers are gone but what about applying victory conditions to Feuds.

Lets say once;
  • X amount of resource have been looted,
  • X number of holdings destroyed,
  • X amount of player kills,
  • X amount of caravans interdicted?

just some ideas. perhaps some victory condition rewards should be a thing also although the conditions should be their own reward most of the time.

Also +1 on the ransom idea. I personally feel non-pvp settlements should have some way of negating a feud if it doesn't fit their play-style.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post