deployment during truce or forced truce *Rejected*

[DangerBoy]

I don't know if this has ever been discussed before, but I had a new idea that could be made available: deploying on another opposition player but only during a truce.

Sometimes you have to make an alliance with someone for the sake of staying alive. What if part of that was being able to deploy on your truce partner? At the very least, if you enter into a truce, what if there was a button where you hit it and you are not allowed to attack the person you entered into the alliance with? I'm not quite sure what people think of being able to fortify a truce partner so I'll save that idea for another thread.

I admit the idea of deploying on a truce partner would be difficult to implement, but I'm just throwing out the idea assuming that the creators of the site could do it. Perhaps it could be experimented with at first with only allowing premium members to exercise it in games with other premium members.

I also think there could be a button that you could hit called "Enter Truce" and then the drop down box for the other player's colors gives you the option to choose which person. There would also have to be a drop down box with "Number of Rounds" on it. Obviously the other player would have to hit the "Accept Truce" button for it to be enacted. But here's the deal - if you enter into a truce with another player it's absolute. If the most powerful player backs you into a corner of the map where your only option is to attack your truce partner you're stuck. There is no undoing of the truce option. I also think this would cut down on people complaining about truces being broken.

Drawback - people who are naturally dishonest wouldn't be found out and ratted out via the player feedback system?

[natty dread]

wrong forum

[DangerBoy]

.

[thebest712]

suggestions forum..
don't like the idee that much, cause I think players would make to much truces, just not to get attacked...

[natty dread]

Btw, this is a totally bad idea. Deployment on another player is already allowed in team games, and they exist for a reason - if you want to play as a team, play team games, it's that simple.

As for the "enter truce" button, what exactly would that accomplish? People can already make truces. And there's not that many people complaining about broken truces. Also, breaking truces is part of the game - if you could make truces that can't be broken then you might as well be playing a team game.

[Crazyirishman]

I think this would cause abuse. Suppose player A an B are in a truce. player A drops and forts to player B who then decides he is now strong enough to no longer need player A and breaks the truce causing all sorts of havoc across the board and possibly eliminating player A.

[stahrgazer]

I think this would cause abuse. Suppose player A an B are in a truce. player A drops and forts to player B who then decides he is now strong enough to no longer need player A and breaks the truce causing all sorts of havoc across the board and possibly eliminating player A.

um... no.. the OP's original discussion indicates that this button would make it impossible to break the truce for the given number of rounds.

I think this would cause abuse.

I agree with only your first statement (even though I showed it last). People would truce with friends; uncaught multis would truce with their multis; and give this truce-team more advantages than occur now in team games. "More" advantages because the opponents might not have made a similar truce, and won't necessarily be in the same agreement as to whom gets this kill.

[jimboston]

Did Player take over Danger Boy's account?

[TheForgivenOne]

Merged the two threads together.

[TheForgivenOne]

Sorry, but there are too many flaws with this suggestion. Rejected