Attacking players from the same Alliance

[Else]

Was it ever open for debate attacking members from your same Alliance? It would help for cooperative progress like leveling colored elemental, reducing heat scars, getting wins, etc.....

[No one]

Yes, it was
It was concluded that it is an acceptable limitation for alliances.

On another note/rant: why bother with fights ?

[Jubaris]

I think it was introduced originally to avoid abuses such as ally members using 'jump to leader' to a remote location and then they get to train for stats which would threaten the balance of power in the world as we knew it  But people could drop the badge and then train, it was just abuse with extra steps.

Since MD is in a period where everything is changing and reconsidered in a more practicle way, perhaps this issue could be revisited... For me personally, it would be okay for ally members to be able to attack each other.

[Chewett]

Any other opinions? Open for change but we may want to take into account TC and similar?

[Fyrd Argentus]

I'll repeat something I said on another thread...

I think it should be allowed, but I think you should lose alliance loyalty if you do, and something should stop you from going negative - either a mechanic or a threat of being kicked out of the alliance.

[Miq]

I see no reason for allowing it. If one wants to grind there are means. But not having combat between alliance members is kind of a symbolic thing, something gained something lost.

[Fyrd Argentus]

59 minutes ago, Miq said:

no reason for allowing it

too many "rules" instead of "consequences".

[No one]

yes, rules make things simpler as it they can be code-enforced.
Consequences make them complicated as they need to be understood by everybody  , thus abuses are really easy to achieve but difficult to prevent.

[Ledah]

True, instead of a rule I believe anyone who attacks their own ally member should be summarily executed and have their account reset... as a consequence.

[Jubaris]

I think Fyrd does refer to coded consequences, No one, like negative loyalty points. 

Annihilating your ally members can be perceived as disloyal, so maybe negative valuing such fights (Sword/Sheet), while not damaging sparring fights such as no damage ones. 

[Miq]

And for what gain?

[Jubaris]

So people can use the combat system, there are too few people around to prevent people that are naturally spending more time with each other to block them from training creatures/stats, and sharing combat knowledge. 

[No one]

 

8 hours ago, Jubaris said:

So people can use the combat system, there are too few people around to prevent people that are naturally spending more time with each other to block them from training creatures/stats, and sharing combat knowledge. 

I get you Juba, but what's the point ? Isn't the trend to limit one-sided activity ?
I used to play MD just by gathering resources and trading and that is messed up now. The independent items are now considered as normal (Ann 5168)

Also, growing creatures is being penalized, big time: Change regarding the creature recruiting cost.

Why would fighting be allowed instead of limited ?

[Jubaris]

Thanks for the links, I was actually unaware of some changes made due to being inactive

What do you mean by one sided activity? I'd imagine with more targets, combat oriented people would stay logged in more, which would encourage other folks to participate too. I approximate a 20% online people increase (from 10 to 12, nice magical number, MD apostoles)