Changing the rules of KoAA!

[Kixxe]

I've been thinking of chianging the rules of KoAA to stop pepole from making games a "draw" to keep the crown...

http://taspring.clan-sy.com/wiki/King_of_AA

I think this fits...

. In 1vs1 games any commander that dguns, self destructs, or commander bombs another commander will result in a loss.

So, i would like pepole's oppinion before changing (Again, since someone reverted it as soon as i tried) and some help editing it so it fits "thy aincent law".



andddd.... GO!

[Neddie]

I support King Titles, and I think a reword might be in order. That one looks solid for AA.

[Hellspawn]

Use tournament rules?

[BoredJoe]

i dislike that rule- if a player leaves his base open enough for a commander to come straight in and take his base out (knowing the other players comm is too far away from that point) i see no reason why that player shouldnt be able to do that- its a valid tactic. Rules on actual gameplay should be limitless- it's up to the challenger to specify if it's comm ends/limit dgun/etc, so the challenger can easily stop it happening by choosing comm continues

[LordMatt]

Has this been a problem recently?

[Ishach]

I dont like the idea of imposing rules on what you can do with what units at what time, but it is a concern on game ends because if the person wants to combomb the other comm its hard to stop.

[Neddie]

i dislike that rule- if a player leaves his base open enough for a commander to come straight in and take his base out (knowing the other players comm is too far away from that point) i see no reason why that player shouldnt be able to do that- its a valid tactic. Rules on actual gameplay should be limitless- it's up to the challenger to specify if it's comm ends/limit dgun/etc, so the challenger can easily stop it happening by choosing comm continues

That's true - but if we don't have the restriction for Comm Ends, now that this idea has been posed publicly, some people will try to exploit the rule.

[Kixxe]

It could also only be

In 1vs1 games any commander that dguns, self destructs, or commander bombs another commander will result in a loss.

[Ishach]

D-Gunning and Self-D'ing are easy to identify, but it could be a bit hazy trying to decide what was on purpose and what was accidental in terms of a comsplosion destroying another commander (That wasnt Dgun'd or Self-D'd).


For example I was playing a game on Small Divide and the usual LLT spam was going on with both of us trying to grab as much land as possible on the small map. I saw a blip on the radar outside my factory so I scouted it and it was a conbot building another LLT, so i walked over and Dgunned it...Then 2 HLTs out of my line of sight carved my commander up. Then the explosion hit the other players commander who was guarding a factory just out of my LoS.


After typing that out actually, I guess even if it wasnt purposefull it would be fair enough to call me the loser in that situation.

[Hellspawn]

Hmm.. I got idea, what if comm was imune to other comm explosion? But that would more go to AA thread then KoAA <_<.

[Kixxe]

Hmm.. I got idea, what if comm was imune to other comm explosion? But that would more go to AA thread then KoAA <_<.

NOOOOOOooooo.

Example:

Addtional rule: In 1vs1 games any commander that dguns, self destructs, or commander bombs another commander will result in a loss. If defences kill one commander and the resulting explosion kills the defence owners commander, the defenders commander will have won.



Only problem with this rule that I see is the fact that if 2 commanders meet, the one NOT attacking with the commander wins, or attacking with other units, such as AK's and Peewee's. And im not sure if that's a problem or not

[Ishach]

Whoever's commander is closest to the start location is named winner and then the loser can challenge them again straight away?

[BoredJoe]

i dislike that rule- if a player leaves his base open enough for a commander to come straight in and take his base out (knowing the other players comm is too far away from that point) i see no reason why that player shouldnt be able to do that- its a valid tactic. Rules on actual gameplay should be limitless- it's up to the challenger to specify if it's comm ends/limit dgun/etc, so the challenger can easily stop it happening by choosing comm continues

That's true - but if we don't have the restriction for Comm Ends, now that this idea has been posed publicly, some people will try to exploit the rule.

it's a risk you take when you play comm ends in every and any game- it's easy to stop two comms meeting so i don't see why the rule should be imposed- if you have "won" and the koaa comm bombs you to cause a draw, you should

1. expect it because you're winning and it's his last desperate chance
2. prepare for it (a few llts, defenders and maybe some scouting is all it takes to secure a win)

[NOiZE]

The rule isn't necessary for KoAA. The rule IS necessary for tourneys, otherwise some match-ups will take too many tries and we will run out of time...

[Kixxe]

I recall angel to com bomb every time she was losing... it wasen't such a gret deal of fun noize. She had it for like 12 challenges and she held it that long thanks to com bombing everytime she lost. Sure, you can challenge again, but is it worth the trouble just to get com bombed AGAIN? na-ah. Offcourse, some tried to stop the com bombing by protecting the com, but they was in a disadvantge by not being able to USE their com...

[Neddie]

i dislike that rule- if a player leaves his base open enough for a commander to come straight in and take his base out (knowing the other players comm is too far away from that point) i see no reason why that player shouldnt be able to do that- its a valid tactic. Rules on actual gameplay should be limitless- it's up to the challenger to specify if it's comm ends/limit dgun/etc, so the challenger can easily stop it happening by choosing comm continues

That's true - but if we don't have the restriction for Comm Ends, now that this idea has been posed publicly, some people will try to exploit the rule.

it's a risk you take when you play comm ends in every and any game- it's easy to stop two comms meeting so i don't see why the rule should be imposed- if you have "won" and the koaa comm bombs you to cause a draw, you should

1. expect it because you're winning and it's his last desperate chance
2. prepare for it (a few llts, defenders and maybe some scouting is all it takes to secure a win)

Good point. You know, now I want to challenge for the title - and I know I'm just mediocre.

[Dragon45]

I relaly dont support the rules change. In AA, its exceptionally easy to stop a commander bombing with two or maybe three LLTs tops, or an LLT and a beamer, etc.

Adding more rules will just end up turning KoAA into a bureaucratic nightmare ala Dungeons and Dragons.

I think current rules are fine, IOW...

[Kixxe]

Again, Angel has the longest standing challenges because she COM BOMBED every opponeth she was losing to! 12 Challenges!

[Neddie]

Adding more rules will just end up turning KoAA into a bureaucratic nightmare ala Dungeons and Dragons.

On a side note, you evidently don't play D&D very often. I just ignore poorly concieved supplements, and everything remains fun and simple.

[Lolsquad_Steven]

I relaly dont support the rules change. In AA, its exceptionally easy to stop a commander bombing with two or maybe three LLTs tops, or an LLT and a beamer, etc.

Adding more rules will just end up turning KoAA into a bureaucratic nightmare ala Dungeons and Dragons.

I think current rules are fine, IOW...

Maybe you could put a disclaimer on the KoAA wiki that says something like "having the KoAA emblem doesn't mean you are the best".