"Blocking" legal?

[Bobj]

How is sending an army with 1 recruit a violation of TOS?
Jeesh, they need to be rooting out these multi-acct users, not wasting time with this.

Why should simply attacking a camp with one general delete its aggro radius for another one? It is the timing that is involved here that makes this seem like a bug that is being exploited, otherwise if this was intended to happen why would you need to game the system by sending them at the same time etc...sorry if they say this is not legal and you will then loose more troops on your adventures but for those of us who are playing this game straight-up it is unfair if people were taking advantage of this. You get mad at multi-account people I didn't go and post harassment of you for that pay me the same respect. I'm only asking for what the developers stance is on this not the opinions of the playing community.

[Jethro702]

How is sending an army with 1 recruit a violation of TOS?
Jeesh, they need to be rooting out these multi-acct users, not wasting time with this.

I agree with this, I see no reason for this to be a violation of ToS. The GM's time should be spent on more important things.

[Bobj]

The GM's time should be spent on more important things.

No one is asking for punishments to be doled out, no one is pointing fingers at any one. I wish to know for my own personal information. Never at any point did I call anyone out for doing this, I simply think it is not so much time if a GM were to post a yes or a no on this. If they don't have the time I am not going to complain I know they are busy. But to try and make this seem as if a response would cause someone to clock overtime, is a bit of an exaggeration can't we agree?

[EpsilonSilver]

I'm only asking for what the developers stance is on this not the opinions of the playing community.

This is a forum where people discuss things and share opinions.

You could have just filed a support ticket or specified that you wanted people to read but not comment on this.

Where are you being harassed, by the way? I am missing that.

[frood42]

How is sending an army with 1 recruit a violation of TOS?
Jeesh, they need to be rooting out these multi-acct users, not wasting time with this.

I agree. I first discovered this looking at the German tactics maps. I use the strategy on many adventures. I cannot see that it can be anything but a valid technique for better gameplay. The people that are crying "exploit" are probably those that cannot get the placement and timing right for it to work.

Block on!

[Bobj]

From the "Official Code of Conduct" : "7. It is forbidden to abuse or exploit any bugs, anomalies, development errors or problems arising during the game. Under no circumstances is a player authorized to use a function for anything other than its intended use." I'm simply wondering if this was an intended use or not. It's not for us as players to say (even though we may have opinions) if this intended or not. I simply started this thread to ask Blue Byte if this Is appropriate. I'm not starting this thread to call anyone out or to make enemies here. If anything I've said up to this point has been misconstrued as such let me be perfectly clear. I want to know for my own personal information, not to throw anyone under the bus or get people in trouble. Thanks in advance.

[Jethro702]

From the "Official Code of Conduct" : "7. It is forbidden to abuse or exploit any bugs, anomalies, development errors or problems arising during the game. Under no circumstances is a player authorized to use a function for anything other than its intended use." I'm simply wondering if this was an intended use or not. It's not for us as players to say (even though we may have opinions) if this intended or not. I simply started this thread to ask Blue Byte if this Is appropriate. I'm not starting this thread to call anyone out or to make enemies here. If anything I've said up to this point has been misconstrued as such let me be perfectly clear. I want to know for my own personal information, not to throw anyone under the bus or get people in trouble. Thanks in advance.

So far I have not seen anyone called out, besides that dynamite uses blocks like many others... and since this is a forum I guess we can post our opinions on threads we wish. I hope you get your answer from a BB, but I dont think it will stop people.

[sagminor]

In board war gaming (I know probably no one does that anymore) this is called sluffing. In reality it is sacrificing a force/units to engage an enemy that could interfere with the the main attack you are trying to achieve. It is tactically and strategically sound (conversation of force, massing units at main point). Perhaps a mininum amount of units/combat power, say 10 recruits would be more "reasonable", as one recruit seems a bit small. Kind of like using a "truck" to block a tank company's advance in some game's I've played.

[metalmaniac]

its a strategy, you lose a general, not a exploit

[EpsilonSilver]

Why should simply attacking a camp with one general delete its aggro radius for another one? It is the timing that is involved here that makes this seem like a bug that is being exploited, otherwise if this was intended to happen why would you need to game the system by sending them at the same time etc...sorry if they say this is not legal and you will then loose more troops on your adventures but for those of us who are playing this game straight-up it is unfair if people were taking advantage of this. You get mad at multi-account people I didn't go and post harassment of you for that pay me the same respect. I'm only asking for what the developers stance is on this not the opinions of the playing community.

That's what I misconstrued.