Zorg Empire

atlervetok wrote:k can i ask a question? can mercs attack eachother and that would count for the td or what? im not really clear on that

They can. Mercs are acting as part of an alliance, therefore their triumphs or defeats count as well. But only within the confines of the war.

Arariel wrote:Oh, so am I correct in saying that both sides would have been limited to one merc each if the war had continued?

Yes. Each side can only have one merc. In any war, each side's number of mercs are limited to the number of players in the smaller alliance; so if it's player vs. alliance, there is only one allowed for each because the smaller number is one.

Ok, and how about "locking" mercs into war until it is final?

Avatar wrote:Ok, and how about "locking" mercs into war until it is final?

Oh wait a minute.... Are you saying that in real life a contractor needs to live with the person paying for a job to be done. That is absurd....

A merc should be able to walk away from a job if he has accomplished what he was paid to do... nothing more, nothing less.

No, not quite...

If I go to war with France, and France pays Mexico to lob a few rockets my way, then Mexico says France isn't paying enough and I'm bored.... I want the right to attack Mexico until my conflict with France is over. I believe, that is not out of the question to ask.

I do not want the bashing rule to apply to mercs for the duration of the war in other words.

If we can't agree to that, and can't make it happen then I ask again, what is the benefit of having mercs? The whole setup as it is right now is poorly defined and convoluted. I'd like to see some officially updated rules/faqs around mercs, or drop the idea sooner rather than later.

Avatar wrote:No, not quite...

If I go to war with France, and France pays Mexico to lob a few rockets my way, then Mexico says France isn't paying enough and I'm bored.... I want the right to attack Mexico until my conflict with France is over. I believe, that is not out of the question to ask.

I do not want the bashing rule to apply to mercs for the duration of the war in other words.

If we can't agree to that, and can't make it happen then I ask again, what is the benefit of having mercs? The whole setup as it is right now is poorly defined and convoluted. I'd like to see some officially updated rules/faqs around mercs, or drop the idea sooner rather than later.

France never did anything to you. Lol.

a merc has theright to quit and go back in anytiem he/ or she wants if the party allows, a merc cannot stay that will be unfair, and plus ur sayingthis cause of wat i did, i switched mercs over and over, i no lol
got to have strategies bro, u cant have 1 merc all the time, thats like saying. if u play this game, u gotta play it till u die, not cool, plus France vs. Mexico, lol,

I still say the mercenary should have to stick with the alliance during the war. He's acting on behalf of your alliance, and acting as a member of the alliance. He's exhausting his resources to benefit the alliance.

Personally, I wouldn't call that much of a strategy to keep switching between different ones >.>.

corbeil wrote:I still say the mercenary should have to stick with the alliance during the war. He's acting on behalf of your alliance, and acting as a member of the alliance. He's exhausting his resources to benefit the alliance.

Personally, I wouldn't call that much of a strategy to keep switching between different ones >.>.

I think the majority agree, I do, and I wish we could get some official attention in this thread.

Strategy or not, its just plain BS to allow a merc to enter into a war, defence bash you to death to run up the TD and back out before you get a chance to hit him back. The limit of mercs was a start, but there needs to be an adjustment here.

a) either attach the merc to the war and bind him to the war until an outcome is decided, or
b) only allow mercs to be hired when a war is declared by or on an individual. Then lock the point limit of the merc to 2x that of the individual declaring or delcared upon, if not
c) abolish mercs all together

The most clear path is to abolish them, and I am also behind that. You want to have war, make one and stop cherry picking.

but mercs are not of that alliance, sometimes thins come up with them too, and they have to leave, it would not be absoulutely right if somthing like taht goes, because a merc might have to leave for other things, and then things just go wrong,all out

Beast(ahsan) wrote:but mercs are not of that alliance, sometimes thins come up with them too, and they have to leave, it would not be absoulutely right if somthing like taht goes, because a merc might have to leave for other things, and then things just go wrong,all out

Vacation mode and merc cannot be replaced for the duration of the war. There is a logical answer for everything.