Casting points

[DezNutz]

Your forgetting about those that just like to see the world burn.

Most people have a reason for their actions, it does not mean it makes sense to the target.

It doesn't matter about what the player's reasons are. It only matters in how others see it.

I'm not trying to argue against your suggestion completely. It just can't benefit a particular playing style under the guise of limiting another playing style that has been deemed toxic by the game administration.

[William one eye]

Your forgetting about those that just like to see the world burn.

Most people have a reason for their actions, it does not mean it makes sense to the target.

It doesn't matter about what the player's reasons are. It only matters in how others see it.

Only if one of the parties involved cares what others think.

[DezNutz]

Not exactly. CJ sees it as toxic game play, and has stated as such. You clearly see it as a bad thing as well, otherwise you wouldn't have made the suggestion as such. The WDs reasons are irrelevant.

[William one eye]

Not exactly. CJ sees it as toxic game play, and has stated as such. You clearly see it as a bad thing as well, otherwise you wouldn't have made the suggestion as such. The WDs reasons are irrelevant.

I already stated I don't have to much problem with WD's. I have a problem with a fear that a more restrictive suggestion than mine will get implemented. Meaning more restrictive to all players, not just a witch doctor.


A witch doctor that works for pay, by casting for people on other people, will be hindered by this.
as this will cut into their profit.

a player that has a grudge with you or multiple players, who has defleeted and intends to mess with you at any opportunity will not be hindered by anything. Even if you completely block witch doctor play, that player will just find a new method to ruin your day.

[DezNutz]

Both are a hinderance, but both will find ways to accomplish their goals.

My only point is that hinderance shouldn't give an unequal advantage to the other styles. If the intent is to stop and or limit the use of Style C, then any additions should be equal for Styles A and Style B. Hindering Style C should not give Style A an advantage over Style B, or vice versa.

[William one eye]

Both are a hinderance, but both will find ways to accomplish their goals.

My only point is that hinderance shouldn't give an unequal advantage to the other styles. If the intent is to stop and or limit the use of Style C, then any additions should be equal for Styles A and Style B. Hindering Style C should not give Style A an advantage over Style B, or vice versa.

lol just messing with you.
I actually agree with that point, although the way it is worded is confusing.
The problem is that merchants will complain this hurts them and pirates will complain this hurts them. Both will have valid arguments.

[DezNutz]

Sorry, complicated issues require even more complicated conversations.

As I said in previous topics, the only solution that is equal and doesn't favor a particular side is phasing out the voodoo into game/battle mechanics and features. Not all voodoo would need to be phased out, as voodoo can still be a powerful tool, just the voodoo that enable WDs.

[William one eye]

Sorry, complicated issues require even more complicated conversations.

As I said in previous topics, the only solution that is equal and doesn't favor a particular side is phasing out the voodoo into game/battle mechanics and features. Not all voodoo would need to be phased out, as voodoo can still be a powerful tool, just the voodoo that enable WDs.

I have no problem with this, actually I have no problem with conversion and phase out any voodoo that can be achieved by other mechanics,
not just stuff that affects witch doctors.

Not saying I want all voodoo gone, but it does in many cases do things that would be more fun to do in other ways.
For example instead of black death, some alternatives could be:


sending a foot army that you have to hire and deliver by ship that goes in and kills population, they have risks their own, like being killed or captured. Currently only suggesting you deliver troops and a mechanic function determine the outcome of the battle. This could be taken
to much higher levels of detail. You even risk loosing troops to skirmish.

A ship based attack on the coast that incurs ship danger. In a similar manner each attack would generate coastal damage by a game mechanic function.

choice of both would be nice