Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Sypo

Visitor
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. If being allied means the loser can't take from balance then it is a disadvantage imo. Near the end of the campaign if I was balance and one side is winning I would want the loser to take our keeps/forts so that it balances out and we win. The problem is we don't fully know how the campaign rules work and if the scenarios we conceive are accurate of what will actually happen or not.
  2. Why should we care how you want to set up the first campaign? Other people on the forums care about the game and want it to test legitimately so we can find flaws and the game can come out better.
  3. This isn't a good idea because this is a test. By purposely deciding where people go and making balance the smallest it would ruin the results of the test, people should go where they want to and normally would go.
  4. A couple things we need to know -does balance get allied if one side has a slight advantage or only if the marker has gone into the red or blue. -can balance capture their own points or does it go to the side that they are allied to/has less.
  5. If its still the same as the FAQ suggests then balance wins the first one and chaos wins the second. Since there are 100 points total chaos has to have 30%(30 points in this case) more than order. Now if order had 11 chaos had 40 and balance had 49 then balance would win. This is going off a possibly outdated FAQ though.
×
×
  • Create New...