Official List of Demands ( Change )

[Admiral Nelson]

Recently, I have cast a few Official List of Demands on certain players, and believe the card is too powerful - So this is the change.

Instead of the 15% inside the players warehouse gets destroyed, change it to 10% - Although it can still be a great amount, it will mean more cards are needed to be casting making " total destruction" a harder move.

Whilst to balance this off we change the card so it can destroy Gold Bars; But instead of 10% of the gold bars to match the other resource it will be put at 2.5% of Gold bars in selected warehouse. I believe this balances it out; Yes it means 'Backbones' can be effected but if you have one in every warehouse... it will take approximately... 840 Official List of Demands in order to wipe a majority of it out, even then there will still be resource left.

* This is a alternate decision then Caged Warehouse card *

[Sebena]

-10

[Admiral Nelson]

-10

So, let me get this straight...

You guys moan about Official list of Demands in a " Suggestion " in a none obvious manner and suggest a " Safe Haven " card however when it comes to changing the card you guys do not want to?

You have me very confused?

However I appreciate the reply, even if it is Spam.

[Most Lee Harmless]

My only issue with the proposed change is its necessity : I dont see why being able to trash GB holdings as well as other resources is important enough to warrant the change, balanced though it may be. It comes across as being a bit petty and mean, displaying a desire to totally ferk a player in every resource orifice and leaving none unsullied. I do think its a good feature to leave some areas untouchable : the game has never had the means to totally destroy a players account, the intent has always been that one can and should bounce back, there should always the means to rebuild remained no matter how severe the kicking received : the current mood of looking for ways to totally destroy an account is a worrying trend. I dont say this suggestion is made to only do that, but the cumulative effects of it and others made recently act to that end.

[Admiral Nelson]

My only issue with the proposed change is its necessity : I dont see why being able to trash GB holdings as well as other resources is important enough to warrant the change, balanced though it may be. It comes across as being a bit petty and mean, displaying a desire to totally ferk a player in every resource orifice and leaving none unsullied. I do think its a good feature to leave some areas untouchable : the game has never had the means to totally destroy a players account, the intent has always been that one can and should bounce back, there should always the means to rebuild remained no matter how severe the kicking received : the current mood of looking for ways to totally destroy an account is a worrying trend. I dont say this suggestion is made to only do that, but the cumulative effects of it and others made recently act to that end.

See this is the kind of responses I need; As Haron states a - 1 is not helpful and Danik just gave a description to why.

It may seem petty and mean, but when one Official list of demands destroys 50,000 resources of X player ( Not going to mention his name ) it is too powerful thus I believe it should be turned down to 10% ( I would say 5% but its a major tweak and makes it not worthy with the amount of turns ). By doing this, the 'required' amount of Official list of demands is approximately 60, of which I think this is needed to double as you said Danik ' Destroying an account is a worrying trend ' so why not make this card " Less worthy ".

Regarding Gold Bars, I suppose you are right so maybe either reduce the amount of gold bars lost to 1% which is considerably small ( If we assume the average player has a 5000 gold bar supply ) - Or just forget about the Gold Bar percentage and just change the card to 5% to 10%.

[Most Lee Harmless]

OLOD is a powerful card : once you locate the main w/h of a player it can and does cause great loss if it is cast at the 'perfect' moment : It could be argued it is the risk taken when one builds up a mega-w/h for party cards (the main reason for them) and must be considered a cost of doing business : with great reward should come considerable risk of loss too : Is 15% too high? Perhaps it is : but one must measure that against the casters risk in employing it : timing is all : a cast on an empty/low stock w/h is wasted turns and also gives warning of your intent so the target can act to reduce losses from subsequent casts : I would prefer GB's to be left out of the equation as currently is the case : I like my enemies to be able to rebuild : it means a steady supply of targets and opportunities for the future and, sometimes, one needs ones enemies far more than ones friends for a bit of excitement in a game like this

[Grimrock Litless]

Casting OLoD on a w/h of someone who uses party voodoo seems pointless to the caster, he doesn't gain anything from it, but just to hurt the person.

[Admiral Nelson]

Casting OLoD on a w/h of someone who uses party voodoo seems pointless to the caster, he doesn't gain anything from it, but just to hurt the person.

Sometimes, Guluere the point is to hurt the player and not gain the gold from him.

However as Danik stated; Once you find the main warehouse ( Or multiple in some cases ) You can unleash hell and destroy such warehouses.

[ChaIbaud]

What? A CHANGE?! We merchants only like to say there should be change, we never want one to actually come along..

[Malachi Constant]

I do like the idea of the % reduction but agree the GB should be left alone.

To many cards and suggestions lately for total sullied orifice destruction.