by Xepshunall » Fri Feb 22, 2013 12:31 am
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this a little like putting the cart before the horse? You seem to be saying that he lost because his ship would have sank if he had possessed 200 ships or more. Sinking is dependent on loosing. Not the other way around. If it isn't explained properly, then the penalty should not be imposed. If, in fact, both ships had equal damage then a tie should have been declared. If both had 100% damage then both should have been devoured by the sea. It's clear to me and likely to all who read this that there is something very wrong with your logic as to whether this is a tie or not. If both are totaled then either both lost or both won. Therefore it is a tie. Whether the ship should have sunk if he had possessed 200 ships or more is arguable but I'd say that based on the win/loss/tie rules regarding sinking, the argument for the ship having not sank under those conditions stands a better chance of holding true than the opposite unless you are willing to admit that there are no guarantees to the integrity of the rules in Pirates Glory. So simply put, it's just a statistic. What's the harm in allowing it to be accurate?
Now look at it from the other angle. What's the harm in allowing it to be inaccurate and, in fact, arguing in favor of the inaccuracy with a complete disregard for logic. I see harm being done here instead of justice. The outcome of two ships reaching 100% damage is that both sink. To the best of my knowledge, the NPC group is well over 200 ships strong. In fact its fleets are infinite. If anything, the NPC group was guaranteed a ship loss more surely than was the player who has a single ship. If your argument for why the player lost was even remotely logical then it would only have been backwards and the win would have certainly belonged to the player with 1 ship. The fact, if nobody saying anything that is actually a lie, is that it was a tie.
Again, correct me if I'm wrong because English is my primary language so I expect text in English to mean what it says by English definitions. I know that this game was made to be played in English and that it's a struggle to design a text-based game in a language you aren't 100% fluent in. My hat goes off to you there. Still logic is logic regardless of any language barriers and expectations are that what is said to be the rule is the rule.
Yesterday I gave my all. Today I'll give more. Tomorrow, I'll take back what you took for granted.