GuildWar Improvements

[Bereror]

Well I agree that starting an attack should be easier by simply double clicking on someone for example.

I have never tested it, but if you look at the page Controls -> Entities in the options, I guess it can be already done so. The default for double clicking on players is to show the description window, but can be changed to Exchange or Attack.

[Quitarias]

how about a /target enimy
that would target the nearest player that you are in direct combat with
that would offer less abuse chance and solve Drahs targeting problem

[Gwinn Ravenn]

In mideval times the shields where used to distinguish friend from for, as it was a time when uniforms did not exist. it was easy to tell from a didtance who your enemy was. it /target outlaw. it would be like attacking that persons shield. it isnt realistic to target a dead friend either but that happens as well,  there are some things that are just not going to be realistic it is a game after all. personall I think being able to target your ememy is more relistic than targeting at random the person next to you. and while we can not usually tell a personas name by just looking at them  it is easy enough to recognise a person at a distance as someone you know or the symbols on there shield or tunic. this was the whole purpose of heladry and coast of arms after all to be able to know your friends and enemies on the field of battle. our guild badges are our coats of arms. just my opinion.

[bilbous]

I would also like to suggest that not all "friendly fire" instances in real life are accidental. Sometimes they are score settling or other criminal actions.

[Garile]

it is easy enough to recognise a person at a distance as someone you know or the symbols on there shield or tunic. this was the whole purpose of heladry and coast of arms after all to be able to know your friends and enemies on the field of battle.

OK this makes three assumptions I can't agree with

1. Who says wearing a shield or tunic with symbols to be able to identify someone with is comon practice in PS? This wasn't even that comon as is said here in medevil times.

Just think of movies like Braveheart and Arthur. Did you see the scots wearing uniforms? Wearing shield to show what lord they served? Would you be able to tell from what clan wich scot is? I would think not. Seen the Saksen horde? Do you see any identifying ffeatures there?

And these are movies that make sure there are differences. Movies where the armor will shine and be placed right in view so you know what side you are looking at.

2. As far as I know heraldy is a knight thing and most of the participant in a battle wouldn't be knights. There are pikeman and crossbowmen and swordsmen. Even if both sides would be using them only the leaders would have such a shield most likely. And even if they had each knight would have their own symbols. With 300 knights on each side would you know all your oponents symbol by heart?

3. As far as I know heraldy was used a symbol for the family plus personal symbols. Simply to show what you stood for and to make identifying easy in a mostly illiterate society. That these sybols then would be set on shields somtimes as a show of pride hardly makes that they made the symbols to be recognized on the battlefield.