http://warlight.uservoice.com/forums/77051-warlight-features/suggestions/4397887-option-to-keep-order-priority-card-when-it-fails-t

By that logic. Shouldn't your order delay card be returned if you don't get last move?

What do you mean when it "fails"? When your opponent uses one too, and it cancels yours out?Then, if you got yours back, your opponent should get his back too.

Worst. Idea. Ever.

Damn..ps is a smart guy, coding and creating clots and stuff, than he comes out with some of the worst ideas ever :/

Wowbagger: no, order priority only affects 1 move, order delay affects a lot more, it's different logic imho

x: one plays order priority to get order priority, if you don't actually get order priority when playing it then you played it for nothing, your opponent got double the benefits, not only did he get his priority, he also got yours out of your hand. i'm asking for an option to be able to configure it differently, so if you guys want to keep playing like that you can knock yourselfs out, while the rest of us who get pissed for wasting OP cards out of luck can configure the game to be a little more fair.

Red: love you too.

Technically, if both players play an OP then they cancel each other out, and move-order is random again(as if neither player played one) so i have to agree with however he calls himself now.

And if you're in an FFA? Say you have three players. A and B play order priority cards, C does not. Resulting order is A-B-C. Did B's priority card "fail"? If he was trying to go before A, then he'd consider it failed. If he just wanted to go before C, then he'd consider it a success. It's a bit ambiguous.

Only one person can go first. It's decided by random. That means you always have a 50% chance of being first. So half the time you play an order priority card, you would have been first anyway.

If you both play the OP card, then you are cancelling their card out equally as much as they are cancelling out your card. Then it reverts to the random 50-50 chance of who gets first turn.

If you were saying this, it wouldn't be so illogical: "If you play OP when you would have been randomly chosen to move first anyway, it should be returned to you." (But this would still be horrible because the idea of getting back a card that you played is confusing, especially when it would happen 50% of the time you played the card.)

If it's so bothersome then play only cyclic with no order priorities.

Good idea. There is often one turn in the whole game on which it is as important to get first move as every other turn put together. Making this alteration to strat 1v1 would go some way to mediating a players bad luck on this one, crucial turn.

When one player has a huge stack and is chasing the other, who only has one territory in an area and is trying not to get eliminated in that area, if both have OP cards then the chaser can play theirs turn 1 and if they dont get priority simply play it again turn 2 to ensure that they catch the escape artist. This would go a long way to preventing games where one person puts down a few reinforcements a turn for 4+ turns getting first move all the time and kiting a massive stack. Essentially getting a win for gambling on first turn luck turn after turn.

Why is this idea being met with hate? and fizzer, just dont allow the option in an FFA. X yes, we clearly need cyclical move order in strat 1v1.

Edited 9/6/2013 23:09:38

cyclical

When an adjective just isn't adjective-y enough.

Haha. You condescending dick weed. Do you disagree with me?

I have more important things in my life to think about. For instance "Why am I watching competitive wood chopping on sky sports 3 at 2:30am on Friday night?"

Okay, then me and PS win. Time for you to do your thing Fixxer. If you could get it done middle of next week, that would be fine. Love your work.

TL;DR: I agree with the FFA idea. Just give the OP back for Master Race games, they are the only ones that really matter anyway.

Edited 9/7/2013 04:21:22

There is often one turn in the whole game on which it is as important to get first move as every other turn put together.

1. Um, no, not "often".

2. If it's 10-15 times as important to get 1st order on that turn than any other turn, getting the order priority card back is pretty useless. Apart from your one very specific, infrequent example. (And by useless, I mean whiny bastards are still going to complain.)

3. You didn't respond to any of the reasons this is a bad idea.

4. If I am chasing a lone runner through my bonuses, and I know we both have order priority, sometimes I'll play it on the second turn instead of the first turn, so there is even an element of strategy to the example you gave.

5. This idea is going to be potentially semi-effective in like 1% of games, so you're better off campaigning for cyclic distribution instead of this slice of fried shit.

6. You are a lower level than me and your argument is therefore irrelevant.

The concept in the very thread title of an order priority card "failing" is so obviously flawed, I don't even know why I'm bothering to half-explain this to you. Just think about it for about 7.3 miliseconds, insolent child.

Thank you for showing me the error in my thinking. I humbly apologise for my insolence.

maybe we could vote x for president of something useless, might help.

Voting is inherently flawed, if you have a need for a leader i strongly suggest using a lottery-system for the candidates, the average quality of the person you make leader would hardly drop yet the need to justify/explain/lie about his actions would disappear.