I usually PM both of them this kind of stuff. Might be 'legal' might not be, depends.Patchouli_Knowledge wrote:Is loftar the only one I need to talk to in regards to a game-breaking exploit? I may have found a way to make an impenetrable low-tech village that still follows the rules in regards to battering rams. Furthermore it is invulnerable to the loophole of creating a brick-wall to invalidate a defense.
-
DatOneGuy
- Posts: 5553
- Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 7:50 am
- Location: I'm in Miami, trick.
Re: Vault question on Legality.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-
NaoWhut
- Posts: 4852
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:55 pm
- Location: |.
Re: Vault question on Legality.
you mean like making it so there's
only room for one person to get on
the ram?
only room for one person to get on
the ram?


-
Valten21
- Posts: 2053
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:40 pm
- Location: Vancouver, Canada
Re: Vault question on Legality.
I kind of wanted to build a ton of minesupports around a house. While it wouldn't be effective, it would be funny.
You may have foiled the plans of BAD-EVIL this time, but there is no rest for the wicked.
-
Patchouli_Knowledge
- Posts: 2248
- Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:57 am
Re: Vault question on Legality.
Impenetrable to where you can simply let them ram and they will still make no progress. Multiply this problem by 5 times per layer of earth and even wall jumping is no longer going to be viable.

-=The law of inverse desire=- The chances of dropping what you want is the reciprocal of how much you want it.
-
NaoWhut
- Posts: 4852
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:55 pm
- Location: |.
-
Patchouli_Knowledge
- Posts: 2248
- Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:57 am
Re: Vault question on Legality.
That is an extremely inefficient method and only having more viability over strongbox in terms of destructibility, though to be fair, some people are already starting to break strongboxes.NaoWhut wrote:made entirely out of cornerposts? ehh

-=The law of inverse desire=- The chances of dropping what you want is the reciprocal of how much you want it.
-
Saphireking65
- Posts: 856
- Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 5:35 pm
- Location: Stormwind
Re: Vault question on Legality.
1369 str is needed with a sledgehammer, meaning they need 959 str (with buffs) and full barbarianism to even begin damaging a strongbox
Jackard wrote:fucking wizardsSotsa wrote:I'm sad to see a wizard has shrunk your cabin and put it in a bottle.
better luck next time.
-
DrakenRahl
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:20 pm
Re: Vault question on Legality.
yep. Been eating 30 MBC / day for awhile.some people are already starting to break strongboxes.
but i suppose you want a screen shot. will do next box I rape.
Bite Me
-
novaalpha
- Posts: 1490
- Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 11:42 pm
- Location: Sparta
Re: Vault question on Legality.
Cool story, bro 
-
Sarchi
- Posts: 2517
- Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 1:14 am
- Location: 109, -37
Re: Vault question on Legality.
You rape boxes?