5 Min Ticks

[Alcibiades]

Re: 5 Min Ticks

BlackWolf the point is that you have more time to get defence there. Not that it affects how units fire at all.
Let's say hypothetically speaking it takes me 1 hour to fly across the atlantic and bomb London. That means the London has 1 hour to scramble defence to stop me from bombing them.

If my plane suddenly loses an engine, and i lose 50% of my speed, then it will take 2 hours to cross the Atlantic and bomb London. That means they suddenly have twice as much time to get defence up against me....

Yeah but your bombs still kills as effectively. Got it clearer?

Once again BlackWolf you manage to miss the point in a spectacular manner. This has *nothing* to do with how your units fire, or how effectively they kill anything. Nothing, whatsoever, at any point.

Once you do that it's clear that it will become easier to organize and send defence.

Simpler BW? Or should i repost what toby, and myself both said as well?

Anyways, fantastic news about 10 minute ticks. \o/

 

[BlackWolf]

Re: 5 Min Ticks

How many times I have to say things to you?
Your dump or something?
Dont you freaking get anything that others say?

Go read what I wrote, I said that ticks have nothing to do with killing somene simple as that! FFS how hard it is to understand? If we talk about how many times you must recall due defence then we are talking of different thing! Your units are still killing at exactly same strength no matter how long ticks are so killing people is as easy as always! Game works exactly same way!

How hard it is to get throught alliances defence changes but that has nothing to do with killing people. Thats it I have now made it "bushtarion for idiots" version. Hope you finally get it now.

Man some people can be stupid when they really dont use their brains.

 

[rooney]

Re: 5 Min Ticks

BW - why do u think exitlude had such an easy time? (and im not taking anything away from them, i know there skilled players) but they chose units that can attack and defend ETA 3. thats 15 minutes. my PC takes 20 to start up ffs. 15 minutes to get someone online is very little time at all. even 25 minutes in an ETA 5 attack is pushing it. defence is next to impossible to organise with more than a few incomings. ofc 5min ticks makes killing someone easier.

What are you talking about?
We only defended with the people we had online.

Get yourself an alliance that has 7/8 people who know how to activate a HL.
We saw incs at eta 4 and could of sent CW or Ranger to def easy if we had them ...

Most units ingame are eta 3 when boosted so i dont really get your point.
+ We MIDDLE TICKED alot of incs.
Look middle ticked up!


x

twigley you said yourself that you chose to have so many thugs to take advantage of the 5minute ticks, so why are you now telling me im wrong?

 

[tobapopalos]

Re: 5 Min Ticks

How hard it is to get throught alliances defence changes but that has nothing to do with killing people.

If you have to recall your attack 10 times before you get through on your target, then it would be reasonable to say that 10 failed attacks means it is more difficult to kill that target than if you got through after 5 failed attacks. Of course your units still perform the same when you get there. Nobody is arguing otherwise. But you cannot disagree that having longer ticks would make it more difficult to get through defences, which is the only point I have been trying to make.

I have read what you have written. I understand your point, for I am blessed with a rather incredible intellect. The point still stands that if ticks were longer it would be more difficult, or would take more time if you prefer that phrasing, to catch targets offline and to kill them. Do you disagree with that?

 

[bushplaya69]

Re: 5 Min Ticks

I understand your point, for I am blessed with a rather incredible intellect.

nah hahaha

 

[BlackWolf]

Re: 5 Min Ticks

How hard it is to get throught alliances defence changes but that has nothing to do with killing people.

have read what you have written. I understand your point, for I am blessed with a rather incredible intellect. The point still stands that if ticks were longer it would be more difficult, or would take more time if you prefer that phrasing, to catch targets offline and to kill them. Do you disagree with that?

What is there to agree/disagree with?
Ofc it is harder to get past defence if ticks are longer, so it is harder to get throught defence of less active players, same goes for all less active alliances etc. Who cares.... it is decision between mediocre and top players, we all have our opinions and Azzer is making the decision. Yet it still doesnt affect killing of someone, as I mentioned in my previous post, just reaching them.

I played PA for some years before bush and never I thouht how hard it was to attack someone, as it wasnt. Even tick length was 1h. Compare that to this kind of ridiculous BS about 10 and 15 mins ticks and it starts to sound pretty damn funny to me. Where is the difference? In that one game was played by 10s of thousands of people and one is played by only handfull due its activity demands... decision is Azzers.

 

[tobapopalos]

Re: 5 Min Ticks

How hard it is to get throught alliances defence changes but that has nothing to do with killing people.

have read what you have written. I understand your point, for I am blessed with a rather incredible intellect. The point still stands that if ticks were longer it would be more difficult, or would take more time if you prefer that phrasing, to catch targets offline and to kill them. Do you disagree with that?

What is there to agree/disagree with?
Ofc it is harder to get past defence if ticks are longer, so it is harder to get throught defence of less active players, same goes for all less active alliances etc. Who cares.... it is decision between mediocre and top players, we all have our opinions and Azzer is making the decision. Yet it still doesnt affect killing of someone, as I mentioned in my previous post, just reaching them.

I played PA for some years before bush and never I thouht how hard it was to attack someone, as it wasnt. Even tick length was 1h. Compare that to this kind of ridiculous BS about 10 and 15 mins ticks and it starts to sound pretty damn funny to me. Where is the difference? In that one game was played by 10s of thousands of people and one is played by only handfull due its activity demands... decision is Azzers.

I didn't say it would make it difficult, I said it would be *more* difficult.

If you agree that having longer ticks would make it harder to get past defence, then we have nothing to argue about. That is the only point I was trying to make, before you started arguing semantics.

 

[BlackWolf]

Re: 5 Min Ticks

I dont speak english as my motherlang so let me be bit stupid, but whatta hell means "they lose war still a lot"? reference to deleted posts - Welsh

Toba: Yeah well if you go to read my previous posts, I never intented to actually suggest longer ticks, my "suggestion" was basic way to make "arquement" against the original topic of this thread. It was only meant to be provocative joke, that majority didnt get at all, so was that part where I said that people will still die as easily. As I still can see difference between player and alliance, and getting throught defence and killing individual.

It is so sad that people in their before made conclusions of certain people have chategorized them to certain class and depending of that class they interact, people just cant nowdays read what others have to say. They are so stuck to their own opinions... Dont they teach public media reading skills at all in english schools now days?

 

[G-Blunted]

Re: 5 Min Ticks

I love the 5min ticks!! Good move!! :x-mas: