Killing The Game

[septimus]

I don't think it's a shame of the game that not everyone does it Coruba, I personally have 0 interest in finishing rank 1 really, because I don't want to put in the kind of time and effort it would take, I don't want to be involved in bashes and all, it doesn't interest me, I much prefer being in a rank 2-4 ally, and having fun all round.

In response to Alci, I agree, the game is built to force rank 1 ally to go red, but, I think it does that to some extent to help with things like resistances, this is just an opinion on my part, but, with bounty it really does encourage LET rushes on the top, and makes a resistance much more doable(if the effort is put in) because the bounty gains can equalize the land difference the top ally has. Rank 1 is forced to go red to get the land to sustain the troops needed to get, and hold rank 1, which then encourages those below them to rush them, and hopefully keep things interesting. The problem is that it doesn't really work out that way generally, because noone seems to have the energy to really go after them much, and with the battles going on between ranks 2-5 they are to busy to make a sustained effort attacking rank 1.

Just my opinion, and completely off topic from Daves original post, sorry

 

[[yoyo]]

i have not read all of this post, but a few have hinted at the real problem.

there is not enough people in this game now and that is why more are sending +1,2.

believe me, i know the fustration of being on the wrong end of 30% attacks Dave but, it is within the games rules and war in a war game is not a pretty site.

Dave, you should try this next round. then post how it went, whether it was more fun or not...

..for the last 3 or 4 rounds i have been only attacking people that are on the same ranking page as me 85/90% to 120% of my score. i dont land very often but i do land enough to play well if i want too. i found this tactic to be the most enjoyable

the only time i attack at plus 1 or plus 2 now is when i know that person [who attacked me before] was way up there and i catch them on the way down. retribution for attacking me at +2

the rules of the game is what it is. Just have fun and take the good or bad in stride!!!

yoyo

 

[timtadams]

I used to do that Yoyo for the same reasons. Its more fun. But flakking 5 targets at 35% is easier than attacking 1 at 100%. Although, i still dont kill at that range though, thats just mean

 

[jamesNchina]

It is quite refreshing to know that so many top ranked players refuse to attack at +1/2 range. It reminds me of an admired hockey coach who would always say that winning wasn't as important as how you played the game.

Also I find it quite intriguing that Alci has been a staunch supporter of the red title here on this thread and yet this round has a green upstanding title and is/has been in the top 30 ranks nearly the whole round. which means to me it is possible to be in winning range with skill and effort. Thanks Alci

 

[Alcibiades]

I don't support the "red title". I have just been trying to explain why rank 1 alliances (and those in competition for rank 1) have red titles. It's not through laziness, or being a "****" player. It's just that a small number of targets are the only source now for most of the land. Repeat attacks = red titles.

I have a green title because i'm in the rank 4 alliance. I defend against inc, and I haven't launched an attack in months. If i attacked anyone these days, it would probably have to be in my 30-50% range and I would lose massive honour. I have 7k acres, and a landfat of 3.68% I've clearly not been attacking recently. I would not use myself as a poster boy for high ranked green players, unless you want to do nothing but sit on massive troops for a round, defending your alliance from top player bashes I have neither skill, nor do I put in much effort. Hence a positive title Although if you're lucky enough to be in a position similar to mine, you can get away with negative attacks because you're going to gain the honour back from massive epic defence.

I'm not saying it's impossible to be high ranked without a red title, but it is damn near impossible to be in the winning (rank 1/2) alliance without a red title due to the way the game must be played.

 

[jamesNchina]

LMAO - can't win with you Alci - disagree with you and you argue it and even flame me here and on IRC -- compliment you and you argue that too, but I do appreciate not being flamed for it --

oh and for the record Podunk's team having the same majority of players as it does this round and with fairly the same epic inactivity for attacking finished R2 above a red titled and tough competitor last round. There were some awesome BR's and a lot of fun getting there as well.

All that being said, I am most certainly brow beaten to having to AGREE that given the current player base and attitudes of that player base, it is impossible to be R1 without the red title. Still a hella good time though and will be back again next round !!

 

[LuckySports]

The only way you'll see a rank 1 ally with a green title is if no one plays to win.. That's when you'll know the game is dead and can't be resurrected. I've played high-ranked with green titles enough to say - you run out of targets pretty quick. At that point your only option for gaining honor is by rushing the top ally for bounty (will be heavily route dependant) or on defense, assuming anyone stays against your troops that won't totally destroy you.


A rank 1 ally in an active game is a fairytale unless you make every attack give honor, or on the off-chance a resistance succeeds and the ally that was 2nd manages it keep it without sending on the massive attacks required to defeat a R1 ally late in the game.

 

[Alcibiades]

LMAO - can't win with you Alci - disagree with you and you argue it and even flame me here and on IRC -- compliment you and you argue that too, but I do appreciate not being flamed for it --

oh and for the record Podunk's team having the same majority of players as it does this round and with fairly the same epic inactivity for attacking finished R2 above a red titled and tough competitor last round. There were some awesome BR's and a lot of fun getting there as well.

All that being said, I am most certainly brow beaten to having to AGREE that given the current player base and attitudes of that player base, it is impossible to be R1 without the red title. Still a hella good time though and will be back again next round !!

Lol I appreciate the compliment James, I really do. I'm just not sure i'm of the right calibre to be model for honourable gameplay at the top since I'm only defending, not attacking

The biggest problem in the game currently is the lack of players. More players = more targets = slightly less bashing. Amongst other things that would make the biggest difference. But the game mechanics pretty much force rank 1 to be dishonourable.

Podunk's team is awesome. I've rarely played with such a tremendous bunch of excellent, fun, talented people. So on that Sir, we do agree They have been a real treat to play with this round

 

[jamesNchina]

Lucky, you are beating a dead horse dude.... you did see I said I AGREE that in order to be R1 you had to have a red title, yes? (love those tag questions)

Alci, Yeah playing with Podunk's team was/is awesome with a great bunch of people who make winning or losing a fun experience here on bush. I think however that you may be a bit modest about your own caliber of skill and knowledge. But then again with them I guess in fact a person doesn't really need to know much of crap about bush and I hold myself out as an example for that honored title (that was a pun, truly) since with them I made portal twice for value on my 2nd and 3rd round playing
Oh S*** that means to win it's not necessarily what you know but who you blow?? hehe PW, keep recruiting !!

 

[penguin]

tl;dr

I have found people in my 'normal' ETA 5 attacking range that have troops, are solo and don't have massive ARs.. it's called waiting.

 

[Dimitar]

tl;dr

I have found people in my 'normal' ETA 5 attacking range that have troops, are solo and don't have massive ARs.. it's called waiting.

tr;dr (figure it out)

What rank are you?

 

[penguin]

tr;dr (figure it out)

What rank are you?

no.. tl;dr.. I don't give one flying !@*# what you think it is.

and why does my rank matter? the low rank people have a decent amount of targets, the middle (usually after rank 100) have a good deal of targets.. and the higher ranked people need to go kill themselves to enjoy the game so they don't complain about useless crap like this. Your question isn't really relevant.

 

[Dimitar]

and I think your post is not relevant. If only you'd put in the effort to actually read the posts before yours... oh well

helpers gonna help

 

[penguin]

I resigned from helper status.. don't know why I still have all the access..

I was staying on topic with the original post. This is why I don't deal with internet people.. you need your bubble busted.

/end

 

[Dimitar]

News from your sources is that in 7 ticks, 166,500,000 people from xxxx xxxx xxxxxxx [xxxx] will arrive to attack you. Mob ETA was modified by +2 from: Attacking at 30-35% attack range.



attacks like this are killing the game.

some people need to get a life and send proper attacks.

tl;dr

I have found people in my 'normal' ETA 5 attacking range that have troops, are solo and don't have massive ARs.. it's called waiting.

I resigned from helper status.. don't know why I still have all the access..

I was staying on topic with the original post. This is why I don't deal with internet people.. you need your bubble busted.

/end

k

 

[jamesNchina]

wow the attitudes just keep getting better on this thread

 

[Twigley]

internet people

 

[Hamilton]

Twigley wins...

 

[LuckySports]

internet people

actually lol'ed.

 

[willymchilybily]

lol nice gif

tr;dr (figure it out)

What rank are you?

no.. tl;dr.. I don't give one flying !@*# what you think it is.

and why does my rank matter? the low rank people have a decent amount of targets, the middle (usually after rank 100) have a good deal of targets.. and the higher ranked people need to go kill themselves to enjoy the game so they don't complain about useless crap like this. Your question isn't really relevant.

tl;dr = too long; didn't read

i did read though; and am confused. The original complaint is about an eta +2 incoming. So for rank 1 lets say to suicide as you imply, wont they be hitting and bashing those below them to die off? which is kinda bashy in itself, and more red titles/complaints/death

surely its more reasonable for the player base to accept this happens sometimes, and is allowed by the rules. than expect high ranked players to suicide after they worked hard to be high ranked. just for more targets that are honourable in range