Low rank One

[Chewyow]

wooo bans!

 

[Garrett2]

Zhouj is DA's alter forum ego? perhaps that's the disparity between punishments.

oh and it's rexes ftw.

 

[Polo]

if there was the activity/will for a resistance HW wouldn't have won in the first place.

Lol.

 

[Dax]

if there was the activity/will for a resistance HW wouldn't have won in the first place.

There was? It was just pissed up the wall by going during summer, which was the most retarded idea ever.

 

[Garrett2]

mmm summer dayyyyyys make me feeel fine.....

 

[Dax]

mmm summer dayyyyyys make me feeel fine.....

In my country we don't have summer days, we have British days.

 

['Tiger']

Oh, doesnt that look a familiar sight

 

[flameharvester]

Guess ill make my replies public too.

I will start by conceding that, after re-reading my original post, I could perhaps have been more clear in what I was saying.

So this round I am seeing something a little different from rank 1.

There score is being kept artificially low through donations and suicide attacks, low enough the bottom 10 always have targets. This has created an odd situation where LC/DW/SC are being forced to keep there scores low or face mass inc from rank 1.

Just wondering how people fell about this?

Personally I am finding that this is leaving me often bored as before we suicided to give ourselves a couple days off, we had to stay home against HQ constantly, We cant initiate a proper war for rank 2, we cant go BH or annoy rank 1 ^^. To me this is the most boring round I have played in quite a while, With HW's artificially low score a resistance could take them, but if there was the activity/will for a resistance HW wouldn't have won in the first place.


tl:dr, Is having rank 1 lower just killing the game through bashing on rank 2/3/4, or opening up more opportunities for the player-base to mix things up.

....what utter horsesh*te... you're bored because you have to defend? That totally invalidates everything else in your post - ignoring the fact that that's all crap too.

Not that I wish to tempt fate, but we have plenty of players with a very small amount of troops and not one Thief has tried to rush for their land. You give the alliance no reason to grow.

On another note, if we grew and you lot got bigger, Chewy & Jason's T-Rex might stop making it to last tick on their suicide runs if you lot get more troops. THAT'S bad for the playerbase.

....what utter horsesh*te... you're bored because you have to defend? That totally invalidates everything else in your post - ignoring the fact that that's all crap too.

Now where did I say I was bored because I have to defend?

Personally I am finding that this is leaving me often bored as before we suicided to give ourselves a couple days off, we had to stay home against HQ constantly, We cant initiate a proper war for rank 2, we cant go BH or annoy rank 1 ^^. To me this is the most boring round I have played in quite a while

To make it simpler to explain my point I will deconstruct it:

Personally I am finding that this is leaving me often bored --- Thats my personal opinion, you may feel differently but no person on this planet can call it horseshit as I did point out that it was boring TO ME!

...as before we suicided to give ourselves a couple days off, we had to stay home against HQ constantly, We cant initiate a proper war for rank 2, we cant go BH or annoy rank 1 ^^.

Now when your facing a situation where your troops must be home to defend, because the Australian day has been full of rushes with the screen rarely clear for more then 30 minutes (prior to the last 2 days anyway), but the attackers never stay unless its just one Bloke who will essentially suicide some of his troops to keep his score lower.

I like to BH, I like to send attacks and generally enjoy the game, How is this horseshit? I love defending, however when the round has reached the point where a br rarely happens because either the defenders have an overwhelming force or the attackers do, it gets a little Boring.

However again this is how i feel and how I see the round, I didn't get on here and complain I posted how I felt and asked for others opinions. I fail to see how this justifies you to say horseshit and imply my entire post is complete and utter crap.

Not that I wish to tempt fate, but we have plenty of players with a very small amount of troops and not one Thief has tried to rush for their land. You give the alliance no reason to grow.

On another note, if we grew and you lot got bigger, Chewy & Jason's T-Rex might stop making it to last tick on their suicide runs if you lot get more troops. THAT'S bad for the playerbase

Now where to start?

I am not a thief, Our thief does hit HW alot, for disables and he will attempt thief rushes. Not always successful but he does attempt them, so we certainly do exactly what you suggest no-one in the game does.

Haven't had a single situation where chewy or Jason's T-Rex have made it to last tick while I have been online, not sure about euro day, but not while I have been online (with the possible exception of course, of situations where they have sent them to a target where we are taking a land hit and hence are not defending.)


Now, on to my pm.

What I said was stupid, inappropriate and ill-thought out. I will explain myself by saying I was in a foul mood, having a terrible day and just generally vented it at you. I infact started with a stupid post in this thread that I thought better of and moved on to my pm.

I do not offer this as justification for what bordered on a personal insult to you martin, I am sure your more then capable of reading and in fact the fault lay with me in failing to be clear and concise in my original post.

In short I apologize, hopefully you will accept my apology and we can return to a civil argument here in the thread as opposed to the stealthy, venomous one that could have easily sprung from my PM had you not dealt with it so well.

 

[willymchilybily]

if i attacked more i might agree its boring having to defend constantly. (not that im saying this is the siuation anymore, im barely online enough to be sure what the situation was before)

but i think even if it was different or the same as other rounds the soul responsibility of constant incoming is on the alliance, (if it was well defended the guys wouldnt come back).
you need to kill it outright, so that if it stays to suicde it dies fully for minimal casualties, or if it recalls and resends you just keep it recalling each time till they get bored of your alliance and bug some one else. so its entirely on the alliance with the incoming

picking the battle, growing as a unit. And most importantly not holding mega land fat people that seed whore for a week. grow massive, then dont want to lose thier precious land so suicide defending themselves killing thier saved up troops.. only to die and get half the alliance killed. (i hate selfish players sometimes) these are dead spaces not worth having. better to have no member than that member.

 

[flameharvester]

Lets be faired, if it was not for the fact that I am a terrible leader I wouldn't be so bored, guess I dont get the experience as a leader without leading.

 

[Garrett2]

penis.

just thought that it belonged here in this thread as much as anything.

 

[Martin]

Guess ill make my replies public too.

I will start by conceding that, after re-reading my original post, I could perhaps have been more clear in what I was saying.

So this round I am seeing something a little different from rank 1.

There score is being kept artificially low through donations and suicide attacks, low enough the bottom 10 always have targets. This has created an odd situation where LC/DW/SC are being forced to keep there scores low or face mass inc from rank 1.

Just wondering how people fell about this?

Personally I am finding that this is leaving me often bored as before we suicided to give ourselves a couple days off, we had to stay home against HQ constantly, We cant initiate a proper war for rank 2, we cant go BH or annoy rank 1 ^^. To me this is the most boring round I have played in quite a while, With HW's artificially low score a resistance could take them, but if there was the activity/will for a resistance HW wouldn't have won in the first place.


tl:dr, Is having rank 1 lower just killing the game through bashing on rank 2/3/4, or opening up more opportunities for the player-base to mix things up.

....what utter horsesh*te... you're bored because you have to defend? That totally invalidates everything else in your post - ignoring the fact that that's all crap too.

Not that I wish to tempt fate, but we have plenty of players with a very small amount of troops and not one Thief has tried to rush for their land. You give the alliance no reason to grow.

On another note, if we grew and you lot got bigger, Chewy & Jason's T-Rex might stop making it to last tick on their suicide runs if you lot get more troops. THAT'S bad for the playerbase.

....what utter horsesh*te... you're bored because you have to defend? That totally invalidates everything else in your post - ignoring the fact that that's all crap too.

Now where did I say I was bored because I have to defend?

Personally I am finding that this is leaving me often bored as before we suicided to give ourselves a couple days off, we had to stay home against HQ constantly, We cant initiate a proper war for rank 2, we cant go BH or annoy rank 1 ^^. To me this is the most boring round I have played in quite a while

To make it simpler to explain my point I will deconstruct it:

Personally I am finding that this is leaving me often bored --- Thats my personal opinion, you may feel differently but no person on this planet can call it horseshit as I did point out that it was boring TO ME!

...as before we suicided to give ourselves a couple days off, we had to stay home against HQ constantly, We cant initiate a proper war for rank 2, we cant go BH or annoy rank 1 ^^.

Now when your facing a situation where your troops must be home to defend, because the Australian day has been full of rushes with the screen rarely clear for more then 30 minutes (prior to the last 2 days anyway), but the attackers never stay unless its just one Bloke who will essentially suicide some of his troops to keep his score lower.

I like to BH, I like to send attacks and generally enjoy the game, How is this horseshit? I love defending, however when the round has reached the point where a br rarely happens because either the defenders have an overwhelming force or the attackers do, it gets a little Boring.

However again this is how i feel and how I see the round, I didn't get on here and complain I posted how I felt and asked for others opinions. I fail to see how this justifies you to say horseshit and imply my entire post is complete and utter crap.

Not that I wish to tempt fate, but we have plenty of players with a very small amount of troops and not one Thief has tried to rush for their land. You give the alliance no reason to grow.

On another note, if we grew and you lot got bigger, Chewy & Jason's T-Rex might stop making it to last tick on their suicide runs if you lot get more troops. THAT'S bad for the playerbase

Now where to start?

I am not a thief, Our thief does hit HW alot, for disables and he will attempt thief rushes. Not always successful but he does attempt them, so we certainly do exactly what you suggest no-one in the game does.

Haven't had a single situation where chewy or Jason's T-Rex have made it to last tick while I have been online, not sure about euro day, but not while I have been online (with the possible exception of course, of situations where they have sent them to a target where we are taking a land hit and hence are not defending.)


Now, on to my pm.

What I said was stupid, inappropriate and ill-thought out. I will explain myself by saying I was in a foul mood, having a terrible day and just generally vented it at you. I infact started with a stupid post in this thread that I thought better of and moved on to my pm.

I do not offer this as justification for what bordered on a personal insult to you martin, I am sure your more then capable of reading and in fact the fault lay with me in failing to be clear and concise in my original post.

In short I apologize, hopefully you will accept my apology and we can return to a civil argument here in the thread as opposed to the stealthy, venomous one that could have easily sprung from my PM had you not dealt with it so well.

I did read this earlier on and there were a couple of things I wanted to say, primarily neutralising my post by apologising for any of my misreads. The point still stands but I cba to re-read the post.
My main issue was the PM instantly having a dig at ME personally, instead of my opinion.

No worries, we all have to vent. The fact I'm the other side of the world than you and type with an anal use of the English language - I'm not your best target

 

[flameharvester]

Oh indeed, I snapped at the moment I read that post. I acted stupid, ridiculous, childlike and without thought. Sorry mate

 

[Dimitar]

In the words of Roger Daltrey, you are forgiven.

 

[Garrett2]

I prefer the words of Xur:

You are forgiven Commander Krill

 

[flameharvester]

I prefer the words of Xur:

You are forgiven Commander Krill

I see what you did there :/

 

[Garrett2]

if you mean that i awesomely quoted the last starfighter, then yes... yes you did