That is actually the only way spartans will war anyone they feel threatened by. To their credit they know what they do well (with a little helping hand here and there) and attempt to force it.
Printable View
That is actually the only way spartans will war anyone they feel threatened by. To their credit they know what they do well (with a little helping hand here and there) and attempt to force it.
That makes it for a sure war. A straightforward war no bs, hostile and war on the same tick. I think its safe to say that warring kds love to war as much as possible and this is a good way. I mean playing with button doesnt really certify a war.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrystal Palace
if u want a full explanation hunt me down on irc...at its core it'd be a 15 v 12 UB battle with them having better UB's and more usefull attackers. Part of waring is knowing how to play your setup v your enemy....here i'd wanna hostile battle it out first.Quote:
Originally Posted by p0ngkol
playing with a button is a significant part of war. If u start fighting a kd and they fight back but wont press a button you can risk learn waves with zero incoming, try to outgrow and make them repay you for wasted time/military/whatever....button games are very straightforward and indeed very much part of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by p0ngkol
However your thinking is why i've said in the past MULTILPE times that a war should occur when two kds hit 15 meter points. Autowar at 15 meter points is more representative of whats actually happening, the simplest way to remove abuse by top kds would be to remove war win bonus's if both kds weren't within 25% nw of each other. Thing is if they actually introduced this then kd setup in the war tier would need to drastically change. Suggestions that go together and would make such a small meter viable are things like 3-4 times increased gc/peasent during war, MS that cannot be MV'ed and targeted prop. They really up econ in war and make controlling the enemy more important forcing any real conflicts where 2 kds exchange hits to go to war. i.e. that ghetto hit us x8....retal, take em to war, let our t/m's remove their def and start stripping them of honor/land/science...not keep the current idea were the only real way to hurt them is "wait till they are about to war then mess with them" OR attack the gheto and give them ops for 2-3+ weeks while we "hope" their monarch cares enough about their kd to just cf.
This is something I learnt the hard way :P
Some set-ups are simply too good against others if both go in ideally pumped.
I think in future we'll avoid arranged wars. It takes some of the fun out of it. You need that antici...pation that can only be gained through an uncertain hostile situation to really appreciate a war.
i understand you guys have been warring whoring kds in the past ages and that tier is where playing with button plays a very important role (ive seen kds with huge gap of NW/land war each other). in the warring tier its mostly how close two kds are, its more about "fair" fight. and by that it means how their land is close to each other, and that is where deals come in order to fix land gaps and bring it closer for a "fair" war. basically warring kds look at chart and choose their targets. point is warring kds dont really like playing with the button. even ascension and hipmunks war is a straightforward same tick hostile and war, though apparently some setup are just stronger at "fair" war so i guess this is the point where two kds neglect war and just cf.
Our monarch is lazy, we're all lazy. We got no stomach being active for such long periods. This allows us to plan a bit of IRL around it, be active for a short stint and then go back to slacking :D
war kds dont like playing with button because they have no idea how to do it.. %95 of war kds suck so bad in hostile play and lose all the game even with superior hostile setups.. worst part is, they think you must cf them immediately or not wave/hit all when they say 'no war'.. the last time i was properly given a free wave for a cf was ages ago, and in 2 of those hostilities they actually ****ed up with meter and gave us button instead.. i mean seriously, its not rocket science! they just dont know what to do when 'chaining' is removed from the table..Quote:
Originally Posted by p0ngkol
OK so Spartans aren't setup for long hostiles. That doesn't mean they don't know what there doing. Second warring kingdoms do know how to play with the button but only do it when another warring tier acts like ass. Warring tier likes to war plan and simple. Long hostiles people can back out. Which is fine for the whoring tier because you get to farm them but warring tier doesn't want the added land. Do to the added down time before they can war again. Goes back to goals of the game. Land is everything to the whoring kingdom. In the warring tier it's just added fat.
I think the big difference is in the warring tier you're open to outside hits, so better to get a war and relieve some of that stress, where whoring tier literally has a CF with everyone who could cause them problems, they CF everyone else with terms like you have to give us 48 hours notice to cancel CF. Plenty of time to play the button game.
Warring>Whoring
does every thread have to end in a discussion if the warring or whoring style of play is better? "the bottom is hot" kind of makes it clear that this is not about whoring kingdoms. If any whoring kingdoms find themselves in this nw/acre range, you are doing it wrong ;) as far as warring kingdoms, not all like agreed wars. Personally I wouldn't agree to grow/drop acres just to war someone. I know game mechanics allow it but to me it still feels like cheating. And while diplomacy is important in Utopia, I prefer to limit diplomacy to interactions with kingdoms we are not warring. How often do you read in the news"Country A served notice to Country B and gives them time to build up their war capabilities before strikes begin." or "stay tuned Country A will run strikes on January 1st, Country B will declare war within 2 hours of strikes being delivered"
Has Warrior Oath turned into double crossing dirt bags. Apparently Warlords where in a Hostile with FOK when Warriors Oath came out of no where massing Warlords top TMS. Warlords send a CF to Warriors Oath and they accept. So then Warlords accept a cf from FOK and go into fort to recover from the massing and Warriors Oath Breaks the CF again and hits the top TMS of Warlords. Apparently these two kingdoms where friendly with each other and had a cf with each other before any of this. So Warriors Oath breaks two cfs in 24 ticks wow. I was shocked when I heard this and should be interesting to see what will happen.
I think the warring tier is tired of being talked down to by the whoring tier, even the title of this thread is condescending " the bottom" were talking about kingdoms ranked 10th and below, far from the bottom. The whoring tier always posting about how they're mehul's gift to Utopia. We're so lucky to be able to play in the same server as them and how we're lucky they don't come down and war us because we wouldn't stand a chanceQuote:
Originally Posted by Goodwitch
Lol @ mehul's gift to Utopia
And on the 4th day mehul created boats...
But on the 300th day mehul decided boats were stupid and removed them
This thread is only authorized for discussing hot bottom talk, interpret that as you will. Take your dirty whoring on top discussions elsewhere.
in response to handofthrawn asking if Warrior's Oath is double crossing dirt bags, my answer would be a simple no. We have had problems with Warlords before, so when they asked us if we wanted to war, we were gung ho. Before we waved them I checked their news to make sure they were not hostile with anyone else, they weren't. Now, I have never been good at negotiations. This whole, "I'll meet you behind the school next Tuesday at 3pm and we will fight, but don't hit me in the face and do not kick me if I am down. Also, you must let me punch you 3 times in the face and you cannot block it." crap has me confused. They wanted to war, we responded by waving them (which means yes, right?), then they did not want to war but they were going to retal us(which means war, right?). I dunno, lets just say I did not want to go hostile with someone else only to have the Warlords hit us from behind, AGAIN. So yes, I broke CF and waved them again. Was it dirty? If they were 500k NW lower than us (like the kingdom they waved was), then I would say yes, but they were actually bigger than us. They responded with the retals, ops and attacks, but said they still did not want war. In the meantime we got waved by a kingdom 500k more NW than us, and declared on them a few hours ago. Win or lose, we like to war, we just do not like to play the games Warlords and others like to play.
You broke a blank ceasefire or you deal broke, broke a ceasefire?Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Ed