The point of war is to take stuff from your opponent.
Well, smartpanty, if I dismantle my opponent, which is going to include quite a lot of razing, both on me, and on him, how do you propose that I 'gain' any land from it?
Printable View
The point of war is to take stuff from your opponent.
Well, smartpanty, if I dismantle my opponent, which is going to include quite a lot of razing, both on me, and on him, how do you propose that I 'gain' any land from it?
Ummm, well, you do a combination of razes and TMs in an attempt to dismantle your opponent. When you have a significant advantage in attacking power, you switch to TMs.
Also, everyone is claiming that everyone is being raze-killed but in all honesty, there is no need to raze kill anyone, and strategically it isn't really that beneficial to you. The reason for the razing in the first place is to dismantle somebody's attack power through overpopulation, killing somebody to do that isn't necessary, you just need to get their provinces to a state where they can't hit your kingdom anymore.
Also, generally speaking, if people get overpopped and release their offense most kingdoms would be smart enough to realize that they can leave them alone and focus on the threats in the kingdom, thus keeping their WPA and science.
Unless both kingdoms are extremely stubborn and decide to war for weeks on end gaining land isn't that difficult.
Also, you will end wars with some provinces making significant gains in land, who then can help the smaller provinces with rebuilding.
Hmmm, why don't we own Japan... this is BS!Quote:
The point of war is to take stuff from your opponent.
The problem here really is, if it doesn't destroy land, raze is useless. Try suggesting something better for raze VT2, otherwise you aren't making any difference.
Yes, nuking them went over so well, America did absolutely not get banhammered by the entire world a bit after the war officially ended, and has absolutely not made sure no one in the world has EVER used nukes in a conflict since.
Nukes are a bit weird.
You see, they don't leave anything for you to conquer, and no one left to conquer, either, so the very act of declaring war before you use them is just a waste of time.
Kind of like raze.
Make it destroy buildings, and remove that aspect from massacre.
Stuff is a very vague word.
you can lose 3k acres and take a war win, take bushels and runes and gcs, take peasants, troops, land, networth, wizards, thieves... heck, you pretty much can take everything through PK.
the objective of war is to take, not to recieve or gain, so current raze fits with your wording, VT2. please clarify, because you seem to be arguing for one side but actively supporting the other of this argument.
//edit//
and about the nuke/raze thing, it's very effective way to end wars, even pre-emptively end a war that hasn't started. raze is effective as well. it hinders the enemy's fighting capabilities. In this way, a normal attacker can be effective like a thief or a mage.
The above is like saying my Terminators don't have Terminator armor.
You know they do - just like you know what I meant.
okay, maybe you were distracted by different points in my post, VT2, so i'll rewrite:
clarify this.Quote:
Originally Posted by VT2
Atm, the only thing you can do in wars is take from your opponent. you clarify nothing about recieving or gaining on your part, only to take. This already happens.
it's hard for me to argue with you, when you're not very precise and are arguing the same thing i'm arguing, when you're trying to argue a different point.
what is the point of wars, VT2?
Ooooh, so make 2 types of attack virtually useless in most warring. Very good VT2, very good.Quote:
Make it destroy buildings, and remove that aspect from massacre.
the point of wars is to gain one of 3 thingsQuote:
Originally Posted by Nuriho
a nice little number on your kd page
honor
land
(potential 4th which is a grudge match to utter screw over other kd...)
most people can do the first, second or fourth =)
I meant equally useful overall, not equal land. usefulness could be measured in a myriad of ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuriho
which isn't a good quality control word then, syele...
atm, i find raze useful, so it's very hard for me to understand what you want to do with raze.
i think i understand what VT is getting at, but i want him to clarify, because i doubt he'd like me assuming something totally wrong. and i assume he'd complain about me for assuming his thoughts, and never clarify it - ever.
If nothing else I'd like to see some sort of cap system.
Right now If I get razed to about 50 acres and I hit someone my own NW with a Trad I get maybe 10-20 acres. If I get quad tap razed by a province 60 acres burn acres no matter the NW difference.
This is where PK becomes too easy and can be done completely by accident. If we gotta have raze destroying acres there has to be a cap of some sort.
Ghettos do run trad chains and switch to extra off razes in wars. Pks can happen easily in a decently organized ghetto. That's why it is too easy to PK with current raze rules.
Fates Warning: +1 again.
sorry to be pedantic, but you should be able to quad tap for ~40% your acres if you were razed 50 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fates Warning
When you've been chained down to 50 acres and the only targets are 1k acres or the opposing chain target who is also near 50 acres your not getting that kind of gains Bishop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bishop
The target is either going to be freakishly out of NW range or a GB protection province with no acres to grab from.
Then that means your kingdom has failed to keep enemy provinces in range of your own chained provs. The failure is your own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fates Warning
Being RKd is a part of the game, just deal with it. We have quite a bit of fun with RKs and being RKd. It is a game after all.
i remember being RK'd first in age 6.
i'm still playing, still enjoying the game.
am i weird? (btw, i managed not to get RK'd in multiple ages, starting age 3, and including this age)
if they want to kill you they will, RK or not. i can understand about sciences, but tbh, it's really not that big of a deal, that's what learn attacks are for.
So if RK isn't part of the game next round it isn't part of the game? <3 circular logic
Addresses NOTHING about it being too easy to accomplish. We can argue the small stuff all day long. The real failure is for you to not think outside the box a little.Quote:
Originally Posted by DHaran
Apart from VT2, nobody is argumenting to ban RK...
So the argument "it was, it is, and it should stay part of the game" is imho not to the point, since nobody asks to make raze-kill impossible.
My point is that it is way too easy now.
An example: In our last war, our oponents had two old fashion +250K T/M's. Those "brave" turtles went in razing my lads, once they were -200 acres. At that point, it ain't a matter of military power anymore, but only a matter of generals (how many armies can one send).
To razel-kill a 120 acres attacker hybrid (with approx 5-6 k def left?), 8 attacks are needed.
When it becomes normal that 2 big lame T/M's are able to do so in one hour, I don't agree anymore, or at least I think raze should become NW-related.
PS1. Before somebody now comes up with the argument (?) "learn to play the game"... My attacker hybrid prov is in top 10 island NW ranking, top 25 acres and top 30 honour.
The same province is top 50 as well in the 3 race/world rankings. So, I think I know how to run a prov.
PS2. Before anybody comes up with the argument (?) "learn your ghetto how to play". We end age with a 3-3 warbalance, while our 3 oponents end with either a 4-3 or a 3-2 balance. The group I am monarching is active and most players are skilled veterans.
Not really a ghetto, unless one considers that all non-top 50 kd's are ... ghetto's.
So please, other arguments than those, quite too often used... :S
thats just strategy, making use of your t/ms generals.
Plenty people are arguing against raze killing. We're just ashamed of siding with VT2 in public :)
I agree with province killing being possible. If you have good reason to wish to inflict pain on another kingdom, you should be able to. I do not agree with it being tactically sound to kill provinces simply to win wars. At present, it is. Incoming acres mean that chained provinces are able to keep hitting indefinitely and keep their off safe that way, so it makes sense to finish off small provinces.
I don't believe that there are only two options here: Destroying land and destroying buildings. The desirable effects of raze destroying land (such as forcing losing kingdoms to withdraw rather than stubbornly refuse and bog the war down as well as discouraging honour hunting on tiny provinces that can't be touched) can be achieved in other ways that don't have its downsides (such as wars being less profitable and provinces being killed frequently for little reason) if we think outside the box.
@ Realest,
T/M's being able to attack-raze-kill is imho rather an indicator that RK isn't even a challenge.
As a matter of facts, the way it is now EVERYBODY can RK...Even T/M's can...
Strategy you say? Nope, imho not even tactics are involved at this point...
Apart from raze, every attack type is NW-related. And the results of thievery and magic ops are NW-related as well.
Raze being non-NW related is why raze might have got so popular this age. Why should one still massacre a hybrid, if it is so easy to overpopulate him by razing him into the ground?
I loved massacre... Quick and ... a tactical option when one was getting landfat himself. It was even a ... strategic choice in a longer war.
---
@ CW +1
+1 .Quote:
Originally Posted by mirage
It's very easy to accomplish by ghettos who like losing acres in wars and only focus on killing other provs. Personally I prefer gaining acres in war, as well as RK'ing the enemy, which is not as easy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fates Warning
Ghettos can make anything easy when they ignore everything else.
@ DHaran,
You should read what people write dear friend...
I already told here why your argument about "ghetto's" - "not knowing how to play the game" is not valid...
---
BTW. I am fed up by the "you are a ghetto" argument...
I am VERY interested to get a defenition of what is supposed to be an Utopian ghetto, Dharan...
Tell me :) What do you mean?
To help you a bit... :D
Wikipedia defenition:
A ghetto is described as a "portion of a city in which members of a minority group live; especially because of social, legal, or economic pressure."
Just in case you should not be aware of... the people who play this game, but don't get out of bed every time when kingie calls, who don't use IRC, who don't necessarily play the Combo required by the monarch and Co are ... tadaa tadaa ... a MAYORITY on this server.
As a matter of fact, taking a closer look at the second part of the defenition sentence (the pressure part), it seems to me that the "top" or the "Super-kd's" fit very well in the defenition... :D
I know this is a tricky one, but I want OMAC to be aware of it ;)
Cheers!
-----------Quote:
Originally Posted by Catwalk
In 100% agreement. Why does RK/raze destroying acres with no cap HAVE to be the answer for not being able to take provinces out of a war? There has got to be a better way as imo the downside outweighs the upside.
Whatever raze is replaced with, you will just complain about it because you can't adjust to it. So it doesn't matter.
That was a meaningless and irrelevant comment Dharan. Please stick with the topic and try to be constructive. Some players can adjust to razing but just don't like it.
@ CW +1
BTW CW. We are at the same island, so I had an eye on you all age long :) You guys took the upper hand very impressivly in the present War. Headtip!
PS. Am still interested to get an answer on the ghetto defenition above, from DHaran or from the other people trowing in that term or argument :)
95% of utopia is ghetto
I would have to say you've got it all backwards. I would rater see raze destroying acres removed but I am willing to comprimise. Your the one that can't seem to adjust to anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by DHaran
He's angry that raze won't be destroying acres this coming age, so he has to actually do something other than see who can raze the other side the fastest for once.
i hardly thing wikipedia is a definitive source on anything, mirage. and i don't know what to think that you reference it as a viable source. .-. i'm sure you don't want me to ignore everything you say, so i'll not assume you referencing it and wanting to be taken seriously makes you a complete idiot.
.-.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merriam-Webster's dictionary:
part 3b is what most everyone refers to. The inferior status of the kingdom.
it's not the answer. Disabling provinces there's no need to kill them, but a quick way to disable them is to get them to a point where they are unable to attack back. this normally is when they are at a lower acres than anyone else in your kingdom. I imagine why people RK is that they don't know how to keep provinces at <200 acres to keep them disabled. Since wars are only 48h long minimum, I assume some kingdoms believe that by killing provinces, they are out for the whole war, and they do just that without much more thought. Plus it's a moral booster for some kingdoms. "hey wow! we killed that guy!" and the like.Quote:
Originally Posted by fates
I dislike a limit on it because i'd rather not have war interfered with by limits unless it's necessary. If you want a limit, limit it to 15-30 acres, as that would keep the province alive (assuming he doesn't PK himself) while keeping him rather disabled.
in a war of 500-1k acre provinces, being 200+ acres doesn't mean you're disabled, is why i never liked the 200 acre cap. Not being able to raze for acres means, as far as i see it, the whole strategy is to take as many acres as you can, then wd for gaining of acres.
a big lame t/m, to me, means one that is an "unbreakable." if nobody can break him while he sends out offense, he should be allowed to do this. If not, it should also address the point of a 3k acre province losing 900 acres in 4 hits by a 9k acre province. It might also bring in the fact of why you're warring a kingdom like that without defense to it. The big lame t/m in your example, imo, earns all rights to do what he did, because he's more of a benefit to his kingdom, and his kingdom has a good strategy for him to do that. I do not agree he should kill you because he can, but it makes it easy for him to keep you down where you're effectively disabled. If you reduce his effectiveness on you, you're not quite disabled and something else will have to be thought up to keep you that way.Quote:
Originally Posted by mirage
not really.... that's just what the nub kd's end up doing...Quote:
Originally Posted by VT2
if you have half an idea what you're doing, you can actually gain just fine with raze destroying acres
Yeah, sure.
Prove it.
qftQuote:
Originally Posted by gakundra
for all raze haters:
kd we just warred used raze in some 80-90% of their attacks. They ended with -18k acres. My kd who used raze only to finish chains ended in some -2k... Activity was the same, they even had help from outside kd..
Give me a paper instead of claims, and I might reconsider your views.
@ Nunho,
Tx for the clear answer on my ghetto question.
Quote:
Your quote:
.-.
part 3b is what most everyone refers to. The inferior status of the kingdom.
Where others answered with … 95% of the community are ghetto’s, you at least tell us what should be understood under that term.
Sorry to say, but I have another point of view.
If you take a better, or more carefull (?), look, your second defenition is identical to the one I used to state that the top is a ghetto. NamelyThat being said, I understood from your first paragraph that you doubt if you should ignore my posts, because I might be an idiot. Do not worry, I do not care you ignoring my posts, and I don’t even mind you assessing me an idiot. Somebody called me already a ****head in this thread, so you are quite polite compared to that one.Quote:
:"a portion of a city (community) in which members of a minority group live; especially because of social, legal, or economic pressure”.
To be frank: you, nor Realest or other Dharan’s and Greenies are the ones I want to react to those posts. But the OMAC team are the ones I want to read and react…
As long as OMAC stays / becomes aware that, what you name “kingdoms with an inferior status” are the mayority on THEIR server, such might withhold them from making rule changes which would further enhance top-powerplay.
It might even inspire them to make raze attacks NW-related, just like any other military, thievery or magic operation.
Cheers!
PS. My example about lame T/M’s being able to RK was posted in a larger context. I said:I never denied T/M's (or anybody else) the right to adjust to the game-rules. I just wanted to argument why non-NW-related razes (or any other non-NW related offensive action) is a bad gamerule, imho.Quote:
EVERYBODY can raze-kill now, even T/M’s.