I disagree, the former was better, encouraged people to be more civil. Four days of us bullying you and ya had leaders starving for 48h and at least 2 people quitting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximouse
Printable View
I disagree, the former was better, encouraged people to be more civil. Four days of us bullying you and ya had leaders starving for 48h and at least 2 people quitting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximouse
I assume that was before the decline in players and top KDs made it so that the acre bonus from warwins made such a massive impact on the charts from halfway through the age onwards?Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
This was with WW bonus. Rage grew a bit on banks but their core got sacked. So we didn't loose any acres, think we even grew a bit, but so did Rage (thanks to the WW bonus). Other kingdoms where able to grow faster than Rage because of their minimal growth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cello
will you give us cookies?
So pyro notice was voided cause pyro is no longer top 5 right? BB notice still stands and pyro can go afk?
1) Pew's notice on Pyro had expired, so we are no longer noticing into a notice. There was also no hostile action, not even a CF being broken (still nothing in paper as of now) so no reason for us to not being able to notice.Quote:
Originally Posted by crease
2) Pyro dropped out of top5 after WSK won their war and passed Pyro.
No response was given to the extra time offered (was up for debate on the length of extra time in exchange for an agreed date to war).
Kinda hard to lose acres in conflict when we had to do massive building raze kd wide and military release on cows just to be able to declare which wouldn't be available first 14h of war so we still grew from a lot each war and asked for cf since it would win the age for us given random potential, it's not like you were doing actual damage, just blocking us from randoming to #1.Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
Completely different circumstances considering prior age you guys were super cocky and acted superior so I decided to make sure you guys down crown and to beat you in war, we did that, had most wins out of any top5 kd and still finished #2, you guys made #5 by a 1k acre margin with no WWs, so who got hurt more that age?
Mostly correct, you also had sage core with better sci that benefitted you in wars whereas we couldn't op you as our tms were too big but we had dws who could be nmed. We also weren't in dragon range to put 1way dragon on you and our kd had to raze building to declare each time and our cows had to raze 70%+ land and a ton of military. Given all of that, we grew 20k+ from each war and the only kd that passed us was Sanc, we ended #2.Quote:
Originally Posted by protector
Are you now really going to bash us for our finish that age, when all we did at some point was just preventing you to win? How is our finish relevant when we did nothing to improve our rank? We both know that if we had just grown instead of 'hurting' you we'd have made a better finish :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Proteus
You bullying us made us decide to just not let you finish #1, which we successfully did. That you got the most warwins out of it from all top5 kingdoms, if you're happy with that fine. It's hardly worth boasting about, had you lost those (the last 2 wars) you should've been embarrassed. The first war, you get credit for, the other 2.. nah :p
Our TMs being able to NM was your own fault. Should have massacred with your banks, would've had a better chance not having to war again then as it was one of our strengths.
Selective/memory and bias at work?Quote:
Originally Posted by protector
1. Havoc was a dick last age, top kds refused to ally them this age and keep them from doing well
-bb/tags were dicks prior age so I wanted to do something about it, we did. Chose to engage you early, after we won you asked for cf, we said no (same way you said no to cf to havoc which no one blamed you for, exact same circumstances...we didnt like your kd same way you dont like havoc
2. This age we were open to cf with havoc for right amount of land, they said no or tried to rax pyro for it. When you asked for cf (2nd time that age), I asked for free wave you said no. Not my fault you were too proud and hurt your own age.
3. My only goal coming into the age was to beat top kds in range, especially your kd because of how cocky you were last and chart well, we did both.
4. I compared how you finished because you claimed to "hurt us", who got hurt/who looks better, undefeated #2 land kd with prov crown and best ww record or t5 kd with war losses/no crowns. That's the point I'm making. For goals we had for age we did very well, I don't know what your goals were but when you beat mercy your age was wide open.
Selective memory how? Regardless if we finished #3 or #12, or #5 with a 1k lead over the #6, once you didn't CF us we had little options left. We could either engage you when we caught you off guard and untrained and make the best out of it, or wait till you're done science pumping, convert and hit us with us having no chance to prevent getting farmed. Pretty sure most people would have done the same whilst being in that position.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proteus
Fact is, both our kingdoms could have had a better finish if it had been solved better with diplo, can't deny that! ;p
So ya, in the end we both got 'hurt'.
I also do not deny you had a good age, that age. However, the boasting about your results that age, is a little inflated. It's not like you won all your wars against evenly matched opponents. The last 2 you won, where wars you couldn't really loose, unless you would do so on purpose. So that's what I mean with your record is a little inflated, that's all. That's my opinion anyway.
Fwiw, getting vultured and losing a war doesn't quite feel that bad. Sure it sucks, but it's part of the game.
I believe the point of floggers post was that old mechanics allowed smaller kingdoms to defend themselves somewhat where as current mechanics give them no chance.
If I am correct he was just trying to say the max meter auto war regardless of nw system is worst then the old system. Not that his ego is larger then proteus'.
I recall using the old system to our advantage (under the leadership of maximouse) in the age when we beat up mercy (what Havoc was then called before they became havoc and then later CR). It was a great fight and a lot of fun. I recall also that bazinga who became snakes who became whoever who became pew pew also used it successfully against abs KDs.
I further recall that every single abs KD whined like little girls about how unfair it was that they could get locked into conflicts and not escape without giving concessions to the KD that THEY INITIATED the conflict with and how the game should not allow smaller KD's to have advantages like that over larger KDs and this is largely discussed in a now hidden/deleted thread in the suggestions forums. Much whining and gnashing of teeth as we had the temerity to use the game mechanics to successfully fight off the larger kingdom. it was just bad bad bad......
Its much better if smaller kingdoms have no chance..... much more satisfactory and likely to improve recruitment into the game.
I don't disagree with you, but if you read floggers post again you will see why I posted what I did, he made it seem like he dropped the bomb on us or something that age, hence I posted...if you did why did we have #2 finish, a crown, and most WWs of any top kd, if you take out last 2 wars I believe we would still have most WWs as there weren't many kds competing for crown that age. Just contradicting his statement which reads as if we got owned or something when we had out typical Rage finish of t3 with WWs over top kds. I agree both kds would have done better if diplo was better.Quote:
Originally Posted by protector
Are we talking about ages 50s again?