#payKuhan
Printable View
#payKuhan
I suppose different play styles etc. I thought I would give this thread a couple of days and see if anything has happened yet.
It's a sad day when war can't be declared by this time. Only thing I can think of is maybe BB is waiting until just before the age ends so Pew can't vulture them? :P
Either way the longer this things goes without a war the higher Pew's chances get to win the round. At some point you have to think do i just hand Pew the crown or do i grab my nutsack and roll the dice.
Does Pew have one of those 'fake' crowns yet? If not, I say go for it. Gotta keep the flame of controversy burning. Particularly since I catch a lot of flies saying the math isn't as important as how you play. I know it's like the 'both' commercial.
@ KuhaN. I'm glad you're enjoying these moments. I will add it's not your job to entertain us; I know you have the Batman gig(your real job).
I knew a guy who worked at a steakhouse, but his real job was messing with people who were trippin'. Yes. I recall all the lights being out in the living room and he ran up to a guy screaming with a flashlight in hand and a devil mask on. The guy reacted like 150 pounds of rubber being pulled apart.
Because typically you push the button after the enemy has sent out a sizable amount of armies meaning not only do you have first war wave (with chain ability), you're doing it with troops out and ops. It's fairly difficult to come back from that in an evenQuote:
Originally Posted by tetley
matchup.
With instant declare, you take the initiative, but it's not as powerful because you're typically hitting into troops home in "set" wars.
And this isn't even about OPness of having button. This would reduce the boring meta play of stocking 1 bil gc and sitting in fort for 96 hrs and "hostile" staring contest of another 96 hrs.
Outside of that, from a "war game" standpoint, this is how things should be. Mehul really hated the fact that he had to remove instant war. He had to do it because people were just instant war FWing to run from kingdoms when notice was almost up and he didn't think that things like that should be policed by the administrators (or he didn't have the resources to do it).
Ok here's my first update then ;p
We sent out a few more bankhits July 9th, they retalled both. July 18th we gave up relations which they answered with FG and MS. July 21st, so 3 hours later, they gave us relations. Upon that we sent out more bank hits and from there on it has been moving towards a 14-14 meter, which it's at now.
The uphold on the hits was primarily due to the size spread, mainly trying to avoid getting 2 CQ's for one of our trad's and on top of that give up relations which they, if we had made this move earlier, would have likely delayed to knock out our GC.
Since receiving relations we used our stealth both to NS a set of provinces and drain their GC further.
Based on current intel (both ways 0-8h old) we have about twice their stock. 1/3rd of their GC is being kept by Aphrodisiac, another 1/3rd is kept by another ~5-6 provinces and the last 1/3rd is spread over the rest of their kingdom.
Just a matter of time before both kingdoms end up being broke.
Both still have a sapphire active and a sapphire aimed at each other.
I'll post more updates from here on when noteworthy stuff happens.
Thanks godly, I was legitimately curious. I see your point.
Perhaps the argument can be made that you should have a choice whether you go to war or not?
I agree the relations system could use some work, but I can see a lot of frustration waking up to a completely unexpected war lol
I agree that this system has no place for it in the ghetto tier. Also, it doesn't solve the problem that a kd in range in full war build can insta declare a kd in range with say armies out hitting other kds and/or sitting in pump builds?Quote:
Originally Posted by tetley
on top of that, it also greatly decreases the playability of attacking races like orcs and undeads where their leets defend so poorly. Godly ' s argument that troops home vs troops out at point of declare doesn't really hold for races like undeads and orcs where they on most occasions would rather have troops out when potential conflict is imminent. (Ie. Not caught at home being smacked with pf + bg + emerald, or not NM and chained and then totally ruined before they can even login to do anything). Unless of course, if you want to go one step further and say you don't give a rats ass about the remaining 4000 people playing in the ghetto tier then I guess you make a case for your argument.
Personally I think I can suggest something like you gain ops when you give hostile too, rather than only for the kd receiving hostile? Nerf the ops for the kd giving hostiles. Say, fireball and ns (ops, that is, just naming 2 common ones here) damage cap at half of that kd receiving hostile? Or -30% wpa tpa offensively? I don't know, just thinking off the top of my head. At the very least I do feel this is less damaging than insta declare to a less prepped kd, and also doesn't allow FWing or running as much. And it also encourages kds to give hostiles more. Still, 1 can argue that rogues that got their proper 35mtpa can wreck a mystic wpa even after 30% Nerf, if the mystic didn't have good wt %, so not really perfect either. Maybe give access to ops for the kd giving hostile 14h after Uf is reached.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13nesta13
told you your gc will deplete before them :)
^ No offense, but it would've been a surprise if something other than that happened. ^Quote:
Originally Posted by LoRD_SaMPuaN
The system argument doesn't hold up in this case so I'm with nesta here. BB has advantage. The smug know that AMA influenced the war. Do I have a problem with that? No. It's simply noted, reparations or not.
But here we see again, mechanics fall in the light of strategy by default. The short answer here is only my perception: after Pyro was attacked by AMA reparations were in order. Did Pyros modesty in accepting reparations lead to slippery leverage here? My recoilection was a stronger Pyro. I realize nobody owes anybody, but it's how you play up there.
Part of the reason I retal so hard is several fold: You took surface resources from me which I require back. You wasted my time and the time it takes to train and rebuild. I now have to play catchup to be where I should've been. You deserve punishment for interfering in my business. So it's not about even, it's about right.
nesta pointed out that bb has only slight gc advantage & more expenses due to agg stance, so definitely he had a different opinion..Quote:
Originally Posted by StratOcastle
ive no idea what you are talking about in the rest of your post.. ama interfered, giving pyro quite some time to prep & they decided to use that to get a land advantage - and you say?
Circumstances have changed since I made that post so I have no idea what you're trying to bring across.Quote:
Originally Posted by LoRD_SaMPuaN
My point was at 280m (us) and 308m (them), and the way BB were playing at the time I was posting (not hitting and keeping meter under 5 points, and BB in aggro and us Normal), that our stocks will last longer than them.
Things have changed and BB gave relations and we gave them back too in a short window interval of under 2 hours, and we have also had to move to aggressive stance, and under this new situation, of course we were going to be drained faster than them because we had a lower gc base, and they had ops superiority with better wpa and tpa across the KD.
So, like you dont understand Stratocastle's point (actually me neither, didnt really understand it. BB didnt damage us, AMA did. BB restored some of the damage done to us :P), I dont quite understand yours either.
Nesta was correct. We were in agr stance when we gave relations. Prior to that GC was close to even (we had 5-10% more). We had most of our GC spread KD wide, while they had 85% spread over 6 provs.Quote:
Originally Posted by LoRD_SaMPuaN
They also had some really bad runs on some of our guys (like 1/12 through or 1/18 through). Our successrate seemed to be better than theirs, but I'd have to ask Nesta how many attempts he caught/got through.
3 :PQuote:
Originally Posted by 13nesta13
yeah he was correct, assuming both kds will stop logging for 48h straight & see when they will run out of gc :p my point in my initial post & following were that economy management is a crucial part in top land kd's hostilities, from what i observe as an outsider and the apparent endgame of that one was pyro running out of gc.. feel free to correct me if my observations were wrong, and id love to hear more as a casual observer..Quote:
Originally Posted by protector
This has nothing to do with econ. It's all about mod tpa and wpa.Quote:
Originally Posted by LoRD_SaMPuaN
With both sides on literally no peasants and 2 million ish troops across, and one kd on aggressive and the other on normal, the aggressive factor on wages will almost assuredly mean BB's stock runs out faster. And that was the case, they were on aggressive and burning a lot of gc, and their core had to resort to robbing on our selective core which had poorer tpa defense to sustain wages.
They sent their sapphire at roughly the same time when their core was depleted on gold in order to rob us (feel free to correct me if i'm wrong, BB). And that also resulted in the skewed gc distribution on our core (the well defended were not targetted for robs). Nothing to do with econ as you mentioned, simply just tpa/wpa.
We were able to narrow the gold deficit when we had a 1 way sapp drake on them and at one point had more gold than them. After BB swapped in sapphire to even the tpa/wpa field, BB was able to rob our selective core which already had its WT efficiency crumbled due to low BE, and our tpa is lower due to their sage sciences.
thanks for the detailed insight! id say, calling 'not having gc to pay wages due to inferior tpa/wpa' either econ or mods is just semantics :) anyway, good luck making your way out of the difficult situation..Quote:
Originally Posted by 13nesta13