Please read more on AR : )
http://www.alliancerankings.com/foru...ead.php?t=4024
Looking forward to hearing from you!
Humbly yours
Narkissos, leader of the Gutbuster Brigade
Printable View
Please read more on AR : )
http://www.alliancerankings.com/foru...ead.php?t=4024
Looking forward to hearing from you!
Humbly yours
Narkissos, leader of the Gutbuster Brigade
So this is basically one big ghetto target-sharing outfit?
What a dumb alliance idea. I'd like to see a bunch of newbs in random ghettos try to mess with my kingdom.
ignore the haters
good luck with this new alliance
No legitimate alliance would target-share and attempt to gangbang anyone who happens to hit one of their members. This sounds like something Prince Blood would come up with.Quote:
Originally Posted by waheed
its not against any game rules. and if indeed they do stuff dishonorable then im sure ingame justice will take care of it
as far as i can see this guy is obviously not as familiar to the "code of honor" amongst the utopia community and mean no harm, so why not just wish him good luck have fun. besides i doubt it'll develop big enough to actually cause problems for other players
LOL, good luck with that...Quote:
*Protection* Large very active bottomfeeding kingdoms is the scourge of Utopia, and some of them wave weaker kingdoms to get resources, making it harder for less active kingdoms to rebuild and prepare for war without interruption. They also make it harder for individual players to compete when it comes to top spots in province charts. They take, and leave the opponent with no chance to retal. the Gutbuster Brigade want to make it harder for kingdoms to get away with this. If your KD get several waves from the same opponent over a certain amount of time, or you as an individual are trying to compete as a province but getting hammered down by provinces from the same location, the GB wants to offer you a helping hand. The irc-based division will be working together ready to combat the threat of an active kingdom trying to crush the little guy. By condoning razing of the active KD, we might prevent this from
happening to often.
i doubt you could get enough decent kd's that arent already in an alliance who could even put a dent in most of the top kd's
im the 5th smallest prov in my kd, and im just outside the top 100 provs, and when all those who probably can hit me are above me, and CF'ed, i doubt you'll have much luck =)
cant beat the age ABS got completely smacked by 200 odd multi's straight OOP :)Quote:
It has never been done in this magnitude before, sure, maybe inactive player alliances have existed, but not one dealing with 50 - 100 ircers working together.
I still find it interesting with these notions about what's honourable and what's not. As for whether or not this'd work, that's a question of activity and coordination. If 200 mid sized provinces with high offense setups signed up for this, it could have quite an impact. Wouldn't protect its members much as they'd just be hit more, but would certainly piss off the kingdoms being targeted. However, I do believe that all alliance action should be done within a kingdom setting. There should never be any doubt that your allegiance is with your kingdom first and alliance second. Only way to ensure that is having kingdoms as members rather than provinces.
Fail.
Gnome multies anyone?Quote:
It has never been done in this magnitude before, sure, maybe inactive player alliances have existed, but not one dealing with 50 - 100 ircers working together.
Cant read, too long.
heheh ghetto target-sharing alliance. Good luck but what makes ghettoes to be ghettoes are the inability to teamwork to extend of sacrificing theirs own prov. =)
Ofc, they would. What's the point of having an alliance that's not going to look out for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Striker073
Re: Indy players - totally agreed with Catwalk. Kingdom only.
Re: Hitting guys or kds that have hit you several times (past tense) - you need to hit the kd that's hitting your alliance member now even as we speak - that means a system that is set up for hands on & immediate action - one that has actual benefit to the kd under seige rather than the rest of the alliance. Bureaucracies & dip may raise the status of the alliance but they don't do much good for the kd that's getting waved. The action has got to be immediate & prevent the kd from losing any more than it has from the moment the cf hits the paper. This means it does not need to be submitted to a committee at the top to ponder your proofs. The only proof needed is your CE showing hits after CF. Monarch sends immediately to all other allied monarchs & immediately, mass alliance bang commences. Couple of these & soon no one dares to hostile rape kds wearing your tag. Ofc, to be honorable, the kd getting waved must fire no shots. We're assuming this is a big kd feeding on a smaller or less ept kd that doesn't want to war them. Wave, yes. After cf is offered, no. I think I'd be a little more aggressive, Striker.
I have run many alliances, large and small, elite and normal. There are zero circumstances I can think of where it is legitimate for an alliance to intervene in a 1v1 kingdom situation. To do so would instantly provoke a proportional response from any friends and allies of the kingdom being targeted, and could easily lead to alliance war. It simply is not acceptable behavior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
I agree with Striker ,alliances need to stay out of 1-1 wars. if i had a province who even attacked into a war without it being a kingdom authorized alliance action such as a alliance war. hes gone before his army gets home.
You speak about this as if it would be a bad thing. Awars are fun!Quote:
Originally Posted by Striker073
An alliance should exist for the sake of it's members, not for the sake of the alliance. Otherwise, what would be the point in joining.
You also speak of 1 v 1 kingdom situation as if you were speaking of equals.
The point of the alliance is to right injustice, not look the other way.
Is like saying that if in RL one of your buddies was getting hit you wouldn't get his back. You'd turn & walk away?
Players need to be loyal to their kingdoms first before any friends in other kingdoms and definitely before some province alliance crap. Your only friends are your kingdom and other friendly kingdoms.
Alliance wars are not frivolous affairs declared over minor offenses. They represent a serious breach in honorable conduct by the offending party that cannot be resolved in any other way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
Alliances exist for the sake of their members, yes, but that does not mean they exist to bail members out of their own stupid actions, or to intervene in normal utopian affairs just because the member is coming out on the losing side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
Utopia is about self-sufficiency. A kingdom forms the basic unit of Utopia, a merging of twenty-five players towards a common goal. 1v1 situations are the norm in Utopia, whatever the circumstances may be. Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad.
Utopia is not a barfight. Think of it as a boxing match instead. Just because one boxer is losing, doesn't mean that he gets to call in some friends to help out because of the other's superior strength or skill.
No, GUW was a boxing match setup. Utopia pretty much is a bar fight. If an alliance chain hostiles a kingdom is that still 1v1? Plenty ways to gang up on people while playing 1v1.
I still find it interesting that absolutes are used in terms of what's legitimate and what's dishonourable.
*********************Quote:
Originally Posted by Striker073
"Alliances exist for the sake of their members, yes, but that does not mean they exist to bail members out of their own stupid actions"
How stupid is it to exist? To have your own little kd setup, be minding your own business, to make no hostile actions & suddenly have a kd way bigger than you descend in a wave? Is like calling the people who got hit by a Tusnami stupid.
************************
"Utopia is about self-sufficiency. A kingdom forms the basic unit of Utopia, a merging of twenty-five players towards a common goal. 1v1 situations are the norm in Utopia, ----- whatever the circumstances may be -----. Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad."
If it were about self-sufficiency, we would not be playing in kds. Be just one big server with a buncha loners running around. Game would totally lose it's social side.
"whatever the circumstances may be"? Might is right?
"Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad."
I have realistically defined it as bad.
If the top keep the bottom suppressed, they have very little chance of getting there. With topfeeding & the top having to actually fight to retain their position, everybody has a chance.
"Utopia is not a barfight. Think of it as a boxing match instead. Just because one boxer is losing, doesn't mean that he gets to call in some friends to help out because of the other's superior strength or skill."
That's just silly.
Next, you're going to tell me you support respawning.
*********************Quote:
Originally Posted by Striker073
"Alliances exist for the sake of their members, yes, but that does not mean they exist to bail members out of their own stupid actions"
How stupid is it to exist? To have your own little kd setup, be minding your own business, to make no hostile actions & suddenly have a kd way bigger than you descend in a wave? Is like calling the people who got hit by a Tusnami stupid.
************************
"Utopia is about self-sufficiency. A kingdom forms the basic unit of Utopia, a merging of twenty-five players towards a common goal. 1v1 situations are the norm in Utopia, ----- whatever the circumstances may be -----. Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad."
If it were about self-sufficiency, we would not be playing in kds. Be just one big server with a buncha loners running around. Game would totally lose it's social side.
"whatever the circumstances may be"? Might is right?
"Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad."
I have realistically defined it as bad.
If the top keep the bottom suppressed, they have very little chance of getting there. With topfeeding & the top having to actually fight to retain their position, everybody has a chance.
"Utopia is not a barfight. Think of it as a boxing match instead. Just because one boxer is losing, doesn't mean that he gets to call in some friends to help out because of the other's superior strength or skill."
That's just silly.
Next, you're going to tell me you support respawning.
So Striker,
Absalom kds making it impossible for anyone but them to win the nw chart isn't an injustice?
and makes it hard on individual kds to get to the top alone.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but larger kingdoms wave smaller kingdoms all the time. That's part of the game and not some sort of grievous offense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
Obviously you completely ignored my statement. Self-sufficiency was obviously referring to kingdoms, which I said were the basic unit of Utopia. Twenty-five people should be more than enough to deal with any situation. This is why 1v1 situations are the normal operating procedure of Utopia and not something one goes around complaining about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
Earth to Prince Blood - Utopia is a war game. The stronger kingdom beats the weaker kingdom. This isn't the UN let's all be friends game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
I wouldn't think it is realistic given that just about everyone else in this very thread thinks your definition is ridiculous, and I know it falls far outside the utopian norms for "bottomfeeding." I've already refuted your absurd arguments that bottomfeeding has magically kept smaller kingdoms from competing with better ones, but I'll say it one more time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
*Bottomfeeders hit outsize selfish players who massively outgrow their kingdom and run no offense*
These players are frankly just a waste of a kingdom slot and the explore pool. Bottomfeeders are probably doing the kingdom a favor by forcing them to stop playing so selfishly without consideration of the their kingdom's needs.
Saying something is "silly" isn't an argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
I have really have no clue this time what you mean by respawning.
Nice myth. Perhaps you should ask for tips from a decent independent kingdom, say Seasons, who won the nw chart just a couple of ages ago?Quote:
Originally Posted by Narkissos
Absalom as an alliance goes out of its way to not coordinate its actions. It gives its member kingdoms complete independence on what is to be done. There has never been an effort from Absalom to hit down anyone. Quite simply, Absalom is better than you are, and has been since it began in Age 2-3. You find a kingdom with the skill to match Absalom, like Seasons has, and you will have no problem competing.
Besides, no one in your little ghetto alliance could even fathom making it anywhere near the top of the networth charts, never mind winning it.
ABS is a defensive alliance at best...
its more a case of a bunch of kd's who have agreed not to be hostile with each other, rather than kd's who band together to stop anyone else winning
**********************************************************Quote:
Originally Posted by Striker073
Still so lazy? Why no competitive spirit? Is it just far tooo cool to be able to tell ppl you play in a top kd ...... do you fear the lack of respect if your lack of skills was outted & you were forced to play mana y mana rather than slapping babies.
You have a double standard. One for 95% of Utopia. One for you & your cushy rich friends.
*****************************************************
"Obviously you completely ignored my statement. Self-sufficiency was obviously referring to kingdoms, which I said were the basic unit of Utopia. Twenty-five people should be more than enough to deal with any situation. This is why 1v1 situations are the normal operating procedure of Utopia and not something one goes around complaining about."
*****************************************************
Yet, in the same breath you tell us the top kingdoms must allie for safety. Not only that they must ally but ALL THE TOP alliances must ally to keep out the riff raff.
Kinda sounds like those rich folk in the walled cities who hire guards to protect their precious suburb. The elite of society! Double standards for all!
A war game? Or people that would do anything to hang on to what they've got ......... including not compete. Seems more like a cartel than an alliance. Nothing that making bottomfeed gains more stringent couldn't cure,
Cov and ABS are often clashingQuote:
Yet, in the same breath you tell us the top kingdoms must allie for safety. Not only that they must ally but ALL THE TOP alliances must ally to keep out the riff raff.
and when it makes more sense for you to CF a kd to get to the top, rather than attacking them, why wouldnt you CF them?
please, enlighten us, what does your definition of "bottomfeeding" entail?Quote:
Nothing that making bottomfeed gains more stringent couldn't cure,
cause all you have EVER said is "STOP BOTTOMFEEDING!!!! OMG!!!111+shift!!"
lol?Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
Are you on drugs Prince Blood? Where have I ever said that the top kingdoms ally for safety (they don't) or that the top alliances cooperate with each other at all (they don't). You should really try discerning between what I actually say and what I would say if I was as stupid as you are. Seriously, if you have to make up nonsense I supposedly said now, you've lost this.
I always admire those who make an effort to join forces to fight the ones who try to dominate this game. You got my support. I just hate hanging out in AR site. Too many ABSers that hide behind there monarch like a little scared baby.
*********************************************************Quote:
Originally Posted by _greenie
For your edification:
Bottom feeding - a guy leaves 65 - 70 dpa at home - very little risk
Lateral feeding - a guy leaves 50 dpa at home - more risk
Top feeding - a guy leaves 40 dpa at home - heavy risk
The game should be commensurate with the risk.
"Utopia is about risk. The more risk, the more reward."
- Original Utopia Guide
*********************************************************
What's the difference between a bottomfeeder & a turtler? Turtler sits in war with his 65 - 70 dpa. He doesn't take big hits. He just sits there like a slug. He never worries. Cuz his mates are taking all the hits for him. You know how you feel when you get a turtler in your kd. I do. Out the door he goes.
Then when the stats are posted the turtler brags about what a good player he is & how well he does for the kd. He looks down on his mates who've been chained because they were threats. He doesn't get it that he never gets hit cuz he's a useless piece of sh*t. Turtler is to war what bottomfeeder is to Utopia.
So imagine now Utopia's your kd & you got a whole fleet of turtlers in it.
Scary stuff!
How many top kds are cf'd in your relations box?Quote:
Originally Posted by Striker073
We have only a couple of kingdoms CF'd outside of our alliance, which is very small and does not represent even a fraction of the top, and those CF's are due to conflicts we've already had with those kingdoms that have now since ended. They represent no sort of cooperation or alliance of any sort as you have so claimed. In fact, they represent the sort of conflicts that you have been such a proponent of. We have no NAPs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
This is a normal relations situation for any top kingdom. Obviously, it is a distant cry from your claims of active cooperation among the entire top of the game so that we can bottomfeed everyone and keep them from reaching our level.
...Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
Bottomfeeding et al are not defined by dpas left at home, they are defined by the nw difference between the provinces in question. DPA is a useless indicator as that fluctuates depending on how pumped the attacking province is and the target he is hitting. I've left less than 30dpa home bottomfeeding targets because they had no offense.
Also, the game already rewards greater risk with greater reward. If you attack someone near your own networth, your gains are much greater than if you attack someone much smaller than you. The networth gains curve is already steeply curved to this effect, plus the advantages of gangbang protection and kingdom networth disparity. These protections have been increased in recent ages, so I've never understood your mythical claim that in the past things were better.
a) my kd isnt in an allianceQuote:
Greenie, Greenie, Greenie ......... ofc you would cf your alliance. So maybe there'd be 3 top groups. All vying & scheming for the coveted top kingdom spot. There would be Awars every age! It would be fun again.
You wouldn't cf every single alliance at the top. Is called static. Boring. Is anathema to a war game. THIS IS A WAR GAME. Was. Not quite sure what it is now. Some old boys retirement home. With more stringent controls on bottomfeeding you would be forced to fight each other for your land & the game could get on it's feet again cuz you wouldn't be after the vast majority of Utopia you think of as food.
(This is me speaking, not Greenie lol - wrote in his quote*)
b) its top 5
c) currently its less than practical for my kd to go around attacking people if we want to achiev our goal for the age, so why should we attack when cf'ing kd's our size is better for us
d) actually, the top is less than static, and there is some rather interesting developments, if you knew anything about the game at the top, you would realise this =)
(mainly DE vs Elf dicing)
so... me hitting that suicider who left 10 dpa at home, which means my gnome leaves 70 dpa at home, even though he is the same nw as me, makes me a bottomfeeder?Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
also, by your measure, im a topfeeder, awesome!!! im leaving ~35 dpa at home on every hit!!! despite the fact my prov is over 500k nw and i havent hit anyone >80% my nw in the past week =)
and a turtler with only 70 dpa is asking to get hit as far as im concerned =)
Greenie & Striker
Bottomfeeding is defined by the feeder, not the victim & measuring it in terms of the feeders dpa is appropriate.
Ofc there will be exceptions like suci's but the average is the rule. This is using 60 draft which is what most players use.
yeah, and alot of the top kd's provs leave 30-35 dpa at home most of the time... but by your logic, they arent bottomfeeding, which, they clearly are...Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince Blood
also, if you take into account 60% draft with 10% homes and 10% pop sci
that gives you ~17 troops/acre - 1 for theives
so you are looking at 16 military per acre
if someone is running 120% DME with 65 dpa, he is going to have (non-human/DE) 11 troops/acre tied up for defense, which leaves him with 5 for offense, even an orc would struggle with that!
of course they are going to be bottomfeeders when the max offense they can get is 50-55 mod opa (as an orc)
so your point is entirely moot, as anyone running that sort of defense HAS to be a bottom feeder, and its what top kd's like to call "free acres"
your logic is extremely flawed prince blood, thinking of military is rather pointless these days, and talking about bottomfeeding in terms of how much defense you leave at home, is even more flawed
He use his own terms.
Simply most people don't have enough knowledge to judge others since Utopia experiences are different on what kind of kingdom and alliance you play.
Greenie - "yeah, and alot of the top kd's provs leave 30-35 dpa at home most of the time... but by your logic, they arent bottomfeeding, which, they clearly are..."
********************************************************
By my definition, they are top feeding & suci. Big difference between suiciding & bottomfeeding. Far greater risk.
What but they get waved while their armies are out? Go to war. How long & how many guys would it take to send them into overpop. Double/triple tap very, very quickly. 40 is good imo. Can't be DT'd by same size provvie. Maybe I am a suck.
Had a cpla guys playing that in tourney & a cpl in every kd we warred. They were always at the bottom of the barrel. Big gains, even greater losses. As a kd wide strat, idk. How well do they stack up against equal kds playing 30, 40, 50 dpa @ home?
Whats NAPS precious?
your definition is wrong then =)Quote:
By my definition, they are top feeding & suci. Big difference between suiciding & bottomfeeding. Far greater risk.
my kd can DT 40 dpa at home... quite easilyQuote:
Double/triple tap very, very quickly. 40 is good imo. Can't be DT'd by same size provvie. Maybe I am a suck.
Non-action pacts, very similar to a CFQuote:
Whats NAPS precious?