alliances, FW's, raze kills and other stuff

[_greenie]

the only time when RK'ing is easy, is when you actually focus on RK'ing people....

we have been in 4 wars so far, and there is nothing funnier than seeing people do 2 razes for 23 and 21 acres, and that's all the hits they make in that one round of hits...

raze is over-used, that is the problem... we have had people who tried to raze us to out-raze us, you know what happened? we ended up gaining acres from them =)

once age is over, i might post some summaries of what happens when you have nubs using raze way to much

[Realest]

@ Realest:


What you mean? Wars in those 41 ages before didn't work?

correct, wars in the building-based raze era was a max gain and dash endeavour, which is not what warring should be.

[Bored]

While we are removing raze I think we are missing the bigger issue. Traditional march is OVERPOWERED!!! I have seen wars where people do NOTHING but traditional marches! Have you seen a war with only razes? Something definitely needs to be done.

I don't like losing 10-15% of my land because some internet-tough-guy like VT2 is too cool to cast paradice or explore. Then his buddies attack me more and call it "chaining"?! Rebuilding is hard work and I feel like it is ruining my experience and a that of a lot of newer players. Utopia is a game for peace damn it.

Lets start with this. I will talk about plunders another day..

[Realest]

I fear that if you remove raze, wars would become a traditional-march fest. I think its bad for one attack to be this overpowering. I mean most wars are already mainly traditional-marches so that tells you how good it is..

Can we consider removing traditional march instead? I don't like losing 10-15% of my land because some internet-tough-guy like VT2 is too cool to cast paradice or explore. Then his buddies attack me more and call it "chaining"?! Utopia is a game for peace damn it.

I see where you're coming from, but if you remove trad march, people will just conquest, it would overpower war heroes since that would be the personality of choice to conquest better.

[Bored]

You are right, there is a flaw.

Our next conquest shall be to remove conquest.

[Nuriho]

Razing for acres is bad, because it makes growth in war impossible, and turns them into slugfests about who can destroy the other side first.

Raze is bad, and makes wars even more rare than they already are.

i understand what you're trying to say VT2, but not all wars do this. it's fair to punish everyone for someting a few kingdoms do?

our strategy in wars is to chain provinces down with TMs and raze when TM gains is less than 70 acres. this allows us to have incoming acres and not be totally screwed. If the other kingdom only razes, without incoming acres, it's a lot easier to screw up their provinces with overpop and low economy.

By only razing each other, the kingdoms just have poor strategies, imo. Maybe instead of taking raze destroying acres, those kingdoms should look into alternate strategies?

I speak from a kingdom that's been in 6 wars this age, has lost most of them, and still is in top 40. If it's so destructive, how do we stay in top 40? surely there are more than 40 kingdoms that haven't been in wars that'd be able to be on top of us, if razing is so destructive it ruins the game?

//edit

but the point is that raze should be equal to or less useful than Trad.

if raze is equal to amount of acres trad takes, there is no point in using it. if you had to choose between taking 100 acres or destroying 100 acres, why would you choose destroy them? doesn't that just weaken your own province?
the point for raze destroying 9-10% land regardless would be for when TM takes less than 50 acres, you can still raze for 60, and when TM takes 4, you can raze for 15-20.

Making raze do the same amount of TM, razing a province below 200 acres would only do 5-10 acres of damage. To me it seems silly to keep raze as an op at that point, unless you want to use it as the new anonymous, where they won't be able to ambush the acres back. then again, anonymous you still gain acres, so when you lose 500a and have 250a incoming, is a lot more helpful than having 0a incoming. .-.

in my opinion at least. maybe some people like to just lose acres and not be able to attack due to overpop unless they release more troops since they didn't have acres incoming...

[Fates Warning]

Raze killing is NOT easy to achieve in a ghetto enviroment unless the kingdom you're warring has already lost the war completely.

Try telling that to a highly active province that was taken down to 50 acres and then 2 provinces in a row began quad tap razes without looking at his acres first. This was in a bottom 400 kingdom (Can't get much more ghetto than that) and pk was by accident. I watched it happen.


Only the hyperactive kingdoms/players really enjoy a total rebuild. Can we not come up with some other way? Is Raze the way it is the only option that we can come up with?

**Edit** Forgot to mention it was the loosing kingdom that committed the PK.

[DHaran]

VT2 doesn't know how to use raze, which is why he never gains in wars. It's quite amusing how he thinks nobody can gain in war anymore.

[VT2]

I can gain just fine in wars, but when my opponent is taking out an average 8% of my kingdom's total potential offensive power each and every day, it's no longer about gaining land, but about dismantling him faster than he's dismantling me, or just staying away from war in the first place.

See the problem yet?

[Gakundra]

Isn't the whole point of a war to dismantle your opponents faster than they can dismantle you?

Wars were completely and utterly boring when raze was changed to destroying buildings instead of destroying land.

If you can dismantle your opponent properly you should be gaining lots of land in these wars even if both sides are using raze.

[VT2]

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?

[Gakundra]

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.

[DHaran]

The point of war is to take stuff from your opponent.

Hmmm, why don't we own Japan... this is BS!

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.

[VT2]

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.

[Nuriho]

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.