Originally Posted by
Proteus
Korp, I never made any statement about how competitive this era is. Nor have I denied that the level of competition has gone down significantly, we have less than 1/10 of the players we did back then, that alone says everything you need to know in a nutshell. Comparing players and kingdoms across eras is always fail, there is too much variability. If they can't do it in professional sports surely we can't do it here.
Dharan I have seen your posts and they have no credibility. You have never done a critique or analysis of a kingdom or a leader. You simply make posts that claim someone sucks or someone is a joke. Thats nothing. The people who actually know what they are talking about wont even bother making posts like that on the forums. And if they did they wouldn't use a blanket statement such as "he, she, it sucks" they'd actually delve into the flaws and explain the reasoning behind it - very much like corporate strategy works if you want a real world example. Based on your posts you really don't know what you are talking about. Simians can't be a garbage kingdom with the results that they have this age and Anri can't be a garbage monarch because he is partially responsible for their WWs and chart position. Are there monarchs currently playing that are better leaders than Anri? Surely. Are their better kingdoms? Yes. But that doesn't mean that Simians aren't any good. I am talking about this era only. Its the one we play in. No one really cares if any of these kingdoms wouldn't be top50 or would be playing on WoL instead of BF in the old days, seriously. Back then good players with perfect activity were a dime a dozen, now its hard to get a kingdom of 25 of such players and keep them around for more than 1 age.