AID vs aggressive actions

[Palem]

Curiosity --

What is the difference between 'I can regain honor by attacking provinces / opping provinces after we leave war' and 'I can regain gold/soldiers/runes by sitting around spending time'?

The issue with the distinction you're drawing is that provinces naturally generate gc -- and they don't naturally generate land (well, significant land) or honor (after a few days OOP). Presumably, resetting chained attackers to avoid spending pool on them absolutely would be ... '[creating] some advantage that can't be replicated freely and with good play'?

The point that Topsy makes is that reverse banking replicates the same advantage freely and with good play, and that resetting them instead allows you the convenience of not having to salvage them in a reasonably small amount of time in the hands of a good player..

I guess I draw the line at this.

Devising a "strategy" that uses junk provinces that are ultimately better off being reset than building them back up is bad for the game. It goes against the nature of your province as being something important (which it's supposed to be, even if you're just a chain-bait/honey pot/grunt attacker). If the plan involves: "Then we'll reset X, Y, &Z" then it shouldn't be welcomed at all. That goes for top kingdoms trying to generate gc, soldiers, and runes, or honor kingdoms trying to bolster their honor numbers. Where as, if a province over the course of the war that they did their best to try fight out of ends up in a totally crappy situation, I can understand just wanting to save themselves some hassle and resetting because in that case it's not about getting land or honor back, it's about saving themselves some frustration.

I understand the game's come a long way since it's inception and you can call me old fashion all you want, but provinces were never meant to be disposable.

I never really wanted to play frisbee with jwhozi.

You fool.