AMA & BB ruin the game

[Sheister]

why doesn't havoc war fake rage? instead they are too busy teaching each other how to unsuccessfully cheat via exploiting game mechanics and getting actioned for it. less time cheating, more time warring.

Will you shut up about warring? Stop talking about CR and RBL as if they are somehow different from AMA/BB in terms of attitude. You all just want structured acres collection actions. Not wars. Wars are actually supposed to be competitive. Not one of your kingdoms actually wants even a hint of competition. so just stop it.

[Sheister]

i still think it's pretty silly for people to worry about staying small in a game where acres can be so volatile and easy to access.

noobium, it is because the way game mechanics are now (not that I am sure it would change too much under some different set) if you grow into range of one of the three kingdoms that has a lot more experience in the game, you just have a miserable time from dealing with the ego's of their leadership to dealing with their abuse of mechanics to create structured acres collections. No one minds a loss, but the mechanics make it so you can't even play a match against them until they give you a button to press for war. So its not like you can do anything but be a victim of abuse. It is not like they are really doing it because they need an advantage, they do it so that they can have EVERY advantage before they commence their acres collection.

That is why it is better just to avoid them. Sadly the only method the game allows for this is to stay away from them in terms of NW which means (largely) land.

[protector]

old oop sucked. there was only one way to do old oop, and it involved a lot of micromanagement over 3 days.

Define a lot?! A pretty basic strategy works for every race and doesn't quite require an extreme time schedule.
The only provinces that really required extra time and planning during protection used to be those that would be exploring. You'd want them to optimize their provinces because all other exploring provinces would try and optimize. And as we live in a competitive environment, nobody wants to loose and thus do their best!

[Sheister]

For the most part, you did not have to do a LOT. I recall one protection with a very competitive player who did not miss a single tick for three days (yes he woke up every hr to tweak it). that is ONE player i saw do that. The result I saw OOP, was he was about 10% better (defined as 15% larger with 10% more defense) off than I was (who had a normal sleep schedule, but logged 16 -18 ticks/day). How much difference would that 10% make? I dunno. There is a lot to it and depends on who is on your island and what happens OOP. Perhaps you think I micromanage a LOT. Compared to logging in 2X/day, the differences do grow. But there are diminishing gains. You don't earn that much more gc/tick by investing sci each tick, etc. It is farm more criticle to log in the PRECISE ticks that you need to. E.g. the training tick, the build tick.

So yes, doing a lot of micromanagement has a benefit, but I don't know that it is as significant as some might think.

[TommyB]

Yea, game mechanics are to blame for losing against more experienced/organized kingdoms.. got it.

Sheister, do you not realize how ridiculous your endless tirade sounds?

What is stopping you from using the same strategies the best kingdoms use to dominate the game? So you would probably still lose from lack of experience. But instead of getting the experience and improving, you choose to whine on the forums and demand to be given advantages for free. Not a very good long-term strategy as that still wouldn't teach you how to win on your own.

Still, if you don't want to compete at the top level of play you can easily stay out of range of those kingdoms and have fun warring kingdoms in a lower tier. This isn't being forced on you, it's your own choice to not want to compete against the best kingdoms.

TLDR: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5dWYZAR9B0

[Sheister]

TommyB, do you not realize how ridiculous you are when you don't read? I did not say the mechanics cause the loss. I said the mechanics make it so that you can't war until the kingdom in the superior position allows it.

I agree, it is my own choice not to compete against the top kingdoms. I was responding to noobium who was stating that he thought it was silly to want to not compete. However, increasingly kingdoms are making that precise choice.

[protector]

If ama/bb were largely interested in warring then each could have had wars this age very easily.

And based on what information did you conclude we (BB) weren't interested in warring?

[Sheister]

I don't know what information topsy is using for that, but for me, I have it from darkie that you don't want to war, you just want acres.

/me shrugs.

But topsy may have some independent basis for his assertion.

[TommyB]

TommyB, do you not realize how ridiculous you are when you don't read?

Unfortunately I do read your posts and all I see is you demanding to be given war 'on equal footing' instead of work on bringing your kingdom into a good position to do so.

Your last post shows exactly where the problem is. You don't understand that wars are fought for acres. The moment you want to war but aren't interested in acres you stop making sense. Of course BB would gladly take your acres if you refuse to fight for them. I have no idea what else you would expect from them?

[Meeni]

Pew stated that they didn't war was because their kingdom was 2/3 inactive

[protector]

I don't know what information topsy is using for that, but for me, I have it from darkie that you don't want to war, you just want acres.

/me shrugs.

But topsy may have some independent basis for his assertion.

Either he trolled you or he's a nub

[TheOne]

Summary of this thread (no insult to any kingdoms. this is un-biased view)

1) You cant aim for nw/land when you war your way up. Current game dynamics do not allow this to happen feasibly. The kingdoms that do not war will be more pumped, probably larger and such. Again, this is game mechanics, there's ALMOST zero ways to bridge the gap between warring and whoring tier. Any solution proposed will have glaring leaks.

If AMA/BB didnt war a single war this age, and are sitting on top of the charts, they are not to be blamed. They want to win nw/land, and they chose the best strategy. end of story. I dont care if I dont get to war (though I will wave kingdoms when I'm in superior positoins), I can just whore and grow and probably war once per age and if I win nw/land, I'm happy enough.

CR/Pyro can go and war all they like, but at the end of the day, it would most probably put them in a much worser spot when faced up vs AMA/BB and have lower chances. That's the fact of Utopia, nothing can be changed. CR's age was probably defined to always be lagging behind AMA/BB the moment they got into an OOP war with Pyro, and vice-versa.

Pew/RBL/Legacy/ZZ?/Wsk? were kingdoms that tried to whore, but once again, early age is very important, and once you screw it up, the rest of the age will be -.- unless you find something else that's motivating for your kingdom to do for the rest of the age. again, that's Utopia.

Just think about it, CR and AMA have their roles swapped almost identically last age and this age.

There's almost no way to merge warring and whoring tier together. The only suggestion that I think is remotely close to achieving this, is to make an age 6 weeks long. It will totally change dynamics.

2) Nightmare, can haz back to pyro?. I miss QQing to you.

-cJ

[Proteus]

Will you shut up about warring? Stop talking about CR and RBL as if they are somehow different from AMA/BB in terms of attitude. You all just want structured acres collection actions. Not wars. Wars are actually supposed to be competitive. Not one of your kingdoms actually wants even a hint of competition. so just stop it.

No people actually enjoy good wars and winning them and crowning after. With that said people also follow their own strat and do what is best rather than what QQers in forum want. When Abs was around there were people who always wanted those kds to war as well. RPP and FPP alliances of last age were a lot worse for the game than BB/AMA being friendly which is no where near the level of commitment Abs kds had to each other(this excludes havoc because they were not truly and but a ghetto merger at the end of the alliance days and they sure played like a ghetto).

[Maximouse]

So exactly who in their right mind would war BB or AMA? It's by choice in the sense that they obviously went for land growth and managed it better than everybody else. But I doubt that either of them would have minded a war or two at some point. The problem is that the air is thinner the higher up you get so there is less availible partners and none of those partners would willingly war either AMA or BB because it'd be a guaranteed loss.
BB tried to notice PewPew and make them war them, PewPew selfrazed their provinces rather than war them, AMA did the same with Rage with the same, albeit an even more spectacular result, it also seems that AMA tried noticing Havoc and Havoc would rather make a deal for 20% of their acres or something like that than war AMA.
So I wouldn't say that it's entirely by choice that they're warless, in fact a war would probably have been a very good thing for them and preferable because it'd let them concentrate acres onto cows and some of the core leaving the rest viable to random again.

Just to correct you on something. It was AMA who didnt want to war CR. Not the other way around. And there was never any notice between AMA and CR. We actualy asked AMA to war us. AMA's goal is acres and not wars, and a CF deal or comming for us when we couldnt war them were both better scenario's to get acres then a war with us would be.

BB earlier didnt want to war us either. They came for us when we didnt have any chance to war them rather then give us time to train up to war them.

In both cases CR wouldnt have hesitated to war either of them if we had been given time to train up. That would mean warring them with a cow, science, wpa, size, gc stock disadvantage. In both cases, both KD's didnt want war (besides perhaps a complete farmwar we would never give them), but they wanted acres. Which given their position and presumed goals is a fair choice.

[Sheister]

Unfortunately I do read your posts and all I see is you demanding to be given war 'on equal footing' instead of work on bringing your kingdom into a good position to do so.

Your last post shows exactly where the problem is. You don't understand that wars are fought for acres. The moment you want to war but aren't interested in acres you stop making sense. Of course BB would gladly take your acres if you refuse to fight for them. I have no idea what else you would expect from them?

Incorrect. You INFER that I am demanding a war on equal footing. What I am saying is no one will war on such unequal footing where they have zero chance to even have fun. To say that pew did not work to bring themselves into a position to do so is also patently false. Pew FAILED to do so, but to say pew did not TRY is simply wrong.

You misconstrue my last post entirely if you think I do not believe that wars are fought over acres. My point was not that wars are not fought over acres, but that AMA/BB/CR are more interested in acres than in war. For example, AMA/BB/CR would rather diplomatically strong arm a kingdom into free feeding for them than to allow that other kingdom to pursue its previously planned war. The posters in this and other threads are very clear that the object is the acres in and of themselves, irrespective of enjoyment and that it is preferable (mathematically) to always make free uncontested hits. Thus the game that AMA/BB/CR play is to develop and stock to where they can leverage a threat for free acres, which they then develop and stock to leverage into free acres.

That is, they prefer to negotiate structure acres collections rather than war. Most of the other kingdoms on the server prefer to simply war and feel no need to maximize their leverage on an opposing KD. This is not to say they do not seek advantage, but when they have say 5/6 possible advantages, they do not need to further prep the target to obtain the 6th advantage before passing the button and just getting down to it. This is because they understand that to get a war, the other side has to have something they can work with. But again, that is because they want a war, not a structured acres collection.

You need to separate wars from acres acquisition. The acres acquisition is something that occurs irrespective of wars and wars occur irrespective of acres acquisition. The two are not absolutely linked.

No people actually enjoy good wars and winning them and crowning after. With that said people also follow their own strat and do what is best rather than what QQers in forum want. When Abs was around there were people who always wanted those kds to war as well. RPP and FPP alliances of last age were a lot worse for the game than BB/AMA being friendly which is no where near the level of commitment Abs kds had to each other(this excludes havoc because they were not truly and but a ghetto merger at the end of the alliance days and they sure played like a ghetto).

Fair enough, I am sure that after all acres settlements have been done and there is NOTHING else to do in the game, that a war right before crowning is satisfactory. However, the behavior of these kingdoms throughout the age is to use diplomacy to set up structured acres collections. I am not sure what the connection of the alliance behaviors has to my post or if that is some general observation. I personally have no problems with alliances because the game was at its most vibrant when there were LOTS of alliances around, a lot more underhanded play and backstabbing and far more "dishonorable play" that what people see now. To clarify that a little, it was not dishonorable at the time but might be considered such by today's standards. Of course, I personally find today's play far more offensive than the worst I saw back in the ages 20-34.