So unfair WW Matching - Age Rushing - Selective Upgrading - 10 GA vs 4 GA

[Brand Marrow]

Yes Navalis but I think BV123 is busy keeping the windmills spinning....

 

[poop_]

Free speech does not mean speech without repercussions.

We are completely open to different points of view, but we do not want you representing ours.

I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors.

 

[Christopher-Outlaws!!]

impressive poop made me chuckle.

 

[Christopher-Outlaws!!]

I don't even know where to begin with this statement. the fact you evented your way to 5*'s is a joke. the other fact that you decided to begrudge Eminent Domain and accused them of cheating... you may want to get your head checked, or go join some stackers, they get nice easy matchups for players like you.

 

[JNation]

This is why i think a weighted score would work. So you would take someones raw score in regard to offensive and defense upgrades and multiple that by which ever age they are in. (you would assign a number for each age). That way iron age bases would weight less in wars and wouldn't bring down average for finding a match (aka sandbagging). This would also fix your rush-age players too. They would soon realize that if they rush and don't upgrade their offensive and defensive stuff then they will be outmatched by their opponent. I would like to see this actually calculation they use so we could fool around with the numbers to see what works, but this is the gist of idea i have... :/

 

[Quali]

If we choose not to upgrade farms, caravans, roads or build any oil wells we have to work that much harder to be able to upgrade things - there is nothing wrong with playing that way. Besides, only offense and defense is considered - farms don't give you a disadvantage in war.

 

[MonsterMMORPG]

This is why i think a weighted score would work. So you would take someones raw score in regard to offensive and defense upgrades and multiple that by which ever age they are in. (you would assign a number for each age). That way iron age bases would weight less in wars and wouldn't bring down average for finding a match (aka sandbagging). This would also fix your rush-age players too. They would soon realize that if they rush and don't upgrade their offensive and defensive stuff then they will be outmatched by their opponent. I would like to see this actually calculation they use so we could fool around with the numbers to see what works, but this is the gist of idea i have... :/

very well said totally supporting

 

[Warlord1981]

This thread touches on the very discussion my alliance; Thor's Legion, has been engaged in for the last few days. We are a primarily EA heavy alliance, and often get matched with alliances who have a stronger top 3, but it wavers after that. Our very last war, we matched against an alliance with with a level 149 IA and a level 143 Global. Their next 3 matched our next 3.

Honestly, regardless of their xp and age, they struggled with us every bit as much as we struggled with them. The war came down to 2 starsstar, and we managed a very narrow victory.

Our number 1 is a 131 EA and he was intimidated by the l levels and ages of the top 2, but after going in with a sound strategy, he pulled off 2 impressive wins which was the deciding factor I'm his victory.

This has cemented our alliances stance that offense alone does not win wars. By having a completely Gunpowder defense maxed top 7, with a few enlightenment defensive upgrades since most just made the transition, we were able to prevent from being 5 starred in our top 7 and this allowed superior strategy to overcome superior offense.

Good players work around challenges and figure out how to win, day in and day out. Thor's Legion has that temperament and we will continue to upgrade everything before moving up.

You won't find easy targets here.

 

[Warlord1981]

On a side note, or newest opponent is an example in the dangers of jumping. They have just as many enlightenment as we do, and they even have a few industrial. However those industrial aren't even talked number 1 or 2. Their highest ranked base is ranked above 4 bases with higher levels. This unfortunate alliance doesn't have the ability to prevent is from 5 starring every base, they got the offense, but not the defense.

If you are going to jump, there is a smart way, and a not so smart way. Key buildings other than offense still need some attention.

 

[QuébecGlory]

Poop, I told Kool you didn't like his design. So he reworked it just for you, I thought you would appreciate the effort

 

[poop_]

I do appreciate the time you spent making that for me. It shows you really care, but not sure that base is good enough yet to earn the poop stamp of approval. I can color notes on it if you think it would help him out.

It may be hard for you to believe that is really our war record considering the minimal glory we still have and the fact we didn't have to add iron/medieval ages to do it. But, it is indeed our war record. I can send you screenshots if you want. Or, do you prefer hard copies?

Since you earn your glory a different way, I will explain how it works for those of us who do not manipulate the system (We have 6 stalemates too. I am not hiding that from anyone, just doesn't fit in the alliance description.) :

When you don't stack your bottom with low level players, you tend to get more even match ups, and the ability to take a large chunk of glory from another alliance is less likely. We have won our glory 8, 12, 24, 30, etc at a time. Occasional bigger chunks, but mostly small amounts. It might be the fact, that our opponents previously got paired with stackers and got their big chunks stolen from them.

Compared to how an alliance like yours steals glory by padding their bottom with low level players so that you can match (I mean "outmatch) alliances that don't have a good chance of winning, and then you steal a big chunk of their glory that they earned 8,12, 24, 30, etc at a time.

This concept may be hard for you to understand because you chose a selfish, cowardly way.

We aren't afraid of your kind (often I feel bad for you all), but I am bothered by the fact that you chose to come onto the forum and try to flaunt some dirt that you thought you had on us to try to feel better about yourself.

You have no moral high ground here. NONE.

I may be full of poop, but at least I am not full of sh*t.

 

[QuébecGlory]

I have said nothing nasty to you, or about you or your alliance, why so much hate? ...don't answer, I know. Anyways, pass on my Holiday Wishes to your family anf friends...and remember that this is just a game. I hold no grudge.

 

[Europeos]

poop_ I don't think insults like these should be allowed in this forum. We all have different views on the game, no need to call people names to express them.

 

[Equal]

with a good strategy and some experience, it is possible to take out 140-150 lvl industrial and global bases without any extra cadrs using only maxed out enlightenment army. probably 143 level global was only the name. not actual global level defences. so i agree. everything is possible when you have a desire to win and not giving up before fight.

 

[Vixen]

especially if you learn to fight without extra troops from nexon, alliance gate, and mercs during multi play... you fight smarter and can hit higher through skill not grunt

 

[poop_]

Europeos, I think you missed something.

It is ok. Quebec knows.

You can go scout Kool's base if you so chose.

 

[jmemira]

the system already doesn't count non defensive/offensive ug in matchmaking... farms/roads/caravans count in levels but don't count in wars.

 

[KniferX]

jmemira Is it certainly true?

 

[Warlord1981]

If you're looking for a new alliance, your welcome to check us out. I'll warn you now, don't blast your opinion on our opponents and all will be good. We upgrade everything before moving up, so it may be a good fit, then again, maybe not, vine check us out, we will see where it goes.

 

[Warlord1981]

Completely agree, there is much to be said for upgrading everything, both about the base, and the player who takes that time. It's a difference in philosophy and I for one choose to believe there is an advantage.