Pity you wimped out of our one then ![]()
Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Posts by Torqez
Pity you wimped out of our one then ![]()
Yes he would
. I told oxy that poley and freezy were likely mob last game. Its a move to gain trust
How did that work out for you? ![]()
Nolio actually has the skill to make anyone fall asleep.
Fixed, plus tag pointed ![]()
The reference.
Also @ Valcona
Lets not get into strategy here, but pop bankers run 40% usually for TO, and go even up to 50%. Saying it, not cos of strat wise, but to show Reindeer that its a tactic to go past the 25% writtent here (which is wrong).
But if the #1 fam, with no less than 20% more NW than the #2, gives in to demands of families #4 and #6 or w/e, then the galaxy is ill. Such couwardness and lack of oldschool ways to settle the galaxy dominance are mindblowing.
I think you've missed my posts entirely. If attackers cannot be online then its not "cowardness and lack of oldschool ways". It's a simple matter of not being able to partake.
So if that's the case, why wouldn't you sacrifice some stuff for the option of a fight later.
I mean what do you expect, bankers all jump defense and attackers jump 8-12 ticks later? I'm sure you'd find that cowardly too and say that isn't "old school" either.
Would be nice to leave pet names out of the players list
lol'd ...and revolted at the same time!
There's a lot of egos in MW right now who think they are gods of attacking. Some of them are in this thread. That's why I laugh when they defend their decisions to avoid wars, even though they are "smart moves".
lol Pie, I think you've been away from the game far too long.
MW has always been a Pissing contest. Nothing has changed =]
Is Milky Way the new Pinwheel?
Yep, in terms of skill! And Pinwheel is the new Virgo.
Skill overall has declined drastically.
Also, you're poll answers are very loaded ![]()
Yea, that woulda been me. It's not correct. There is no maximum effect, so that needs to be fixed.
So if you have 50% of your infra as TO's, your income will be multiplied by 2!
Ya, I know. But I mean it's similar.
If you start hiding threads that people create - then you're kinda defying the purpose of why they exist in the first place!
I do know what you mean though - but probably not possible to implement easily.
Mmmm, check here for comments on this idea!
Given that, I think you are right that just creating individual NAPs for the fams involved would be the best thing.
Ya, perhaps keep it simple for now.
Regarding your example where a family is joining an alliance with existing NAPs
.....
I can see this being very useful, but don't think it should necessarily be a requirement for this to get out the door.
^ Agreed!
Any issues with things as they stand now? If this gets enough support I would love to prioritize this as an official coming feature.
Nope! Full steam ahead! ![]()
That could seem like a good way to do it.
Reason I was saying individual, is because in a 2-1 NAP, you're essentially condoning the 2 Fams to cancel on the now Single Fam and 2v1 them. Granted, this is actually possible now in current game, but it is generaly frowned upon (yep, game meta, and that 'where to draw the line' issue with ambiguities that come up as a result) for 2 fams to war 1 fam - allies or not.
So essentially although the 2 fams have no obligation to not 2v1 the fam that broke alliance, they could potentially still get the option to cancel it as a 1v1 (either party) if they choose to cancel the NAP. Again, this is relative (because say these 2 fams are much smaller than that original fam, they can still 2v1 or do w/e they want).
Also, to add another spin to this - what happens if Fam A, now wants to ally Fam Z? In some situations, A will approach C and D to reinstate an Alliance NAP with Z's inclusion. In fact, Z might also already have some diplomacy with C and D, so there perhaps needs to be some kind of consolidation or re-negotiation.
lol, why would you care if it's not fun for them? ![]()
It's fun taking planets to gain and fight more later.
It was a common tactic back in the day to cancel on people when the time suits you and not them. It should still be a tactic now even. Nothing wrong with it.
What I was saying though, is that the setup with only 2 attackers or so, means you have to give up if thats the case, rather than try to drag something on.
Top guys making alliances!! ![]()
Yep, mine too. Best part of IC.
Gone out of style some number of years ago, sadly.
that makes 2 wars this round between top alliances where it stopped before it started.
you can say what you want about top fams "playing smart" but this sure sounds like imperial trading to me =P
Tbh, I blame it on the set up (not why the set up is in place itself, but the resultant of what happens).
I mean, each fam has what ...2 attackers? If you find an opportune moment, to cancel a NAP when the other fams' attackers can't be on - then yes, you've won your war, before it's even started.
Cool thing is, you can now use polls for the heats =]
I'll send in nominations soon!
Least amount of work dictates to leave it where it is.
Therefore I decree to leave it where it is!
I did however vote for the 'Right' option ![]()
Anyway, i'm sure intention will be to make it prettier soon
....Pie has already done a good small modification to the existing sidebars. Will be nice to get rid of these in the long run!
Okay, 7-7-6! Overwhelmed with the participation!
Looks like it stays where it is!
Thx for voting - all 20 of us!
Saves a few clicks! Love it!
Wooohooo, gratz us townies for yet another win =]
Ty SSL and HP for hosting. Giving the writers shit is also part of the game =]
^ This is the case for Alliance Breaking and how Alliance NAPs should be handled, that is.
Imperial Forum → Posts by Torqez
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.