Messages

Ladies and gentlmen, the so-called "Honor" clan, hiding at the bottom of the ranks and destroying the work of others instead of actually trying to compete. It's easy to not lose if you start out by claiming you aren't trying to win, right?

And they call Woof rats. Honor indeed.

Why does our lack of objection to a feature make us less likely to be annoyed at wolf's objection? I don't see the connection?

I mean, Honor is using captures now, so the objection is even less valid than before.

wolf appears to not have a race spell this round

anyone else notice this?

magic.php appears to be identical between reg and turbo, and race spells work in reg, so there must be a difference in the DB where race abilities are defined, I think.

There is no aid benefit this round, juska. We get 5 aids internally, same as unallied warlords.

really your 1-man clan scenario is probably the best approach, but meh. clan forums are nice to have.

drop tag's been around since before I even rejoined. You're the first I've seen complain about it.

I dropped land to pass it to my teammate because I am indy. That will happen on the rare occasions that we coordinate runs.

firetooh drops land to ratio because he is a leaderer

what's wrong with that?

I've been part of one coordinated run this round. It's not a regular thing due to time zones and schedules, but we'll do it when convenient. I've dropped land once this round.

Not that I see why anyone would apologize for that.

Nobody has ever objected to you using capture and sack! Nobody has ever said that you playing competitively would be dishonorable! In fact, I've said precisely the opposite. If you are going to threaten people for playing competitively, you should be playing competitively yourself.

Ah, the time-honored strategy of arguing by putting words in peoples' mouths.

Not accusing anyone of intentional maxxing wolf bite, but repeatedly failing attacks is a bad way to get anything done because of how the math works out. If you failed once, you are guaranteed to fail the second time unless something significant has changed. The last string of attacks are all 3 seconds apart, so presumably nothing has. Doing it multiple times is wasteful.

My request was simply that you don't do that anymore, it has no upsides for anyone.

I'm not picking on anyone (maybe Juska a little bit ^_^), and I don't think I've sacked or captured anyone in your clan all game. I just object to the attitude of "I don't want to win but I will destroy others' hard work if they don't follow my arbitrary rules". If you're going to complain about how other people play, put the effort in. If you're not going to bother putting in the effort and you don't care about winning, then there should be no reason to complain.

What am I trying to divert attention from, anyway?

Shadow,

Jaska said they were standard attacks, But windy posted the attacks and they were all rats. So your whole last post is not based on fact. Who is trying to pick a fight?


Wolf Bite

If I was picking a fight I would just sack and capture you a lot ingame ^_^.

Yes, now that I'm looking at those attacks I'm even more confused... more than 10 failed attacks?

We should be clear that intentional maxxing is still against the rules this round... I'm sure that wasn't the intention here, but please don't do that.

It's Krowdon. Not even close, either.

Krowdon has more posts that have been deleted from spa room than most other people have posts at all. 1 in 6 spa posts, ever, is Krowdon.

Spa Room 101
    23424 posts of the board's 140500 posts (16.67%)

In this time, Krowdon could have personally posted the entire "Last Word" topic herself and still have had enough posts leftover to be a top 10 poster.

Shadow, you know that there is no compassion with the need to attack someone for their land. And if that land is defended the defender takes losses. Juska wants to have his cake and eat it too. He will bust anyone with his attacking army to get their land, and sure, there are defender losses. If someone wants no loses, then post what type of army they have none of. But if someone is defending in ALL armies and is holding a lot of land, then there will surly be losses. Not a complicated issue here.


Wolf Bite

Sure, but single troop losses are fine for an indy, and all-troop losses are not. Pretty much the same way the leader losses are bad for a leader player, since both are the respective sources of all other resources. Basically, standard attacking an indy is far more harmful to an indy than captures are to a leader player, so you can't smash people down with the one hand while insisting that nobody do it to you on the other.

It looks to me like you're just trying to pick a fight. Which is fine, but if that's the case just go for it instead of setting up elaborate excuses.

so smashing down someone's source of both net and income is fair game, but taking their leaders which would have deserted anyway is an act of war?

=/

I believe that was removed a long time ago, but I can't recall why. Possibly it was leading to land discrepencies?

it's on par with the land discrepency bug - the cause is known, but the fix would require significant changes to the code and so Shael built a "fix clans" button into the admin panel for use whenever it goes nuts instead.

I think it glitches out if all members of a clan go on vacation or something.