Shadows a dirty cheat

[Kilkenne]

Let me at least set the record straight so we don't have to continue down the path of KILK CRIES ABOUT LITERALLY EVERYTHING, because for the times that I've not been drunk, I have legitimate reasons for disliking what I've disliked. That said, that's the Shadow issue aside, I was basically looking for some excuse to let him have it, and found one in the changes he'd pushed through. He and I more or less immediately were made to talk it out by Holby and everything is fine. Anyhow, I digress, and let's go to the other issue, that being aid credits and why I overall think that it's a poor change:

During the evening when I originally had said that the aid credit changes are awful, we had found that when running with 4 people total and doing standard net-passing that isn't usually out of the ordinary, the 18 credit limit (if some people are clanned in an "allied" clan and some are clanned and whatever) makes it needlessly complicated to do anything. We were able to get done what we needed to get done, and really only got demolished because I ended up getting onlined to the tune of 900,000 land in the last five minutes of the plan. It took us 1.5 hours to work out a way to make the aid credits work in a way that was beneficial, and this is the crew (Neobaron, Volkov, Ruddertail, Myself) who generally talks in real time when we do a thing on the Turbo, because we're friends, you see. (Not because we're all veteran players and hate everyone, which is a stupid allegation in the first place, you're smarter than that.)

On to the point about aid credits: Imagine not being people who are endlessly coordinated math dorks? You literally don't stand a chance other than running with just 2 people and at that point you might as well stay unclanned and just peaceful net, because you can send significantly more of your networth around per aid in terms of cash/food than you can in troops for whatever reason. So the 6 aids total isn't that big of a problem. Basically the change itself doesn't hurt me in the slightest, I just have to use my brain more (read: Rudderbutt needs to think more, 'cause I'm not to the brains behind most things, believe it or not, I just to the math). What it does hurt is the people who are less coordinated, making the game easier to win for any two (or three, god forbid) players that know how to press their goldmine button and maek cash and/or feast unclanned. As Sevah said, and as we knew full well, he did have enough cash and food on hand to jack up another 10b, and honestly, with the state of things right now, two leader players can absolutely peacefully need their way to unquestioned victory every round if they really wanted to. Especially if they know what they're doing with leaders, a la you and Sevz. No amount of sacking would come close to hurting you enough, the only way would be to wait until during a run and poison it out.

This isn't to say that I've not complained about other things, I wrote that incredibly long diatribe on murders versus sacking, but that is more of a social construct than a game mechanic manifesto.

But now that we're perfectly clear on why I dislike the aid credit change, feel free to take my name out of your mouths when it comes to HE COMPLAINS NONSTOP. The last round? I did, sure, I was pretty drunkenly angry at Shadow, and took it out on him in a public and stupid manner. I've since made peace and am back talking to him on a daily basis. The other problems that I've brought up, I work to solve. Trust that you all don't see everything that I write, and a good deal of it is constructive.

The issue at hand:

Dropping land to the farm is a game mechanic, it always has been. If it's such a huge deal, why is it any different in regular rounds when people scrape to 110-120k and drop 50k of that to have a perfect ratio for our huts? This accomplishes the same goal, mainly for indies, because leaders don't care if they lose troops/resources opening ops and attacking the land farm. Anyhow, I'm not going to get on my high horse and champion indies like I normally do, because most of the time you all now roll your eyes at me and say BUT KILK ALL YOU DO IS INDY and ignore the rounds where I've leadered.

[Pippin]

probably a bad idea posting that on second thoughts

Dropping land to the farm is a game mechanic, it always has been. If it's such a huge deal, why is it any different in regular rounds when people scrape to 110-120k and drop 50k of that to have a perfect ratio for our huts?

yes but that was when leaders were available, with no leaders we (everyone playing) have no way to get at the land other than waiting an hour for 1 attack.
I dont think it was meant to become an argument but the only real solution would be to clan or possibly up the rate of attacks on the land farm

[Firetooth]

Let me at least set the record straight so we don't have to continue down the path of KILK CRIES ABOUT LITERALLY EVERYTHING, because for the times that I've not been drunk, I have legitimate reasons for disliking what I've disliked. That said, that's the Shadow issue aside, I was basically looking for some excuse to let him have it, and found one in the changes he'd pushed through. He and I more or less immediately were made to talk it out by Holby and everything is fine. Anyhow, I digress, and let's go to the other issue, that being aid credits and why I overall think that it's a poor change:

During the evening when I originally had said that the aid credit changes are awful, we had found that when running with 4 people total and doing standard net-passing that isn't usually out of the ordinary, the 18 credit limit (if some people are clanned in an "allied" clan and some are clanned and whatever) makes it needlessly complicated to do anything. We were able to get done what we needed to get done, and really only got demolished because I ended up getting onlined to the tune of 900,000 land in the last five minutes of the plan. It took us 1.5 hours to work out a way to make the aid credits work in a way that was beneficial, and this is the crew (Neobaron, Volkov, Ruddertail, Myself) who generally talks in real time when we do a thing on the Turbo, because we're friends, you see. (Not because we're all veteran players and hate everyone, which is a stupid allegation in the first place, you're smarter than that.)

On to the point about aid credits: Imagine not being people who are endlessly coordinated math dorks? You literally don't stand a chance other than running with just 2 people and at that point you might as well stay unclanned and just peaceful net, because you can send significantly more of your networth around per aid in terms of cash/food than you can in troops for whatever reason. So the 6 aids total isn't that big of a problem. Basically the change itself doesn't hurt me in the slightest, I just have to use my brain more (read: Rudderbutt needs to think more, 'cause I'm not to the brains behind most things, believe it or not, I just to the math). What it does hurt is the people who are less coordinated, making the game easier to win for any two (or three, god forbid) players that know how to press their goldmine button and maek cash and/or feast unclanned. As Sevah said, and as we knew full well, he did have enough cash and food on hand to jack up another 10b, and honestly, with the state of things right now, two leader players can absolutely peacefully need their way to unquestioned victory every round if they really wanted to. Especially if they know what they're doing with leaders, a la you and Sevz. No amount of sacking would come close to hurting you enough, the only way would be to wait until during a run and poison it out.

This isn't to say that I've not complained about other things, I wrote that incredibly long diatribe on murders versus sacking, but that is more of a social construct than a game mechanic manifesto.

But now that we're perfectly clear on why I dislike the aid credit change, feel free to take my name out of your mouths when it comes to HE COMPLAINS NONSTOP. The last round? I did, sure, I was pretty drunkenly angry at Shadow, and took it out on him in a public and stupid manner. I've since made peace and am back talking to him on a daily basis. The other problems that I've brought up, I work to solve. Trust that you all don't see everything that I write, and a good deal of it is constructive.

The issue at hand:

Dropping land to the farm is a game mechanic, it always has been. If it's such a huge deal, why is it any different in regular rounds when people scrape to 110-120k and drop 50k of that to have a perfect ratio for our huts? This accomplishes the same goal, mainly for indies, because leaders don't care if they lose troops/resources opening ops and attacking the land farm. Anyhow, I'm not going to get on my high horse and champion indies like I normally do, because most of the time you all now roll your eyes at me and say BUT KILK ALL YOU DO IS INDY and ignore the rounds where I've leadered.

True. I was just pointing out other people have complained.

As for aid credits, I agree it is a bit too overpowered, but perhaps I am being unfair as you champion indy so much. I just think that you didn't like that indying was now more strategic and tactical, but I can see now that (to an extent) you have a point. Also, I never said you guys hated everybody or are some kind of illicit organization, I'm just saying the same teams each round aren't fun. I usually quit for a month or three if things stagnate in terms of teams as they are beginning to. TS has done the same.

No questions the leader/indy/other strats divide is unbalanced. I agree with you there. ;) I personally think people are too one-sided. Instead of looking for ways to make indy actually work as I and others have been trying, too many people simply yell "NERF," which whilst can help solve something will ultimately be worthless if other things aren't done. Also, I think solo leadering doesn't need much nerfing. There are far too few solo players (at least, outside this round) and seeing as the only solo strat is indy (most rounds) I don't think it needs much weakening, except possibly making takedowns easier.

Now, onto the main point.

Dropping land to the farm is a game mechanic, it always has been. If it's such a huge deal, why is it any different in regular rounds when people scrape to 110-120k and drop 50k of that to have a perfect ratio for our huts? This accomplishes the same goal, mainly for indies, because leaders don't care if they lose troops/resources opening ops and attacking the land farm. Anyhow, I'm not going to get on my high horse and champion indies like I normally do, because most of the time you all now roll your eyes at me and say BUT KILK ALL YOU DO IS INDY and ignore the rounds where I've leadered.

[Kilkenne]

The point about solo leadering is that it's too powerful as a team strategy right now. Which seems counterintuitive, but it's really not, because it's nigh impossible to screw up having a bunch of food or cash net. What I'm getting at is that any two players with a pulse can do amazingly well if they stay unclanned and one cashes and one makes food, or both cashes, or both make food, whatever combination, and they'll have enough resources at the end of the round to suddenly spring to the top. There just aren't enough attacks even if you maxed them constantly to slow their cash gain. Put it into the hands of two players who actually know what they're doing, and they can generate 4-6 billion net at the end of the round without breaking a sweat. Maybe this'll change with a change to how fast people unmax, but at present that strategy is the easiest way to go if you want an easy win, I've been saying that for three months now. Even with the aid credit change, it doesn't balance it out, it's nigh impossible to stop people from doing that.

Please note that this has nothing to do with the fact that Firetooth and Sevah did last round. I've been on this for months; I've been saying that people solo (read: Unclanned, solo != alone) massing cash as a marten and food as a wolf generates a lot of net that isn't possible to touch until they are around 800 million networth of only food or 500m networth of only cash. Only then will maxing them in sacks take more than what they've made, and every billion net of cash/food can cash out to four (or more) times its value in troops once the leaderer builds camps. If you need the math to prove that you are still gaining food/cash even whilst being max sacked, feel free to read the sack thread that I made and plug some numbers in on your own. Your gains are slower at 800m or so, but who cares, if that's all food net, you're going to rock ~3.5 billion at the end of the round anyhow if you convert to camps/troops. The same goes for the cash, if not even a bit more.

[Firetooth]

Ooops, I forgot to reply to you on the main point lol. Let me do that now.

Dropping land to the farm is a game mechanic, it always has been. If it's such a huge deal, why is it any different in regular rounds when people scrape to 110-120k and drop 50k of that to have a perfect ratio for our huts? This accomplishes the same goal, mainly for indies, because leaders don't care if they lose troops/resources opening ops and attacking the land farm. Anyhow, I'm not going to get on my high horse and champion indies like I normally do, because most of the time you all now roll your eyes at me and say BUT KILK ALL YOU DO IS INDY and ignore the rounds where I've leadered.

The problem is, in a usual round the land farm can be op atked. Also, this is contrary to the farm's use. It's meant to make land readily available. Thats why it sells troops that get aided to it, and that's why if its killed it still collects land. Were this round a permanent fixture, I have no doubt this maxing issue would have been solved.

Also Kilk, only 4-6bil? Me and Sevz made 10bil, discounting sacks and Oblit's net. :P I don't think the issue is the strategy itself, more that takedowns are too difficult on solo players, but it is a fine line to balance between "possible" and "easy." Another issue is that two team indies and a storehouse can still, from what I've seen, produce more net, at least with the old aiding system. Team play adds all kinds of issues. Team indy can produce more quick, easy net than any other strat.

Also nerfing food wouldn't have too much of an impact (a tangent, but people keep calling for it) because as you said it can be sold, and with camps built you can actually produce more net with the cash then the food itself is worth at its current value. Also, I agree sacks don't stop growth, but they do severely hinder it if you are clanned...remember that time I had 300bil cash and TS sacked 100bil? Granted, it was a whole runs worth of focused attacks, but the losses are still not to be ignored.

[Kilkenne]

Last round's numbers were atypical due to the amount of land which is why I said what I did. You were also clanned when TS brutalized your cash. What I'm saying is that two unclanned leader resource masses by the end of the round should easily win 90% of rounds with ease. God forbid there are more than 2. I understand there are disadvantages to being unclanned but for resource massing, the benefits vastly outweigh those disadvantages. Posting on my phone takes forever.

[Blobfish]

Last round's numbers were atypical due to the amount of land which is why I said what I did. You were also clanned when TS brutalized your cash. What I'm saying is that two unclanned leader resource masses by the end of the round should easily win 90% of rounds with ease. God forbid there are more than 2. I understand there are disadvantages to being unclanned but for resource massing, the benefits vastly outweigh those disadvantages. Posting on my phone takes forever.

True, but at least half of what was produced in terms of cash was made before the break.

And yes, I acknowledged I was clanned. I'm not disagreeing that sack doesn't do damage that isn't outweighted by production for unclanned and clanned leaders, though. Just pointing out it can be very damaging depending on the amounts and depending on the attacks done.

Edit: OOps, posted on Blobfish, oh well.

[Sevah]

Sacks hurt like hell. Yeah you all may not realize how unfair this featureis.

Last round I got sacked for about 10days of stockpiling. As a Wolf holding a trillion cash, any rat lizard or wildcat sacking takes atleast 15bil x10 200bil upwards.
MOST you don't realize 1tril is acquired over a period of time and after that hardwork's stored up it's not rewarded when some ineffective high upkeep indy needs gold.

Where's WolfBite?

*Opens Eski for all**

[Firetooth]

Agree and disagree with the above.

As Sevz partner and a victim of heavy sacks before (sounds a bit melodramatic,oh well haha) I do think it is slightly silly how a player can get so much cash with little to no effort on their part besides owning a few million rats.

However, I think the point of sack is to give indies a way to skim off the top. Which it does fine, however as I've said before when people are holding a lot of cash/food, the sacking should gradually decrease or reach a limit (say 2bil cash per sack). Of course it may also be to encourage more defensive player. For what it's worth it's impossible to defend resources from any organized clan and still gain resources, but I can see why people would want to encourage a more troop-based style of game.

[Kilkenne]

I'm well aware of what happens when you get to a massive value of cash, but I'm also well aware of how much that cash is in potential networth. If it were physically possible for someone playing any other strategy to get that much networth, it wouldn't be potential anymore, it would be real value, and a trillion cash will buy you some obnoxious amount of troops.

Cash net you definitely don't need as much before you start seeing declining returns, but cash net has a higher potential net (when you convert it to troops directly) than does food net. Someone that regularly runs on 400m of food net will still make gains each and every time they run, and the food itself can be market hidden if absolutely necessary. I'm not here to tell you that you don't have to work to get yourself a trillion cash, or whatever amount, but you bear the responsibility of having that net "unprotected" as it were, and have free reign to murder/steal the attacker should they wound you badly enough. My point through all of my arguing, though, is that in the typical course of play, a player isn't going to have a trillion cash sitting around particularly often (400m net of cash, give or take) without expecting that it's going to get nuked at some point, if not by another leader player finding a way to steal it, an indy sacking them.

Just the same as if you see an indy, whose net has to all end up being "real" net (and I use this term loosely) somehow sitting on 3-4 billion in stuff because he's been heaped up (not possible to go this high alone unless you are under the most ideal of conditions and have pre-piled...well, a lot of cash) and think that it's a good idea to murder him.

The more I think about the whole thing, a lot of it is about "real" versus "potential" wealth. Cashing unclanned gives you a lot of freedom to not be hit hard whilst you make what I would call "potential" wealth, only because that cash net means absolutely nothing in the end, other than you can at the end of a set convert it to troops. I just don't know why or how someone can expect to hang onto it an entire round, the same as how or why an indy could expect to hang onto 500-600m of troops towards the end of a set.

[Kilkenne]

Double postin' like it's my job.

I think it's kind of a slippery slope either way, it's hard to say that indies should be forced to defend themselves with leaders. On the other more relevant side of the coin, that I now understand better, after having been taught to leader by Sevz, it is also awful to try to mount any kind of troop defense solo as a leader.

The good news though is that Shadow has some wonderful ideas regarding this.

[Firetooth]

Me and Sevz did find a way to (relatively) protect our cash through clever aiding and co-ordinated runs, but we still lost tons to cash.

The issue isn't that people get sacked, it's that too much is taken with little effort (well, at higher values of resources, anyway), which you do seem to realize. Still, whilst I agree it's foolish to hold net, potential or not, unclanned or clanned without expecting people to try to destroy it, it does seem to punish success a bit that people with little skill and a few troops can easy destroy a ton of your cash if they try, where as with murders and such it's planned and requires suicides and such, actual effort. I see indies have the same problem with murders, but indies are a whole other issue due to the net cap meaning, effectively, there is little to no solo indiers.

Also, nice that you agree trying to mount a defense as a solo leader is tricky, about time. :P I'd be interested to see the ideas sometime.

[Sevah]

No value in playing solo defensive leaderer here anymore. If they ever make a race that's capable i'll post a detailed strategy guide.

[Kilkenne]

Also, nice that you agree trying to mount a defense as a solo leader is tricky, about time. :P

I've never said it's not. But what I have said is that in 99% of cases, an unclanned leader player can let someone knock the stuffing out of them, and after one run come vastly ahead, same as an indy can do, unless they get murdered (or if the leaderer gets poisoned, I guess, but to lose enough that one run won't make it back, you need to be under atypical circumstances as an unclanned leaderer, and don't tell me that 1T cash is common or should remain untouched, because that's 4-7 billion potential networth, depending who you ask.)

[Sevah]

Hear me out.

if sack takes 10% and I save every dollar for 10 days, day 11 gets stolen. Day 12 gets stolen. Day 13 gets stolen etc. The initial banking pays for better efficient sacking and the fact that very few people at redwall have the skills to stockpile substantial amounts is a testament to how primitive and uninformed this community is.

1trillion cash isn't hard to come across if your on my team. Many know this. Sack is rude