Sack

[Sevah]

Can you sorta tune it down a bit? I'm losing 30-50% of my stockpile between turns. Why is it so massively powered?

Theoretically it's impossible to get anywhere decent without being fully supported by others. This is utterly ridiculous so please fix it asap.

In around 60 sacks it's taken 3bil from 9bil food. How can you defend yourself against a Rat indy with such finances?



Rat has +25% attack, the military unit is 2atk 1 defence. 250% advantage plus the race indy is +25%. rat masser vs rat masser the rat masser will always break. 40m breaks 100m

[The Masked Wolf]

he migt be talking about me :-[

[Dark Claws]

You defend yourself by sacking him back with your own troops (if he's an indier, then skiffs). Sacks are a big part of the game, they give you others resources which infuriates you and they can help fund your army. Sacks are more designed for people with huge armies to fund their up keeping costs but are still often used to bolster the minute resources of others.

[Alazar is Back]

Hey Dark Claws, heres an idea....How about you try to make your own resources to fund your runs? Nahhhh, thats way to hard, taking someone elses hard earned resources is much easier!

[Firetooth]

Hey Dark Claws, heres an idea....How about you try to make your own resources to fund your runs? Nahhhh, thats way to hard, taking someone elses hard earned resources is much easier!

Oh quit whining, Dark Claws is *shocked face* taking advantage of a weakness in your defense in a war game. I'm getting sick and tired of supposed vets whining each and every time the little guy dares to make an attack on them. And on your last point you're (ironically) completely right. Why make your own resources when somebody else makes some already but fails to defend them?

Do you know what I did when TS sacked me? I killed him and brought troops at the end of every run to stop him from doing it again. I don't see why it's difficult to buy your troops to defend your resources, and before I get the whole "not resource effective" argument, if you lose more resources from buying troops then you do from sacks, the sacks obviously aren't that bad.

[The Masked Wolf]

well said

[Kilkenne]

The best part is where alazar says that undefended leader resources are hard earned. Hysterical. Must be rough, being a self declared expert hitting that feast/goldmine button on ratio. There's a thread I made about sack and murder in this subforum. All of you should slog through its contents, you cab learn a lot abput why sack is like it is.

[Alazar is Back]

Kilk, do you follow where i post in threads just to troll me? Jesus kid...

Guess what, there is a reason that an indy strat 90% of the time. Im just saying that Sevah has a very valid point, there are no other promi sites with anything like sack. Its really, not a needed feature, and it gives the already overpowered(in  a sense) indy strat more of an advantage. Because you can basically never as a leader player defend from a mono stacking indy player, even if you do, it will cost way too much to even make it worth it.

[Shadow]

there are no other promi sites with anything like sack.

That's not even close to true - sack is actually weaker here than the equivelent elsewhere (FaF for example)

gives the already overpowered(in  a sense) indy strat more of an advantage.

Which sense would that be? The sense where solo indy never wins ever? Or the sense where allowing solo leader players to hold invincible store of food somehow gives indy an advantage?

Because you can basically never as a leader player defend from a mono stacking indy player, even if you do, it will cost way too much to even make it worth it.

And as an indy player you can never defend against a leader player. What's your point?

[Kilkenne]

Kilk, do you follow where i post in threads just to troll me? Jesus kid...

I only respond when you (and anyone else) says something that is blatantly wrong. It just happens that you are almost always hilariously off base in your attempts to leverage what little to no working game knowledge to make a point in order to curry favour with the likes of wolf snare and sevah.

[Muse]

So should we stop sacking vets because it gets on their nerves? Really? So we can either take the approach that a little kid would take or take it as a part of the game. Like you've never sacked anyone before. Why waste time building resources when we can take someone else's way too illdefended resources? I suggest you quit whining and maybe build up your defenses next time.

[Dark Claws]

I sack Landfarm because everyone yells at me if I sack them. I have a huge army that I use for defenses, but the resources are too astronomical and unlikely that I have to sell the army. So I attack with my small amount of soldiers on Landfarm to get some land and I sack because it speeds up the process of me grabbing resources from Landfarm. Do I sack vets? No, because they flip out unreasonably when you take their resources. It's just a game. Sheesh.

[Muse]

Seriously. Give it a rest, vets. I've seen more immature insulting and stupid arguing from you guys, Sevah being number one, than from the younger guys, who you'd think would be more immature than you guys, but obviously I thought wrong.

[Pippin]

man up and sack whoever you want, what are you scared off, loosing a little net to a big bad wolf? topic was made to contribute and was met with cries

[Dark Claws]

Newbs sack me all the time when I bother to play (been busy). Do I care? I just sack them back. It is overpowered and easy to take advantage of it, but if your annoyed, take advantage of it!