haha, i had only used 300 turns. what did i ever do to you runbin(who ever you are)
harsh few days, not been on for like 2-3 days. come back with my state is dead, im bankrupt n no longer a mod
haha, i had only used 300 turns
harsh few days, not been on for like 2-3 days. come back with my state is dead, im bankrupt n no longer a mod
Private
ouchOriginally Posted by Missionary
haha, i had only used 300 turns
harsh few days, not been on for like 2-3 days. come back with my state is dead, im bankrupt n no longer a mod
just trying to get some good old revenge, now will someone tell me z and sob's states pretty please
Major
having looked at ge just now of sky it seems LoR shouldnt be surprised when they find their top states as fair game for all who want.
Command Sergeant
Why would that be Anton? We followed our retal policy that we posted...
Private First Class
Can someone help me translate this? Maybe it's my lack of understanding in English, but I really don't get what DI is saying.
I'm assuming he meant people are allowed to make war attacks on top states, but I dun see the logic behind it. Runbch is acting on his own behave, and killing inactive states who targetted him in the past for revenge. I don't see why LOR is involved. As for the ARs we did on #13, it's simply for retaliation. AR was actually a kind move, we could've waged an all out war as retal. The retal policy was stated in our forum post, and #13 subsequently called it "made up for pussies"....our problem? maybe not.
Last edited by doppy; 10-06-2009 at 23:18.
Command Sergeant
The translation is Anton hates LOR
I believe he is talking about how the state that did the attacks is attempting to seem like he is AAing randomly in the top ten. But actually, you can tell it was focused and the state was "appearing" to try and damage other states first.
For example. Here are some of the losses in the AA attack. When you lose attacks, you send 50% of cash on hand or 50% of forces destroyed. It just looks fishy, it just doesn't look like enough ships were sent to win the attacks, but destine to lose. No more then 800 ships were sent in these attacks in my opinion.
Defeat / $29.495= 13 ships
Defeat / $17.323= 8 ships
Defeat / $61.448= 27 ships
There is also the fact that one LoR state has been feeding land of this attacking state all set. So with that and the benifit LoR states got from the attacks, i would say it was linked....maybe not planned by LoR leaders, but someone in LoR is involved in my book.
P.S. I don't hate LoRI could be wrong, but this is just my opinion.
Last edited by Tnova; 10-07-2009 at 07:39.
dont remember us doing anything to you, then again i dont know who you are so.......ouch
just trying to get some good old revenge, now will someone tell me z and sob's states pretty please
tnova is definatly right. when he lost the attacks on the LoR and SLOB state he lost less than 100k cash meaning he didnt have much on hand. most likely because he was planning on loosing the attacks and dint want to waste the money. but when he starts to AA the SKY state and then grabs he looses alot more cash, because he was expecting to win the grab. you may say hes just forgot to bank the excess cash from the turns he just used but i doubt that. between attacking pron and then kanny 26 seconds later he manages to bank some cash so there is none given to kanny on the 1st attack.
Private First Class
Iono, I did an intel this morning on vuss, and he only had 631 ships with 361 NA ships. Plus vuss has very few spies at lvl 1 which makes him an easy target for this kind of attacks. Maybe the low ship count attacks aren't an accident.
And I don't think the reasoning that the attacker didn't bank his cash because he is expecting to win against other states is sound. If we're assuming the attacker is a friend of LOR, I don't get why he/she would bank when he/she's attacking LOR and not SLOB/sky (like the 2 AAs on Max and 2 SAs on vuss). I could be wrong about there being someone in LOR doing this, but everyone in LOR withheld our policy and did not take advantage of the situation to grab from vuss. There was a "no attack" message sent an hour after the incidence occured, but everyone has the mutual agreement that we should not be involved and no one did any attacks in between when it occured and when the message was sent. Instead, it was TTG that double tapped vuss right after. It looks more like what TTG has been doing this whole set. Vuss's high land/low spy/low ship makes him an easy target.
Sorry if I'm holding the wrong party responsible. Just stating the possibilities. It's a new game, and we're expecting new playing styles from different players. I think sometimes it helps to build your state to be well-rounded. I think for a top 10 state to have less than 1000 ship is a bit asking for it tbh...
Command Sergeant
Yea, but #13 had very few ships--maybe a 1,000 when he finished jumping. By your calculations, the suicider only needed about 800 ships. #13 was 99% infantry, so it would not take too many ships for someone to break him. Seems more like the state that suicided the top was looking to hit INF hoarders, and Kanny and I had decent defenses.
The only thing I see on GE is that #78 tripled #98. I don't know what you're talking about here Tnova. No one in LOR grabbed after the AA, because our retal policy--and Kanny and I even talked as he jumped and were saying that he won that one fair and square (I wanted to AA a few times and grab him
#13 was in our nation last set netting, and Kanny and I had nothing against him. No reason for us to want to suicide him.
Aye.P.S. I don't hate LoR
P.S.--Why is this discussion in the "bunnies" thread?
Last edited by pron; 10-07-2009 at 12:36.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote