Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: To be clear.....

  1. #1

    Default To be clear.....

    I know some nation leaders are allowing their top 10 states to be grabbed 2, 3 or more times in a 36hr time frame.. I, am not!

    I'm not here to ruin anyone's state and I have no intentions on aggression to anyone however, I will not just be land farmed all set. You hit me more than once in a 36hr period, there will be a military response. I could easily be killed however, do you really want me as a thorn in your side for sets to come? Take your one hit and move on. No need to rape the hell out of my land.

    "You counted on America to be passive... You counted Wrong!"

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    1,781

    Default

    What state number are you again?
    Nations
    [usa] x 48[wlf] x 8 [want] x 3 [tng] x 1 [NS] x 8 [px] x
    1 [HuuF] x 1

  3. #3

    Default

    #333

    "You counted on America to be passive... You counted Wrong!"

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    1,781

    Default

    Fake news
    Nations
    [usa] x 48[wlf] x 8 [want] x 3 [tng] x 1 [NS] x 8 [px] x
    1 [HuuF] x 1

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,154

    Default

    Followed swifly by #248 ��
    YOU'RE NOT AFRAID OF THE DARK ARE YOU?


    [SOUL] ~ [xELDx] ~ [NIP]

    Quote Originally Posted by State Scores
    Vendetta - 1 Missionary(#11) [PIST] 106.334 $1.431.712.561

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    888

    Default

    It's fascinating to see players like MrPresident and Max Logan get so irritated by being grabbed.

    How have you played this game so long and haven't noticed that SAs create a symbiosis between the attacker and the defender. Attacker gets land and defender loses less land on the next hit. Assuming there will be a next hit, then it's a win-win for both. No? The only time you should be annoyed by being attacked is when you are not expending the "next hit".

    Yes, there are occasions when you have more land than the attacker and you lose "too much" land. Annoying, agreed, but no reason to delete your state. If you are stocking and you are actively land grabbing, then you are likely to lose a lot of land too. Don't like it? Go top5 and you lose less land. But you also produce less, because your costs are up. Sounds like perfect balance to me.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Missionary View Post
    Followed swifly by #248 ��
    Version #1:
    #2 had about 29.5k land. Got hit twice by a state with 90k land. #333 lost 1.5k land.
    Version #2:
    #2 had about 29.5k land. Got hit once by a state with 90k land. Got hit once by a state with 30k land. #333 lost 3k land.

    No, version #1 is not worth declaring war.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blaa View Post
    It's fascinating to see players like MrPresident and Max Logan get so irritated by being grabbed.

    How have you played this game so long and haven't noticed that SAs create a symbiosis between the attacker and the defender. Attacker gets land and defender loses less land on the next hit. Assuming there will be a next hit, then it's a win-win for both. No? The only time you should be annoyed by being attacked is when you are not expending the "next hit".

    Yes, there are occasions when you have more land than the attacker and you lose "too much" land. Annoying, agreed, but no reason to delete your state. If you are stocking and you are actively land grabbing, then you are likely to lose a lot of land too. Don't like it? Go top5 and you lose less land. But you also produce less, because your costs are up. Sounds like perfect balance to me.

    Perhaps you would also be fascinated to learn that maybe, just maybe....... I am trying to create a little drama in a boring set. Perhaps, hypothetically speaking of course, a leader draws a line in the sand, knowing that eventually someone will cross it and then some action could happen. Who knows, this is of course, hypothetically speaking of course.

    I'm well aware about the game mechanics and grabs. Of course, I am also well aware that the more land I have, the better score I will have. I wouldn't need GB protection if nobody grabbed me Maybe the next post will be, anyone who grabs me will receive 20 destructive spy missions. There are no rules in the game that state I must accept being attacked.

    "You counted on America to be passive... You counted Wrong!"

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Latvia
    Posts
    3,236

    Default

    Trump is that you?
    CW, TWC/PX, E

    USA(x), Deli, DOOM, GRIM/DEAD(x), EURO, SLOB(x), LoR, ABT(x), CR(x), RE

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,260

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Max Logan View Post
    Trump is that you?
    The best negotiator! he'll grab you and make you pay for it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Cemetary View Post
    Pretty sure if Anton wanted to he could have a 15+ person nation every set of decently experienced players.. hell id probably join him every set if he asked jsut because i know that their wont be a bunch of tards in the nation with me

Similar Threads

  1. Let's make this clear!
    By Mr President in forum Redemption Server Discussion
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-15-2012, 22:10
  2. Joe Cocker Captioned for the clear headed
    By Dogma in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-11-2009, 12:45

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •