Dictating Play

[Daryn]

Heh i know completly what this topic is about as it concerns me completly.
Btw for Geniveive i am Ichigo
Ok i did three steals on Geniveive in order to see if she had sheilds up the next day i logged on to find i had been hit to 3k land.
So i retalled killing off 60 mil net.
I sent a message saying that it was retal and that i could stop there however her clanmate then proceded to take me down to 4k land.
So then i got a bit angry i onlined Geniveive, murded their highest player into the ground and left it at that.
It was all retal I put the message take me below 12k land and pay up so i have to show people that i am willing to enforce it otherwise no-one will obey it.
So there you go the whole story.

so that's who you are ><
i thought you were a new player
Bleach Fans Unite!

[Gen. Volkov]

I'm sorry that Genevieve is not following the "almighty" rule here at RWL:  Give up your land. And just for that she is a better player than 9/10ths of the people here.

Or maybe it just makes her stubborn. The way I see it, people trying to hold land just makes things bloodier. If person using a leader strat can't easily break for land with troops, they're liable to either attack with leaders, or murder the player doing so, especially if they are an indy. Neither situation benefits both players especially and generally just tends to increase the amount of bloodymindedness in the game. I suppose if you are looking to make a more combative and nasty game environment, then holding land is good. If you are trying to make the game at least somewhat civil and more welcoming to new players, then perhaps land passing is the better way to go.

[Shadow]

To be fair, this game isn't about benefiting everyone, it is about benefiting yourself. And holding land does that, if you are able to keep it. So more power to her. However, in doing that, you acknowledge that if you fail to hold you are going to get hammered a lot harder than were you not trying to hold. So, defend all you want, just don't complain when people come after you for it.

On the other hand, murdering is generally not necessary - you can free the land with leader attacks in the case of an indy, so murders are usually done out of spite if it is leader vs indier. Leader vs leader, murders are usually necessary to keep the land freed.

[Gen. Volkov]

On the other hand, murdering is generally not necessary - you can free the land with leader attacks in the case of an indy, so murders are usually done out of spite if it is leader vs indier. Leader vs leader, murders are usually necessary to keep the land freed.

You can, but it's far less harmful to your leaders if you murder them instead. This run was the first in the last five where I didn't manage to get a 100 leader ratio at the end without dropping land. If it's a choice between spending enough cash to break, losing huge amounts of leaders attacking with them, or murdering for a few turns, well, murdering seems like the best option.

[Sevz]

i agree with volkov there
i would murder someone to make it cheaper.

[Gen. Volkov]

In that case, I agree with Shadow. LOL. Just kidding Sevz.

[Genevieve]

If you are trying to make the game at least somewhat civil and more welcoming to new players, then perhaps land passing is the better way to go.

Volkov, I am a new player and this whole idea that you not only have to worry about playing the game well enough to go up in the ranks, but also the convenience and welfare of all the other players is really turning me off. It is not me pushing new players away. I will probably stop playing after this turbo round.

And I know you've been playing a lot longer than me, but I'm pretty happy with the indy strat I was taught and I really don't think yours would be better.

[Sevz]

genevieve, don't quit, i'm starting to like you.
you do whatever you want and if anyone gives you any hassles let me know and i'll take care of them.

if they're to small for me to take care of i'll pay my bounty hunter

i wanna see more of you Gen

[Holby]

On the other hand, murdering is generally not necessary - you can free the land with leader attacks in the case of an indy, so murders are usually done out of spite if it is leader vs indier. Leader vs leader, murders are usually necessary to keep the land freed.

You can, but it's far less harmful to your leaders if you murder them instead. This run was the first in the last five where I didn't manage to get a 100 leader ratio at the end without dropping land. If it's a choice between spending enough cash to break, losing huge amounts of leaders attacking with them, or murdering for a few turns, well, murdering seems like the best option.

If they have their shields up, murdering won't do heaps. Especially if they have towers. You'd have to spend at least max attacks just to murder enough to get their troops down, then buy enough troops to break their towers + what they have remaining. If they have shields, it's better just spending more outright and getting enough to break than wasting the turns/loyalty/health.

[Shadow]

Volkov, I am a new player and this whole idea that you not only have to worry about playing the game well enough to go up in the ranks, but also the convenience and welfare of all the other players is really turning me off.

You don't have to worry about the rest of them if you don't want to - just be prepared for the retaliation when you step on toes. But you sound like you like the retal side of things anyway, so no worries. Seriously, why is this such a big deal? If you don't want to play like that, then don't. Just don't get mad when people fight back.

but I'm pretty happy with the indy strat I was taught and I really don't think yours would be better.

There is -always- a way to improve your play, even if it is only circumstantial.

[Gen. Volkov]

And I know you've been playing a lot longer than me, but I'm pretty happy with the indy strat I was taught and I really don't think yours would be better.

Going by your current NW and amounts of troops, I could help you do far better than you are. I dunno who taught you your indy strat, but I think he or she gave you bad advice. Contrary to what you may have been told, I am one of the elite players of this game, and I know I could have you at a much higher rank than you are now within 1 run. My advice set Neo in the top ten from somewhere in the 30's or 40's in one run.

Volkov, I am a new player and this whole idea that you not only have to worry about playing the game well enough to go up in the ranks, but also the convenience and welfare of all the other players is really turning me off. It is not me pushing new players away. I will probably stop playing after this turbo round.

Well, that's too bad. But if all you want is the competition, and not worry about what other people do, as Shadow said, you should be prepared to accept the consequences. Which includes people being very mean to you. I dunno how many in this game would have even sent you a warning like I did before they did something nasty to you. I certainly never receive warnings when I get hammered, even though I always send them before I hammer someone. It's funny how I always warn someone before I come after them, and then they get all mad when I carry through. Snare wanted to kill me after I punched out the top guys in BlackFly for the first time in the Woof-BlackFly war. Even though I told them I was coming for them, and they said they were ready.

If they have their shields up, murdering won't do heaps. Especially if they have towers. You'd have to spend at least max attacks just to murder enough to get their troops down, then buy enough troops to break their towers + what they have remaining. If they have shields, it's better just spending more outright and getting enough to break than wasting the turns/loyalty/health.

Well, shields do change things, but it would still be cheaper overall to murder even with shields than either buying up outright or using leader attacks. I don't lose any loyalty when I'm murdering, and only 2% health. So it's just the turns wasted, and I'd rather spend those than fail a bunch of times and have to use open atk opportunity anyway. Why buy a bunch of troops with a marginal chance at achieving superiority when I can spend a few extra turns and ensure that I will break? Besides, Gen sounds like she wants to play hardball.

[Holby]

Well, shields do change things, but it would still be cheaper overall to murder even with shields than either buying up outright or using leader attacks. I don't lose any loyalty when I'm murdering, and only 2% health. So it's just the turns wasted, and I'd rather spend those than fail a bunch of times and have to use open atk opportunity anyway. Why buy a bunch of troops with a marginal chance at achieving superiority when I can spend a few extra turns and ensure that I will break?

Volkov, you know that doesn't even make sense. :P

[Gen. Volkov]

Volkov, you know that doesn't even make sense.

What the not losing loyalty bit? It's true, as a stoat, I don't lose much loyalty when I murder, I might even gain some. It's only 22k loyalty per 2 turns, and I probably make more than that on a per turn basis. Health is basically a non-issue, since max-attacks murders would be only 80 health or so, and heal will get that back in 16 turns. So it really is only turns used. Given that I'm going to be using academy to get my leaders up to full anyway, I really don't see any disadvantage to murdering someone to ensure that I can break, and more than a few advantages. So where am I not making sense Holbs? If people wanna play hardball, then I don't see why I should hold back on their account. Murder is definitely the best option, in my opinion, and I'd be a fool not to use it if people don't want to give me any breaks. Not murdering people is one of the things we collectively decided was a polite thing to do, just as leaving troop holes was decided to be a polite thing to do. If people don't want to be polite to me, then I see no reason to be polite to them.

[Genevieve]

Oh you taught Neo, Volkov??? He certainly is an amazing player. You must be fantastic. *pump*
You're right, your indy strat is truely the best *pump pump*. No one knows how to indy as good as you *pump pump pump*. I really should feel honoured by your offer of help.

In fact, Volkov, you are so good, I don't think I really need to leave troop holes for you... I mean that would be just be making it too easy for you.

[Firetooth]

Oh you taught Neo, Volkov??? He certainly is an amazing player. You must be fantastic. *pump*
You're right, your indy strat is truely the best *pump pump*. No one knows how to indy as good as you *pump pump pump*. I really should feel honoured by your offer of help.

In fact, Volkov, you are so good, I don't think I really need to leave troop holes for you... I mean that would be just be making it too easy for you.

Btw, you know only about a year ago I don't think there was even team indy at this site, now it's a very widely-used strat here.
You and volk should have a little war to resolve it :P