Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandvold
I posted something about this during the weekend, but deleted the post since ppl was just discussing things that had happened 2-3 rounds back.
Maybe it's time to try getting the discussion going again.
Ult is at the moment a surperior alliance then the others. However I think the alliances do a big mistake every round, which ulitimatly leads to the scenario you decribed. This round almost every alliance forted, and most of them had fort agreements with everyone. This is something Ult is great at and have proven many times that they benefit from such tactics.
If you think you can def galraids better then ult, and at the same time land more attacks i understand why you would fort and have a fort agreement with them. If you don't think this is possible and you would like to go for the win then fort agreements helps ult get their lead. If nobody except Ult forted it would be much more difficult for them, and i doubt we would see the early round lead as they got this round. So that some people are complaing that Ult is to good and it ruins the game when ppl play to their tactics is a bit stupid if you ask me.
Also like this round it was almost impossible to galraid without pissing an alliance of, and everyone was roiding the same random gals. Which makes the game extremley boring for the guys that end up in these gals.
I think it would be interesting either to remove bp's for one round (doubt that will happen), or decrease bp limit to two or three players and put two bp's together. Would create a new dynamic to the game.
|
I am personally all for the removal of bp's.
I think it could help the community to come together as a whole while also encourage people to help those of inexperience to improve their pa knowledge and skills rather than simply exiling them at the first opportunity.
Edit: I also think it could stop this nonsense where hitting one fort becomes a declaration of immediate war which seems to be an ever increasing case.