Top 12 by Yossy Bossy with hair so glossy you want to stick your fenix into it

DeletedUser27128

Guest
LOL I think we all know thats Heres20bucks .The main reason why a few players are leaving Fiasco and why a few more are considering it .
And all because no one has the balls to tell heres20bucks he isnt wanted in the alliance .
who are you?
 

Sorin Markov

Phrourach
I thought Sons only took one city from Fiasco?
Maybe after they changed the alliance name and took over O53, but I personally took 3 cities from True Fear or ex-True Fear players. And I was on the frontline for about 3 weeks without a major offensive force.

Hiding behind scummy strats and calling it a tactic has gotten pretty lame at this point.

If you're going to play like scum admit it, don't try and find some imaginary high ground to climb on.
So let me ask this, then. What strategies are scummy? The ones you don't think up/use first? Turn and Burn has been a part of the strategy of this game for a looong time. Flipping cities, dodging with OLU, dodging with resources, spelling before being hit by myth units, all of those are a part of the same philosophy. So if you want to call breaking the Senate down a level or two before your city gets taken scummy, you should also leave your LS in the harbor the next time someone attacks your LS city.
 

DeletedUser54755

Guest
I'm starting to think I am an idiot for trying to be reasonable in a Fiasco echo chamber.
No. You're an idiot for being a contrarian and hooting other peoples hornes at the wrong times. You get no browney points simply for being in the minority, if you have dumb opinions people will call you out on it.

And thunder1806 is a crybaby coward who runs off into vm when he doesnt get what he wants
 

Sorin Markov

Phrourach
"Dumb opinions" today seem to mean "opinions that Fiasco don't have".
So if being in the minority is irrelevant, why bring up contrarianism?
Not sure whose horn I'm tooting. Maybe I misunderstand how you use that figure of speech.
 

1saaa

Strategos
"Dumb opinions" today seem to mean "opinions that Fiasco don't have".
So if being in the minority is irrelevant, why bring up contrarianism?
Not sure whose horn I'm tooting. Maybe I misunderstand how you use that figure of speech.
You did literally just say that you consider yourself someone who breaks the so called fiasco echo chamber. That goes hand in hand with contrarianism.

So let me ask this, then. What strategies are scummy? The ones you don't think up/use first? Turn and Burn has been a part of the strategy of this game for a looong time. Flipping cities, dodging with OLU, dodging with resources, spelling before being hit by myth units, all of those are a part of the same philosophy. So if you want to call breaking the Senate down a level or two before your city gets taken scummy, you should also leave your LS in the harbor the next time someone attacks your LS city.
Just because something has been around for a long time does not necessarily make it good.

The thing about demolishing cities is that it reeks of a pathetic crybaby who decides that if they don't get to play with their toys, no one does.
 

anes king

Phrourach
Maybe after they changed the alliance name and took over O53, but I personally took 3 cities from True Fear or ex-True Fear players. And I was on the frontline for about 3 weeks without a major offensive force.
This is a straight up lie, I just went through your city takes and not a single one of them is from TF / ex-TF players, let alone from a Fiasco player.

But nice try ;)
 

Sorin Markov

Phrourach
You did literally just say that you consider yourself someone who breaks the so called fiasco echo chamber. That goes hand in hand with contrarianism.


Just because something has been around for a long time does not necessarily make it good.

The thing about demolishing cities is that it reeks of a pathetic crybaby who decides that if they don't get to play with their toys, no one does.
Never said I wasn't being contrarian, just that it contradicted something else he said in the comment.
No, but it does mean it's an established part of the game and one that a lot of people use, so it's curious that I'm getting all the flak for it.
Please re-read everything I've posted on this topic. Philosophy of Fire is a legitimate *war tactic* and one that's been a part of Grepolis since almost the start.

To destroy the city on your own before the capture is purely anger from powerlessness) I don't think it's a good tactic) If the city is in the right place, then what's the difference in what size it is. Build back in the world at normal speed is not a problem at all)
Indeed. It's a minor advantage, but an advantage nonetheless. The more hours you spent building the city, the more hours it is until you get that LS nuke up.

This is a straight up lie, I just went through your city takes and not a single one of them is from TF / ex-TF players, let alone from a Fiasco player.

But nice try ;)
1612115291471.png
Those three are from a TF player who ghosted (ex-TF player). Fiasco tried for the cities, CS died, stuck a bir wall in, got it broken and lost the cities. So ah, yeah please don't try to claim you know things that you can't actually tell. But nice try ;)
 

DeletedUser54339

Guest
Never said I wasn't being contrarian, just that it contradicted something else he said in the comment.
No, but it does mean it's an established part of the game and one that a lot of people use, so it's curious that I'm getting all the flak for it.
Please re-read everything I've posted on this topic. Philosophy of Fire is a legitimate *war tactic* and one that's been a part of Grepolis since almost the start.


Indeed. It's a minor advantage, but an advantage nonetheless. The more hours you spent building the city, the more hours it is until you get that LS nuke up.


View attachment 15037
Those three are from a TF player who ghosted (ex-TF player). Fiasco tried for the cities, CS died, stuck a bir wall in, got it broken and lost the cities. So ah, yeah please don't try to claim you know things that you can't actually tell. But nice try ;)
If you opped/hit that player and they ghosted out as a result, then you have some grounds to claim that you got the cities 'from' them. I'm going to take a wild guess that this wasn't the case.
 

Sorin Markov

Phrourach
See, you're missing the point. Fiasco defended them despite them being ghosts and I took them anyway, but that's not even the point either. The reason me taking cities from TF/Fiasco was important was because we were talking about who breaks down buildings before ghosting/losing a city. The cities I took had Senates in the teens despite not yet having Thermal Baths and them not being ghosts long enough to have city destruction happen nearly in that amount.
 

Ro deschain

Phrourach
See, you're missing the point. Fiasco defended them despite them being ghosts and I took them anyway, but that's not even the point either. The reason me taking cities from TF/Fiasco was important was because we were talking about who breaks down buildings before ghosting/losing a city. The cities I took had Senates in the teens despite not yet having Thermal Baths and them not being ghosts long enough to have city destruction happen nearly in that amount.

Why do we care about the fact that some random TF player had a weird city build? Look at Sorin being proud of taking ghost cities and demolishing his cities instead of defending them, I wish I could be that good.
 

DeletedUser54339

Guest
See, you're missing the point. Fiasco defended them despite them being ghosts and I took them anyway, but that's not even the point either. The reason me taking cities from TF/Fiasco was important was because we were talking about who breaks down buildings before ghosting/losing a city. The cities I took had Senates in the teens despite not yet having Thermal Baths and them not being ghosts long enough to have city destruction happen nearly in that amount.
You do realise that a lot of departing TF players would have had no particular reason to like Fiasco, and may have decided to demo a few buildings prior to leaving just for the hell of it, not caring who the new owner was?
 

Sorin Markov

Phrourach
Why do we care about the fact that some random TF player had a weird city build? Look at Sorin being proud of taking ghost cities and demolishing his cities instead of defending them, I wish I could be that good.
Because we were arguing about whether demolishing buildings is scummy, and it seems like Fiasco are unaware that their own members do it as well on occasion.

You do realise that a lot of departing TF players would have had no particular reason to like Fiasco, and may have decided to demo a few buildings prior to leaving just for the hell of it, not caring who the new owner was?
So they're demolishing their buildings to make the person they don't like, who is about to take the city, have to work a little harder? Sounds familiar.
 
Top