Actually, it is a continuation of your personal attacks about my size making my opinion irrelevant. I may not have tonnes of cities, but I get the ideas of how to do so, and the ways to manage larger numbers of cities. It may make us play the game in slightly different ways in some scenarios (you have the option to rely on brute force rather than tactics, when you actually bother to fight), but it doesn't mean that my views on your leadership are invalid. I provided evidence about flaws in your leadership and their actions, and that evidence stands, no matter if I were ranked 1st or 1001st.1) It is not ad hominem attack. It is simple the reality of having such a vast difference in size. I am rank 2/3 in the world, and you are ranked 323. This by itself makes us play and proceed the game differently. You have little idea of how to get to this point and to play with the demands of having 80+ cities.
2) Yes, but the "Game" now has WW, and profoundly changes it. In my view, this is a good change as makes this war game more realistic. No war in history is purely militaristic affair. This is what so many people fail to understand in this forum.
This game is usually marketed as a military strategy game, not Sim City: Ancient Greece Edition. Combine that with the effort invested into the combat mechanics, and the original concept of the game, and I would say that the community are right in their beliefs that WWs are not the best endgame for Grepolis. Furthermore, Grepolis isn't meant to represent real life - if it was, I am sure we could all point out a lot of discrepancies between how the game mechanics work and how it would work in real life.
You are playing the game upside down. This is what you do not realize or understand. If you want to play this game well, then you need to start thinking about WW from day one.
This is the problem with WWs as an endgame mechanic. They are heavily opposed to military strategy, which is what this game is meant to be about. WWs encourage pacting, simming and recruiting, rather than proper wars. But because Inno won't come up with an endgame more suited to the rest of the game, and ignores any suggestions from the community on this topic, we are left with two choices: play in the intended spirit of the game, relying on military skill and strategy for success, or prepare for Wonders from day 1, by avoiding any sort of large or evenly-matched war.
3) This is your opinion and experience. However, Sniping is ineffective against good and experienced players and can be highly inefficient in terms of time management. Try to come to the core, and you will learn how your sniping will become useless.
Sniping works fine as a tactic against good or experienced players, so long as you are not purely restricted to it. It's only if you are permanently restricted to sniping that it becomes dangerous.
4) Once again. This is what you do not understand and you will do well for yourself by reading the Art of War by Tzung
"To fight and conquer in all our battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."
"Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win."
If you want to win in Grepolis, you should try to obtain positions that later on will give you an advantage on the WW, and you should obtain them with the least amount of resources possible. This is it. Not fighting for the sake of fighting.
And now you are using The Art of War as an excuse for your poor BP. You claim to be an alliance of great fighters, yet their biggest player (yourself) sits here prattling excuses as to why it doesn't matter that his BP is appalling for his size.
5) This is your misguided misconception.
Actually, it is truth based upon experience. If you rely on others to do your fighting for you, you are going to be an easier target when isolated or alone. In many top alliances they kick players who don't pull their weight in terms of fighting.
If Thermopylae suddenly had some players defect from them, we all know that you would instantly be on here calling them disloyal traitors. And human beings are never as simple as cost-benefit analysis machines. It's one of our crucial differences to current artificial intelligences - we have morality and personal values that are not mathematically quantifiable, such as loyalty. We are doing our job, but if someone is discontent and chooses to become a traitor rather than bringing their issue to us for us to help them, that is their fault, and shows a lack of morals on their behalf.6) Yes, it is called cost/benefit analysis and not blind and stupid indoctrination or brain washing. If you leaders are not doing their job properly and your teammates are not pulling their weight, you should not stick around due to "blind loyalty".
The technical objective of a game is to win. So yes, you could say that the point of playing is to win. But in a community-driven game, where the prize for victory (a crown) is becoming ever more devalued by the people that achieve, and where you will have to play with or against many of these players again in the future, reputation is paramount. You might win the battle in terms of winning a crown on a particular server, but if you lose the respect of your fellow players because of your actions on that server, you will lose out in the long run.7) I do not agree with you. This game is about winning the crown. If you want to choose "respect from the others" and confuse "loyalty" with stupidly and foolishly sticking around people who are not doing things right, then by all means go ahead because I will always end up beating you.
Reputation means more than a crown these days, for a couple of reasons:
- So many people have a crown now, that it is no longer an indication of skill. There's a player with a crown that I have been in the same team as once, and fought against twice. When we were on the same team, he showed very little teamwork or communication, and the two times I have come up against him, I have definitely come out on top. And this is a player with 2 crowns and a separate victor's award.
- If you have a bad reputation, a crown won't make up for that. If you have no crown, a good reputation can still get you into that same alliance.
If your way of winning against someone is to hide behind better fighters and sim, then you aren't the one winning against anyone. You are simply baggage for your teammates to carry all the way up to WWs.