Conquest!!?!?!?! Revolt?!?!?!!?

  • Thread starter WildBlueMongoose
  • Start date

DeletedUser

Guest
I prefer conquest because it makes more sense than revolt does, and all that stuff.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser15100

Guest
I find Revolt easier :D

I think this is because when I started Grepolis I started in a Revolt world and now that I am used to Revolt and try playing in conquest system I find Revolt more preferable.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I have only played in a conquest world in a different account that has failed, and I like it more, but Revolt is pretty good also, I like both but conquest is for me.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
It depends:

With morale - conquest (you only need to attack once... then the morale doesn't affect you).

Witout morale - revolt (attack attack attack). This system with morale is so messed up. Image you are conquering a guy. You conquered half their towns and the morale drops to 50/30%. Then what? With all alliance support you can't conquer those.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
PurifyingFire said:
It depends:

With morale - conquest (you only need to attack once... then the morale doesn't affect you).

Witout morale - revolt (attack attack attack). This system with morale is so messed up. Image you are conquering a guy. You conquered half their towns and the morale drops to 50/30%. Then what? With all alliance support you can't conquer those.
Click to expand...

Yea that is crappy
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
PurifyingFire said:
It depends:

With morale - conquest (you only need to attack once... then the morale doesn't affect you).

Witout morale - revolt (attack attack attack). This system with morale is so messed up. Image you are conquering a guy. You conquered half their towns and the morale drops to 50/30%. Then what? With all alliance support you can't conquer those.
Click to expand...
Skype-emoticons-33-wait.png
or, OR...

with morale - either

without morale - none
:p
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
I have never played on a Revolt world but I truly do love Conquest. <3
 

DeletedUser

Guest
@ Pythagorus - Great point of view^^
@ Owen - With Revolt, you can be a veteran top 1 player without recruting a single defense land troop
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I believe it is also. Conquest just makes more sense. Why would people start a revolt by listening to enemy troops. Or is it they think your a better leader and revolt against them? I think the latter is correct.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
It really depends on what type of player you are. With conquest, you need brute force. Stack that city you're conquering to the rafters, and it's yours.

Revolt also requires force, but the right amount at the right time.

Defender: You've gotta time just enough support to land right before that CS.

Attacker: You've gotta time your CS to land as soon as the second window opens, whilst timing nukes to land seconds before the CS to kill whatever support the defender has collected.

I personally like revolt better.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Kelptic said:
With conquest, you need brute force. Stack that city you're conquering to the rafters, and it's yours.

Revolt also requires force, but the right amount at the right time.

Defender: You've gotta time just enough support to land right before that CS.

Attacker: You've gotta time your CS to land as soon as the second window opens, whilst timing nukes to land seconds before the CS to kill whatever support the defender has collected.

I personally like revolt better.
Click to expand...
i could just as easily say that revolt is brute force and conquest is more tactical.

revolt: if you are put under revolt you have 12hrs to stack thousands of biremes and the attacker has to constantly (mindlessly?) attack the city to keep it clear before landing a CS.

conquest: has double the amount of ways to beat a CS (defence or attacking siege) and probably more than 10 times the amount of strategies to land a CS.

timing is equally important in both versions, so i'm not sure how that was brought up in the differences between the 2... if anything conquest requires slightly better timing since you bneed to have both clearing attacks and support timed well otherwise your CS could be sniped or your siege could be sliced.

both versions are cool really, i'd say conquest is more tactical and revolt more simplistic (which is def not a bad thing), and i would play either. both versions require you to kill stuff and that's really what we're all here for, or most of us ;)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
are there any speed 3 revolt servers? I have always wanted to try revolt, but don't really like speed 1 or 2. although speed 2 is ok.
 

DeletedUser10850

Guest
sploggo said:
are there any speed 3 revolt servers? I have always wanted to try revolt, but don't really like speed 1 or 2. although speed 2 is ok.
Click to expand...

There's Theta. It's been out for a year though so it's a well developed world.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
PurifyingFire said:
@ Pythagorus - Great point of view^^
@ Owen - With Revolt, you can be a veteran top 1 player without recruting a single defense land troop
Click to expand...

I don't quite get your point because surely you'd need defensive units in case you were attacked?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top