Current War Scores

[DeletedUser39847]

Spoiler

That does not look inactive to me... He gained points 1 day before 13th took his cities

Spoiler

Neither does he look very inactive around that period...

Not sure where you got your "facts" from but they seem to be well... wrong?

Did his city names give the story? remember that 5 day vacation he had

 

[DeletedUser33297]

Did his city names give the story? remember that 5 day vacation he had

The conquest dates prove there was max 1 city taken from him while he might have been inactive.

I'm done discussing about this stuff, this kind of nonsense make the idalium forums rather boring to me.

 

[DeletedUser39847]

The conquest dates prove there was max 1 city taken from him while he might have been inactive.

I'm done discussing about this stuff, this kind of nonsense make the idalium forums rather boring to me.

no there were 4...exactly 4. There were 1-2 taken while he was active no doubt...

But at the end of the day we can all agree exe0 is a noob.

 

[DeletedUser]

Really though you can dress it up whatever way you want but when 2 alliances are at war and alliance A has 50 conquests of all active players and alliance B has 17 conquests 11 of which were inactive it shows huge weakness

Just checked the stats, although you say that all of your 50+ conquests are from active players, the actual stats show that at least 16 of them were inactive players. Thats not bad, but saying "50 conquests of all active players" is stretching the truth a bit.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hello everyone,

I would like to place my 2 cents. Love doing that. Since I'm the biggest stat player. I would like to make my personal observations.

1) Taking inactives is part of the game. If you don't you are losing a great opportunity. But a good old fashion Op, is always fun. But a city is still a city.

2)Concerning the Byksy cities- 3 cities were taken while he had an open attack ban. The last one taken by Sirthomas, was taken right after he came back and we had no idea the city was even under attack. In my point of view that was a great opportunity that 13th took advantage of. I would have done the same.

3) If I notice a 13th is inactive, i post as fast as possible and try to take cities before anyone notices. To me thats a sign of good leadership. You have to use any weakness an alliance gives you.

4) Quantam- your numbers look right to me. I would say around 15 were inactive at the time. No shame in admitting it. Im still extremely prude my our alliance (DW) for the team work you have all demonstrated. We have fun, and do everything as a team.

I still have the greatest respect for 13th and the accomplishments you have made in the server. I like to think we are Frenemies.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't see what's wrong with taking an inactive city really, it has been discussed about a million times on the grepolis forums and I'm not planning on discussing it over and over again. But a city is a city, whether the owner was inactive or not. If you don't want to lose inactive cities you might want to protect them better rather than complaining about your enemies taking them. It's simply a part of the game and I do not believe that'll ever change.

i think you misunderstood me. a city is a city, is a city. inactive or not. my only regret was not kicking the players out earlier to avoid the loss on our stats. but i'll also hop on the bandwagon and grab an inactive city if it's sitting around and belongs to my enemy, no doubt about it. stats are stats.

 

[DeletedUser25746]

Hello everyone,

I would like to place my 2 cents. Love doing that. Since I'm the biggest stat player. I would like to make my personal observations.

1) Taking inactives is part of the game. If you don't you are losing a great opportunity. But a good old fashion Op, is always fun. But a city is still a city.

2)Concerning the Byksy cities- 3 cities were taken while he had an open attack ban. The last one taken by Sirthomas, was taken right after he came back and we had no idea the city was even under attack. In my point of view that was a great opportunity that 13th took advantage of. I would have done the same.

3) If I notice a 13th is inactive, i post as fast as possible and try to take cities before anyone notices. To me thats a sign of good leadership. You have to use any weakness an alliance gives you.

4) Quantam- your numbers look right to me. I would say around 15 were inactive at the time. No shame in admitting it. Im still extremely prude my our alliance (DW) for the team work you have all demonstrated. We have fun, and do everything as a team.

I still have the greatest respect for 13th and the accomplishments you have made in the server. I like to think we are Frenemies.

Yup, Our leader is a giant hippie. Every one gets a star for a good effort.

I hope you are having a good time following Phish around on your American holiday.

And come on Obsidian you violated rule 14 of the internet please watch yourself in the future.

 

[DeletedUser39847]

Just checked the stats, although you say that all of your 50+ conquests are from active players, the actual stats show that at least 16 of them were inactive players. Thats not bad, but saying "50 conquests of all active players" is stretching the truth a bit.

Interesting as I don't think I used DW as an example instead alliance A and alliance B...just to clarify that there Quantam

 

[DeletedUser]

Flower Power.....I am a big old hippie.

 

[DeletedUser]

every alliance takes inactive cities, especially enemy ones,

kayfon has lossed 3 to MILANTHEGREAT
Thurles lost one to Mirva
Metalic Knight to Doxie Dog of Zeus
Demonlon to Jturk
decimanus to Lonely lion
gabyteodor to TradeMarc

Now these are only the ones from September when the players points had not increased any for days prior to losing the city, not defending the 13th, but just wanted to point out that even the elite take inactives and why wouldnt they?
It all goes down to stats, and there is only the odd sado (me) that would look further into it

Edit as only read a bit of the thread before I posted

So virtually same as Pawns post nothing wrong with taking inactives, its all about stats

I am prude also

 

[DeletedUser]

my question:
Would you colonize an island next to an enemy's WW island if there was a player from another alliance on the island you're attempting to colonize? (Meaning your own alliance couldn't take all 20 slots on the island because someone from another alliance [a much larger and more powerful alliance] is already on the island.)

I wouldn't do it, but then again i consider myself fairly intelligent. Although i think this more of a common sense issue rather than an intelligence issue. But some leaders aren't the most rational strategists in the game to begin with.

i can't wait to read the turd-bashing letters after this post! sling the mud, let's see those excuses! ;-)

 

[DeletedUser33297]

my question:
Would you colonize an island next to an enemy's WW island if there was a player from another alliance on the island you're attempting to colonize? (Meaning your own alliance couldn't take all 20 slots on the island because someone from another alliance [a much larger and more powerful alliance] is already on the island.)

It depends, what would be the reasoning behind doing so? I could think of quite a few reasons why I would do so.

 

[DeletedUser]

could I ask for the coordinations for the island

I did colonize a city on a nearly complete wonder island in 34 of DW, that lasted all of 18 hours think it is now named
"no 13th here"

I ment to send support to land straight after but forgot because I am a noob

 

[DeletedUser]

please, you know it's not you, Graeme. You're intelligent and have common sense. These cities are being settled in response to a mass colonization we pulled off in KoM's backyard. so KoM (in all their infinite wisdom) decided to one-up us by doing the same thing, however their leaders have missed the point of our exercise. while our island has a purpose and was strategically planned, the KoM island is like farting in the bathtub. it's funny and entertaining until you have to smell it.


Island 185906

 

[DeletedUser25746]

From my view it looks like both KoM and Apa have end game plans with the 13th. This leads to many interesting toughts. Biggest of all is will either ME or DW take your building of a wonder island with so many 13th cities around as a warning.

 

[DeletedUser]

From my view it looks like both KoM and Apa have end game plans with the 13th. This leads to many interesting toughts. Biggest of all is will either ME or DW take your building of a wonder island with so many 13th cities around as a warning.

i won't say that we do or don't, our intentions for the mass colonization deep in KoM's territory reaches far beyond just playing in their sandbox. tbh i have no idea where we stand with 13th at the moment after Graeme's departure. it's no secret we've had a pact with them from day 1 (figure of speech, not literally) but about 8 weeks ago Eury said that 13th were no longer going to support us. i wished him well and a few days later Graeme came back from VM and Eury's mutiny was quelled. whatever, it doesn't matter. our plans are our plans and we're not looking for support or acknowledgement and whatever we decide will be known when the time comes. read into it whatever you want, we're not going to show our hand before we're ready. so please, make all the assumptions you want, but don't try to paint us into a corner and call us out on our motives. we're smarter than that

 

[DeletedUser25746]

Thanks for at least some response. To many people take the diplomacy in this game to serious in my view. Most people (unless they live in a hole) know who is allied with who in this world.

 

[DeletedUser]

besides, everyone knows i still gush over DW like a charmed schoolgirl.

 

[DeletedUser]

HAHAHH........Like a charmed schoolgirl. LOVE IT.

 

[DeletedUser25746]

besides, everyone knows i still gush over DW like a charmed schoolgirl.

That's how I feel when I talk to pawn. I give him a hard time to try and hide my man crush.