DeletedUser11965
Guest
How could you say no to free cities.
"If you can't keep it, you don't deserve it."
"If you can't keep it, you don't deserve it."
Well said. Saying no to free cities is a sign of weak alliance.How could you say no to free cities.
"If you can't keep it, you don't deserve it."
Just that the only difference is instead of half, almost all the cities we took have 500+ to 1k+ Birms and more than 1k LDU. Mal love to tell fictional stories so i've already expected her to try to word her way through as always.Considering half the cities we take from you guys get stacked with 500+ bir and a few k GDU, I don't think they're all that inactive.
If ISIS is only taking inactives that's not such a bad thing for them. Because taking inactive cities now could be the gateway to taking active cities later and ultimately making the war more interesting.
As for MI, sure your inactive players are getting conquered, but when you have so many inactive players in O43 which is a KA stronghold, that is bound to happen. But lets not forget the active palyers that KA has taken. We eliminated your best players in the ocean. The only monsters behind the front-lines were cowards who went on Vacation mode upon getting attacked.
sablestag, will you be doing one for february?
that would be a very interesting read
where do you get the stats from?