Nominees for Best Paranoid Conspiracy 2015

[DeletedUser]

I honestly didn't check the Server settings for herm when i joined and didn't go on the forums for a couple months, when after a few days i realised it was a 400 cap server i thought it was initially mistake by inno.
Anyway your answer is a little political GGN, we all know the current end game criteria. Having been where i was in OL/TD i can honestly say events moved to quickly in herm for any sort of strategical planning other than setting up ww islands and taking in actives off those islands.
Remembering the NG scenario was a perfect example for OL. I had just joined and we were battling ZT in the south, all our northern cities in 43 were supplying defense to the front which was then mid 44 -if NG had hit us instead of turning on TD we would of been easy meat for ZT, something i had to handle very quickly and build a new front up north, which was just in time for NG's collapse but did slow down Pan pushing in and encircling us from 42..it was a weird server.
I will say that in my experience TD did not fair well against organised opposition, not due to inability due down to MRA's usual issue, inactivity..if you were a more concentrated core you would of been equal to anyone on your day but this was not the case..i don't however think setting up differently would of helped, the server was impossible to call is my point from my time alone there was NG/coalition/ZT collapse/Coalition collapse/ APoca forming/Ol demise/zt reforming/MP reforming/the expendables/ak..no one could call it.

 

[DeletedUser48096]

In part I agree Jams, But in hindsight its easy to look back and point fingers. It is safe to say that on a different world we would be more selective with recruitment thats a gimmie. But here and now we used what we had to our best advantage. I dont know if I would agree that Apoc are necessarily more organised than TD, In attack yes. But in WW organisation its a clear no. Without blowing our own trumpet too much we simply used what we had to better effect than Apoc did.

The fact is Apoc were too pre-occupied with hoovering up our baggage and bragging about it, (I was assisting in that distraction here).. While it went seemingly unnoticed that we where preparing our core for WWs in preperation..

Or to put it another way Jams we pulled a "Kansas City Shuffle"

 

[DeletedUser]

Is anyone else knackered?

 

[DeletedUser48377]

Na just bored stuck in the middle of nowhere for a week with no car, its either gonna be heaven or hell

 

[DeletedUser]

Conventional wisdom says ABP is what makes a great player but its obvious that defending is a much harder skill to master. If you look at ZT/Wreckless at the start of this world or the coalition vs ZT, the ABP were highly in favour of 1 side but that was because they were big enough to keep constant pressure on their enemies who were forced into defending. It is easier to squire ABP when you dont have to worry much about defending.

Now, if your city is not in an area your alliance has control over and it isn't viable to just stack a city defensively, real skill comes into play. Judging the closest CS, identifying incoming CS, dodging unimportant attacks, preparing snipes to sink a CS. GGN may get a lot of stick here but ask ZT how well they fared taking his cities when they massively outnumbered us in 44/54. Look at Jonny still going strong, barely losing a city while his alliance crumbled around him.

Now, those players who claim to be great because they have the best ABP are the people who get into a strong alliance and use the safety to go full offensive. Eventually though the tide turns against them and they quit for 1 of the usual reasons: Their alliance doesn't support them; they are bored of the game; their enemies are cheating MRA scum.

The age of wonders is a test of team work and defensive ability, something not as strongly emphasised throughout the rest of the game but an important skill for a strong alliance. Its an easy excuse to make that WWs are rubbish when you just dont have the required skills to win. We were preparing for WWs, you were smashing troops against our walls and taking strategically unimportant cities.

You wouldnt claim to win a 100m sprint because you led the first 80m would you?

 

[DeletedUser]

Exactly!

 

[DeletedUser]

beefy that was a well made point, coherent and incisive ...

who'd of thought it

not sure defending is a harder skill tho -stacking cities is pretty easy, selected targets and working successful op plans is much harder IMO

 

[Archidiamedes]

No Arch I understood you perfectly, Do you not think that I could change my writing style if I wished?

No, I don't think you could copy someone else's writing style as easily as you think, especially if you don't know the person well. And I'm assuming you don't know the person who sent you that that well. It's actually quite difficult to pull something like that off.

Also I dont know who wrote that script for Effinel. Iam guessing you since I know you are from North America/Canada? But if so you failed miserably with your attempt to pretend to be Effinel...

No, not me. I suspect I could do a fair imitation of a few of you guys, but I barely know Eff.

Also since Jamo didnt tell you my thoughts on you I may as well share them.

I have no dislike for Arch, I think he is dishonest and will twist facts to suit his own narrative. But suspect that is more of a gimmick for the externals rather than his real personality at this point............ Iam sure outside of the game we can be reasonable (to each other)

hahaha, you funny guy. You seem to forget that I have your comms with S, where you said this:

While Apocalypse like to claim that they were a better attacking force than TD, the truth of the matter is

...that we are a better attacking force:

TD is older (those numbers stem from Pandemonium's) and has almost twice as many players (and certainly had twice as many when we were still Pan).

Our unbreakable defence of our wonder islands just goes to show how prepared we were.

Oh?

Unfortunately I couldn't launch a CS. Mine wasn't the only revolt we had in a few cities.

I suspect you may not be aware that Darkstorm78 messaged some people here today. In it, he had this to say:

"First of all,I'm not sure if you realised how close you came to taking one of our WW cities in your last OP,squeaky bum time didn't quite cover it ) "

No idea what "squeaky bum time" means, but it must mean pretty close.

You should have won when AK left us with 6 wonder islands in limbo but somehow you managed to fail in beating us to the Tomb and Temple. How you managed to lose both those races is a mystery to me.

I've addressed some of these issues already. The Tomb was the last one we started and severely far from most of the alliance, so resource travel times were very long. The Temple was a matter of hours. Your greater resource and favour base made all the difference, particularly the latter. I believe this also coincided with the failed assault on pwnin's city, so people may have used more resources to rebuild or were focused on the attacks--not 100% sure.

Conventional wisdom says ABP is what makes a great player but its obvious that defending is a much harder skill to master. If you look at ZT/Wreckless at the start of this world or the coalition vs ZT, the ABP were highly in favour of 1 side but that was because they were big enough to keep constant pressure on their enemies who were forced into defending.

But you always outnumbered us.

The game is also biased toward defending, you get more BP from defending.

Defending is more STRESSFUL and causes some people to quit (or retreat in VM). But I can't agree that putting up some defense requests is more difficult than designing a successful op. Correctly distributing long-term support can take some planning, however. Some of your points are certainly valid in their own way, though.

 

[DeletedUser48096]

You think blotting out the name Spaekhugger makes a differnce? Even more so considering that I have already named him?.. I know what I said and who I said it to "S" Arch. Perhaps your forgetting that what I said before Arch, I was playing up to the person I was talking to.. I told Spaek what he wanted to hear. Not what was actually true. Spaek was in ZT at the time and ZT were still allied with Apoc, I simply wanted to see if my words would travel back to Apoc. Nice to see they did.. Also How many times do I need to repeat myself on this matter? Is once not enough for you Arch?

Also I see you missed out the part where Spaek agreed with me that you and Cod are hypocrites, Made even more laughable considering he is now in your alliance..

I wont bother covering up the names considering we all already know who was conversing in this message.

You just cant seem to get past the fact that taking cities and attacking strength isnt the way to win a world can you Arch? What differnce does attack value make if you cant take a city. As KB said "You wouldnt claim to win a 100m sprint because you led the first 80m would you?" Attacking BP means nothing at this point in the world Arch. Those 100+ cities you took, They mean nothing now. Apocs failure has been and always will be their failure to organize WWs. I told that to Principle Salvatore and would you believe it? I was correct....

Also remind me how did Apocs CS landings on those cities go?........ I'll give you a hint.......

Spoiler: Reminder..

Even if Darkstorm did message you and say that Arch, It doesnt matter. Apoc threw their best at it, And failed. The city in question is still flying a TD flag.. Iam not going to deny you got fairly close. But did you or any other Apoc player didnt manage to get a TD WW city Arch?.. Close doesnt quite cut it, does it? I refer you back to KB 100m line..

I've addressed some of these issues already. The Tomb was the last one we started and severely far from most of the alliance, so resource travel times were very long. The Temple was a matter of hours. Your greater resource and favour base made all the difference, particularly the latter. I believe this also coincided with the failed assault on pwnin's city, so people may have used more resources to rebuild or were focused on the attacks--not 100% sure.

You still had a maybe a 10 day head start on us on the tomb even after AK left us and we switched it and you still couldnt beat us to it? Excuses aside Arch that really is pathetic considering the time you had to get it done. Also you are correct when you say that that "so many people used res to rebuild or were focused on the attacks". Because that alone sums up why Apoc fell behind.. Priorities... You were to concerned with slowing us down and attacking rather than trying to win yourselves.. That is the reason you are now 3-2 down as far as wonder go.

Defenders should rightfully get more BP. Defenders have a defensive advantage in the respect of a Wall. That gives the defenders a percentage advantage over the attackers. On a one to one basis, One slinger will beat one hop everytime. But give the hop a defensive bonus (A level 25 wall and tower) and the hop wins every time. As a result because of the defensive advantage the wall brings the attacker will always lose more troops attacking than the defender will defending. Hence why knocking down the walls is so important... Would of thought a leader in the number one attacking alliance on herm would have realized that??

 

[Archidiamedes]

You think blotting out the name Spaekhugger makes a differnce? Even more so considering that I have already named him?.. I know what I said and who I said it to "S" Arch.

I blotted his name out not because you haven't named him before, but because he didn't want to be dragged into our PnP. I've said this before. Why do you have to keep naming him? To what purpose?

Perhaps your forgetting that what I said before Arch, I was playing up to the person I was talking to.. I told Spaek what he wanted to hear. Not what was actually true. Spaek was in ZT at the time and ZT were still allied with Apoc, I simply wanted to see if my words would travel back to Apoc.

Ah, I was waiting to see which backpedaling argument you would use this time, that's why I posted both contradictory accounts.

So you see the problem we have here? Why would I believe your statement to Jamo when I have a contradictory one you sent to Spaek? Why even mention what you told Jamo about me, since it's obvious you were just telling him what he wanted to hear too, since, you know...that's what you do to people you talk to who aren't in your alliance. You presumed Jamo likes me, I'm guessing, so you said something dare I say almost positive about me because that would be what he wants to hear. Now let me see. You're talking to an ALLY of Apoc (Spaek), and you tell him what he wants to hear by insulting his allies. Err...wait, that doesn't make sense...but that's what you said up there. You then go on to say that you said what you said to him to see if it would get back to us. So which is it? Telling him what he wants to hear (which isn't really what he wants to hear), or telling him something to see if it gets back to us?

And for what reason would you want to see if that specific info would get back to us? As if I don't know any of that already?

But wait. This is also the conversation where you were supposedly saying everything tongue in cheek, remember? So does that mean that you actually do respect us and think that our arguments are valid? haha, your convoluted web of "reasoning" is unreal.

Here's a revolutionary idea: just start saying what you actually mean and don't back down from your comments afterward. I'm sure saying the truth will be a massive struggle, but you can get through it, buddy, I have faith in you.

In the meantime, maybe I should start a thread. We can call it The Generic Greek Game. In it, I'll post screenshots from that entire conversation and then we can all guess which ones were honest statements, which ones were tongue in cheek, which ones were pure lies, which ones were meant to draw something out of Spaek, which ones were meant to see if they would get to Apoc, which ones were meant to stay secret, etc.! It should be lots of fun for everyone!

Also I see you missed out the part where Spaek agreed with me that you and Cod are hypocrites, Made even more laughable considering he is now in your alliance..

Oh, but previously you said that HE was also speaking tongue-in-cheek, which is what caused you to speak tongue-in-cheek, so I guess he didn't mean it!

You just cant seem to get past the fact that taking cities and attacking strength isnt the way to win a world can you Arch? What differnce does attack value make if you cant take a city.

So there's no correlation between ABP and taking cities? Err...right, that's why the combined Apoc-ZT city take was about 500 to 150 losses the last time I checked back in April.

(Here's the part where I hear they were all inactives...lol, whatever)

In any case, as usual, you've switched the topic yet again. It is a response to KB's statement, "While Apocalypse like to claim that they were a better attacking force than TD," not a statement on winning WW's.

Even if Darkstorm did message you and say that Arch, It doesnt matter. Apoc threw their best at it, And failed. The city in question is still flying a TD flag.. Iam not going to deny you got fairly close. But did you or any other Apoc player didnt manage to get a TD WW city Arch?.. Close doesnt quite cut it, does it? I refer you back to KB 100m line..

Close doesn't count for city takes, but when you are making a statement that your defense was "unbreakable" and people did get through and get revolts started, then your defense, by definition, wasn't really "unbreakable."

Also you are correct when you say that that "so many people used res to rebuild or were focused on the attacks"

LOL, you are such a liar, I'm glad I caught this.

My actual quote:

I believe this also coincided with the failed assault on pwnin's city, so people may have used more resources to rebuild or were focused on the attacks

YOU KNOW, TRYING TO RECLAIM THE WW CITY THAT WE LOST? Not some pointless city/cities.

Also, I didn't say, "so many people," I said, "so people may."

Grab your bicycle and sit on the handles, it be backpedalin' time once mo'!

Defenders should rightfully get more BP. Defenders have a defensive advantage in the respect of a Wall. That gives the defenders a percentage advantage over the attackers. On a one to one basis, One slinger will beat one hop everytime. But give the hop a defensive bonus (A level 25 wall and tower) and the hop wins every time. As a result because of the defensive advantage the wall brings the attacker will always lose more troops attacking than the defender will defending. Hence why knocking down the walls is so important... Would of thought a leader in the number one attacking alliance on herm would have realized that??

And the point of this paragraph is what exactly?

KB was trying to say that defense is more difficult than offense. My point is that the game is biased toward defending which therefore makes attacking more difficult.

 

[DeletedUser]

In the meantime, maybe I should start a thread. We can call it The Generic Greek Game. In it, I'll post screenshots from that entire conversation and then we can all guess which ones were honest statements, which ones were tongue in cheek, which ones were pure lies, which ones were meant to draw something out of Spaek, which ones were meant to see if they would get to Apoc, which ones were meant to stay secret, etc.! It should be lots of fun for everyone!

Aha, this legit made me cackle, for it sums up GGNs epithet: Mr Backpedal.

How can we ever "interpret" his words correctly when only he knows what they "truly" mean.

 

[DeletedUser48096]

Actually Arch. I did name Speak... Multiple times in the previous times you posted these comms. Did you not read them either?

Ah, I was waiting to see which backpedaling argument you would use this time, that's why I posted both contradictory accounts.

So you see the problem we have here? Why even mention what you told Jamo about me, since it's obvious you were just telling him what he wanted to hear too. You presumed Jamo likes me, so you said something dare I say almost positive about me. Now let me see. You're talking to an ALLY of Apoc (Spaek), and you tell him what he wants to hear by insulting his allies. Err...wait, that doesn't make sense...but that's what you said up there. You then go on to say that you said what you said to him to see if it would get back to us. So which is it? Telling him what he wants to hear (which isn't really what he wants to hear), or telling him something to see if it gets back to us?

Backpedaling? Hardly.. You are simply interpretting what you want to read from my words and cherry picking the conclusions from them. What basis do you have to conclude that what I told Jamo was simply "Telling him what he wanted to hear"?... Because it fits your narrative?

Your forgetting but at that time the merge had just gone sour with Gondriga ending ZT prematurely and some of the former ZTs were in the process of returning back to the new ZT, So I wanted to see what the state of the pact between Apoc and ZT was so I decided to see what I could get out of Spaek to answer that question. Insulting you was part of that plan. I figured if he rejected my insults he was on your side and the pact was still good, and I figured if he accepted my insults then the pact was through. All part of the grand plan Arch.

Iam not going to deny that there is a contradiction between the two statements, But as I have already acknowledged Arch one is true and the other isnt. You have simply decided that the one that fits your pre-supposed conclusion must be true. I would ask is my word not good enough?... Clearly not... Jamo joked to me that there was some sexual tension between us in those coms, so I told him the truth about my thoughts of you. Now clearly that may not fit how you want me to view you. But that is how I view you Arch.

Generic Greek Name Game

Or why not Archi's slanderous interpretation of someone elses words game? If we are being honest....

Close doesn't count for city takes, but when you are making a statement that your defense was "unbreakable" and people did get through and get revolts started, then your defense, by definition, wasn't really "unbreakable."

You really need to visit an optician Arch because I didnt say our defence was "unbreakable", I said that close isnt good enough. People did get through and start revolts, I never denied that. But as I said "how did Apocs CS landings on those cities go?" Revolting a city is the easy part, Landing the CS is the hard part, As Iam sure you will agree..

You said that:

The game is also biased toward defending, you get more BP from defending.

I disagreed that the game is biased torwards defenders, and I explained why defenders get more BP.. Again, I think you need a new set of glasses Arch..

 

[DeletedUser]

Backpedaling? Hardly.. You are simply "interpretting" what you want to read from my words and "cherry picking the conclusions" from them.

Classic GGN, my post above called your response.

 

[Archidiamedes]

 

[DeletedUser]

i don't think your defense example is valid GGN as no one uses 1 type of unit to defend and of course sling mash Hops the same way a horse will mash up archers ..it doesn't mean defenders have it harder and deserve more BP, the game is by design made easier for defenders than attackers. The fact that walls exist is proof of that.

if you use the same example but replace the Hop with a sword, the sling losses every time, further evidence that defenders have the advantage is found in morale worlds (see cosnuta saga) all in all DBP is easier to gain but really shouldn't be gained to heavily as it indicates turtlism and to me grep is an attacking game and the quality and skill is in taking a city, not stacking one..it is in sniping an attack not stacking a city..thats where skill,activity and luck (to some degree) comes into it. Incidently those who know my MO know i always advocate letting an enemy revolt you and i always snipe from the habour..less DBP than turtle defence but more rewarding i think..

as for the rest of what you and arch are arguing about, i see my name being mentioned...nice to be the topic without being the cause for once lol!

 

[DeletedUser]

Aha @Archileaks - if I could plus rep you for that pic I would. Perhaps the penny will finally drop for GGN, is he deluding himself or just really stubborn?

 

[Link of time]

/slithers in\
bow down to tah masta jam

 

[DeletedUser48096]

Aha @Archileaks - if I could plus rep you for that pic I would. Perhaps the penny will finally drop for GGN, is he deluding himself or just really stubborn?

Nope. The fact that none of you address the points raised by me tells the bigger story in my own mind.

 

[DeletedUser]

bow down to tah masta jam

You heard the man - everyone bow down to me!!

 

[DeletedUser]

Nope. The fact that none of you address the points raised by me tells the bigger story in my own mind.

Dude, you're clearly just interpreting our words incorrectly to suit your own narrative. *derisive snigger*

@Jam - The loveable Codfish genuflects before no one but his own reflection