Nordic Nightmare in total Control

DeletedUser

Guest
I dont think any one alliance is in total control honestly... There are deff some favorites out there, but to say "total control" is a over statement.

I mean just awhile ago NN was in "total control" and look at them now. I think That pretty much all the alliances in the top 12 are pretty decent at the moment...

I think the new thread should be started about the top alliances and how competative this world actually is.

It was a joke. No alliance has ever been in total control, and never will be. This thread began when NN were top of the rankings, however, and I was implying that it was time for a new thread seeing as the #1 spot has changed hands.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
i've played in many servers, but none were so fun as athens is. there is no dominant alliance specially in terms of having way more ABP than DBP and it's not so boring because there are wars brewing on all sides of the world. basically the fun starts here and now :)

wish we can somehow refuse to build a WW so that we can stick around some more eh?

not sure if you have looked recently but take a look at this..
ABP
1 Nordic Nightmares 6844095
2 Masters of Rogue Chaos 4070448
3 Band Of Brothers 1709537
DBP
1 Nordic Nightmares 6589907
2 Masters of Rogue Chaos 3288686
3 Imperium 1852169
TBP
1 Nordic Nightmares 13434002
2 Masters of Rogue Chaos 7359134
3 Triad 3532167
"there is no dominant alliance specially in terms of having way more ABP than DBP"
thats true but we arent really too far from a dominant BPs alliance.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
not sure if you have looked recently but take a look at this..
ABP
1 Nordic Nightmares 6844095
2 Masters of Rogue Chaos 4070448
3 Band Of Brothers 1709537
DBP
1 Nordic Nightmares 6589907
2 Masters of Rogue Chaos 3288686
3 Imperium 1852169
TBP
1 Nordic Nightmares 13434002
2 Masters of Rogue Chaos 7359134
3 Triad 3532167
"there is no dominant alliance specially in terms of having way more ABP than DBP"
thats true but we arent really too far from a dominant BPs alliance.



I think he meant that, while ABP/DBP/BP overall is higher than all other alliances, ABP is not significantly higher than DBP.. which shows that NN are also being attacked just as much as they are attacking.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
My personal opinion is that everyone can attack anyone when they are offline, call it strategy or whatever, but not many can attack while we are online. I am trying to do attack my enemy when the person online, this way everyone are ready for a good and fair battle and I believe that this the most realistic battle we can expect. Unfortunately we are looking for offline time??? Why???
 

DeletedUser

Guest
The answer is that many players have no guts! For example Gumbles claims that colonizing cities in the middle of O56 is a coward strategy on the other hand taking city from the player who is offline is a fair one, well I guess you have you own thoughts, so please keep them within yourself. Another one is Star Wars geek, you don't know anything about us,so don't claim that we are arrogant and bragging players, you are the ones who are trying to catch players offline other wise you have no chance!!!
 

DeletedUser11165

Guest
Farabdul you trying to siege players while they are "online" is your choice; figuring out players online/offline times is part of accepted strategy these days and many of your fellow alliance members do the exact same as do we all. We use spy reports, fake attacks to name but two to aid in working out a players times.

Part of good defensive strategy is knowing which of your polis are under threat of a fast siege and defending accordingly.

NN has/had a very in depth list on Triads activity/online times but here we have made a great effort to educate our players on how to hide their online/offline times & fool sites like grepo intel also part of a good alliance strategy.

As for colonizing...look its an accepted and in my opinion can be a very successful strategy for taking a fortified Island. When world wonders come i'm sure we will see alot of this in order to hamper / deny islands to build on - again this is accepted tactical behavior.

Now settling polis due to being incapable of actually taking a front line polis of an active player in a fight due to the idiocy of your players i wouldnt call it cowardice as gumbles does but i would call it perhaps "acts of desperation" (not aimed at anyone btw just a general opinion).

Also agree completely with Stormvoort & SH, athens has become a fantastic server to be on due to the constant warfare and skilled players along with a huge line up of turtles and MRAs to be fed upon.

When the world wonders come I can only hope the wars intensify even more.

/See you at the end of my spears.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser22847

Guest
The answer is that many players have no guts! For example Gumbles claims that colonizing cities in the middle of O56 is a coward strategy on the other hand taking city from the player who is offline is a fair one, well I guess you have you own thoughts, so please keep them within yourself. Another one is Star Wars geek, you don't know anything about us,so don't claim that we are arrogant and bragging players, you are the ones who are trying to catch players offline other wise you have no chance!!!

And you have a chance? You have much lower chance to win against an opponent of EVEN strength since the defence counts more as stacked.. you will time ur attacks close, he will time his support close, bam, wall + stacking kills you. If it was like that you re either attacking weaker players constantly to get cities or you re getting help. Fair, huh? I didnt see you complain about it some weeks ago .. Now its suddenly a problem..

Everyone plays with the same rules so its fair. If you want to point out something unfair in the game its the gold usage.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
If you want to point out something unfair in the game its the gold usage.

I do not use gold but you and I play for free.somehow grepo/Innogames has to make money if not yo turn a profit then to atleast keep servers running.
 

DeletedUser22708

Guest
What's up with NN's top members going into VM? First Fargo, then Elddor and now Tanharaman, are they cowards or is there another explanation for this?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
the maps explain it all. Push long and hard enough and the walls come crumbling down.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
RL is more important to some of us than this game. yes this game is a blast and many of us would trade RL for this game lol. but never the less things happen in RL that must be attended too. :)
 

DeletedUser3149

Guest
Maybe they just all go to the same location for vacation.
A reunion of nightmares so to speak.
:p
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Those that are losing tend to quit at a higher rate than those that are winning. This is entirely reasonable ... its harder to stay motivated when you are losing ! (Grepostats is showing MoRC have conquered 122 NN cities, NN have conquered just 40 MoRC cities).

The NN losses to VM might surprise some ... eg. Corinthian II said this on 28th Jan:
Logically, who do we think are more likely to quit the server before that time? Sure, MoRC have some good players. People like Digital, StormVoort, the experienced players who know what they're doing.. but a far greater percentage of MoRC's strength comes from smaller members, as the average score shows. A lot of these players are people who have nothing invested in the server. No highscores, no money spent on the game, etc. NN, meanwhile, has a smaller total number of players, but it has a greater number of experienced players, here for the long-run. It's these players who will be around at the end.

Wheras I think I called it more accurately with my reply at the time:
I have played in several worlds, with large accounts, and I can tell you this ... the players that quit are the ones that start losing their primary conflict. And that includes experienced players, with large accounts. Such players are unused to losing cities, and when it starts to happen, it is devastating to their morale. As you say they have invested a lot of time and money, so (if we must speculate) ... I predict you will be surprised as some large accounts start to slip into VM rather than suffer the indignity of enemy conquest...
Still a way to go, but I'd expect to see more of the same...
Leonidas_Head2.gif
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Those that are losing tend to quit at a higher rate than those that are winning. This is entirely reasonable ... its harder to stay motivated when you are losing ! (Grepostats is showing MoRC have conquered 122 NN cities, NN have conquered just 40 MoRC cities).

The NN losses to VM might surprise some ... eg. Corinthian II said this on 28th Jan:


Wheras I think I called it more accurately with my reply at the time:

Still a way to go, but I'd expect to see more of the same...

Absolutely.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
for those that want to have a laugh, and a descent read in game, i direct you to [player]tcl2301[/player] profile, and check his alliance name to funny!
Enjoy!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top