taking cities easy way or hard way?

lorbella

Phrourach
Im sure you all have heard us rant and rave how styx takes our inactive and they have admitted it because its easier to do. So i ask you all would you sit there and take your enemies inactive exclusivity. would you do this most the time just because hey you give your enemy bp when doing a real fight . I dont want anyone answering this from styx coailation( styx -styx- The norse loki) Or from EN OC. This needs to be fair. how many of you guys have seen a alliance only go after most of the inactive cities of enemy. Its true they get some breaks and get cities on island of active members but thats only because they got the inactive members but if you look at there grepo stats i can show you where it says inactives of ours and they cant say they dont know they are all inactive. Because when someone doesnt do anything for a whole day or two and you check it out see nothing you know they are inactive and thats when they strike. So the question i have for you

1. Would you go mostly for inactive cities of the enemy or would you fight active enemies?

2. Do you think its fun to go after inactive or just necessary?

3. Do you think its beneath a alliance who has 4 alliances to continue to go for these easy takes?

4. Have you seen any world where this has happend?

5. which alliance do you like better and why?
 

sacmaster211

Phrourach
1. Yes if your enemy is unwise enough to leave inactives as a part of them is is best to take advantage and gain a foothold in their territory before going for the players that are more of a threat.

2 .necessary

3. No

4. Everyone that I have played, Zeta,Mu,Xi,Psi, and Calydon, it happens everywhere

5. I like Styx as I have friends there and was with them in the beginning. EN/OC brought the hate of the world upon themselves when they breached the alliance cap right at the beginning, I don't see any grounds for them to complain about the other alliances branching out or banding against them.
 

SGT Slaughter

Guest
1. Both- if you take an active city, you will earn another city slot or 2. By the time you rebuild (A week) you have another slot or 2 especially if you are supporting on defense during that week. After one week you already have more slots than troops needed to fill on active cities. If you lose your troops and dont get a city, the slot ratio is much higher. Should you just sit on them? Answer is NO! Fill those slots and grow...although I average 5 open city slots.

2. both- fun because of the cat/mouse game on level playing field and necessary to fill slots (see #1)

3. No and if they are so easy why do we stop EN/O from taking ours most of the time? Mazz said you dont defend some because there arent any prems activated and its a waste of troops. Less than half of our active players use prems, yet that doesnt stop us from defending. Maybe EN lacks heart.

4. No if you are talking about the whining. Inactives on Zeta, Naxos and Rho were a race against time, but I dont recall whining from either side. On Rho I was in Infectious State then later renamed EN. Dont recall any leaders steering away from inactives as long as you participated in Ops.

5. lol what grade are you in?

I dont want anyone answering this from styx coailation( styx -styx- The norse loki) Or from EN OC.
How does it feel to want :D

BTW lorbella I was wrong, you have taken exactly 3 actives cities and 2 inactives from styx. The other 36 were mainly EN inactives the rest were ghost towns and 1 active 5k PD city. So less than 10% of your conquers were actives, should you lead this propaganda smear?

http://www.grepostats.com/world/en41/player/1577889/colonizations?page=0
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mesomike

Guest
I would generally, and would rather, fight active cities but I would jump on the chance of a big inactive if it was a good position.

It can be necessary and if you're the ones chasing the inactives then yeah can be fun, but if you are trying to defend inactives then its pretty annoying.

It's below them because by the sounds of it the majority of their conquers have been inactives, would be better if who they took had actually been active.

My main world was Psi, and the branches of 4tress ( another 4 branches ) only jumped on inactives, was genuinely their only conquers for about 2 months and it was ridiculous but I'm sure it happens everywhere.

I dislike both alliances, talk to people and play with people in both sides but the pact/Nap's early of the game then the beating of the chest by EN/Occ is annoying, but then The apparent turtling up/conquering of inactives by Styx or whoever are doing is quite annoying too. I'm quite a hateful person though :p
 

mesomike

Guest
It would be good actually to talk to every leader, and convince them to just drop every pact they have (even with branches) and the not conquer unless it's an allied city above 5k points. Would make the world a tonne more fun in the core.
But unfortunately no one would do this because they're either cowards or they would find some way to get help from others.
 

Tea city

Guest
Here is a proof that the alliance of lol bella fight only gainst the most active players:D
19-S 4,011 david12746 seki777 None Occupy 2012-12-21 16:04:40

This was yesterday:D
 

Tea city

Guest
It would be good actually to talk to every leader, and convince them to just drop every pact they have (even with branches) and the not conquer unless it's an allied city above 5k points. Would make the world a tonne more fun in the core.
But unfortunately no one would do this because they're either cowards or they would find some way to get help from others.

Hey buddy,how dare you to call the others cowards?
Is it not a bit inappropriate?
 

mesomike

Guest
Well no not really, first of all I didn't directly call anyone a coward and second of all if you wouldn't drop your pacts when the whole server is dropping pacts (Which'll never happen) then yes it is a bit cowardly.

Real life example, group of twelve people want to fight so they all group up in three groups of 4's but one guy says oh let's make it fair and just do it 1v1's or a free for all and there is just this one guy that doesn't want to leave the advantage of fighting people with his pals. Playing a bit safe/cowardly is it not?
 

brlinho

Guest
enemy city is enemy city,it is flagged red so I dont see anything wrong with taking those cities,just the opposite they are easy targets,if you dont like your inactive guys loosing cities kick them out of alliance,what good do they bring if they are inactive!?

I guess you would like your enemies go after active guys so you get BP-s so you could take inactives.

I am not very familiar with this world so have no clue about alliances but my vote goes for that alliance which is taking more enemy cities (active or inactive it just doesnt matter)..

good thread btw,plus rep.
 

brlinho

Guest
well whining is what noobs always do when got beaten to the bone I guess.
 

Hasan Naqvi

Strategos
lol, yeah. They broke their NAPs in un-honorable ways, had more than half points of the server and still fell apart. Now they blame it on us. They tried to unpact 1 alliance and feed on it. but the norse/styx developed as a good coalition, and spoilt their efforts.

You call it taking cities hard way? maybe then you need to consult a dictionary...
 

SGT Slaughter

Guest
enemy city is enemy city,it is flagged red so I dont see anything wrong with taking those cities,just the opposite they are easy targets,if you dont like your inactive guys loosing cities kick them out of alliance,what good do they bring if they are inactive!?

I guess you would like your enemies go after active guys so you get BP-s so you could take inactives.

I am not very familiar with this world so have no clue about alliances but my vote goes for that alliance which is taking more enemy cities (active or inactive it just doesnt matter)..

good thread btw,plus rep.
EN/O cant drop their inactives. They are clearly the largest coalition in the world. They say they dont have any pacts, however they have NAPs and cease-fires with the entire world so they can focus on Styx and The Norse. If they boot their inactives, all alliances could grow in their core.

They keep the inactives and benefit from the BPs on offense and defense when they clear them and absorb the cities. They are whiny cause we clear them or take them or both. They try this huge propaganda campaign to pressure us to stop, as you see another huge fail. I received a PM the other day saying EN has met all the qualifications to win the world. Another desperate attempt lol.
 

Bangbros

Guest
Bangbros on 2012-12-20 at 06:55
SGT here is the exact convo and anyone like kron or even your buddy JJ would agree with this statement. Worlds get boring when its to easy to take active players or alliance only go after inactives. As you will all see i agree and and disagree with SGT below on certain points.

EN and OC did beat our chest because the stats we point up is one of the best in grepo history for a world. Doesnt matter if you want to talk about premade or not. (STYX you all were premade as well) We just came here faster because you were finishing up ZETA.

1million ABP closest to us was like 400-500k if that. Most worlds lose many players when this is made and the world slow down because one or two alliance starts to take over. Perfect example is all the great players who have left and playing under different names now in other worlds.

Maybe if PD or the others we fought earlier or even styx would have been around sooner to put up a fight those players would not have left. If it wasnt for terrible players like RAIDER aka DEADLY TRUTH who we listen to not to clear you guys out of 45 early you would not be around or even be with us now.

THE MESSAGE SGT IS REFERRING TOO

Well for vets like us who love to attack

reaching the 1 mil and controlling two core oceans were already met and held for most of the world. Now its just really 1 one now and a strong present still in 44.

I do agree longevity is a key point as well but where there is no excitement and new worlds opening people will leave to find the fun of attacking again.

Winning wars have already been done on are part. Taking inactives isnt really winning a war. It is tactical and maybe by number in the end you guys could win the war with us but it will be a stalmate for many months to come. Even with all the allies/branches you have working with you. (norse,loki and everyone else)

Could you imagine a entire world of turtles and only grabbing inactives and ghost. I for one will not play in it if it gets any worse
 

SGT Slaughter

Guest
Ok lets break it down.

EN and OC did beat our chest because the stats we point up is one of the best in grepo history for a world.
This is the 1st Ive ever heard this. I have no idea if its true and who did the research? Also, keep in mind it was the first time grepo Olympics were used. Basically, a pay to win situation that ruined the level playing field. I doubt many servers were in their infancy during this time. The older servers couldnt even speed up troops and buildings.


1million ABP closest to us was like 400-500k if that. Most worlds lose many players when this is made and the world slow down because one or two alliance starts to take over. Perfect example is all the great players who have left and playing under different names now in other worlds.
EN players didnt leave Rho during this milestone. I remember PD saying they would and getting hassled from EN for saying it. I remember Kron saying he would rather have a good player for the duration than a great player for a few months.
Not sure why great players would change their names and how could you tell?

If it wasnt for terrible players like RAIDER aka DEADLY TRUTH who we listen to not to clear you guys out of 45 early you would not be around or even be with us now.
You are assuming you could clear us out. We both had better players back then and it wasnt only Raiders that wanted to take out PD first. However, lets face it, our NAP only lasted a couple weeks. I doubt anyone would have join EN simply cause they were already #1. Thats the death of a server and signs of cowardliness.

Well for vets like us who love to attack
What exactly is stopping you? We have a 1000 cities you can attack. Plus you could drop all your NAPS and cease-fires. It not the guys on the front quitting, its the players in the core. Bad leadership decisions have cause players to quit. They have no chance to take a city. We dont pact with O45 alliances for this reason.

controlling two core oceans were already met and held for most of the world. Now its just really 1 one now and a strong present still in 44.
Maybe you did control 2 oceans, but I not sure of the second one. 2 oceans equals 2/9th, thats a win now? Please define "most of the world" You have a strong presence in 44 cause we beat GotA and they merged with you, so thats not a real accomplishment.

Winning wars have already been done on are part.
What wars? PD? I think we won more and last I heard we were up on EN in this one though its still going.

Taking inactives isnt really winning a war.
You guys are all over inactives when you get a chance and have been since the start of the server. If you dont want them to count, remove your flag. Please admit why you dont. Just another bad leadership decision.

It is tactical and maybe by number in the end you guys could win the war with us but it will be a stalmate for many months to come.
Stalemate? One month I believe oct 22 to nov 22 we had you 42 to 8. This past month was closer at Styx +6 and even our academy was +2. We have 92 cities in 55 now, it is tactical and you'll see more conquers on our side as you will have to defend more than the front.

Even with all the allies/branches you have working with you. (norse,loki and everyone else)
Styx and the Norse thats it. We both have academies for small players trying to grow. Our only other pact is Legacy and you have the same. EN also tried to get the norse to pact up. We have no other NAPs or cease-fires(pacts) like EN. Thats where EN made the world boring and thats why your players leave. O55 should be chaos as its the center, not a love fest.

Could you imagine a entire world of turtles and only grabbing inactives and ghost.
EN is #1 in defense and Occupy is #3. EN/O has all the inactivity. If you wish to stay and want better health for the server, EN leaders need to make better decisions and stop playing it so safe, its boring its players to death. The same happened on Rho, many stayed but I left. Its the fight one enemy til they merge plan, then surprise attack your next opponent and start all over again.
 

lorbella

Phrourach
so none of you think the big inactive is because people are bored because all anyone ever does is go for the easy takes?
It doesnt matter about just styx if you look at any alliance all thats being taken are inactives.

when anyone ever does this all i ever see is the server dies all the people who would have fun fighting wars against each other are gone from the world.

and yes we have some major problems with inactives because ones leaving have like more than 30 cities there has only been one time that styx had one leave that had even close to 30 cities ( also look how many barely make it compare cities to cities on players and you see where the problem lies) and that was tut that had over that so its unfair to say others take care of there inactives when thats not whats going on. that can take big toll especially when we want to plan ops and we cant.

i like to plan ops and create some life but there is not going to be any it was a long shot and because of bad blood between server us right if we just turtle like you do and do fest and take all inactives.

. as for the cap thing get over it dude. You know how many alliances have way over what we even have now? I have not join a server where people havent done this. Fact we did this and you guys didnt means you didnt have 100 friends wanting to play together.
So what its just pretty much two alliances that are packed and work together as a team and havent been destroy in a world.


EN is #1 in defense and Occupy is #3. EN/O has all the inactivity. If you wish to stay and want better health for the server, EN leaders need to make better decisions and stop playing it so safe, its boring its players to death. The same happened on Rho, many stayed but I left. Its the fight one enemy til they merge plan, then surprise attack your next opponent and start all over again.
please explain from what i know you where only naps with us that means that tech we could break it at any time honey. Do you not do this you have a war with us and if by chance something happens and we gone wont you break or will you continue to kill all the new people coming in? And if your saying we are doing bad job then please in lighting me how to fix people who vmode and never come back? What would oh styx do?
 
Last edited:

SGT Slaughter

Guest
please explain from what i know you where only naps with us that means that tech we could break it at any time honey. Do you not do this you have a war with us and if by chance something happens and we gone wont you break or will you continue to kill all the new people coming in? And if your saying we are doing bad job then please in lighting me how to fix people who vmode and never come back? What would oh styx do?
Drop inactives so you dont lose cities to your enemies, its a moral killer. Styx cant

Give your players in central and East 55 close targets they can attack too. EN doesnt even have to declare war on the alliances in 55, just declare them neutral. There are 600 other cities in 55 besides EN/O and Styx not to mention other oceans.
If your players fear they will be attacked, they will check in more often. If they are attacked, they will want some revenge so they will play more.
Just hope you EN hasnt handcuffed their players for so long its too late. Making your forums fun and entertaining wouldnt hurt either.

Here's a suggestion from an original EN member. Maybe reinventing yourselves isnt a bad idea, since there is little EN/O left.


****** on 2012-12-24 at 22:01
yeah i think they should rename the alliance and dont use the name Eviction Notice anymore.