UAE Hiding their losses??

[DeletedUser]

Has anyone else noticed that UAE likes to hide their losses by kicking players while they are being conquested? Seems a little cowardly to me. :heh:

Proof:

This is a screenshot from Latest Colonizations in grepostats

Now here are some shots of a couple of players who suddenly found themselves without an alliance.

This one you are just going to have to take my word for. He only had one city and must have been asked to completely cancel his account. Unfortunately the way report links work, all of my attacks were updated with "Ghost City" in the name. You can tell it was not a ghost city though because the player's name is listed on the CS attack report.

And he is nowhere to be found in grepostats:


Has anyone else experienced this cowardice?

 

[DeletedUser]

Hmmm... Very interesting :]

 

[DeletedUser]

I was also confronted about this. I know for a fact we have never kicked any member being conquered.

Also tosh I recall had been inactive, since I considered targeting him, but figured that would be a cowards way of taking cities...

Im leaving that to Big Joke E and his UAE buddies ..

Trust me if I could find any dirt on UAE, I would jump on the band wagon but Im not sure the above information can really tell the truth..

I know at 600+ members and over 1000 cities, I for one dont have the time or concern to waste considering ways to doctor the stats to make us look better... Simple game play and persistence does that much better ..

 

[DeletedUser]

Tosh was growing fairly well until one of or players started beating him up, but they didn't support him I don't think so he was certainly not a favorite son.

I understand all of what you are saying. I am just making a suggestion. We have a pretty cranky top 5 player as a next door neighbor.

 

[DeletedUser]

or....

Maybe if you looked at their alliance changes they are kicking alot of people.....Maybe your just targeting the members that are the weak links. Or we could always assume the conspiracy theory.

 

[DeletedUser]

lol GMAN is that really you?
Still playing beta I see

 

[DeletedUser]

They have been kicking out their weak players so I don't know if this particular case means much. Can't talk about UAE but I know AoA used to do exactly this. The amount of times we started attacks on a player and then mid way through they would be kicked from the alliance..

 

[DeletedUser]

UAE have been kicking alot of players lately, so i doubt this is the case. Though it is common practice for alliances to kick lost causes. All alliances do it at some point in time, it keeps morale up and can help lessen the psycological effects of war.

 

[DeletedUser]

I understand the strategy Ryan - it makes sense. Apparently they need to work a little faster. Maybe appoint someone full time to that job.

 

[DeletedUser]

it has been recent. But I notice they have kicked some active players when they have lost key cities.

 

[DeletedUser]

True that kicking someone before they are conquered saves some morale and stunts the psychological effects...but when you save the person doesn't it boost your alliance's morale? I think it could go both ways and UAE just has too many members too support at once.

 

[DeletedUser]

which is why their good members look for a way out first, leaving the less strong players to shuffle support around those that cannot support themselves.

 

[DeletedUser]

Do you mean as their good members leaving? If so to where..?

 

[DeletedUser]

I know that UAE is kicking members to cut the fat, its a fact we can all see.

I can also tell you many a player has left based on the careless disregard of the upper leadership of UAE.

that...... and UAE not so secret secret

 

[DeletedUser]

How does kicking out members boost morale?
Pardon me but I don't quite understand. It definitely cuts the fat, if you want to call it that. But an alliance should be all about support. Inactives I understand, Non participation I understand, but just because someone gets conquered, nah.. I don't understand!

The members who did get kicked out could have been non-participative, that's a theory someone from UAE will have to clear out! :heh:

Out!

 

[DeletedUser]

They indeed kick out their players when they are conquered. It happened to me too when i conquered one of them. It was some time ago when UAE was not kicking out inactives or small players.
But it is their choice... as long as they can recruit faster than they loose players they are a successful alliance.

 

[DeletedUser]

Assuming of course that they don't just bring in 1-2k points players in exchange for 50k players.

 

[DeletedUser]

That would be, like, sad.

 

[DeletedUser]

I am hardly ever on this forum, just thought I would have a browse after answering my Trojan question.

Lots of idle speculation. Its true that we have kicked out a lot of lame simmers recently.
Its something most successful alliances do on a regular basis.
Once they are kicked they often join an enemy alliance but this is ok as it will simply weaken the enemy.

As for kicking someone while they are being conquered. It is entirely possible.
Inactive players get targetted by lame enemies, and if we happen to kick them in our latest purge, then you have yourself a nice conspiracy.
If you are clever like eGod or Kadjayuni you might even use it for some clever propaganda! woahhh! ;-)

As for support, we support everybody who helps themselves. People with 10 cities but unable to repel an enemy CS, because they have only got defensive troops or insufficient navy is useless to us. Those who "fight the good fight" have always been taken care of.

As for Krustards idle boasts:

Also tosh I recall had been inactive, since I considered targeting him, but figured that would be a cowards way of taking cities...

COWARDS way? how about the fact that 5 of your towns being conquests from your OWN alliance mates?!
http://www.grepostats.com/world/en2/player/71614/colonizations
Did you ask your 594 members to soften them up first?

COWARDS way? targetting Big John E by asking your entire alliance to bolt him?

I would never of course call you a coward to your face. I will only dare insinuate it. I don't want the whole of your 594 member alliance targetting me with bolts. I like my shiny buildings.

Although, since 480+ of your members have only 3 towns or less I doubt they will take part in your cowardly bolting. PS: why do you keep players with 1 town or 0 towns? is it to bolster your ranks? Looks like quantity over quality?

Can't get good players nowadays? That's probably because the majority of good players are in UAE and our allies.

Wasting enough time here. I suggest you guys go back and work on something useful and not waste time doing more idle speculation

Willcx
UAE

 

[DeletedUser]

Well that was a pointless wall of text. The only part that I will comment to is this:

If you are clever like eGod or Kadjayuni you might even use it for some clever propaganda! woahhh! ;-)

Huh? If you look at my one other post in this topic you will see I have not used anything here as propaganda. As far as I could tell UAE have just been doing the same as what Molon Labe have done, kicking out inactives.

I guess Willcx is too clever to read through the thread before posting.