Jump to content

Jacob Hanson

Members
  • Posts

    181
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Jacob Hanson

  1. Hello Sheepy/Alex,

    I was hoping to come back to the game and can't recreate my nation with the account I have. Is there any way to do that without re-registering? I dont want my old stats back etc. 

    4665085b2ac69dc88d1e46b80c9ac7ff.png

     

    Thanks,

    Jacob

    • Like 3
  2.  

     

    He's actually right. None of my cities have 40 improvements anymore, most of them are signifigantly lower. At the same point, Improvements also generally drain my income rather then supporting my nation. Especially Commerce, which becomes a money sink once you go lower then 1k infra. 

    • Upvote 1
  3. The point of score and war ranges is so that you're only able to fight people who can field similar levels of military as you. Otherwise, there wouldn't be war ranges at all, and we'd like 20 city, 2,000 infra nations attack brand new players. But how fun would that be for the new players?

     

    If you really want cities deleted, you can PM me, and I can remove them. But there's no way to undo such an action.

     

    Hang on - Wasnt that fixed by the pop caps? Because it did that >.>

  4. No alliance is assured of safety from raiding nowadays, you should already know this Prezyan.

     

    Its not raiding, We're hitting Cloud 9 as direct retaliation for harboring spies and organizing said spies. People go around saying "ARRGH IS SOOOO EVIL". In all reality we just dont let shit fly.

     

     9SYgyxx.png?1

     

    nAGzWQg.png?1

    • Upvote 4
  5. Don't you have a separate conflict with Arrgh that you recognised? Or have you written that one off as a bust and now jumped into a new one? Odd.

     

    They where made to sit down. 

     

    Mind you this was after we curb stomped them the first time and gave white peace. Clooney messaged me a few days ago "Blah blah attacked we're countering". One NAC declared, Three Arrgh countered before I could even read the message. Then 2 other poorly armed NAC followed in on "orders".

     

    Einstein-Frame-1036x583.jpg

     

    Thats how I feel. 

    • Upvote 1
  6. We're at war? Why the !@#$ didn't you tell me, Tywin?

    I thought Arrgh was nibbling on Terminus Est just to get a hint of what pure Badass and Evil taste like.

     

    Last time I checked we all have higher bad ass scores and better leaderboards rankings then any of your members. 

     

    Ahh the days of phiney being "Badass" are clearly over. 

    • Upvote 1
  7. This does seem to be based on the leaders of our two respective alliances having a personal disagreement as to the vaginal likeness of Jacob, but I'm always up for a scrap so c'est la vie.

     

    The screenshot misses the part where I say "But hey, I probably deserved it".

     

    We also forget that pre went around and threatened all our protectorates after we ruffled his feathers with that raid a few weeks ago. 

    • Upvote 1
  8. Why did some of you even come to PnW when it's painfully obvious that you just want to play !@#$ (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)...

     

    A lot of the culture does persist from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), but thats about where the line is drawn. 

     

    found on an old (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) page

     

    Bill lock happens in PnW too.

     

    Explain bill locked.

     

    You can also be bill locked in PnW. Its painfully obvious this @$@hats dont know that. It is comparable to your nations power not being kept up, negative income and not being able to use military etc. with this new update it will be much easier to send a nation into bill lock. Its also amazing how easy it is to just go negative with a max airforce at my build. Let alone tanks.

    • Upvote 2
  9. I don't see why I should have to suffer a game disadvantage because of game mechanics, the whole reasoning I am getting from Sheepy for not enforcing the new mechanic is because it would be unfair to arrgh. Well it is unfair on more of us than it is arrgh and there is precedent where he has enforced cap changes before.

     

    It's easy to wave your pom poms from the side lines having every arrgh member back you up as the benefit from this !@#$ up.

     

    Most of us are literally in the same position you guys are, We're just doing it better >.> These caps hurt you guys more then they hurt us tbh. You should really add some military on.. 

  10. Was it this? Because my previous post explained why this is stupid. Even down declaring, you would still be attacking superior forces and would be doing so inefficiently. So you would have to take extra loses just to remove units your opponent shouldn't have. War range is more out of sync with military power then before.

     

    Hang on you're complaining because you would have to try to win wars? and use more resources? Hang on, so you're telling me war is costly? 

     

    Your complaints completely go back to the fact that Rose had no prepared nations to defend itself. Which is a MAJOR fall through on your leadership. The only people who complain and have a hard time dealing with raiders are people who would rather sit around and talk about it, some of us are trying to use all the mechanics. You just used this "broken system" to buy a treasure off a nation so I would stop whining. 

     

    Fight first, Diplo later. 

     

    Are you serious? Do you hear yourself?

     

     

    As Fasolt points out durmij your alliance has made a choice. That choice comes with benefits (higher growth) and downsides (less security).  Your alliance did not modify its policy after you were attacked did it?  Again, choices.  Surely the alliance high growth option will allow you to return to your previous level faster after the conflict.  Again, a valid game-play style and one you choose to participate in.  However, it comes with a downside for you now.  If you whine to admin to magic away your problem then you have removed a set of game-play options (choices) from the game thereby reducing the dynamism of the game which is unhealthy.

     
    This is what I said in a far nicer tone. 
    • Upvote 1
  11. Is the war range formula actually changing?

     

    Or could it be something like if a nation with 14 cities has such low infra (but still has all his military), that they can attack and a nation with 8 cities and so get an unfair advantage  - then nations, in that same alliance of the member who got attacked, that have the same or less number of cities of the aggressor can attack them back regardless of the war range

     

    Trying to make it even - wars should be even based more on the number of cities which determines the size of the military

     

    If your members had enough military in the first place this wouldnt be a problem. If there is no mil, it doesnt matter what size the raiders are. 

    • Upvote 2
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.