Sketchy

@Alexio15 You never learn fam. They wanted slots. They'd have rolled you regardless of the reason. Rushing to throw people under the bus to save your AA was never gonna work. I hope you guys licked Kev's butthole real good cuz if I was him I'd never speak to you again.

Hey maybe NPO can call this war "The Great Sock War" instead lmfao

And I didn't make that argument, so yet again, respond to my actual points rather than strawman versions, or don't respond at all.

You didn't respond to my response, you responded to a strawman argument I never made, with an argument that supports my overall point. I already made the point that the strategy is pragmatic for NPO and core allies, Its not pragmatic for the wider coalition though, that is hardly debatable. If you are openly admitting that you are intentionally sabotaging your own coalition members in order to preserve your pixels,... well then lol gg I guess? As far as long term structural ones, well thats not generally the metric people use when they decide who wins a war, and you can't predict those at this juncture. Somehow I doubt this hurts TKR all that much long term structurally, they are built on fairly sturdy foundations. Your coalition allies though, and some of theirs, sure. I mean, the purpose was not clarified in the OP, and the follow up responses suggested it was about things not being enjoyable or competitive. Improve the game is debatable. Obviously your view that there is a universal consensus is slightly off at the very least. More like you want to improve the game for NPO. Which would be consistent with how NPO generally approaches any changes to the mechanics. After all, this change is designed to address a specific flaw in the mechanics surrounding your strategy.

Damages. I didn't advocate for suicide missions, I advocated that if people want to be ultra pragmatic and remove all risk from conflict, which is their prerogative \, they shouldn't complain about things not being competitive enough for their enjoyment. Ironically you are basically making the same argument I'm making, against your own alliance member, you just haven't realised it yet apparently.

My post was a response to the OP, someone from your alliance, who has a different opinion. Perhaps you should argue with them then? You still haven't achieved self awareness yet. I hope Roq releases that in the next update.

Its impressive how many things wrong you were able to pack into such a small post. > Complains strategy his alliance is using is boring and the game should be changed to make it more fun > I suggest perhaps instead of trying to change the entire game, you should pick a more enjoyable strategy > "The fact some alliances follow a strategy you don't like doesn't change that its a good strategy" You truly redefine the limits of ones ability to completely lack self awareness. Bravo Also, just because you call your strategy good, doesn't mean it is. It obviously isn't in fact, given your coalition has such a narrow lead in the largest dogpile in the games history. I'd suggest you let the grown ups talk buddy.

Also, just one other point. This isn't even true. You could have fully militarised and hit their upper tier this time around since you have a legion of other alliances supporting you. You'd likely have had more fun and you'd have done better as a coalition too. Oh and the war would be shorter. You instead chose the option that best protected your bloc from damages, and let your upper tier support take all the damage instead. Pragmatic and in your self interests? Yes. Fun, fast and effective? Not so much.

You are saying that to someone who co-founded an alliance built on the idea of doing things against our economic self interest in the pursuit of our personal enjoyment of the game. Alliances have different priorities, and those priorities come with different sacrifices. You are asking the game developer to offset the downsides of your particular strategy, to cater to your own subjective version of what constitutes fun. Pragmatism has a cost. If your foremost priority was fun, this wouldn't be a problem, because you'd adapt your strategy to maximize that at the expense of other priorities. You can't be ultra pragmatic, plan wars to the extent at which losing is not a possibility as many alliances do, and then blame the game for not being suitably "competitive". If people want competitive wars, take risks, don't be ultra pragmatic. Perhaps you might be in the wrong alliance?

Exactly, so we agree, it is a result of your actions. Case closed...?

Then don't hold them down for 5 days in a blockade and hit them when they rebuy once a day? The whole point of attrition straight from the mouth of IQ leadership back during Git Gud Friday was that attrition warfare was done with express goal of boring people out of their minds to make it unpleasant for anyone to fight IQ. If you want to have fun, try beiging your opponent and waiting for them to come back after you so you can fight them properly again. If you don't want to challenge yourself or take any risks, don't be surprised when its not as enjoyable. Also don't change resistance per war type sheepy that is stupid.

I don't see what the argument about vote rigging is. Unless you pull some weird shit where you have a set number of reps from each alliance vote, a direct democratic vote is always going to lean in the direction of alliances with more members who are active. The votes have never been unbiased or reflective of reality, which is why no one should really put any stock into them anyway. Its also why sheepy shouldn't make ingame awards for them. They are just a novelty sideshow for the community to focus on for a few weeks at the end of the year. Just do it with a forum poll that is public so people can see who voted for what, and people will determine how biased the outcome is on their own and whether they should pay attention to it.

Its ok I know you have to say that publicly. When you *wink* move on to a *wink* new alliance that you *wink* don't know who it will be yet, don't forget to announce your candidacy in the 2018 TGH Princess Elections. Can't let these outsiders win, one of them might be a Fake Polaris plant in disguise as a princess.

Princess Sphinx has a nice ring to it, when are you joining again?:

Well we are in the market for a new princess.