Author |
Message |
aister
|
Post subject: Re: SAGE, SoTF, I + affiliates vs VND, BEER, HaHa + affiliates Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 1:59 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 2:48 am Posts: 7985 Location: Fuyuki City Gender: male
|
aazaadx wrote: :/ well I'm glad I came in late, may have curbed my tongue if I knew who was in the alliances not worth mentioning in topic heading.......maybe not. I still love you guys though xD
Nevertheless fighting a losing battle so that your allies gain an advantage to me personally is one of the main reasons for the deterioration of game play and hence BD. You have nothing to lose........
You guys have more to contribute to BD
Nothing personal, this is the way I play and the way I've always played. sometimes u don't have enough time and money to invest into playing competitively in an era, hence u decided to be a sub, which was the case of TFM... however, the active "helpers" though, I don't really like it... they can go for the win themselves, but they didn't. They can say friends for all they want, but friends doesn't mean u can't compete against each other?
_________________
|
|
Top |
|
Milanos
|
Post subject: Re: SAGE, SoTF, I + affiliates vs VND, BEER, HaHa + affiliates Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 2:04 pm |
|
Moderator |
 |
|
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 3:13 pm Posts: 2041
|
Quote: sometimes u don't have enough time and money to invest into playing competitively in an era, hence u decided to be a sub, which was the case of TFM... Yeah, Andrei really doesn't have the money to be playing...  That made me laugh 
_________________ Won both Championship Eras as rank 1.. Waiting to make it 3 out of 3.
|
|
Top |
|
lifenstuff
|
Post subject: Re: SAGE, SoTF, I + affiliates vs VND, BEER, HaHa + affiliates Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 2:48 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 2:55 pm Posts: 1544 Gender: male
|
andrei is cosmin? 
_________________

Apollo wrote: Eh, I try to win every once and awhile. Gotta keep up appearances.
|
|
Top |
|
Celtic
|
Post subject: Re: SAGE, SoTF, I + affiliates vs VND, BEER, HaHa + affiliates Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 2:54 pm |
|
Specialist |
 |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 9:06 am Posts: 35
|
[/quote] sometimes u don't have enough time and money to invest into playing competitively in an era, hence u decided to be a sub, which was the case of TFM...
however, the active "helpers" though, I don't really like it... they can go for the win themselves, but they didn't. They can say friends for all they want, but friends doesn't mean u can't compete against each other?[/quote]
Your point is invalid in the case of DR btw. I would consider Kent an old friend on BD. I have never played with anyone in SAGE or talked to them as much as him. I told him that we would be fighting against him as soon as war broke out. We are playing for fun and to get as many kills as possible. We are not "active helpers", we chose a side and we're sticking with that side, wherever it may lead.
|
|
Top |
|
aazaadx
|
Post subject: Re: SAGE, SoTF, I + affiliates vs VND, BEER, HaHa + affiliates Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 3:00 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:27 am Posts: 269 Location: 1 ETA Gender: male
|
aister wrote: aazaadx wrote: :/ well I'm glad I came in late, may have curbed my tongue if I knew who was in the alliances not worth mentioning in topic heading.......maybe not. I still love you guys though xD
Nevertheless fighting a losing battle so that your allies gain an advantage to me personally is one of the main reasons for the deterioration of game play and hence BD. You have nothing to lose........
You guys have more to contribute to BD
Nothing personal, this is the way I play and the way I've always played. sometimes u don't have enough time and money to invest into playing competitively in an era, hence u decided to be a sub, which was the case of TFM... however, the active "helpers" though, I don't really like it... they can go for the win themselves, but they didn't. They can say friends for all they want, but friends doesn't mean u can't compete against each other? yeah, I realize this. life happens. Though there has to be a better way. I've been wrapping my head around this for some time now and have been very vocal about the precedent it is setting. Most seem to just jump on the band wagon and take this as the status quo of game play. And if you disagree with the way the establishment is running/ruining the game then I my topics are locked and/or I am seen as a trouble maker. Though I personally believe its such a detractor from the way the game is now played......that we need a championship era to bring back some of the competiveness. As you see though it is ingrained in the mechanics of the game now and no matter how many championship era's you have.....this is going to be the outcome, unless change takes place.
_________________ This game sucks; you have been fore warned.
|
|
Top |
|
generated-KrEc5gbTAqLC-1608557600
|
Post subject: Re: SAGE, SoTF, I + affiliates vs VND, BEER, HaHa + affiliates Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 5:43 pm |
|
Private |
 |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 8:33 am Posts: 0 Gender: male
|
mfreak wrote: Kenny, here is a reality check for YOU:
1. VND has never whined about SAGE having allies or subs. Its infact the other way around. We acknowledge that we asked friends to help us win, but just because our friends are good players and win battles does not mean we have to be blamed for it as if we were the only ones to bring in allies.
2. The OC probably had some strategic elements in game mechanics that are not present today, but even in those times, teams like GML with huge sub empires, ganging up on others did exist. Having allies has always been a crucial part of BD so I dont see why this era has to be any different.
3. Granted, these days on most servers there are not too many wars, but this can be attributed to what I call as the "Return on investment" mentality. BD today has translated into a game where big bucks and big squads win you games. Combined with activity of course. Most of the strategic elements as far as I understand are practically non existent. So when someone spends 1000s of USD on an era, you wanna make sure you win. This did not exist in the old client, where people mostly did not have anything to lose by losing an era. Today, you lose a lot of money. This is THE most important reason why there are very less wars and such. Not that people dont wanna fight.
4. Saying that people "trust" you as an ally would be an overstatement. People dont. So you need a bit of perspective on this one:
a) You definitely write many words, say many words, but I have hardly seen anything spectacular to back that up - both now and in the past.
b) Generally the ones that I have talked to, do not trust you so am not sure they would suicide for you, nor are you in a position to offer them rank 2 or whatever.
c) Its bad strategy not to have any sort of diplomacy or allies. I know many in your alliance are crazy bastids, but being bad at diplomacy is simply not strategic given the fact that diplomacy is also a huge part of the game.
So here, I would advice you to calm down a bit about yourself and your so called "winning mentality". Your approach to the game is just as idiotic as you think ours is. In reality, we have simply adapted to the game, the way it is played today. 1. So you deny whining about DR and Immortals on this thread? I'm merely pointing out how hypocritical you've been. If you wish to deny this again I'll make sure to quote your posts and other posts, but I don't like wasting time. 2. The game mechanics aren't entirely alien to the style of play OC had. You weren't here, but when NC had just come out the eras were like this about 3 eras in. Maybe longer, but I had quit due to some personal reasons to focus in on highschool at the time. 3. 'Return on your investment' LOL! You think MORE money is spent in NC? In OC Boosting/donating was UNLIMITED. Michael set record numbers and was able to hire on 3 devs and create the new client. More than 1000s were spent back then. People would drop insane numbers. What was different is there were 10 or so competing alliances, and it would take far into tick 3000+ to whittle down into 3 or so competing alliances. Nowadays you're lucky to see 4 competitors like here on the champion era. A return on your investment wasn't/isn't winning. If you think that winning an era is worth dumping roughly $1,000 in, you're an idiot plain and simple. How about have fun? That's what I pay for, to have a little extra army to have fun with. If I win an era, I want it because I did everything. I outsmarted/bested my opponent in every way possible, with handicaps even. That's a fulfilling win to me. I've done this a few times. You can go on about your wins, but I went out there, I beat Kane to a pulp twice, and I did so without breaking my honor. THAT was fun. 4. You don't even know me Allen, the people who do know me have played with me long enough to see I keep my honor and deals even if it harms me in doing so. E2 A5 I lead an alliance called XXX and defeated SHRK which was WDH + Kane group. I was allied with Thor who had 3 of the remaining relics. A friend of mine in the alliance named Fredeth sent troops at Thor as a joke. I kicked him out, killed his units, and conquered him. We had a deal with Thor to merge, or just remain separate for the era. There's a player playing with you who can attest to this, his name is Gaurav. He was a supporter of Fredeth's actions and constantly told us to backstab Thor. I no longer play with Gaurav for mainly that reason. a) You don't know me, and you're starting to come off as some arrogant child now. b) You played in BYZ. Apollo, Harvester, Malicewolf, Colin, and all of those have played with me long enough and know me very well. I do not go back on my word. Malicewolf in Moo won't suicide for me because it's not in his best interest to. As for trust me? He was a player in Thor. One that was skeptical that I wouldn't keep my honor on that deal. One that is now one of my favorite BD players and I would do a lot for the guy. I wouldn't suicide my armies for him though, what gain do I get? There's no fun in suiciding for someone else, so I won't do it, and I wouldn't expect Malice to do it. I've never asked someone to join an era, boost, and then do AS MUCH DAMAGE AS POSSIBLE (IE: Suicide) FOR MY SAKE. It's stupid. c) You consider diplomacy to be pre-determining your allies and getting people to boost and support your cause and your cause alone. You don't understand a DAMN THING about diplomacy Allen. A diplomat plays the deck he's handed, and still finds a path to victory. What diplomacy have you done during the round? Immediately war me on the start, backstab GML, then you couldn't even neutralize SAGE from stepping in before you had dealt a finishing blow to GML. Your diplomacy during the round has been 1 failship after the next. Not only that, but you've failed to include CHAM in your deals, allowed your subs to attack me, thus bridging your stupid pact with me and allowing me to fight and kill your subs. Name me in this paragraph where you see a successful policy/deal you've done during the round that actually HELPED you. Btw, you've said a lot of words, but you were the one who convinced BYZ that backstabbing UN was the only way, and you were the one who quit mid-era because you couldn't handle the heat after you stepped into the fire. You're 'mentality' is pure idiocy, and the fact you're in VND is laughable. I wonder how long it would take for you to quit if you saw the wars you're in now changing tides and going against your favor. I'm betting not long at all. Please, bring someone more competent to speak with me. Allen, you're a straight waste of my time.
|
|
Top |
|
Slinkybd
|
Post subject: Re: SAGE, SoTF, I + affiliates vs VND, BEER, HaHa + affiliates Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 6:00 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 5:20 pm Posts: 1182
|
Lolowut wrote: mfreak wrote: Kenny, here is a reality check for YOU:
1. VND has never whined about SAGE having allies or subs. Its infact the other way around. We acknowledge that we asked friends to help us win, but just because our friends are good players and win battles does not mean we have to be blamed for it as if we were the only ones to bring in allies.
2. The OC probably had some strategic elements in game mechanics that are not present today, but even in those times, teams like GML with huge sub empires, ganging up on others did exist. Having allies has always been a crucial part of BD so I dont see why this era has to be any different.
3. Granted, these days on most servers there are not too many wars, but this can be attributed to what I call as the "Return on investment" mentality. BD today has translated into a game where big bucks and big squads win you games. Combined with activity of course. Most of the strategic elements as far as I understand are practically non existent. So when someone spends 1000s of USD on an era, you wanna make sure you win. This did not exist in the old client, where people mostly did not have anything to lose by losing an era. Today, you lose a lot of money. This is THE most important reason why there are very less wars and such. Not that people dont wanna fight.
4. Saying that people "trust" you as an ally would be an overstatement. People dont. So you need a bit of perspective on this one:
a) You definitely write many words, say many words, but I have hardly seen anything spectacular to back that up - both now and in the past.
b) Generally the ones that I have talked to, do not trust you so am not sure they would suicide for you, nor are you in a position to offer them rank 2 or whatever.
c) Its bad strategy not to have any sort of diplomacy or allies. I know many in your alliance are crazy bastids, but being bad at diplomacy is simply not strategic given the fact that diplomacy is also a huge part of the game.
So here, I would advice you to calm down a bit about yourself and your so called "winning mentality". Your approach to the game is just as idiotic as you think ours is. In reality, we have simply adapted to the game, the way it is played today. 1. So you deny whining about DR and Immortals on this thread? I'm merely pointing out how hypocritical you've been. If you wish to deny this again I'll make sure to quote your posts and other posts, but I don't like wasting time. 2. The game mechanics aren't entirely alien to the style of play OC had. You weren't here, but when NC had just come out the eras were like this about 3 eras in. Maybe longer, but I had quit due to some personal reasons to focus in on highschool at the time. 3. 'Return on your investment' LOL! You think MORE money is spent in NC? In OC Boosting/donating was UNLIMITED. Michael set record numbers and was able to hire on 3 devs and create the new client. More than 1000s were spent back then. People would drop insane numbers. What was different is there were 10 or so competing alliances, and it would take far into tick 3000+ to whittle down into 3 or so competing alliances. Nowadays you're lucky to see 4 competitors like here on the champion era. A return on your investment wasn't/isn't winning. If you think that winning an era is worth dumping roughly $1,000 in, you're an idiot plain and simple. How about have fun? That's what I pay for, to have a little extra army to have fun with. If I win an era, I want it because I did everything. I outsmarted/bested my opponent in every way possible, with handicaps even. That's a fulfilling win to me. I've done this a few times. You can go on about your wins, but I went out there, I beat Kane to a pulp twice, and I did so without breaking my honor. THAT was fun. 4. You don't even know me Allen, the people who do know me have played with me long enough to see I keep my honor and deals even if it harms me in doing so. E2 A5 I lead an alliance called XXX and defeated SHRK which was WDH + Kane group. I was allied with Thor who had 3 of the remaining relics. A friend of mine in the alliance named Fredeth sent troops at Thor as a joke. I kicked him out, killed his units, and conquered him. We had a deal with Thor to merge, or just remain separate for the era. There's a player playing with you who can attest to this, his name is Gaurav. He was a supporter of Fredeth's actions and constantly told us to backstab Thor. I no longer play with Gaurav for mainly that reason. a) You don't know me, and you're starting to come off as some arrogant child now. b) You played in BYZ. Apollo, Harvester, Malicewolf, Colin, and all of those have played with me long enough and know me very well. I do not go back on my word. Malicewolf in Moo won't suicide for me because it's not in his best interest to. As for trust me? He was a player in Thor. One that was skeptical that I wouldn't keep my honor on that deal. One that is now one of my favorite BD players and I would do a lot for the guy. I wouldn't suicide my armies for him though, what gain do I get? There's no fun in suiciding for someone else, so I won't do it, and I wouldn't expect Malice to do it. I've never asked someone to join an era, boost, and then do AS MUCH DAMAGE AS POSSIBLE (IE: Suicide) FOR MY SAKE. It's stupid. c) You consider diplomacy to be pre-determining your allies and getting people to boost and support your cause and your cause alone. You don't understand a DAMN THING about diplomacy Allen. A diplomat plays the deck he's handed, and still finds a path to victory. What diplomacy have you done during the round? Immediately war me on the start, backstab GML, then you couldn't even neutralize SAGE from stepping in before you had dealt a finishing blow to GML. Your diplomacy during the round has been 1 failship after the next. Not only that, but you've failed to include CHAM in your deals, allowed your subs to attack me, thus bridging your stupid pact with me and allowing me to fight and kill your subs. Name me in this paragraph where you see a successful policy/deal you've done during the round that actually HELPED you. Btw, you've said a lot of words, but you were the one who convinced BYZ that backstabbing UN was the only way, and you were the one who quit mid-era because you couldn't handle the heat after you stepped into the fire. You're 'mentality' is pure idiocy, and the fact you're in VND is laughable. I wonder how long it would take for you to quit if you saw the wars you're in now changing tides and going against your favor. I'm betting not long at all. Please, bring someone more competent to speak with me. Allen, you're a straight waste of my time. tl;dr But everyone will have an argument for their side. No1 has done too bad or great this era. Its basically just any other era with extra peeps fighting b/c the stakes are higher.
_________________ BoS (E4) NUKE (Fantasy)

Retired NEWS Reporter.
|
|
Top |
|
Alexander
|
Post subject: Re: SAGE, SoTF, I + affiliates vs VND, BEER, HaHa + affiliates Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 6:11 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 6:41 am Posts: 4589 Location: The Netherlands Gender: male
|
Slinkybd wrote: Lolowut wrote: mfreak wrote: Kenny, here is a reality check for YOU:
1. VND has never whined about SAGE having allies or subs. Its infact the other way around. We acknowledge that we asked friends to help us win, but just because our friends are good players and win battles does not mean we have to be blamed for it as if we were the only ones to bring in allies.
2. The OC probably had some strategic elements in game mechanics that are not present today, but even in those times, teams like GML with huge sub empires, ganging up on others did exist. Having allies has always been a crucial part of BD so I dont see why this era has to be any different.
3. Granted, these days on most servers there are not too many wars, but this can be attributed to what I call as the "Return on investment" mentality. BD today has translated into a game where big bucks and big squads win you games. Combined with activity of course. Most of the strategic elements as far as I understand are practically non existent. So when someone spends 1000s of USD on an era, you wanna make sure you win. This did not exist in the old client, where people mostly did not have anything to lose by losing an era. Today, you lose a lot of money. This is THE most important reason why there are very less wars and such. Not that people dont wanna fight.
4. Saying that people "trust" you as an ally would be an overstatement. People dont. So you need a bit of perspective on this one:
a) You definitely write many words, say many words, but I have hardly seen anything spectacular to back that up - both now and in the past.
b) Generally the ones that I have talked to, do not trust you so am not sure they would suicide for you, nor are you in a position to offer them rank 2 or whatever.
c) Its bad strategy not to have any sort of diplomacy or allies. I know many in your alliance are crazy bastids, but being bad at diplomacy is simply not strategic given the fact that diplomacy is also a huge part of the game.
So here, I would advice you to calm down a bit about yourself and your so called "winning mentality". Your approach to the game is just as idiotic as you think ours is. In reality, we have simply adapted to the game, the way it is played today. 1. So you deny whining about DR and Immortals on this thread? I'm merely pointing out how hypocritical you've been. If you wish to deny this again I'll make sure to quote your posts and other posts, but I don't like wasting time. 2. The game mechanics aren't entirely alien to the style of play OC had. You weren't here, but when NC had just come out the eras were like this about 3 eras in. Maybe longer, but I had quit due to some personal reasons to focus in on highschool at the time. 3. 'Return on your investment' LOL! You think MORE money is spent in NC? In OC Boosting/donating was UNLIMITED. Michael set record numbers and was able to hire on 3 devs and create the new client. More than 1000s were spent back then. People would drop insane numbers. What was different is there were 10 or so competing alliances, and it would take far into tick 3000+ to whittle down into 3 or so competing alliances. Nowadays you're lucky to see 4 competitors like here on the champion era. A return on your investment wasn't/isn't winning. If you think that winning an era is worth dumping roughly $1,000 in, you're an idiot plain and simple. How about have fun? That's what I pay for, to have a little extra army to have fun with. If I win an era, I want it because I did everything. I outsmarted/bested my opponent in every way possible, with handicaps even. That's a fulfilling win to me. I've done this a few times. You can go on about your wins, but I went out there, I beat Kane to a pulp twice, and I did so without breaking my honor. THAT was fun. 4. You don't even know me Allen, the people who do know me have played with me long enough to see I keep my honor and deals even if it harms me in doing so. E2 A5 I lead an alliance called XXX and defeated SHRK which was WDH + Kane group. I was allied with Thor who had 3 of the remaining relics. A friend of mine in the alliance named Fredeth sent troops at Thor as a joke. I kicked him out, killed his units, and conquered him. We had a deal with Thor to merge, or just remain separate for the era. There's a player playing with you who can attest to this, his name is Gaurav. He was a supporter of Fredeth's actions and constantly told us to backstab Thor. I no longer play with Gaurav for mainly that reason. a) You don't know me, and you're starting to come off as some arrogant child now. b) You played in BYZ. Apollo, Harvester, Malicewolf, Colin, and all of those have played with me long enough and know me very well. I do not go back on my word. Malicewolf in Moo won't suicide for me because it's not in his best interest to. As for trust me? He was a player in Thor. One that was skeptical that I wouldn't keep my honor on that deal. One that is now one of my favorite BD players and I would do a lot for the guy. I wouldn't suicide my armies for him though, what gain do I get? There's no fun in suiciding for someone else, so I won't do it, and I wouldn't expect Malice to do it. I've never asked someone to join an era, boost, and then do AS MUCH DAMAGE AS POSSIBLE (IE: Suicide) FOR MY SAKE. It's stupid. c) You consider diplomacy to be pre-determining your allies and getting people to boost and support your cause and your cause alone. You don't understand a DAMN THING about diplomacy Allen. A diplomat plays the deck he's handed, and still finds a path to victory. What diplomacy have you done during the round? Immediately war me on the start, backstab GML, then you couldn't even neutralize SAGE from stepping in before you had dealt a finishing blow to GML. Your diplomacy during the round has been 1 failship after the next. Not only that, but you've failed to include CHAM in your deals, allowed your subs to attack me, thus bridging your stupid pact with me and allowing me to fight and kill your subs. Name me in this paragraph where you see a successful policy/deal you've done during the round that actually HELPED you. Btw, you've said a lot of words, but you were the one who convinced BYZ that backstabbing UN was the only way, and you were the one who quit mid-era because you couldn't handle the heat after you stepped into the fire. You're 'mentality' is pure idiocy, and the fact you're in VND is laughable. I wonder how long it would take for you to quit if you saw the wars you're in now changing tides and going against your favor. I'm betting not long at all. Please, bring someone more competent to speak with me. Allen, you're a straight waste of my time. tl;dr But everyone will have an argument for their side. No1 has done too bad or great this era. Its basically just any other era with extra peeps fighting b/c the stakes are higher. Kenny spends his valuable time making his argument, attempting to convince people to play in what he considers a better way, words his every sentence with care - and you come, don't even bother to read it - and respond completely missing the point with some "mature", "make me mod pls", text-language reply? Seriously. Stop posting on the forums if you're not going to contribute. I do not agree with all of Kenny's points, nor am I in any way shape or form affliated with him, but it's just sad and shameful some people don't even have the courtesy to read and contribute, or alternatively just keep out. Sigh.
_________________ Best Regards,
Alexander Product Manager Battle Dawn
Skype: dreamerofdestruction
|
|
Top |
|
Murija
|
Post subject: Re: SAGE, SoTF, I + affiliates vs VND, BEER, HaHa + affiliates Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 6:24 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:46 pm Posts: 18 Gender: male
|
hey guys look, kenny is moralising
_________________
|
|
Top |
|
mfreak
|
Post subject: Re: SAGE, SoTF, I + affiliates vs VND, BEER, HaHa + affiliates Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 6:57 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:21 am Posts: 2755 Location: Chicago, Illinois Gender: male
|
Quote: 1. So you deny whining about DR and Immortals on this thread? I'm merely pointing out how hypocritical you've been. If you wish to deny this again I'll make sure to quote your posts and other posts, but I don't like wasting time. Yes I deny whining about DR and Immortals in this thread. Quote me. Infact I was the one that said, backstabbing is just a part of the game and infact appreciated Greeny's light hearted attitude about it. Quote: 3. 'Return on your investment' LOL! You think MORE money is spent in NC? In OC Boosting/donating was UNLIMITED. Michael set record numbers and was able to hire on 3 devs and create the new client. More than 1000s were spent back then. People would drop insane numbers. What was different is there were 10 or so competing alliances, and it would take far into tick 3000+ to whittle down into 3 or so competing alliances. Nowadays you're lucky to see 4 competitors like here on the champion era. A return on your investment wasn't/isn't winning. If you think that winning an era is worth dumping roughly $1,000 in, you're an idiot plain and simple. How about have fun? That's what I pay for, to have a little extra army to have fun with. If I win an era, I want it because I did everything. I outsmarted/bested my opponent in every way possible, with handicaps even. That's a fulfilling win to me. I've done this a few times. You can go on about your wins, but I went out there, I beat Kane to a pulp twice, and I did so without breaking my honor. THAT was fun.
E2 A5 I lead an alliance called XXX and defeated SHRK which was WDH + Kane group a) You did not beat Kane. The only one running his mouth here about beating Kane is you. Infact from what I heard, its just that Kane was tied up with other alliances, eventually won teh era, you lost your army. He didnt end up conquering you. And you conquered him in some era where he wasnt that serious. Thats what most of the players here, who were around that time actually tell me. Except for probably your minions. If conquering someone in a non serious era or not ending up conquered after you lose your army is your idea of "beating" somebody, then your standards are quite low. b) Yes more money is being spent on the NC than on the OC. Again not my claims, its comes from some of hte biggest boosters in the game like Avi. Given the fact that you are known to run your mouth about things you never did, given the fact that you actually lie about things, given the fact that most players who have come across you and your ilk dont trust you, AND given the fact that Avi is one of hte best in the game and is absolutely trustworthy, am sure most players will take his word over yours. You also ignore the fact that boosts those days were what, 2 or 3 USD? Lets not even go there for now.  c) If you actually read my post, I didnt say a return on your investment is winning. I am saying that after spending a lot of money, one would definitely want to reap some benefits - like not getting conquered or losing the era and end up rank 1000. Its not a notion one can call invalid. After all its real money spent. And this is what CAUSES less wars, relic handovers etc., Its like walking into a 5 star restaurant, ordering a dish worth 100 USD and ending up with 1 or 2 pieces of meat. One could claim that the ambience, service, quality of ingredients is what costs that much of money, but it wouldnt be invalid if someone felt "not satisfied" with the food there, because the quantity was too less. Each one looks for something different. Lastly, its completely valid to calculate, if spending 1000 USD can get you the win on a particular server. Its a persons money. He/She may not wanna waste it on an era where the probability of success might be less. Quote: a) You don't know me, and you're starting to come off as some arrogant child now. Yes I dont know you. But I can see BS from a mile away. And the first day I talked to you, I figured what you were all about. Most players that have played with you like G, Matt etc have told me similar. Quote: c) You consider diplomacy to be pre-determining your allies and getting people to boost and support your cause and your cause alone. You don't understand a DAMN THING about diplomacy Allen. A diplomat plays the deck he's handed, and still finds a path to victory. Yes, diplomacy also includes predetermining your allies so you know where you stand when you get into an era. And that is the same thing that we did. We knew GML was coming, and GML is a sub empire. So we had to recruit. We played the hand we were dealt. You on the other hand....well...I'll give you credit that you came to play alone. But had zero diplomacy. You couldnt get any allies probably because of 2 reasons: a) Your diplomacy is bad b) No one trusts you. I personally think its a combination of the two. Quote: What diplomacy have you done during the round? Immediately war me on the start, backstab GML, then you couldn't even neutralize SAGE from stepping in before you had dealt a finishing blow to GML. Your diplomacy during the round has been 1 failship after the next. Not only that, but you've failed to include CHAM in your deals, allowed your subs to attack me, thus bridging your stupid pact with me and allowing me to fight and kill your subs. Name me in this paragraph where you see a successful policy/deal you've done during the round that actually HELPED you. We did do diplomacy. We held off SAGE till relic release. We got trustworthy allies. Secondly, the success in our diplomacy cannot be revealed right now. I will make sure to answer this question of yours, when the era is over. Quote: Btw, you've said a lot of words, but you were the one who convinced BYZ that backstabbing UN was the only way, and you were the one who quit mid-era because you couldn't handle the heat after you stepped into the fire. Eh, another lie. I was the one that asked not to war. But Steve CM had set it all up so I didnt say anything. Secondly, yeah I quit mid-era for like 3 ticks. Immediately after quitting and pulling back to my colony, I was the one that gated all my squads to defend along with the others, bought 6000 tokens to ion UN and kill their squads. I was also the guy that relocated to UN territory, rushed all my workers and got nuked till end of era. Yeah, I quit mid-era indeed! Talk about talkin outta your ass. Quote: You're 'mentality' is pure idiocy, and the fact you're in VND is laughable. I wonder how long it would take for you to quit if you saw the wars you're in now changing tides and going against your favor. I'm betting not long at all. You hvaent seen me in wars kiddo and anyone that has ever played with me knows that I am there till the end, win or loss. You talk too much, you literally dont have many achievements and you simply run your mouth about how you are awesome when in reality you are as bland, uninteresting and unoriginal as they come and out of ideas. And the only idea that you can think of is to take credit from others. Credit that you dont deserve, achievements you never had. Others dont speak up against that not because they think what you say is the truth, its just that they dont wanna confront indecency with indecency and bother themselves. It would do you good if you stopped with all the nonsense, stopped bein a dumbass that you really are and attempted to be a little bit more truthful. You just constantly expose yourself and dont even have a clue about it. What a fool. Infact you went ahead and took credit from Steve CM, for the attack on UN about how you were the one that set it all up. FFS. Even Matt was sick, I wish I could pull up that chat convo from skype, but I left that chat. I asked him "Does Kenny always do this", he says "Thats Kenny for ya. He will keep taking credit and running his mouth". lol Quote: Please, bring someone more competent to speak with me. Allen, you're a straight waste of my time. LOL, funny that it comes from someone that builds castles with words and is solely competent while running his mouth on skype.
_________________ Deadman - SYN ----------------
Last edited by mfreak on Sat May 04, 2013 7:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|

|