Jump to content

Photo

Kongregate - Alliance War


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#41
Ivan

Ivan
  • 557 posts

I get it.

 

But the timing is what it is,this situation just never happened before,at least not while i was here and playing. So when it happened i just highlighted it.

I understand for a lot of people it might not be a good look, but there are also other people who appreciate this kind of discussion.

 

And if you want to be honest,you can admit it is just a discussion, without any salt. Examples of salt you can search and find in other places on this forum.

I am also ready to wrap this up,like you, we can just move on and hang out in chat as always..not bothered by this topic.

 

Cheers.


  • 1

#42
CasualRace

CasualRace
  • 72 posts

Gosh, I hope I don't offend Whopper with this post...I would die of shame.

 

Ivan's "whining" follows on changes made by Con, not because SP lost to TED.  I would point out that TED won by numbers and presence, which is great and exactly what the game needs.  Ivan's point about empty, wrecked pounds is valid, though, since it goes against all the principles players and Con have espoused since the beginning ( I refer you all back to Con's idea of requiring killing all defenders and destroying a certain percentage of defenses to get points; a pre-trashed pound would be worth little to nothing.)

 

None of the "solutions" being put in place are doing much to help war.  As far as the myth of a Golden Age of Raiding, there was never one.  War was always controlled by two to three alliances on Kong. 

 

As for alts, what can you do?  Ban alts?  How many would quit if all you could do is get to 55 and run (broken) bounties in Green Plains?  Wheee!  Are SP alts OP?  Yep.  But lower level alts are at least beatable for anyone who applies himself ( I know from being on both ends of that). 

 

The point system does need tweaking.  As Ivan pointed out, why bother upraiding four levels for 80 points when you can one or two-man someone three levels lower for 40 points? 


  • 1

#43
tingadabopper

tingadabopper
  • 25 posts

k


  • 1

#44
SaintChrispy1

SaintChrispy1
  • 14 posts

IDK what these complaints are about. I have raided this way since my time in SOA and thru keeping RWO in the top tier. I played over three years with no uni lrs so in order to become a good raider i would have to hit A- to C+ targets with 1 or 2 attackers. Very rarely hitting a SP or KBF target. Target volume < single target points; this shoud b common sense. If you want your alliance to succeed recruit more raiders and help them to do well and improve their efficiency.


  • 1

#45
bighits

bighits
  • 7 posts

Nice to see war chat on here.....I thought everything was working fine for years. Then SP were not winning so I am guessing it is now broken. War is essentially the same as ever people with more members and more time win (or fuel in KBF days) it is a shame though that current war system does not highly reward or recognise great raiders for hard flags....that should change and all the free flags that everyone takes (including SP) are over priced. It is definitely not an easy thing to fix

Big


  • 0

#46
bighits

bighits
  • 7 posts

oh dam I forgot to add more salt...........SALLLLLLLLLLLLTTTTTTTTTTTT

Big


  • -2