Quote:
Originally Posted by eksero
How is that related to what i said?
|
I'm explaining that the game needs to reward you more when you attack rather than mass nap and initiate to win. An alliance like Ultores can just pre-round nap and already create a block if anyone dares to attack them, and they can cover the random incoming they have and initiate / farm to win. Do you honestly think that anyone else will compete against a strategy like that? Folk may compete more if there was more rewards for attacking.
EDIT: GM's opinion could be seen as being biased as his alliance is poor at defending, but so can yours because your alliance is superior at defending. But then you just need to look at the state of the game. With the current mechanics, no one is going to challenge you not when you have laughable alliances like p3n who backs off and surrenders after 1-2 days of being hit.
So obviously you're going to argue that defence needs to be a fundamental part of the game and it should equally be as rewarding as attacking because if the rewards of defence was nerfed and attacking gave people more incentive, then an alliance like Ultores wouldn't be able to utilise their strength efficiently.
People need to stop mass napping all the time. It's gay and damages the game. I mean look at the current round, there have been no proper wars and everyone is just farming.