Quote:
Originally Posted by oil
Missed this bit. I remember the hc giving a relatively good argument for why this was the best option before (i think on the forums). I can't remember exactly what but I think it basically came down to the fact that we were probably going to do better launching attacks than trying to defend our planets. I imagine for a number of reasons ranging from likelihood of us landing our attacks (which most people here seem to respect to some degree), offensive stats, and an awareness that unlike in ult, us grounding our fleets probably isn't going to guarantee having a large number of people online to send out their ships when needed. I don't know though, i imagine a ct hc will explain it to you if you ask them though.
|
Example Round 47:
CT has a 57m lead, including stock from both Ult and CT.
Theres 7 days left and CT decides that attacking is more beneficial as #1 ally with the most value and score? Sounds to me like that logic doesnt fit at all. You need 2 to 3 lands for every land you get against you. Which makes it impossible to profit in any way.
Also dcing should give you extra credit? Thats why the point is there, there shouldnt be any defpoints gained by dcing, you dc for the sake of the alliance. Not your own ambition.