Game Off

Uther wrote: Why is H? being held up as the bad guy when this guy was a complete rat?

If enough people disliked Harmless to destroy us, there would be lots of spoils, strutting, and opportunity for political advancement to spread around.    But siding against Blue doesn't even net a spot in a lynch mob.

It's just mankind's baser attributes raising their reliable rumps, reaping where they have not sown and roaring to get their rocks off.  It's not hard to see what they really care about is themselves and what they really want is sabotage and destruction wrought against whomever is perceived as being higher on the proverbial ladder.  As for the "victim?"  Well, it's easy to stand up for someone who's not in your way against someone who is.  More like "convenient alignment of objectives" I'd call it.

StJude wrote: Here is where this gets crazy to me. In a GAME, there is an element of players who banded together and now feel JUSTIFIED in determining levels of PUNISHMENT. This is CRAZY. When did this stop being a game with some fun and a simple, GG?

Ander wrote: after ambushing them with 7 alliances you still fancy yourselves as brave heroes?

I don't recall Harmless? suddenly being in charge of any other alliance besides Harmless? They didn't ambush them, they declared war with them. What everyone else did is out of their control.

Ander wrote: you cannot blame him for going back to his alliance as you already   proved with your 7 on 1 war that fairplay is not something you prefer.

That's just it, he didn't go back to his alliance. He abandoned his alliance and is now hiding in World's End.

StJude wrote: nightfury wrote: StJude wrote: Brids17 wrote: StJude wrote: Do you have a sense of proportion? And now suddenly pixels have value. How quickly your flawed argument falls apart... Sigh... Let me help you get some perspective with one simple question. Do you spend money buying prestige building your moving military pixels? If one can buy some troops with prestige then I am sure that many will do that... Nightfury, before interjecting, could I request you read the debate at hand? You seem to be discussing a different topic regarding troop purchases and prestige?

I am not off topic. what makes you think I haven't read previous posts. Point you are raising is all about the proportion of punishment and you are making a point that City is worth much more and several K's of lost troops are nothing because real money is used for building city, to show your flawed logic I gave statement that "If one can buy some troops with prestige then I am sure that many will do that..."
To be clear let me tell you this, in this game creating big amount of troops is as hard as building city. take an example, human t2 cav(knight) takes 13.33 minutes, so to create 10k knights army it takes 92 days, One can build a city in 15 days(using prestige) but 10k knights...no sir...one has to wait 92 days for that.
now go ahead and slaughter somebody's 10-20k knights and offer them double amount of resources needed to create knights, lets see if they accept that.
On same logic if somebody razes your city and offers you double the resources that are needed to build that city again, that should be acceptable?
 

HonoredMule wrote: I'm really tired of this "but I spent prestige building that" argument.  It is woefully invalid.  If you spent prestige, you did so to support the developers and/or enjoy advantages/convenience/huge chronological shortcuts while playing the game.  You got and enjoyed what you paid for and are in no way entitled to some sacred protection of how you used it just because you spent real money.  We all spend real time, and we all chose how we spent our time (and money).  Those of us who didn't spend prestige, spent that much more time. Everything we build in this game, we can lose.  Those of us who are truly not prepared to face that loss have the option of playing an entirely peaceful game.  We don't have to launch all our troops at a much larger foe and then cry wolf.  Whining about the loss of investment after a failed gambit wreaks of nothing but the cowardice Harmless so violently abhors. If you're destitute and found the tiny cost of prestige overwhelming, it's your own damn fault for spending your money so unwisely.  If you aren't, then stop making such a big deal out of it.  I spent a lot of prestige on this game myself.  I've now been on a much tighter budget for about 5 months now and can no longer (wisely) afford prestige myself.  But come and raze my cities, and I can guarantee you one thing: you won't hear me bitching and whining about my lost prestige investment.  I will simply rebuild--that is what people with strength of character do. So let me make this crystal clear: we don't care if you spent prestige.  There are reasonable limits to what constitutes a reasonable response and though others may disagree with our assessment, we do measure our reactions carefully.  Whether you spent prestige has no effect whatsoever on our decisions.