Постови у којима сам цитиран

PC moms for best training

Написао the99percent, 27.12.2011 at 05:45

Well, then i'm pretty much done with this game, even though I actually have more time than ever to play games, there are just so many games I would rather play over this one. Maybe I will come back in a few months.

off topic:

thank god

on topic:

this is a highly unreasonable request. I've went through a phase similar to yours, but now I'm actually doing something about it. Being less predictable for starters, and walling important countries and stacks are a priority (thx ZOG and houdini). Also, TBing has a 50% chance of working first turn, so if you don't have anything to TB move whatever you can on the first turn and it most likely won't work. Sure there's not much you can do, but it's part of the game. Either do it yourself or deal with it.

Написао Fidel_Castro, 26.12.2011 at 13:19

Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 26.12.2011 at 11:14

I can get all of europe in 5 turns with IF germany (a lot of people can, with the exception of turkey), try harder

I'm not mad yet, please troll harder.

i'm not trying to make you mad, just giving you a bit of constructive criticism

I can get all of europe in 5 turns with IF germany (a lot of people can, with the exception of turkey), try harder

>lowsky
>trolling

to be honest, this is as much 'trolling' as it is an example of severe retardation. trolling in world games simply does not work -- you're going to get beat and will QQ yourself to death in any scenario.

also,

>deviL
>STILL LOST

gg lowsky u r mastr trll

It's a nice idea [seeing troop movement between turns], though I feel that running graphs of information would be somewhat useless though. the ability to see stats at the end of the game would be really cool though

Написао xn0ize, 18.12.2011 at 04:32

I think the militia needs the 1 attack back , it would be fair.

the whole problem with GW was that militia were way too powerful, removing cost nerf (if that) would be most sensible

Join pc moms

Написао Caulerpa, 15.12.2011 at 02:53

Yes, good nerf. Just what do you think of reducing nerf on transports (now it's -4 and -5) to -3 and -3. So that can be a little more usable in bigger maps, and not only europe.

-3 and -4 to norm and air transports respectively should do it, transports should gain 1 range each so they don't become too good like they were before

Even having a button to snapshot the map and save it somewhere in the directory is cool. this is a really great idea, and should be high on the priority list

You're going to need to either have an atk or def nerf. militia are too powerful (as you gain them as you cap), so if you remove the atk nerf they'll be too powerful again. I suggest a def nerf, but it's not terrible the way it is

Nerf is perfect. Been playing IF all day and it feels much more balanced now. I just barely lost a 1v1 just now, but have been doing very well with it in other games. feels great, thanks

Написао Garde, 12.12.2011 at 21:08

We should just get rid of the roll system...would make things a lot simpler

no, the game would be too monotonous. it's fine the way it is

Kind of an irrelevant problem, but I got a gold medal at the very end of a game (the turn that I won), and I didn't receive medal SP.

Making clans more than they are now (i.e. annexation, government, etc) is just dumb. Clans should be the same as they are now, there is no problem with the system and no reason to add pointless features to isolate certain clans even further. If you want to fight for a different clan just pull a Sixstars and make a new account and join : )

Just put them on your ignore list and turn off chats. a personal dashboard is really not viable and if you get bothered by spam you have an issue

The layout itself is nice. everything seems more organized and I'm glad you kept the color scheme and good general features (top players, etc). the only thing that really bothers me is the banner (which I personally don't like at all), and the font of the words. the rest looks vry nice though, and the forums look really good with the revamp. I just dislike the banner and the font

Написао Guest, 06.12.2011 at 02:40

Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 06.12.2011 at 00:16

Написао Guest, 05.12.2011 at 09:36

IF = good when used by good players who know how the strategy works.
theyre not invincible... not at all.

are you joking? please refer to the IF is overpowered thread in suggestions. otherwise you just sound dumb sry

I was referring to the guy who said IF = invincible troops. Please get your shit together.

They are practically invincible. Read up on the HP system and you'll see why these units are almost invincible

Написао Guest, 05.12.2011 at 09:36

IF = good when used by good players who know how the strategy works.
theyre not invincible... not at all.

are you joking? please refer to the IF is overpowered thread in suggestions. otherwise you just sound dumb sry

Wud recomment cooking mama 1 + 2 hours of fun and excitement, I personally rate it an 8.5 / 10 tell me what you think rate comment thanks

LilD I have never laughed so hard in my life

5/5 bro this is some funny shit

Anything your heart desires

vote if you have a heart

Написао the99percent, 29.11.2011 at 21:29

"Also, no area of canada will be worth more than the U.S."

Well Vag, since you are from Guyana, you really cannot make and valid comment on Canadian, USA comparisons.

yes bcos I am legit from guyana : ) guyana is my home not new york : )

also yes I do, in every aspect except for land area (not even talking about arable land, TOTAL land mass) the U.S. is vastly superior. Anyone, even a third-worlder like me (:() knows this

Detroit probably does have more monetary value than chicago does (chicago doesn't have much production/industry, while detroit does -- chicago will outpace detroit later). There are more than 0.9 million people in detroit lol, the "suburbs" that you talk about are usually the outer skirts of a major city, not considered suburbs. Also, no area of canada will be worth more than the U.S.

Написао the99percent, 26.11.2011 at 14:33

19 bombers plus general vs 13 inf , that's not too bad, you say he had 10 left but did he reinforce? watch the actual battle to see how many units he had total please.

I had 23 in my cap, only lost 13 inf in an att vs 19 SM bombers + general (w/ bomber att)

The 45 units vs 20 units is the worst though, something needs to be done. test out both nerfs

Написао Guest, 26.11.2011 at 13:08

Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 26.11.2011 at 13:05

Написао Guest, 26.11.2011 at 13:03

Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 26.11.2011 at 13:01

Написао the99percent, 26.11.2011 at 12:49

... that is ridiculous if true. we should do some testing.

It is 100% true. Just played another game, 19 bombers + general killed 13 infantry. Held cap with almost 10 extra units. idk why they won't listen, everyone (except for them) who has played IF frequently knows well that it is TOO OP

also you will not destroy the nature of IF. you will have transports back to normal, and units will still be pretty strong but will be BEATABLE

IF Units are OP nobody denies this.
But units can be OP if they are slow and have a appropriate strength/cost ratio. This is what IF is about and there is no need to destroy its nature. Just adding cost until it is balanced is way better.

If only rushka was still around, +2 HP would still keep the nature of IF but it wouldn't be as OP. It would actually take brains to use, not just mindless facerolling wherever you have the most units. Sure a cost nerf would be semi-effective, but you're only taking germany into context. A cost nerf would give give neg monies in 5k, which we don't want -- the point is to nerf it appropriately, not to kill the strat in general.

But this is pretty much what you would do by reducing its HP because it still has the transport nerf so it would even suck more than now on big maps.
Also no negative monies since +cost and not +weekly cost.

no, part of me/fruit's nerf was to remove the transport nerf so you wouldn't completely kill IF and it'd still be fair. yes, it definitely would not be as OP and I guess it would kind of lose the 'nature' of IF (which is just plain OP), but at least it would still be very good close range, and hard to win long range (since you would have less leftover units every time you get a neutral country, which would cut some expansion, and would make it harder to get units to the frontline), which is exactly how the strat is supposed to work

EDIT:

instead of arguing, why can't we have some sort of test server in which we test these nerfs...or test both nerfs separately, something needs to be done (either cost nerf or this nerf quickly... one way or another)

Написао Guest, 26.11.2011 at 13:03

Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 26.11.2011 at 13:01

Написао the99percent, 26.11.2011 at 12:49

... that is ridiculous if true. we should do some testing.

It is 100% true. Just played another game, 19 bombers + general killed 13 infantry. Held cap with almost 10 extra units. idk why they won't listen, everyone (except for them) who has played IF frequently knows well that it is TOO OP

also you will not destroy the nature of IF. you will have transports back to normal, and units will still be pretty strong but will be BEATABLE

IF Units are OP nobody denies this.
But units can be OP if they are slow and have a appropriate strength/cost ratio. This is what IF is about and there is no need to destroy its nature. Just adding cost until it is balanced is way better.

+2 HP would still keep the nature of IF but it wouldn't be as OP. It would actually take brains to use, not just mindless facerolling wherever you have the most units. Sure a cost nerf would be semi-effective, but you're only taking germany into context. A cost nerf would give give neg monies in 5k, which we don't want -- the point is to nerf it appropriately, not to kill the strat in general.

Написао the99percent, 26.11.2011 at 12:49

... that is ridiculous if true. we should do some testing.

It is 100% true. Just played another game, 19 bombers + general killed 13 infantry. Held cap with almost 10 extra units. idk why they won't listen, everyone (except for them) who has played IF frequently knows well that it is TOO OP

also you will not destroy the nature of IF. you will have transports back to normal, and units will still be pretty strong but will be BEATABLE

also, look at my fav strats: Favorite strategies: Iron Fist, Perfect Defence, Great Combinator

I am not biased, I have played IF for a bit, and I know that it is too OP and needs a nerf. it's just a bitch in general

Написао goodnames679, 26.11.2011 at 10:42

In my opinion, IF is already where it needs to be. While it's troops might be a bit powerful, the movement reduction as well as the fact that it's nearly impossible to spot stealths with IF makes it fair enough.

lolol, try playing against IF anywhere with good income, you will lose badly. Today, when playing cow to try to find a counter, I had over 45 units in his cap from an SM rush. FORTY FIVE. He took it with 16 tanks and 3 infantry and 2 bombers (just checked with him)...and he was LEFT WITH 9 TANKS AND 3 INFANTRY. This is a problem bros