Пронађено резултата: 257
24.04.2018 у Rate a player!
9/10
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
Написао Kanker, 13.04.2014 at 18:07

Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 13.04.2014 at 16:10

Low cash world games were never a thing, nobody in my time ever liked a 5k world game, shit sucked...15k was fine and was fun but eu+ was and still is the standard

also, khal, the gameplay you are used to now was formulated by us old players...things you take for granted like expansions that you learned, and even 3 unit walls were made by old players. If you played back then it was much different because everything was much less homogenized and there was actual thinking to be put into moves, rather than blatant unit spam.


nostalgia eh, opinions and statements blinkered by a love of an older time. i agree with khal, ive watched vids of older games, the skill level is less in them than it is today.

you can mindlessly spam your units in games nowadays and lose to those of us who actually know what we're doing. undoubtedly losing with many cries of "OMG THAT TB I HATE THIS GAME.".

i love that theres all these oldschool noobs declaring players nowadays are rubbish, lack skill etc. you never see any of the good players that are still playing today from back as far as your so called golden era talking shit like this. those that actually know what theyre talking about as they know what it means to be skilled.

like great you invented walling. but guess what, you still suck.


The thing is you only "know what you're doing" because everything is pre-set nowadays. There's no creativity. I would say that the skill level in general was less back then only because strategies were only there for so long to be perfected. Relatively, though, the skill level of the best players to the others was higher than it is now. The only player that I've been impressed with thus far is khal. And I suck? loling right now
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
Low cash world games were never a thing, nobody in my time ever liked a 5k world game, shit sucked...15k was fine and was fun but eu+ was and still is the standard

also, khal, the gameplay you are used to now was formulated by us old players...things you take for granted like expansions that you learned, and even 3 unit walls were made by old players. If you played back then it was much different because everything was much less homogenized and there was actual thinking to be put into moves, rather than blatant unit spam.
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
31.03.2014 у Welcome back, SRB!
Good to see a lot of old players, and looking forward to meeting and playing against new players. It's been fun so far.

Also, good to see you again Desert Fox, it's been a while
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
Написао Kanker, 31.03.2014 at 06:19

Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 30.03.2014 at 20:58

Написао Kanker, 30.03.2014 at 14:17

Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 30.03.2014 at 13:40

cannot tell if serious or low-tier trolling


the only reason you wouldnt be able to tell if i am serious or not is if you found what i posted so outrageous it couldnt be for real.

i dont engage in low tier trolling, so yes i am serious. so please explain how this game is pay2win? and how the 1 time fee of 40$ for potentially years of entertainment is so outrageous when many people drop 60$ on a playstation game they clear in a few days and never touch again.


A game that is advertised as free should not be pay to win. You need to pay for your general, a very important part of the game, like really? It's ridiculous


the gen is very useful, but not essential, the game is free in that you can play it at a decent level and never have to spend a dime, nobody is putting a gun to your head to buy premium. all games that are free but have a premium aspect to them that provides advantages advertise themselves as so, its not a deception on the part of the admins. and im surprised you begrudge them this money when they dont rely on advertising and have put so much time into this game. especially you, a beta trooper.



A gen is almost essential for most first turn expansions (at least the ones that I use, in any case they for sure make them better) and is extremely useful for any kind of defense and offense. I don't think you're seeing my point clearly here. As of now, the premium features provide too much of an advantage. I'm not saying they don't deserve money, they should just figure out other ways of getting them (advertisements would even be fine, I don't care, as long as it doesn't affect game play). There's a reason I found aw more competitive back then, and that's because the playing field was much more level and fair.
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
30.03.2014 у MK Strong
So am i accepted
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
Написао Kanker, 30.03.2014 at 14:17

Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 30.03.2014 at 13:40

cannot tell if serious or low-tier trolling


the only reason you wouldnt be able to tell if i am serious or not is if you found what i posted so outrageous it couldnt be for real.

i dont engage in low tier trolling, so yes i am serious. so please explain how this game is pay2win? and how the 1 time fee of 40$ for potentially years of entertainment is so outrageous when many people drop 60$ on a playstation game they clear in a few days and never touch again.


A game that is advertised as free should not be pay to win. You need to pay for your general, a very important part of the game, like really? It's ridiculous
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
30.03.2014 у MK Strong
Can i pls join

mortal kombat cln
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
Написао Kanker, 28.03.2014 at 19:30

Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 23.03.2014 at 05:10

Just make the game less pay to play, as the game progressively got more and more premium-oriented the balance went to shit. Back in beta there was actually strategy (even a little afterwards) and you had to know what you were doing to win, but now that it's so pay-to-win it's boring and that's one of the reasons I quit, as did many others. Sorry if I'm not giving feedback on this podcast which I'm sure has great ideas, but the updates should focus on fixing this balance


what? if youre gonna quit at least quit for a reason that makes sense. a 1 time payment of 40$ puts you on par with all the other premium members. and the only advantage this affords gameplaywise is it gives you a gen. the premium strats are just strats, if you suck with non prem strats youll suck with them too.

having played true pay2win games where the players around you can and do drop upwards of 5k$ on in game upgrades i laugh when i see people grumble about the measly 40$ theyre asked to pay for hours of entertainment here.


cannot tell if serious or low-tier trolling
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
TIL: Russians use grammar as a basis for debate while having horrible grammar themselves
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
Just make the game less pay to play, as the game progressively got more and more premium-oriented the balance went to shit. Back in beta there was actually strategy (even a little afterwards) and you had to know what you were doing to win, but now that it's so pay-to-win it's boring and that's one of the reasons I quit, as did many others. Sorry if I'm not giving feedback on this podcast which I'm sure has great ideas, but the updates should focus on fixing this balance
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
22.03.2014 у AtWar enemy list
Tophats
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
22.03.2014 у The beginning
Came back from dead just to say 5/5
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
Vaglneer is in
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
15.05.2013 у Dalmati and future
Написао tophat, 15.05.2013 at 21:03

Написао Pulse, 15.05.2013 at 17:12

Indeed, Cow.

I'm constantly in touch with members who have long stopped playing and I've heard a few things that would make them come back. It's always like this - we have been involved in a game for so long that we never really stop following it, we always yearn for new content, for interesting changes, things that would make the old game new again. New strategies are a mixed idea - it's good to add diversity, but do we need more than we actually have? I'd much rather have the old strategies become more viable than having totally new ones (LB, GC, Blitz, I'm looking at you).

I had a few ideas thrown that could make things a bit more interesting:
  • Return of Turnblock and Flower Power. And we should add more information to the new players about these, to make sure we don't alienate part of the community with it.
  • Team Swap/Shuffle. Whenever I play a 3v3 with Fruit, I'm always first pick and he's always last. I've spoken to Ivan about it and apparently it's a bug, as team picks should be shuffled as well as world picks, but they are not. The Team Swap idea would be a turn right after picking where players would be able to switch picks (and like a regular turn, we'd only be able to see the changes after it ended, to prevent players from reswitching because someone switched right near them, and to add the predictability factor).
  • Full upgrades on CW, Rated Team Games and Duels. I know upgrades are very important to the longevity of the game and we'd never look a rank 5 the same way again, but one of the things that greatly halt competition is the fact that a coalition is often forced to play a certain combination of ranks to match other coalition's combination of ranks (the so called FAIR RANKS POLICY). Also ranks don't really matter much, Leaf is rank 8 and much, much better than a lot of rank 10s around.
  • Tracking of coalition wars. Show on profile how many coalition wars this played participated in. How many did his CLN arise victorious.
  • Special ranks for coalition wars. I don't know if you guys played Diablo 2, but we had titles for players who beat the game on normal, nightmare and hell difficulties. And when you played HARDCORE MODE (if you died you'd lose your character), you had much cooler titles. We could add the title in a similar way, depending on the amount of coalition wars played (not won, played).
  • 3x SP and improved chance of getting protocoins for CWs, Duels and Rated Team Games.


  • Agreed on everything except the return of the old TB system. This will not solve this problem in anyway or form. I guarantee to you all that if it were to return, the situation would be worse and there would be a significant loss of strategy and competitiveness. First of all, the very concept of having an immediate 50% chance of turnblocking with one unit is an instant simplification of strategy. The current system offers various alternatives to turnblocking, less probable, however diversely both tactical and technical. Currently, the delaying of transports, coastal cities, secondary sources/cities are viable options that players can attempt to successfully turnblock in accordance to a given situation. Many think it's too arduous to amount 50% of the units of the stack you want to turnblock, and that it encourages the removal of strategy. Their problem is that they're too caught up in the immediate solution to halt an enemy's movement with the initial concept of turnblocking an enemy's first movement and/or most important stack. It's true, nevertheless, that attempting this turnblock is difficult considering you must amount 50% of an enemy's stack in order to have a 50% chance of succeeding. What most don't come to realize, is that there are other ways that one can go about turnblocking an enemy. Like I mentioned earlier, you can turnblock transports, coastal cities; both initial priorities or secondary sources to an attachment stack, you can also turnblock secondary sources, or sources that will have an attachment stack accorded to them, that being if you can predetermine this action by your enemy. Lastly, you turnblock cities or stacks with 1-4 units with 1 unit and have your maximum 50% of success just like the old TB system. There's also a lot of misconceptions that several are flaunting, due to a lack of misunderstanding the system and its varieties and outcomes. The system works in priorities. For instance, there's first movement versus first movement, second versus second, third versus third and so on; equal movement priorities that is. Then, there's all the other combinations. (1v2, 2v1, 1v3, 3v1, 1v4, 4v1) (1v26, 22v5) I'm just naming a bunch of random movement combinations determining various success rates and clauses. The point is that the system we now have is much more complex and strategic in comparison to the older one. Obviously, this has resulted in several bugs, none of which are major, but that have surely troubled several of the experienced players of the game. I suggest a full report and explanation of the TB systems from the admins, and maybe even a bit of the coding, so that we can all evaluate the system in its whole, and determine the flaws, problems and so on.

    Back to your post Pulse, I agree with absolutely everything else. It would be beneficial for the game to have all of what you're suggesting. I'm pleased that you mentioned the "flower power". I agree here as well, the whole "walk through units" thing, was a bad implementation. First of all, I fail to discern the logic behind this, and it also removes strategic opportunity to the gameplay from a competitive perspective. The return of the flower power would add a lot of strategy back to the game as well as greatly enhance larger scale wars.


    No, TB's promoted prioritizing moves, which required strategy. People who were able to think out their moves and TB's more quickly were simply betters players. I don't really see the skill in this game anymore, it's just first turn expansion and then a bunch of unit spamming. The fact of the matter is that the game was much better before than it is now, and having TB's was a huge part of that. Trust me, I was against TB's because I thought they were gamebreaking, but I took them for granted. We need them back. Only then will the game actually be fun and competitive as it once was.
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    15.05.2013 у Dalmati and future
    Everything pulse said needs to be implemented. I'd definitely come back if it did and I'm sure a lot of older players would as well
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    VAGlNEER in
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    12.05.2013 у Dalmati and future
    The only reason newer players were able to beat better players was because of TB's. After the removal of them, the game became too upgrade dependent, and those with premium features and more SP had a ridiculous advantage over those who don't have premium. Back in the day, as a rank 7-8, I'd be able to beat a rank 10 often, but now it's nearly impossible*. The game is just unit spam now, so whoever has the expendable upgrades will have an unfair advantage -- yes, this was present before the "update," but the issue has multiplied in severity now. yes, I have been away from the game for a while, but that's because the game just isn't fun to me anymore because of how one-dimensional it is. mind you, I didn't even use TB's because I ran IF a lot -- in fact, TB's usually fucked me harder than others because of how dependent my strategy is on stacks, but I was able to get over it. There's little to no diversity even in the team games that I played recently, and going back to the old system will bring us back to the times when aw was actually fun and when there was actually competition. until then though, vag out PCE

    *note: this example was from back when I played, rank 10s are probably bad now, idk what the standard rank for good players is anymore
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    02.03.2013 у AW Database
    Написао VRIL, 02.03.2013 at 16:01

    This should be included in the wiki anyway. It is unnecessary to create a new website for any piece of information.


    i think it's unnecessary to talk down contributions in an aw community that has been getting less and less active as time goes on, as this is really the only valuable thing that i've seen in a while
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    Cities that regen inf should regen militia instead, 9 inf vs 8 inf makes a huge difference, 8 inf + 1 militia doesn't (as much)
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    Amok: why dont i have premium back yet
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    Написао tophat, 06.01.2013 at 16:22

    Nice one avatar. you were my 2nd choice behind Aristo

    also mfw mathdino 2nd


    exact same reaction on my part
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    Написао Hugosch, 01.01.2013 at 15:56

    Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 01.01.2013 at 13:41

    How the fuck is LDK a player of the month?

    Click to see how. There is no need to take LDK down, you are hardly online to spot how much someone is doing for AW.

    Написао VAGlNEER 2.0, 01.01.2013 at 13:41

    my vote goes to aristo

    ORLY? How unexpected...



    1) I did. Not impressed.
    2) Yeah! Surprise! I voted for the best possible candidate. How...predictable of me.
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    Написао Mathdino, 01.01.2013 at 13:54

    Haters gonna hate, VAG. It's a question of who's done most for the game, not pure skill, and I think every player of the month deserves it for one reason or another.


    i know it's not about skill, but a player of the month should be good at the game and not be a complete dbag like LDK is. just go keep my shit on topic, aristo has done by far the most for the game -- he weeded out so many of the bugs that you guys take for granted now. he didn't make some shitty map and become player of the month like that, he earned it. oh plus hes rly good
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    How the fuck is LDK a player of the month?

    my vote goes to aristo, hands down. none of the other players listed touch him in terms of skill or knowledge
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    No cos they'll just take it away COUGH
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    Написао Puzzles, 25.12.2012 at 17:17

    Написао Acquiesce, 25.12.2012 at 12:28

    This is becoming adorable. I nominate King of Cuteness, Nateballer.


    I support this, he opened my eyes to the Dalmati mod conspiracy.


    modmati was discovered by me sry
    vaglneer poty 2013
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    25.12.2012 у Openings
    Написао Pulse, 28.11.2012 at 10:09

    I wonder who still uses IF these days ;b


    dat vaglneer
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    I'll nominate fruit. not only did he lead solunae/srb during the glory days, but he was plain unbeatable and probably had the highest peak of any player (maybe ironail idk) in aw. he's created some of the most op strats (imp turkey) and even developed the turg->italy thing which is pretty mainstream now. A lot of tactics that we take for granted were pretty much created by fruit -- which is why if we're doing player of the year, i don't think there's another candiate that touches fruit.
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...
    You're kinda evading the point tik-tok, gun control will limit the flow of guns period -- whether it be to the hands of criminals or innocent citizens. We'd be limiting guns to both parties, so there'd be less need for self defense anyways. Just use a baseball bat or something if you really need to. The thing is, gun control at this point is useless, as anyone who wants to commit a crime probably already has one. And no, mathdino, the gunman wouldn't kill all of the students with a knife. That's too time consuming, and im sure one of the women would be able to stop him if he had a knife...it's just not as efficient as a gun.
    Учитавање...
    Учитавање...