Evening

setorines

Guest
That is the funniest thing I have read on the forums for some time.

From a superior position you would deliberately use a strategy that you expect to fail :icon_rolleyes:...
Yes, I think I would in fact send a train if I were trying to take a village. What do you do? Send a noble 20 times and hope they don't backtime you instead of cutting your train and back-timing you? I mean do you know how stupid your argument is?
 

Tata Steel

Guest
So now that every player in the world can use p2w for free, how is there an unfair advantage?
Players cannot use p2w features for free. The definition of free (in the context you're using) is: without cost or payment (or along those lines).

And yes i'm aware that in order to get PP to start with your growth might be slowed slightly at first due to resource selling, but in late game those resources become insignificant if you farm correctly.
Why do you assume that you will reach the late game? Whilst you're selling resources for pps, the player that is using p2w features (whom already has a far better developed village and more troops than you) is continuing to go further ahead.

I know certain people will still argue that not having to farm for PP at the start is an advantage, so i'll point out that every single player can create a village on another world and farm PP to use here, so where is the disadvantage if it's completely equal for everyone? The size of your wallet is no longer a factor, and as such the game is no longer unbalanced as i agree it was before the market update.
The fact you're willing to play a world purely to harvest pp's; in order to use them to gain an advantage in future p2w worlds, proves my point that: p2w features give an ingame advantage.

If people can't accept the truth of these facts then i give up with this topic and leave you to all to argue in peace.
Persons; do not and should not, need to accept arguments based on a fallacious line of reasoning as being true.

Yes, I think I would in fact send a train if I were trying to take a village. What do you do? Send a noble 20 times and hope they don't backtime you instead of cutting your train and back-timing you? I mean do you know how stupid your argument is?
The point I was making is why would someone follow a strategy that they knew was going to fail?

Lets also not forget this is from a superior position, you have a better developed village and more troops than your opponent. Therefore: literally any other strategy that doesn't involve your nobles getting sniped and your offensive units annihilated (from a backtime), would be better than the strategy you intended to follow. It is strategic stupidity of the highest order to follow such a course of action.
 
Last edited by a moderator: