It's official: RAM are DOOMED!

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser44039

Guest
1 target means loss of troops. Its always good to not fall for bait and go for them charging. Divide and conquer!

:icon_eek:
no no no lol u are all bad karmaX
tribe A has 60 villages
Tribe B has 40 villages
Tribe C has 30 villages

Example 1
Tribe A its at war with both tribe B and C

Tribe A decides to ¨charge¨(as u said) on tribe B....
Tribe A rebuild troops
Tribe A charge on Tribe C

Results:
conquered vills on tribe B: 10-5(retakes and operations of enemy tribe)
conquered vills on tribe C: 15-4 (retakes and operations of enemy tribe)


Example 2
Tribe A decides to start nobling both tribes B and C randomly

Results:
Conquered vills on tribe A: 5-7(retakes and operations of enemy tribe)
Conquered vills on tribe B: 7-6(retakes and operations of enemy tribe)

¨Charging¨ at one tribe as a time increase effectiveness and conquered villages in a war for the tribe that its ¨charging¨

This is just an example and have nothing to do with the actual war...
 

KarmaX

Guest
Well there might be cases on how the situations are. If someone is stacked and baiting then its kinda stupid to go after them and lose. Plus RAM is a big tribe and its funny and stupid to go all out on 1 target. Anyways, keep running North boy! U seem to be doing good nobling villages in the NORTH. You can run but you can't escape :p
 

DeletedUser44039

Guest
Well there might be cases on how the situations are. If someone is stacked and baiting then its kinda stupid to go after them and lose. Plus RAM is a big tribe and its funny and stupid to go all out on 1 target. Anyways, keep running North boy! U seem to be doing good nobling villages in the NORTH. You can run but you can't escape :p

im not running neither escaping, its just that would be a noob move to start sending random attacks to RAM with an account destroyed, just wait a bit till i fully rebuild the account and u will see :)
 

KarmaX

Guest
Yes, old friend. I hope to see you fully back in shape and exchange some fun battle. We at RAM accept any fun battle challenges and make sure you have fun.. !
 

DeletedUser

Guest
To: KarmaX and Irizkyr
From: Cy-Pres
Re: Targets

I am assuming both of your statements relate to a tribe target, and not an individual targeted player in an enemy tribe?

If so, I was wonder what both of your thoughts were as to this:


Scenario 1: Tribe A's Players 1-50 attacks Tribe B's Players 51-80. (AKA Tribewide Assault on Most of Enemy.)

Would it make a difference of the makeup of Players 51-80? Would you target most active, most important, least active/easy kills, closest to strategic position, a combination?



Scenario 2: Tribe A's Players 1-50 attacks Tribe B's 51-60. (AKA Tribewide Assault on Select Enemy.)

Again, same questions as above.



Scenario 3: Tribe A's Players 1-10 attacks B's 51-60; 11-20 attacks 61-70, etc. (AKA Mass Battle Group Attacks.)

In this scenario, would the Battle Groups attempt to attack simultaneously (not those inside each Battle Group, but every battle group launching on their respective targets at once)?



Scenario 4: Tribe A's Players 1-10 attacks 51; 11-20 attacks 52, etc. (AKA Concentrated Battle Group Attacks.)

Same follow-up question as for Scenario 3.


Obviously, we are assuming several factors as well - like massive fake nukes and fake trains, etc.

Any thoughts?
 

DeletedUser44039

Guest
To: KarmaX and Irizkyr
From: Cy-Pres
Re: Targets

I am assuming both of your statements relate to a tribe target, and not an individual targeted player in an enemy tribe?

If so, I was wonder what both of your thoughts were as to this:


Scenario 1: Tribe A's Players 1-50 attacks Tribe B's Players 51-80. (AKA Tribewide Assault on Most of Enemy.)

Would it make a difference of the makeup of Players 51-80? Would you target most active, most important, least active/easy kills, closest to strategic position, a combination?



Scenario 2: Tribe A's Players 1-50 attacks Tribe B's 51-60. (AKA Tribewide Assault on Select Enemy.)

Again, same questions as above.



Scenario 3: Tribe A's Players 1-10 attacks B's 51-60; 11-20 attacks 61-70, etc. (AKA Mass Battle Group Attacks.)

In this scenario, would the Battle Groups attempt to attack simultaneously (not those inside each Battle Group, but every battle group launching on their respective targets at once)?



Scenario 4: Tribe A's Players 1-10 attacks 51; 11-20 attacks 52, etc. (AKA Concentrated Battle Group Attacks.)

Same follow-up question as for Scenario 3.


Obviously, we are assuming several factors as well - like massive fake nukes and fake trains, etc.

Any thoughts?

Scenario 1: i dont fully understand your question here (sorry im a mexican noob :p) but i would definitely target players in an strategic position, being those players active or not,

Scenario 2:same as scenario 1

Scenario 3: i would prefer all the battle groups launch on their respective targets at the same time/day, but it depends a lot of your own strategy... by this i mean

You can launch first a fake operation on a target with some nobles to make the OP look like a real one, of course the enemy tribe will start moving support troops

1 day later the battle groups start with their own operations...

What is the advantage of this??

Enemy tribe will have less support sending to the real targets, and with this the operation will be more effective.

But again there are a lot of strategies you can use, but it depends on the situation in which u are
 

KarmaX

Guest
When when your enemy is a noob like SFC, you take your time, drink some beer and send nukes where the target villages stands with a big welcoming party and let them march with no resistance. Maybe you're telling from a small tribe perspective but its useless to do tribewide fakes and nukes on SFC aka dairyboy and if you don't know what we were talking about then it think it was pretty stupid for you to jump in the debate. Anyways bro, you seem to be having fun, go on with it.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Was that last post directed at me or Iriz, KarmaX? If me, I wasn't trying to jump in the debate, I was asking what both of you thought about an overall strategy against a full tribe, not a one-man tribe like SFC.
 

KarmaX

Guest
Was that last post directed at me or Iriz, KarmaX? If me, I wasn't trying to jump in the debate, I was asking what both of you thought about an overall strategy against a full tribe, not a one-man tribe like SFC.

Sry it was against Iriz!
 

DeletedUser44039

Guest
Sry it was against Iriz!

:icon_eek: ohh really?? lol i thought it was to Cy :p

my post wasnt directed specifically to the SFC
i was just giving my opinion to Cy
thats why we are using incognits like tribe A or tribe B right?? :lol:
 

DeletedUser71961

Guest
lets not all forget SFC deleted his account about a week ago.
 

Michael Wittman

Guest
after telling ram he was going to kick there ass with his uber skills
 

DeletedUser71844

Guest
I deleted my account before RAM took any villages.
It was 5-0 to me when I deleted so...
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Yeah, yeah you're the best that ever played. 5-0... You're such a big deal. We are lucky you deleted!
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Yeah, yeah you're the best that ever played. 5-0... You're such a big deal. We are lucky you deleted!

Hey give him credit, He did what most of us wouldn't..... quit while he was on top.

Now he has the excuse to why he failed.
 

DeletedUser71844

Guest
How can it be called a failure when I CHOSE to delete? I CHOSE to delete after winning 5-0. The fact that you may or may not have killed me is irrelevant.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I wish I had half the courage you have big guy. You are so impressive that I think I will create a fan club for you :icon_wink:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
How can it be called a failure when I CHOSE to delete? I CHOSE to delete after winning 5-0. The fact that you may or may not have killed me is irrelevant.

Damn you won 5-0, Karma you might as well hit disband tribe since we lost.:icon_rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top