DeletedUser
Guest
My tactic has always been to shoot down my largest neighbour, in the long run it's more cost effective, geographically sound since you're expanding into your closest threat, strategical since they'll be weaker, logical since you'll only widen the gap between you and your close rivals.
What i said was that it's for those incapable of taking a decent village of an enemy with their nobles, either through their own fault or not the only reason behind nobling a low barb is being unable to noble anything bigger.
Hoang Nghiem did the same on W3.co.uk i believe, he/she's an extreme case, perhaps done for safety but fortune favours the bold and the risk/reward of taking a red not a grey is clearly worth it judging by looking at the top players of all the worlds.
if we're simply to expand taking barbs like smiththefitter then where's the fun?
What i said was that it's for those incapable of taking a decent village of an enemy with their nobles, either through their own fault or not the only reason behind nobling a low barb is being unable to noble anything bigger.
Hoang Nghiem did the same on W3.co.uk i believe, he/she's an extreme case, perhaps done for safety but fortune favours the bold and the risk/reward of taking a red not a grey is clearly worth it judging by looking at the top players of all the worlds.
if we're simply to expand taking barbs like smiththefitter then where's the fun?