Raging Tide's TW Report - Week 38

Shamoke - Raging Tide wrote: »

It's safe to assume Bware is going to be bidding on us from now until the season ends. We are bidding to sustain lands for the rest of the season. How long have you been doing TW, DirtySouth? The logic seems pretty simple to me but I guess I don't see it from your side. We like the wars vs Bware. It doesn't mean we're going to straight up attack them every week and not gain any lands for the sake of long wars, especially if we're already expecting one without having to bid for it.

As I've said before TW vs Bware is more preferable than rolling and getting wined by factions who have no business being on the map. But they're there taking up territories they can't keep. I don't see how it's a flaw in our faction that they happen to be adjacent to our lands.

Firstly, the logic of giving up one fun TW a day on a different time than the one you are expecting anyways is flawed. Why want to not have fun in a game? Not to mention you can practice more to then beat the opposing faction and stand a better chance, improve personal skills and faction teamwork so you can know what to expect the next war and have plenty of time. Boring TWs are indeed boring, why play a game to be bored?

Sustaining lands for the season...Ok, I'll buy that. Still facing Bware more means you can study them for next season, if you two factions have fun then keep doing it. A friendly rivalry is good and this game needs more friendly people/factions.

"Wined by factions that have no business being on the map" Who are you to decide that? Any faction of any people that want to do any TW have business being on the map. As for taking up territories you can't keep, sounds a lot like Levi vs Bware to me, of course we can't uphold our lands as brilliantly as other factions, we're still powering up, this is extremely hypocritical of you. You really could have made other valid arguments but these are just self centered egotistical BS excuses.

Example, maybe you expected a good fight from us? or to measure us up? Valid reason. Wanted more lands to gain money (as you said) was indeed valid. Trying to get to a strategical point on the map? Valid. My point is, your reasons are ridiculous. I don't personally care that levi took a land, nor do I care if it continues, but for the love of god, provide a reason that isn't complete garbage.

Jenisky - Raging Tide wrote: »

Hm... You kind of answered this.



All of these are valid reasons. Thank you for listing them for us.

I'm sorry (and this is not directed only at you, Sae), but I'm really not understanding what is making our sole bid on Vertu such a big deal on this forum. Vicious, for example, is taking a land from us every week and it's a pretty quick fight, if we show up at all. They've been ganking us every week with Bware. Isn't that the same thing? Sure, we don't like it, but we haven't been complaining. We haven't been demanding "legitimate reasons." We know the reasons. It's to improve land count.

That's it. Let's be real.

We already expect one really good fight every weekend, and 2 decently long fights in one day is too much. We did it a few times, but it burns me out and I know I'm not alone in thinking that. It's a completely wasted Saturday. Even if we were winning against Bware in these fights, if they were 3h consistently, I don't think we'd be bidding if we could expect a bid from them.

Vertu, I'm sorry that you were victim to one of our bids. LEGIONES, I'm sorry you're right next to us. Maybe we will start bidding on Bware again once in a while. And before you know it, map will reset again and we will have the same thing all over again on a larger scale: stronger factions taking out little ones until the little ones are off the map, and the strongest remain on it.

I'm not upset we got attacked, just what shamoke said was uncalled for and irked me quite a bit. To expect to be left completely untouched by all factions is ludicrous, It's like I say, if you set yourself up to be attacked in PK, NW, or TW, then expect to be attacked respectively.