Retal Rule

[Iamsmart]

why does everybody ignore me when i make a serious post

 

[atsanjose]

blabla?

blabla

blabla

So you believe something in bushtarion should be so easy to gain money with no risk?

like harvesting planting and selling plants?

 

[Iamsmart]

Weather, DUH!

 

[penguin]

I think the retal could be lowered, but shouldn't be completely removed.
The reasoning: I do agree with points made by willymychillybily, webvictom, atsanjose, and a couple of others, and I do agree with points made by Cheese, Silence, DaX, Wouter and a few others.
There should be more of a risk of adren rushing top players, the risk being a retal, but if you remove that entirely (rank 1 can retal the lowest rank), I think that would be mad. I am looking at the lowest score possible because it can happen. It may or may not happen either way it goes, someone adren rushing, or the person being adren rushed retaling.
On the other hand: I don't think it's fair that top players can completely kill lower ranked players because of an adren rush. Simply because the higher ranked player (who usually has over 15k land a round) can get his/her troops back faster than someone who has 200 land - the one with the lower land's time is exponentially greater than the person with 15k+ land.
For Ex: I would send 1m harriers to a higher ranked player. I may kill some of his troops, but not much if I do. If he retal's me and I'm (let's say 2%) 2% of him/her, he/she could kill all my troops + those 1m harriers.
From that example, for the higher ranked player to gain back those (I'll say 1m, although it isn't realistic, unless they were INN) 1m troops that were killed would probably be as simple as waiting a couple of bush days to plant, then buy his/her troops up while I would sit there and wait for weeks to gain my staff back and not even at full force.
I agree that it would prove a lesson, but I think that's taking it too extreme.

Just my opinions and justifications - I don't really mind what happens with it.

 

[atsanjose]

Just my opinions and justifications - I don't really mind what happens with it.

you dont?

YOU DONT?

:/:/:/:/:/

but think about all the newbies who dont know what theyre doing and send theyre entire mob of hips, yobs and flak to rank 1 and get 11111111111ziljon right back at them,
tbh, everyone who agrees with the idea to remove it is batchipscrazy

.

 

[penguin]

Just my opinions and justifications - I don't really mind what happens with it.

you dont?

YOU DONT?

:/:/:/:/:/

but think about all the newbies who dont know what theyre doing and send theyre entire mob of hips, yobs and flak to rank 1 and get 11111111111ziljon right back at them,
tbh, everyone who agrees with the idea to remove it is batchipscrazy

.

Well, I would prefer it to only drop from 5% over the retal being taken away for good.
And I would prefer it to stay over the retal percentage lowering from 5%.
--If you would like my justifications behind those reasonings, please - read my prior post.

But if it were to change, I'm sure there would be reasoning behind Azzer's change, legit reasoning.

 

[Dax]

Just my opinions and justifications - I don't really mind what happens with it.

you dont?

YOU DONT?

:/:/:/:/:/

but think about all the newbies who dont know what theyre doing and send theyre entire mob of hips, yobs and flak to rank 1 and get 11111111111ziljon right back at them,
tbh, everyone who agrees with the idea to remove it is batchipscrazy

.

My point was to simply remove the entire idea. It's not encouraged anything but allowing huge players to send insanely huge mobs to people that can't defend it. Risk? Yes. Possible annihilation and land loss for using a new implement to keep top players occupied? No.
I got hit for 30b losses to like 6m RPG, but it doesn't make me cry. I didn't retal because it simply isn't worth the time of day. That person has just made some much needed growing cash, for 40 minutes of seed gathering for me.

 

[Jonny]

Just wanted to mention that anyone arguing that retals should be possible below 5% because "nothing should be without risk" is not arguing correctly in my opinion. I mean, what could be connected with less risk than attacking someone below 5%? It seems arguments only function when they help you? Or am I missing something? Maybe your suggestion is to allow retals below 5%, with the detail, that retals allways involve a risk that the gov will send help 1second before the first BR calculation. In that case your reasoning isnt so bad after all, otherwise...

 

[timtadams]

i think you may be missing something, then again, it may just be me...

The problem is people attack at 20 times their score, and send for example, RPGs to attack robo. They do damage and make a killing in bounty, which usually covers their losses. The thing is, that it is garunteed return, and their is no risk as the target is too large to retal. Hence the argument, there is no risk involved for the attacker.

Maybe you already got this, but i couldnt tell from your post, sorry if thats the case.

And Gov def doesnt come 1 second before the BR. They come when attacking for 3. The attacker has the whole 10 minutes to recall

 

[Davs]

i think you may be missing something, then again, it may just be me...

The problem is people attack at 20 times their score, and send for example, RPGs to attack robo. They do damage and make a killing in bounty, which usually covers their losses. The thing is, that it is garunteed return, and their is no risk as the target is too large to retal. Hence the argument, there is no risk involved for the attacker.

Maybe you already got this, but i couldnt tell from your post, sorry if thats the case.

And Gov def doesnt come 1 second before the BR. They come when attacking for 3. The attacker has the whole 10 minutes to recall

I think his point was that saying "nothing should be without risk" should include the person being rushed if they're then able to retal on someone who's less than 5% of their score. I can't see any sign of risk to the player being rushed at that point...

 

[Alcibiades]

Well if the top rank want the retal limit lowered then I want the retal to be fundamentally unprofitable. Instant HUGE honour loss. And something under 1% landgrab. Totally ridiculous that you guys want to remove the retal.

As has been mentioned already, if someone "abuses" the free bounty rule, they'll eventually grow into range, one way or another and then you'll have your opportunity to run a train on them. Grow the **** up.

 

[pinpower]

Well if the top rank want the retal limit lowered then I want the retal to be fundamentally unprofitable. Instant HUGE honour loss. And something under 1% landgrab. Totally ridiculous that you guys want to remove the retal.

As has been mentioned already, if someone "abuses" the free bounty rule, they'll eventually grow into range, one way or another and then you'll have your opportunity to run a train on them. Grow the **** up.

Just realised I haven't replied to this thread so yeah, just to say once again completely agree with everything Alci says.

 

[Dax]

Well if the top rank want the retal limit lowered then I want the retal to be fundamentally unprofitable. Instant HUGE honour loss. And something under 1% landgrab. Totally ridiculous that you guys want to remove the retal.

As has been mentioned already, if someone "abuses" the free bounty rule, they'll eventually grow into range, one way or another and then you'll have your opportunity to run a train on them. Grow the **** up.

Just realised I haven't replied to this thread so yeah, just to say once again completely agree with everything Alci says.

This. He pretty much summed up my point with more insulting vocabulary. Kudos.

 

[Walking_Death]

Lower it to 3%. Now close this thread. It gives me false hope that someone will read my threads

 

[dave]

And Gov def doesnt come 1 second before the BR. They come when attacking for 3. The attacker has the whole 10 minutes to recall

whats unfair about that?

 

[Dax]

And Gov def doesnt come 1 second before the BR. They come when attacking for 3. The attacker has the whole 10 minutes to recall

whats unfair about that?

I think that was his point.

 

[dave]

And Gov def doesnt come 1 second before the BR. They come when attacking for 3. The attacker has the whole 10 minutes to recall

whats unfair about that?

I think that was his point.

haha your know me bruv. was i really gunna read more than a few posts

i assumed he was moaning sorry.