[Full] Aftermath

[Dax]

As always, the group is going as normal. Message me if you're interested - Although I will say I'm amping up the game for next round due to there being a larger group than I'm usually used to having at my disposal. So be prepared for proper attack plans, defensive perfection and a bloody good laugh!

PM if anybody is interested - And whilst I don't really care for contact, if you are intending to not be contactable then I will require a fairly hefty activity level.

 

[Dax]

Still looking for homies, as always. As above, contact is not required but activity is required if that is the case.

 

[jamesNchina]

used to having at my disposal

?? MY disposal ??

 

[Dax]

used to having at my disposal

?? MY disposal ??

Yes, unless you intend on doing all the attack/defence/setup coordination for me?

Please don't post such stupid things, James. It's not befitting of the thug lyf code of conduct.

 

[Dax]

Still taking on stragglers if anybody is stuck for a home!

 

[jamesNchina]

used to having at my disposal

?? MY disposal ??

Yes, unless you intend on doing all the attack/defence/setup coordination for me?

Please don't post such stupid things, James. It's not befitting of the thug lyf code of conduct.

nothing stupid about it.. just curious as to your possessive choice of wording.. it's almost as if you are saying your way or the highway.. not real conducive to recruiting "solo" groups... you might try recruiting and maybe do better if you offered your services to help coordinate the group versus "OWN" it.. I know for a fact there are a few solos out there this round who are every bit as good as you or even better at planning... instead of one leader in this en-devour how about 10 or more ???

 

[Spiky Spoon]

Realistically you can't call it solos any more though, as you're not. Lol

 

[Dax]

Realistically you can't call it solos any more though, as you're not. Lol

JFC these people just need to sit and think a little. I say the operative word "think" in high hopes.

 

[MattM]

In the context of the game, they'll always be solos.

That said, a 'solo group' aims to get the benefits of being in an alliance while still getting AR. Would be nice if they got some courage and actually made an alliance.

Cue whining and comments about 'I don't want to be zeroed when I'm not online' / 'I don't want to put the commitment into an alliance' etc.

It's commonly called for-the-fun. Get over it.

In my opinion solo groups are cheating the system just as much as the multis you claim to detest, Dax.

 

[CLem]

In the context of the game, they'll always be solos.

That said, a 'solo group' aims to get the benefits of being in an alliance while still getting AR. Would be nice if they got some courage and actually made an alliance.

Cue whining and comments about 'I don't want to be zeroed when I'm not online' / 'I don't want to put the commitment into an alliance' etc.

It's commonly called for-the-fun. Get over it.

In my opinion solo groups are cheating the system just as much as the multis you claim to detest, Dax.

If there is a large group of solos always attach together/ sleep mode at the same time then I can see it being an argument for cheating the system, but just wanting to hang out in a group and join in on some juicy rushes against the top alliances I would argue is not cheating.

Might sound controversial but in my opinion the 2nd tier alliances that are not contactable are better off being a solo community if their aim is more geared towards "playing aggressively" (i.e. killing and stealing) rather than "playing passively" (i.e. hanging out sharing posts on Pols, yolo defending, etc)

I've not seen how the solo group(s) is/are operating this round but this is my two cents.

 

[MattM]

To be clear I don't think cheating the system is the same as cheating. Perhaps a poor choice of words.

I dislike it in the same way that I dislike time-wasting by the corner flag in football. Sure it's within the rules, but it isn't cricket.

 

[Dax]

Well first of all, I run the rank 3 alliance with a bunch of frankly fantastic individuals.

Second of all, even if I were solo I pride myself on never using sleep mode (in fact this applies to any of my gameplay). I solo'd for 4 rounds consistently, using no sleep mode and a South African and American PNAP. I personally don't understand your hostility, but Clem is bang on the money - Solo allows for more laid back individuals to have more fun than being bashed in a casual alliance.

I'd respond to James, but frankly his point is plain-faced retarded. " YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO CLAIM LEADERSHIP OVER OTHER PEOPLE, BLAH BLAH BLAH." Well I am, actually. So stick that in your tobacco pipe, chap.

 

[MattM]

A simple change of title, and the whole context of the thread is taken away!

Might sound controversial but in my opinion the 2nd tier alliances that are not contactable are better off being a solo community if their aim is more geared towards "playing aggressively" (i.e. killing and stealing) rather than "playing passively" (i.e. hanging out sharing posts on Pols, yolo defending, etc)

You might be right. Personally, I prefer a defensive game to an offensive one, so perhaps that's why I am a fan of comatose alliances

I'd respond to James, but frankly his point is plain-faced retarded. " YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO CLAIM LEADERSHIP OVER OTHER PEOPLE, BLAH BLAH BLAH." Well I am, actually. So stick that in your tobacco pipe, chap.

In the context of when this was a post about a solo group (which it was when James posted), his comments are not retarded. In fact they made sense. In terms of an alliance, though, a strong leader making decisions, planning and dishing out some orders is a good thing!

 

[Dax]

Sorry, I left a tiny bit out about my solo experience: I never contact my PNAPs. I never did, as I cannot call out of this country on my contract. So, next move regarding how scummy solo play is? It's not my fault nobody can attack me or my PNAPs properly, it's yours?

 

[Asmodeous]

Looks like the last word is MINE!