Earth: 2025 Talk

Earth: 2025 Talk / Alliance Talk / Missles as retals??

Back 20 Messages

Bass Master
New Member Jul 1st 11:34 AM
What is the verdict gtoing to be? somme people get nailed with a missles as a retal and let it go other says that is a death sentence can everyone clear it up please.

So many clans so many different retal policies..

Can't there just be 1 for everyone??

Mercury
Member Jul 2nd 6:13 AM
Since we are on the missel subject... Small clans here is one you should try more often. Don't you get tired of seeing those same major alliances ranked in the top 10 with all that land? Send them a missel and take the retal.

Now let's have some fun. Let's make a list of everyone that refuses to take a missel.

Jove
Member Jul 2nd 7:09 AM
Is it acceptable that 2 missiles sent for a retal
while the first one is failed?

OLD PLAYER
New Member Jul 2nd 7:12 AM
MISSILES for retals????
Why do you think All the big Alliances dont want this???

Well would you want to change a rule that allowed you to farm lower ranked countries, and make it all but impossible for them to RETAL back?????? IMHO I feel that Land Grabs are attacks on you... and you have the right to defend yourself in what ever way is available to you.Last time I looked there were a lot more little guys than the top guys... They cant fight everyone at the same time.

The NO MISSILES for Retals Policy only benefits the Big Alliances!

Mercury
Member Jul 2nd 7:23 AM
Jove retals must be kept 1:1. That second missle is an over retal.

Old Player I agree but the alliance I belong to has been here forever and we have always accepted any type of attack for a retal as long as it's 1:1.

Sabe
New Member Jul 2nd 9:13 AM
Probably the reason why people don't like missile retals are because they waste land, and the retaler doesn't gain anything from it. But that is so obviously wrong. If he doesn't retal, he's probably going to get hit if he/his alliance is incapable of retaling. Missile retals will probably cause however LGs him to think twice.

dragan
Member Jul 2nd 9:25 AM
to those lazyares who like to bottom feed, gear up your SDI or prepare to get retal by missiles!

Cornholio M4D
New Member Jul 2nd 9:37 AM
The way I see this.
It SHOULD be allowed... i mean, as people say, when someone is even only 2 times bigger than u, how is it possible to retal?
Its not!
Missiles are the only way.
I dont use them however, as I wouldnt like to provoke someone to start a war.
If they were a part of the game (as they should be, because the person doesnt lose much more land than a successful retal) then i would use my missiles for retals.
The only problem then is, if we get into a war, what am i gonna use to hit my enemies with?
I think that it is part of the game. Missiles are just another war weapon.

Simon
Member Jul 2nd 10:28 AM
Sabe, you r argument is simple to rebut and i have done it many times. A RETAL IS NOT MEANT TO GET BACK WHAT YOU LOST. IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO DETER YOUR ATTACKER FROM ATTACKING YOU AND YOUR MEMBERS IN THE FUTURE!!!!!!!!!

X Men
New Member Jul 2nd 10:34 AM
Since some ppl want missiles as retal why not make it this way like 1 missiles for two attack 1:2 and the missiles must be a sucessful one so there must be no complain on both side since the attacker is in the wrong first to double tap some one smaller.

Anyway benito sucks!!!

Diocletian
Member Jul 2nd 11:57 AM
I am amused when people say things like this:

"It SHOULD be allowed... i mean, as people say, when someone is even only 2 times bigger than u, how is it possible to retal?
Its not!
Missiles are the only way."

The whole PURPOSE of bottomfeeding is to hit those who are incapable of hitting back. That's the way the big alliances get lots of land in this game. It's pretty ridiculous for people to come on here and whine about how missiles should be allowed because it's the only way for a weak country in a weak clan to retaliate. I mean, that's the whole reason why alliances DON'T accept missiles as retals. Take away their only retaliation option and they are easy pickins.

Now don't give me any sad stories about how bad we should feel for the little guy because he is farmed by the big alliances and has no way of retaling. The big alliances earned theirs spot in this game. Nobody gets a free ride to the top.

Al Man
Member 0th 12:00 AM
I am lost Dio, so do you agree Missiles are ok, or are you saying that Big alliances put a lot of time making their alliance as big and they should not worry about Missiles?

And as my God Mercury said, I think as long as you keep it 1:1 , a small country should be able to send Any Type of attack back!!

And please spare us the "but the small country does not gain anything by retaliating with a missile or a speciality attack" ..oh really!? And if you care so much for the little guy, why dont you donate 200 tanks per acre everytime you land grab a small country and spare him the efforts of sending you a missile or an AB?

Diocletian
Member 0th 12:00 AM
I have nothing against missile retals from a morality perspective.

The weak will be exploited by the strong. That's the way it goes. The strong make the rules to favor the strong. Missile retals favor the weak. That's why most alliances don't accept missile retals.

If the weak don't like the fact that they are being exploited by the strong, the answer is not to retal with missiles (and get their butts kicked by the strong) but rather to work on becoming strong themselves.

Aplomado BU
Member 0th 12:00 AM
I would agree that the weak will be exploited by the strong, that's the way things go. Might makes right. Since smaller alliances or clans are unable to put up a fight against the larger alliances, they must submit to their rules.

However, I think missile retals should be allowed, from a fairness perspective. Small countries should have some way to defend themselves. The fact that big alliances do not allow them to do this is unethical. Heck, it's a wonder they let them retal at all.

Of course it's not going to change. But I can still b1tch about it. :-D

"Simma down nah!"

Al Man
Member 0th 12:00 AM
Kua dan nah Aplomado BU,

I think everything could be changed, we just need to voice our opinion more and let others know how unfair it is :)

Aplomado BU
Member 0th 12:00 AM
Hey, Al-Man, let's just simma down nah, OK!! Simma down nah!!!

Al Man
Member 0th 12:00 AM
ok, now I will start doing the part where others will hate!!

Which alliance allow Missiles .. Which one does not?

The ones I know of.
Allow:
SOL
UCN
Revolution
RuM

Anymore who allow or do NOT allow?

Al Man
Member Jul 2nd 1:23 PM
ok, it seems like nobody wants to say who does not allow, I can start that :)

Does not allow:
LaF
PoW
Avengers

anymore??

Al Man
Member Jul 2nd 3:39 PM
ttt

Land
New Member Jul 3rd 12:00 AM
A missle, whereas a no-win LG, is useless. There is no reason for missles, *or earthquakes for that matter* to be in the game, except to get some revenge by simply distroying some stuff. That's why I'd rather LG than missle. That's my say on it though.

Land

Back 20 Messages

Bass Master New Member	Jul 1st 11:34 AM What is the verdict gtoing to be? somme people get nailed with a missles as a retal and let it go other says that is a death sentence can everyone clear it up please. So many clans so many different retal policies.. Can't there just be 1 for everyone??
Mercury Member	Jul 2nd 6:13 AM Since we are on the missel subject... Small clans here is one you should try more often. Don't you get tired of seeing those same major alliances ranked in the top 10 with all that land? Send them a missel and take the retal. Now let's have some fun. Let's make a list of everyone that refuses to take a missel.
Jove Member	Jul 2nd 7:09 AM Is it acceptable that 2 missiles sent for a retal while the first one is failed?
OLD PLAYER New Member	Jul 2nd 7:12 AM MISSILES for retals???? Why do you think All the big Alliances dont want this??? Well would you want to change a rule that allowed you to farm lower ranked countries, and make it all but impossible for them to RETAL back?????? IMHO I feel that Land Grabs are attacks on you... and you have the right to defend yourself in what ever way is available to you.Last time I looked there were a lot more little guys than the top guys... They cant fight everyone at the same time. The NO MISSILES for Retals Policy only benefits the Big Alliances!
Mercury Member	Jul 2nd 7:23 AM Jove retals must be kept 1:1. That second missle is an over retal. Old Player I agree but the alliance I belong to has been here forever and we have always accepted any type of attack for a retal as long as it's 1:1.
Sabe New Member	Jul 2nd 9:13 AM Probably the reason why people don't like missile retals are because they waste land, and the retaler doesn't gain anything from it. But that is so obviously wrong. If he doesn't retal, he's probably going to get hit if he/his alliance is incapable of retaling. Missile retals will probably cause however LGs him to think twice.
dragan Member	Jul 2nd 9:25 AM to those lazyares who like to bottom feed, gear up your SDI or prepare to get retal by missiles!
Cornholio M4D New Member	Jul 2nd 9:37 AM The way I see this. It SHOULD be allowed... i mean, as people say, when someone is even only 2 times bigger than u, how is it possible to retal? Its not! Missiles are the only way. I dont use them however, as I wouldnt like to provoke someone to start a war. If they were a part of the game (as they should be, because the person doesnt lose much more land than a successful retal) then i would use my missiles for retals. The only problem then is, if we get into a war, what am i gonna use to hit my enemies with? I think that it is part of the game. Missiles are just another war weapon.
Simon Member	Jul 2nd 10:28 AM Sabe, you r argument is simple to rebut and i have done it many times. A RETAL IS NOT MEANT TO GET BACK WHAT YOU LOST. IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO DETER YOUR ATTACKER FROM ATTACKING YOU AND YOUR MEMBERS IN THE FUTURE!!!!!!!!!
X Men New Member	Jul 2nd 10:34 AM Since some ppl want missiles as retal why not make it this way like 1 missiles for two attack 1:2 and the missiles must be a sucessful one so there must be no complain on both side since the attacker is in the wrong first to double tap some one smaller. Anyway benito sucks!!!
Diocletian Member	Jul 2nd 11:57 AM I am amused when people say things like this: "It SHOULD be allowed... i mean, as people say, when someone is even only 2 times bigger than u, how is it possible to retal? Its not! Missiles are the only way." The whole PURPOSE of bottomfeeding is to hit those who are incapable of hitting back. That's the way the big alliances get lots of land in this game. It's pretty ridiculous for people to come on here and whine about how missiles should be allowed because it's the only way for a weak country in a weak clan to retaliate. I mean, that's the whole reason why alliances DON'T accept missiles as retals. Take away their only retaliation option and they are easy pickins. Now don't give me any sad stories about how bad we should feel for the little guy because he is farmed by the big alliances and has no way of retaling. The big alliances earned theirs spot in this game. Nobody gets a free ride to the top.
Al Man Member	0th 12:00 AM I am lost Dio, so do you agree Missiles are ok, or are you saying that Big alliances put a lot of time making their alliance as big and they should not worry about Missiles? And as my God Mercury said, I think as long as you keep it 1:1 , a small country should be able to send Any Type of attack back!! And please spare us the "but the small country does not gain anything by retaliating with a missile or a speciality attack" ..oh really!? And if you care so much for the little guy, why dont you donate 200 tanks per acre everytime you land grab a small country and spare him the efforts of sending you a missile or an AB?
Diocletian Member	0th 12:00 AM I have nothing against missile retals from a morality perspective. The weak will be exploited by the strong. That's the way it goes. The strong make the rules to favor the strong. Missile retals favor the weak. That's why most alliances don't accept missile retals. If the weak don't like the fact that they are being exploited by the strong, the answer is not to retal with missiles (and get their butts kicked by the strong) but rather to work on becoming strong themselves.
Aplomado BU Member	0th 12:00 AM I would agree that the weak will be exploited by the strong, that's the way things go. Might makes right. Since smaller alliances or clans are unable to put up a fight against the larger alliances, they must submit to their rules. However, I think missile retals should be allowed, from a fairness perspective. Small countries should have some way to defend themselves. The fact that big alliances do not allow them to do this is unethical. Heck, it's a wonder they let them retal at all. Of course it's not going to change. But I can still b1tch about it. :-D "Simma down nah!"
Al Man Member	0th 12:00 AM Kua dan nah Aplomado BU, I think everything could be changed, we just need to voice our opinion more and let others know how unfair it is :)
Aplomado BU Member	0th 12:00 AM Hey, Al-Man, let's just simma down nah, OK!! Simma down nah!!!
Al Man Member	0th 12:00 AM ok, now I will start doing the part where others will hate!! Which alliance allow Missiles .. Which one does not? The ones I know of. Allow: SOL UCN Revolution RuM Anymore who allow or do NOT allow?
Al Man Member	Jul 2nd 1:23 PM ok, it seems like nobody wants to say who does not allow, I can start that :) Does not allow: LaF PoW Avengers anymore??
Al Man Member	Jul 2nd 3:39 PM ttt
Land New Member	Jul 3rd 12:00 AM A missle, whereas a no-win LG, is useless. There is no reason for missles, or earthquakes for that matter to be in the game, except to get some revenge by simply distroying some stuff. That's why I'd rather LG than missle. That's my say on it though. Land