Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: 4.1k arch > 3.9k arch + 1200 ATs

  1. #1

    Default 4.1k arch > 3.9k arch + 1200 ATs

    reported and erased
    Last edited by Morak; 10-30-2009 at 01:30 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Umm

    HUH? didnt you win the attack? Both sides had about the same number of archers, so the side with 1200 AT, and a decent layer of troops won the attack. There is nothing surprising here at all.

  3. #3

    Default

    I vote this thread as dumb and the title as misleading.

    The side with the AT won.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Bonnie Scotland
    Posts
    3,822

    Default

    Your title makes no sense. Perhaps you should change it to:

    3,9kar+1,2kat > 4,1kar.

    Which ofc would make sense. The numbers do indeed mean somethin'. Attack someone heavily layered with higher numbers than you and you will surely return home dead.

    Quote Originally Posted by Satan
    I said before I need to be in the top 100 players or else I won't be able to defend myself.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Ken Deathmarr View Post
    You know, I don't understand your post sometimes ok? So I take it as a mean threat.

  5. #5

    Default

    He might be one of those people that think 4 low payments of $29.99 is less than $100.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by devek View Post
    He might be one of those people that think 4 low payments of $29.99 is less than $100.
    Lol, it is isn't it?

    Jokes
    I am far cry....

    I came with nothing....

    10 years later....

    I still have nothing....

    please rep me if i helped you, or just because you like me. If you don't know how to do this click the scales at the top right of this post.


  7. #7

    Default

    The real question is why did the guy attack you, did he really think he stood a chance?

    With that being said, what are you complaining about, you won? One of the stupidest threads I've read in awhile. I guess I probably shouldn't have replied because that will just make it stick around longer. Oh well.

  8. #8

    Default

    Maybe I'm missing something here, but it appears he does have something to be upset about. A level 10 guy attacked a level 15 guy. The level 15 guy was on the defensive and look at his numerical advantages:

    34% more workers yet he lost them all
    34% more warriors yet he lost them all
    7070 more scouts with no scout losses (7071 vs. ONE)
    154 more pikemen and he lost them all (154 vs. ZERO)
    124 more swordsmen yet he lost them all (124 vs. ONE)
    411 more cavalry yet he lost them all (411 vs. ZERO)
    121 cataphracts and he lost them all (121 vs. ZERO)
    100 traps and he lost them all
    1273 AT's and he lost 38

    The only numerical advantage the attacker had (remember, a level 10) was 104 more archers. So are we expected to believe that 104 archers caused the extreme losses by the defender, even though the defender had every other advantage? Help me out if I'm really missing something obvious here, because I am new at this. So if I'm wrong, please point me in the right direction. But this seems like fuzzy math to me.

  9. #9

    Default

    We don't know the technology levels.

    The attacker could have had level 10 archery for all we know.

    Level also doesn't mean anything. A level 10 hero could have had 79 attack while the level 15 could still have had much less than that.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •