Jul 23rd 2010, 16:53:28
eh, I'm a big fan of the idea that you should play the game you want to play it (assuming it's within the rules, of course).
If you want to war--war.
If you want to try to compete for the #1 spot--find what strategy is going to work the best and use it and do everything in your power to avoid suiciders and play that strategy well.
If you're against land-trading/self-farming, play each country to the best of your abilities, and consider it a competition against yourself.
I personally don't think llaar's strategy is anything all that impressive, but the outcome was. Before I get attacked for that, what I mean is, had I come up with the idea and attempted to have done what llaar did, I believe I could have finished in the top 5 or at least top 10 myself. Could I have done what llaar did? Probably not. However, instead of whining about it, I'm just gonna keep playing the game I want to play it.
It's more fun for me to play what I consider to be a more traditional strategy and compete against my personal bests. Crying about what llaar did will neither stop him, nor benefit anyone.
Heck, if nothing else, the amusing thing about llaar's strategy this last set is it's far more transparent than any other attempt to create a monster country. When someone does a buyout, the casual player can't watch how it happened, and learn step-by-step just by watching the news. Same with an FA-chain (even though it's more obvious, you still can't see the evidence of it just by watching the news).
With llaar's strategy, if you're curious how he did it, all you have to do is look up the news and you've got the vast majority of the strategy.
So if you want to try to finish #1, check his news and replicate. If not, why cry about it? It's just not productive.