Mar 7th 2012, 16:46:31
Originally posted by KingKaosKnows:
There is no risk for land trading? Lol
Hanlong pro tip:
What do you think is more costly? Having enough Tanks/turrets to avoid hits of countries that are 10 times more smaller than you and having maxed SDI, or hits that HAVE to bypass your defences to work, that means that for every 2800 ghost acres that you get, you have to rebuild 7000 buildings.
Go and run your numbers because the cash and turns needed are obscene and well over the billions, if you factor in douche hits the risk is even greater because your capabilities to defend yourself are diminished by the fact that you spent most of your cash rebuilding.
Bottomfeeding factors "luck" not risk, because if you do it right you hardly get hit, a stray missile may get in once in a bluemoon but usually that won't happen, not to mention that is public knowledge a few untaggeds are actually multies, but that is another thing.
Hanlong if you want to feel how ridiculous are the building cost, go to your building page, pick the cost per building and multiply it for 10000 acres, THAT is the cost of 3000 acres, and let's not factor the CS/military/Oil lost, and with that clearly you will see why bottomfeeding will always be stronger as long as there are enough good targets and you play smart you will always be ahead, if sets where much longer then yeah land trading would be much stronger because the gains get progressively better while bottomfeeding isn't (well I guess if your country is 10 times bigger than what most clans can muster then you would probably be able to bottomfeed small clans like ICN, but that is another thing.
Land trading isn't as easy as you want to make it to be, bottomfeeding is much easier and less costly, is just that there are not enough targets for everyone.
Hanlong pro tip:
What do you think is more costly? Having enough Tanks/turrets to avoid hits of countries that are 10 times more smaller than you and having maxed SDI, or hits that HAVE to bypass your defences to work, that means that for every 2800 ghost acres that you get, you have to rebuild 7000 buildings.
Go and run your numbers because the cash and turns needed are obscene and well over the billions, if you factor in douche hits the risk is even greater because your capabilities to defend yourself are diminished by the fact that you spent most of your cash rebuilding.
Bottomfeeding factors "luck" not risk, because if you do it right you hardly get hit, a stray missile may get in once in a bluemoon but usually that won't happen, not to mention that is public knowledge a few untaggeds are actually multies, but that is another thing.
Hanlong if you want to feel how ridiculous are the building cost, go to your building page, pick the cost per building and multiply it for 10000 acres, THAT is the cost of 3000 acres, and let's not factor the CS/military/Oil lost, and with that clearly you will see why bottomfeeding will always be stronger as long as there are enough good targets and you play smart you will always be ahead, if sets where much longer then yeah land trading would be much stronger because the gains get progressively better while bottomfeeding isn't (well I guess if your country is 10 times bigger than what most clans can muster then you would probably be able to bottomfeed small clans like ICN, but that is another thing.
Land trading isn't as easy as you want to make it to be, bottomfeeding is much easier and less costly, is just that there are not enough targets for everyone.
i never said there's no risk. i said it was lower risk than traditional landgrabbing, but higher risk than all-explore so it shuold be slotted appropriately in terms of landgaining speed. please re-read my posts =)
and to answer the rest of you the only reason why some people "rarely get hit by missiles/suiciders/etc." while bottomfeeding/midfeeding is because they have to carry adequate defense. i see many spy ops of the landtraders and saw < 100k turrets and 0 SDI, which are things that no bottomfeeder will get away with (if you do that as a bottomfeeder, you will get raped). just the fact that you can landtrade and get away with such little defense tells me there's less risks involved. i fully understand why they carry low defense, because of the building costs of losing all that land.. they can't afford to both balance upkeeping military while gaining land and that rapid of a pace. if you want i can privately give you at least 7-8 examples of no defense landtrading countries going on this reset (and there's a total of 10-15 landtrading countries total, so just me casually seeing half of the spy ops having inadequate defense while landtrading tells me that it looks like it's the norm.. i'm willing to bet almost all of those 50k+ land landtraders didn't have the defense a normal 50k bottomfeeder would carry)
that's why i suggested to both pang and qzjul to make ghost acres depend on the attacker's defense to force people to upkeep military while landtrading, just like bottomfeeders and midfeeders have to. it will slow down landtrading so the landgain is more in line to other forms of grabbing (aka balancing it)
and balin: i did not say i prefer an environment where the big guys rape the little guys. i just said landtrading should be balanced based on the defense you need to carry (aka risk) to successfully execute it. no matter if you topfeed/bototmfeed/midfeed (aka normal grabbing) you always kept more land as you kept more defense. like some of those untags (like croatia) can retal the fluff out of you, and if you could somehow bounce his retal, then more power to you... you get the land that no one else would get.
just to clear things up, i'm not opposed to landtrading specifically, i just want it balanced compared to the other landgaining methods. it clearly isn't balanced right now...
Don Hanlong
Don of La Famiglia
Don of La Famiglia