Jun 13th 2014, 13:43:35
Originally posted by Celphi:
side note: I don't know why you keep saying I don't understand costs. I'm #1 in tourney. Don't you think someone in top 10 realizes costs vs those who are just stocking their profits into bushels? I get it. I just prefer not to be a target. I think there's a way to stay #1 the entire set. But that's what this game is all about... one person's idea vs another.
Trust me- I recognize both strats and I'm experimenting with both. In FFA I could move to 2.5 mil net which is easily #1 right now. The current #1 isn't even 1/2 that number.
In tourney I'm hovering around top 2-3 sometimes #1, and I see the price of a costly military. I get both strategies.
Trust me- I recognize both strats and I'm experimenting with both. In FFA I could move to 2.5 mil net which is easily #1 right now. The current #1 isn't even 1/2 that number.
In tourney I'm hovering around top 2-3 sometimes #1, and I see the price of a costly military. I get both strategies.
It's because you REALLY don't understand costs. Stocking has other benefits other than saving on upkeep costs. The people that win Alliance are the ones that are able to destock and sell down their stockpiles at the right time, while everyone else loses money on the food they bought. Reselling brings a hefty amount of profits as well.
Going back to costs, you probably aren't aware that upkeep costs aren't linear. If you have 1m turrets in a country with 10m NW, vs the same 1m turrets in a country at 20m NW, the 1m turrets cost more money every turn to maintain on the latter country. Go ahead, try stocking at 50m NW, vs someone stocking at 10m NW on Alliance. Not only do you have 10x more units to maintain, the upkeep is probably 15x more than the smaller country. Your income would probably be less than half of the former country after deducting upkeep.