Shad23
Emperor
lol INNO woke up the sleeping bear with this stupid idea for pvpLol go back to sleep bear Zzzzzz
lol INNO woke up the sleeping bear with this stupid idea for pvpLol go back to sleep bear Zzzzzz
We have to wake up all the sleeping bears and make them riot !lol INNO woke up the sleeping bear with this stupid idea for pvp
right onWe have to wake up all the sleeping bears and make them riot !
I honestly think that the game not having cross server support is something massively holding this game back from being so much more popular. It would be great to GBG cross server so its not the same boring guilds every single time, and of course, make alliances impossible so its always a mass free for all with strong guilds from multiple servers battling it out.
This PVP tower seems like an interesting idea, and a great new way to get other rewards besides medals from the pvp towers on the map currently. Just such a weird implementation. (Thanks for the link btw)
Only auto battling, AND you are limited in your hits unless you spend diamonds.... lol. It would have been quit cool if we could manual battle on the defending side, have real time PVP action. defenders don't lose troops that die, attackers do.
LollHow would that stop Alliances? All it would do is allow for Groups of people to run Multiple Guilds across All Servers and getting a chance that they run more than one guild in a GbG season.
Imagine having control of 2 or 3 guilds all in the same GbG season - Now that would be a greater Exploit than it already is!!!!
So then it won't happen - LOLLoll
Managing 1 is enough for most
...don't forget to also go and poke the sleeping dragon in the eye.We have to wake up all the sleeping bears and make them riot !
he was relying to my signature , on beta server they already have 10 pages of negative feedback on this stupid idea and it still not on beta server yetWrong thread to chat about it though,
Here is my feedback
I would like to see only active participants could attack other active participants only. If you dont participate then your city would be left at peace and no more plundering. If you need goods you make them yourself. This would resolve alot of issues of bullying that goes on between players. It would finally give you a choice if you wanted to be attacked or not without having to remain in Iron age.
i dont care who agrees with me or not, that is my opinion.
YOU chose to participate in a game where attacking and plundering each other are parts of the game. Don't like it, find a more peaceful game to play.Here is my feedback
I would like to see only active participants could attack other active participants only. If you dont participate then your city would be left at peace and no more plundering. If you need goods you make them yourself. This would resolve alot of issues of bullying that goes on between players. It would finally give you a choice if you wanted to be attacked or not without having to remain in Iron age.
i dont care who agrees with me or not, that is my opinion.
Here is my feedback
I would like to see only active participants could attack other active participants only. If you dont participate then your city would be left at peace and no more plundering. If you need goods you make them yourself. This would resolve alot of issues of bullying that goes on between players. It would finally give you a choice if you wanted to be attacked or not without having to remain in Iron age.
i dont care who agrees with me or not, that is my opinion.
Now if only we could add plundering with... FIRE! >Yawn.
Leaving a city with it's buildings as blazing wrecks is just icing on my newly requisitioned fps/goods.
I would not be getting excited about it in Bete I am EMA and the middle opponent had progressive troops what a joke