Sigrun Vapneir Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 It's called having friends. Something TOP will teach you about. Nonetheless, by the same logic that allows the one the other is allowed too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youwish959 Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 If you don't like it when your enemy turtles then fight him with even odds. Otherwise, man up, you arent losing nearly as much as he is. I've fought 6 on 1 still bought troops, still fought. It's called trying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkalunka Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 I've fought 6 on 1 still bought troops, still fought. It's called trying. Oh, so did I, three rounds in a row against NS totals several times mine; I was adequately prepared. Not all players are, and thus they turtle. I even turtled for a couple days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youwish959 Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 Oh, so did I, three rounds in a row against NS totals several times mine; I was adequately prepared. Not all players are, and thus they turtle. I even turtled for a couple days. I was referring mainly to those that don't try at all. Once their troops are killed, they don't buy more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiao Weng Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 I thought you were supposed to deploy them all instead of decommissioning them Deploying them all will bring them back and open you up to further attack after the defeat alert, as I've found. Decomming means you'll only get hit with one ground attack a day, but it'll hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Scott Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 Turtling is lame. War is always fun, even if you're losing. Until you can't afford troops, and after 5 days of war you can only field 20K troops compared to your attackers 200K each Defending isn't hard provided you put a solid defense behind your nation. People forget, the game favors defenders not attackers. It doesn't favour defenders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkalunka Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 (edited) Defending isn't hard provided you put a solid defense behind your nation. People forget, the game favors defenders not attackers. It doesn't favour defenders. Yeah, where do these ideas come from? Edited June 10, 2008 by Junkalunka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruthenia Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 (edited) Defending isn't hard provided you put a solid defense behind your nation. People forget, the game favors defenders not attackers. Maybe one on one, but three on one? Or, if you really screw up, six on one? I've fought 6 on 1 still bought troops, still fought. It's called trying. What's the point when the numbers point towards you never having a chance of winning? The whole point of the "never give up, never surrender" mentality is that you may just be able to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. If you're six on one, buying troops...and totally unable to win a ground attack still, why try? So you can convince yourself that throwing your money away for the benefit of your attackers was bravery rather than poor thinking? Edited June 10, 2008 by Matthew George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Van Zant Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 (edited) If you have been dog piled, facing vastly superior foes, and you plan to go nuclear it is a great tactic. It is true that you will still lose infra and to a lessor extent tech, it does drastically slow the hemmorage of your war fund. If you have Manhattan Project it is even a greater tactic, it helps you hold on to your money, stay out of bill lock and purchase more nukes. A nation with Manahattan Project, a large war chest and max spies can optimize damage and sustain said damage for a long time using this tatic. Edited June 10, 2008 by Ronnie Van Zant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Notatalldude Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 (edited) Well my opinion behind turtling is this: I don't think I'd ever use that tactic, I've tried it oince in the past, it seemed effective because I'm good when it comes to backing people into the verbal corner, and eventually I got them to pay much of the reps so that I would stop hitting him with these missiles and my 80 aircraft compared to his receding 25, because ultimately, he lost more when figured into cash than I did, and then after that I just rebought more than 85% of what I lost and his nation came off incredibly injured and I'd say it took him around another 5 months to partically recover while it took me 2 weeks to get back to what I had before he had attacked. I've been blitz'd by 3 nations at a time who were larger than me on my old nation, I stood and fought, though given, I don't think I could do that nearly as easily with this new nation, considering it's several hundred times easier to defend against large nations when you have nukes However, for most nations around 3k - 9k NS turtling is a great method as long as you don't accept peace from your attackers, because if your nation is about 8k NS, and your attackers are around 15k NS, then his infra/tech costs FAR more than yours. Thus before turtling most smart nations buy 50 or so cruise missles and some destroy improvements of their afterwords,some even have a great aircraft force so they keep it up. That way during all the days of the war you are firing several CM's causing 17 infra and 6-7 tech in damage as well as some tanks, and they aren't gaining anything, in fact, they are losing a lot of infra and as I mentioned early in my post, some will even offer reps so that you'll stop attacking since they AREN'T GAINING ANYTHING and they losing several months worth of work. Though again I'd much rather join in and attack back with ground attacks in all, using my own tactics which I as well as other quite large nations find very very useful. Thogh, as I also mentioned earlier, I don't think I could hold up the attacks like that against a nuclear nation without nukes myself, and if given the chance, no one wants to be in this situation unless of course they quit and want to go out with a bang. Edited June 10, 2008 by Notatalldude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oktavia Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 Defending isn't hard provided you put a solid defense behind your nation. People forget, the game favors defenders not attackers. I vouch this as truth. I've lost a lot of 80% to 20% odd fights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTTezla Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 I vouch this as truth. I've lost a lot of 80% to 20% odd fights. Check your tech level. Defenders do not have a significant advantage, in my experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HordeOfDoom Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 (edited) If you don't like it when your enemy turtles then fight him with even odds. Otherwise, man up, you arent losing nearly as much as he is. Try reading next time. The words 'War is always fun, even if you're losing' being the key ones. Until you can't afford troops, and after 5 days of war you can only field 20K troops compared to your attackers 200K each Never had that happen to me, the times I've been losing I still steal enough to stay alive Also, 5 days? Need moar warchest. Edited June 10, 2008 by HordeOfDoom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 Whatever action that doesn't circumvent the limits that the Admin set is legitimate, especially in war. Next question please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kindom of Goon Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 Seems a little pointless to me, and I hate fighting wars against people who just lie down. Should be more like a last resort than a tactic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkalunka Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 (edited) Try reading next time. The words 'War is always fun, even if you're losing' being the key ones. Ok, well I would have to disagree with that as well, It may be fun for us warriors but I think many average players don't think fighting an overwhelming enemy (3+ nations, 6x NS) with practically unlimited resources for an extended time period is fun, especially as it literally destroys months, years of hard work and progress. Especially if they are billocked. If anything, it leads to disgust, and then apathy, and then leaving the game for another one much of the time. I remember being crushed and raided in other online games that I didn't totally dedicate myself to and that's exactly what I did; leave. Also, turtling is not a treat for the defenders, either, however much the attackers may grumble. Edited June 10, 2008 by Junkalunka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairna Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 And as Napoleon led his army to Moscow, she burnt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTTezla Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 Try reading next time. The words 'War is always fun, even if you're losing' being the key ones. The billock tends to not be fun. Even with a warchest, fighting 3-5 vs. 1 for two or three war cycles will undoubtedly run you dry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Scott Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 Never had that happen to me, the times I've been losing I still steal enough to stay alive Also, 5 days? Need moar warchest. Well your a large nation. Easier for you to keep out of anarchy as opposed to say a 10K NS nation. Just how it goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 Having a FAB and a large warchest makes turtleing a great strategy. Sit back, hopefully you have max spies (if not, noob!), and just eat the raid each day, while bombing/CMing your opponents for 60+ damage a day. You'll take damage sure, but if you can keep your fighters up and have a nice warchest, you will out damage each of them on average. People seem to forget that turtleing can easily include using air. In fact, the only downside is that air gets expensive.. but if you have a good warchest, that shouldn't matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkalunka Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 Having a FAB and a large warchest makes turtleing a great strategy. FAB+Manhattan+Weapons Research+Massive Warchest Now THAT is the ultimate turtle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 FAB+Manhattan+Weapons Research+Massive WarchestNow THAT is the ultimate turtle. Might as well add the ADN too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 (edited) It's called having friends. Something TOP will teach you about. I'm not so feebleminded that the possibility I might ever be on the dog side of a dogpile changes my opinion of the situation. To answer the OP: All means of defense in a war such as any that are going on right now are legitimate, from turtling to global thermonuclear war. As Starfox said, if an alliance is going to go 11-on-1, they'd better expect to slog through the mire whether that's turtling or guerilla tactics, and they ought to be able to do it without pissing and moaning on the OWF (that not implying Hymen is moaning, I'm not even aware if Legion is fighting, I avoided this war). Edited June 11, 2008 by Schattenmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Ghaffari Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 It works...although why not have the ability to nuke one's self? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdnss69 Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 If you're in a war with no way of winning, then yes, I consider turtling a fair tactic. What are the other options? Get hamered and lose a lot more, or... get hammered. Better to turtle and then inflict some on your oponent than let the war be one way. Its boring, it will set you into bill lock, its not fair on the attacker either, but hey, war isn't fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.