A

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • It has definitely caused some grief for players trying exactly what you all tried. The best way that could work is by your coalition declaring war on anyone who is at war with one of you.

      Nevertheless, you will still be blindsided by an attack from a country that was at peace right before they attacked said city. So, unless they change mechanics, it's best to just defend your own cities whenever possible.
      but, that's just my 2 cents' worth
    • potato wrote:

      I send my troop to one of my ally's city and we're in a same coalition.

      And then,the enemy stack came to that city.

      Guess what?

      The enemy stack suddenly ocupied that city and became the defending side,and my stack,which was waiting in that ally city,became the attacking side,and lost the bunker affect.
      This is absolutly unfair and unrealistic,and please forgive me for saying this ,it needs rework.
      You should have declared war on the attacker before he took the city. YOUR fault.
      *** Warning: This poster is on double secret probation ***

      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Dealer of Death wrote:

      potato wrote:

      I send my troop to one of my ally's city and we're in a same coalition.

      And then,the enemy stack came to that city.

      Guess what?

      The enemy stack suddenly ocupied that city and became the defending side,and my stack,which was waiting in that ally city,became the attacking side,and lost the bunker affect.
      This is absolutly unfair and unrealistic,and please forgive me for saying this ,it needs rework.
      You should have declared war on the attacker before he took the city. YOUR fault.
      How could I know which one would attack?
      Yes,I can declare war on all the potential attackers,but declaring war against many countries can cause a great loss on morale.
    • STOP BLAMING OTHERS FOR YOUR OWN NEGLIGENCE.
      DoD is right, when someone attacks you ally, and you plan to defend, declare war on them.
      You don't have to declare war on everyone, just the person who attacked your ally.
      Now that the question is answered, @Opulon Please close this thread.
      Thank you.
      "Le patriotisme, c'est aimer son pays. Le nationalisme, c'est détester celui des autres."-Charles De Gaulle, Leader of Free France in World War 2.
      English: "Patriotism is to love your country. Nationalism is hating that of others."
    • ewac123 wrote:

      STOP BLAMING OTHERS FOR YOUR OWN NEGLIGENCE.
      DoD is right, when someone attacks you ally, and you plan to defend, declare war on them.
      You don't have to declare war on everyone, just the person who attacked your ally.
      Now that the question is answered, @Opulon Please close this thread.
      Thank you.
      Whoa buddy, It's just a forum. And DoD's response smells fairly sarcastic (tho, he does tend to bring that odor wherever he goes) but points out that:

      MicahWill wrote:



      ...you will still be blindsided by an attack from a country that was at peace right before they attacked said city. So, unless they change mechanics, it's best to just defend your own cities whenever possible.
      So, it wasn't exactly negligence on his part. He just learned that this coalition member defense tactic is flawed because of the game mechanics (which he points out in the original post). Definitely not worth an ALL CAPS response.
      but, that's just my 2 cents' worth
    • ewac123 wrote:

      STOP BLAMING OTHERS FOR YOUR OWN NEGLIGENCE.
      DoD is right, when someone attacks you ally, and you plan to defend, declare war on them.
      You don't have to declare war on everyone, just the person who attacked your ally.
      Now that the question is answered, @Opulon Please close this thread.
      Thank you.
      The question still is "Who will be 'the person who attacked your ally'"?How would I know that?If I don't,how would I declear war on him?
    • potato wrote:

      ewac123 wrote:

      STOP BLAMING OTHERS FOR YOUR OWN NEGLIGENCE.
      DoD is right, when someone attacks you ally, and you plan to defend, declare war on them.
      You don't have to declare war on everyone, just the person who attacked your ally.
      Now that the question is answered, @Opulon Please close this thread.
      Thank you.
      The question still is "Who will be 'the person who attacked your ally'"?How would I know that?If I don't,how would I declear war on him?
      Did you not see him coming thru your ally's territory? Was it a sea invasion? Were you offline all thru it?
      *** Warning: This poster is on double secret probation ***

      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Well... if you were offline... well...
      That's another issue.
      I apologize for the all caps, I was... just frustrated by "Potato's" frustration with something that makes total sense.
      "Le patriotisme, c'est aimer son pays. Le nationalisme, c'est détester celui des autres."-Charles De Gaulle, Leader of Free France in World War 2.
      English: "Patriotism is to love your country. Nationalism is hating that of others."
    • This actually happened to me once. But I was the attacker. The player I attacked was not in coalition with "defender". Yea, I know he was tricked and I told him that. But he was not able to do anything. It was too late for him.
      I decided to attack. The city was empty because "defender" gave him "advice" to attack me with everything he had. Didn't scratch me.
      The "defender" was not in control of the city, he was waiting for me.

      And you know what?
      I took control of the city a moment before we clashed.
      But nobody was defender, we were both attacking each other.
      So I didn't had any bonus from entrainment or bunkers.

      That's how it's working, well at least was working before.

      So @potato even if your enemy got control of the city, neither of you had bonuses in this situation.
    • Zemunelo wrote:

      This actually happened to me once. But I was the attacker. The player I attacked was not in coalition with "defender". Yea, I know he was tricked and I told him that. But he was not able to do anything. It was too late for him.
      I decided to attack. The city was empty because "defender" gave him "advice" to attack me with everything he had. Didn't scratch me.
      The "defender" was not in control of the city, he was waiting for me.

      And you know what?
      I took control of the city a moment before we clashed.
      But nobody was defender, we were both attacking each other.
      So I didn't had any bonus from entrainment or bunkers.

      That's how it's working, well at least was working before.

      So @potato even if your enemy got control of the city, neither of you had bonuses in this situation.
      Good to know, Zemunelo. Thank you for the info.
      *** Warning: This poster is on double secret probation ***

      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD