Limit on wars per week?

[AEJustin]

not to sound biased but 12 wars in 1 week is a little crazy if you ask me. I know these 2 wars in a day is wild and the only time 2 wars in 1 day would even possibly work would be Fridays and Saturdays. Maybe we should have a limit on wars per week?

[Platinum]

All things considered, alot of things have to happen perfectly in order for all of those battles to actually take place. Various wins and losses during the week could cause a handful of those to fall off.

I agree it sucks, I speak from experience, but it wouldn't be fair to clans that wouldn't get to attack, unless something can be mutually agreed upon.

That is also the downside of having alot of countries, especially strategically placed ones.

Allies can help too to ease the load.

[AEJustin]

oh yea exactly, this could be an issue for SQ3 im not worried about it for AE cause i wouldnt schedule all those lol, but def something that may need to be considered for SQ3

[Chief]

So perhaps a better way to do business is a clan can attack the same country only once. So when it gets down to two countries....and that one clan has only one piece of land...then they don't have to go at it twice a week from the same clan. It just doesn't seem right...

[OldEnglish800]

we will be fine 3 wars have already been knocked off so its down to 9
but i do love the alleged switch to alliances....errrrrrrrrrr..i mean 5 team alliance

[Undertow]

When APC was in SQ still, we were doing so with a clan roster of 12 active members. Needless to say, we were utilizing allies alot. And even when it started, the Gervs brought the number of attacks from three down to two because people were complaining. And rightly so, in my opinion.
However, I thought the 2-attack limit was great, and that a country could only be attacked three times. That, to me, was just and fair. It comes with the territory of this tournament, guys. war isn't about fighting when you're comfortable to do so, it's about making due with what you have and overcoming odds if need be. It all plays into the strategy of this game. If the battling was changed even more, I believe SQ would get diluted with even more whining to change other things. I thought what was going on was great. The less countries you have, the more people want to knock you out. The more countries you have, the more you have to defend your massive territories. It's pretty formulaic. Altering things now would just be appeasing those that can't handle the tournament that they signed up for.
My opinion only.

[Chief]

Check out the Brain on Brad.......



Good stuff...I like it...I recant what I wrote.

[Platinum]

OldEnglish800 said:

I do love the alleged switch to alliances....errrrrrrrrrr..i mean 5 team alliance. And that Platinum guy is the coolest.

Part of the game buddy, part of the game. JLA needs to stay alive so a rustling of the ranks was in order.

And thanks for the compliment. ;D

[D]

just so u know E our saturday night wars are still go-we can attack Poland thru our allie in Russia -got to love them allies.

[Undertow]

Chief said:

Good stuff...I like it...I recant what I wrote.

Good to read you can see another's opinion as valid, Chief. I never offer my side for the sake of an argument...just thought to offer another side of sense. I think, SO FAR, what the Gervs have put together is a great idea built on a great game. I liked the stressful situations in the tournament, like the number of wars. Like I said..."it's WAR."