Flazers kd fell of so much because he didn't have control over sector states and was forced to have overly long periods in mob because of war.
You got rolled out early and stomped him WELL before the war.
If my KD was Flazers you'd be bringing that up incessantly, stop wasting my time with this shit Jones
Im not saying his kd was better than mine, it obviously wasnt for a number of reasons. Im saying that strat is better for income, which it is.. even with barracks and extra pps taken into account.
Would i play it? No. Mainly because of the reasons that have been stated.
What i am TELLING you, is flazer had less land than me and slightly more income at numerous points throughout the round when we was both turtleing (i was 50% sms at this point also). I know this because i kept telling him to fuck off.
Ive never seen anyone so bitter in being so wrong in all my days on sk. Its hilarious how much you are trying to convince everyone you are right Darinub, im enjoying your attempts to get people believing you.
Flazers kd fell of so much because he didn't have control over sector states and was forced to have overly long periods in mob because of war.
You got rolled out early and stomped him WELL before the war.
If my KD was Flazers you'd be bringing that up incessantly, stop wasting my time with this shit Jones
Im not saying his kd was better than mine, it obviously wasnt for a number of reasons. Im saying that strat is better for income, which it is.. even with barracks and extra pps taken into account.
Would i play it? No. Mainly because of the reasons that have been stated.
What i am TELLING you, is flazer had less land than me and slightly more income at numerous points throughout the round when we was both turtleing (i was 50% sms at this point also). I know this because i kept telling him to fuck off.
Yeah but he had less overall land because he wasted a fuckton of money on scis which shouldve gone to exploring, to maximizing the land he had instead.
Thats the point all of you seem to be oblivious to.
fucktonne of money on what scies? This is what your not understanding here Darinub, if both of me and you have the exact same size KDs, both Terra, lets say for instance 10k land,
the exact same scies, the exact same defense (lets say full turtle) the exact same research, the exact same everything besides the fact that you have lower pop due to having sms and i have all res, lets say neither kd has pfs so robs wont affect the comparisons, then my kd would have everything your kd has but more income than you, this is a stone cold mathematical fact, no other factors come into play but these two kds, my kd is better than yours due to having higher income.
Flazers kd fell of so much because he didn't have control over sector states and was forced to have overly long periods in mob because of war.
You got rolled out early and stomped him WELL before the war.
If my KD was Flazers you'd be bringing that up incessantly, stop wasting my time with this shit Jones
Im not saying his kd was better than mine, it obviously wasnt for a number of reasons. Im saying that strat is better for income, which it is.. even with barracks and extra pps taken into account.
Would i play it? No. Mainly because of the reasons that have been stated.
What i am TELLING you, is flazer had less land than me and slightly more income at numerous points throughout the round when we was both turtleing (i was 50% sms at this point also). I know this because i kept telling him to fuck off.
Yeah but he had less overall land because he wasted a fuckton of money on scis which shouldve gone to exploring, to maximizing the land he had instead.
Thats the point all of you seem to be oblivious to.
fucktonne of money on what scies? This is what your not understanding here Darinub, if both of me and you have the exact same size KDs, both Terra, lets say for instance 10k land,
the exact same scies, the exact same defense (lets say full turtle) the exact same research, the exact same everything besides the fact that you have lower pop due to having sms and i have all res, lets say neither kd has pfs so robs wont affect the comparisons, then my kd would have everything your kd has but more income than you, this is a stone cold mathematical fact, no other factors come into play but these two kds, my kd is better than yours due to having higher income.
I'm not keeping pop bonus maxed, especially later on. The result is you need ~50% more scis to keep research maxed, and at 10k land I was running about 30-40k scis just to max money/mili iirc, which means you need ~15 mill cash extra pumped into sci, which roughly translates into about 2k additional land + buildings at that size.
Or if you are running the same scis as me, pop bonus isnt even close to maxed and you're a moron.
Why is this so hard?
this was already explained earlier on or dont you read because your a moron?
we are talking simmed kingdoms here without any outside factors, also what flazer lost in rax due to needing more scies he gained in needing less Res (due to his pop bonus being alot higher) i dont see you factoring in that either, he dropped in land due to consta mobi and not having control of sector states not because of having more scies and not being able to afford it, you literally wont open your eyes and see that, instead you are choosing to insult instead which shows me you have lost, its a mathematical fact that all res is better than all sms with no outside factors included, 2 identical kingdoms minus the two factors of one being all res with lower pps and one being a mixture of sms/res then the all res wins, it may not win by much but its still the superior build, it just holds alot higher risks. Let your stubborn brain process that then come back and apologize for all the insults, thanks.
You have 45k scis, pop bonus/money/mili bonus all maxed.
I have 30k scis, money/mili maxed
You make approx ~10% more pure income on the land you have due to bonuses, being generous and not even including the loss of about 2% additional land to barracks, so the rough equivalent of 600-1000 SMs worth of land.
I spend that money (~18 million) on land instead of scis.
With that money I am able to explore & build on approx 2k additional land.
So now I have about 2k more land than you, both running 65% income buildings, or about 1300 SMs.
My income is now close to yours but slightly higher, because I have more land, and because I dont have to keep pop bonus maxed and therefore dont need extra scis.
You now have a smaller overall income in exchange for a more fragile KD. Great job
none of what are saying changes the fact its still the optimal way to build though, your just way to stubborn to admit it, ive already said a million times i wouldnt play it that way due to the risks and the extra scies needed but by actual mathematical fact it is the optimal way to build a Terra kd, nothing you can say will actually change that face, dress it up however you want you are still wrong.
you're also forgetting to factor in that the all Res kd would of been ahead by this point if we are talking actually simmed kingdoms right now, from the start when rax pps and scies are a minimal difference, the all res kd would of slightly outgrown the sms kd every single day, your picking parts out of it all that suit your argument.
you're also forgetting to factor in that the all Res kd would of been ahead by this point if we are talking actually simmed kingdoms right now, from the start when rax pps and scies are a minimal difference, the all res kd would of slightly outgrown the sms kd every single day, your picking parts out of it all that suit your argument.
SMs vs resis are roughly equivalent with bonuses maxed before longevity in base income, seriously Lynog just stop.
Res is still ahead, and even slightly ahead means you would take a slight lead, you notice how absolutely nobody is in here defending you? Thats because you are wrong, so please you stop.
Nah I'm not, theyre actually just wrong, and they keep admitting it without realizing it which is the best part
the numbers dont lie, lets just leave it at that, arguing over something that doesnt or wont ever affect me and will only minimally effect you is just retarded.
You still havent told me how you are exploring all this extra land when the all res kd will be max exploring too.
Scis cost money
Land costs money
Pick one
PS its almost impossible to max explore with the 20% max explore round bonus Qwj, you should probably play the game for the first time in 5 years before commentin on it
Pretty sure flazer sacrificed def for scis, not land though.
we are talking a straight up no external factors here, not going to go over old ground but 20% explore certainly cannot be counted into it. 10% explore would be easily doable for a long time on full turtle kds. Head to head Darius with literally only those two kingdoms, from a straight up score perspective the Res wins.
And before you start reffering to this round or how bad Flazer has played again for the millionth time, im not talking about Flazer or you, im talking 2 Terras one playing your strat and one playing his, totally simmed kds, no threats, no 20% explore just turtle and score, the all Res kd wins.
we are talking a straight up no external factors here, not going to go over old ground but 20% explore certainly cannot be counted into it. 10% explore would be easily doable for a long time on full turtle kds. Head to head Darius with literally only those two kingdoms, from a straight up score perspective the Res wins.
Are we joking?
After 2 months of explaining to me that doesnt matter when I explained the sci rush strat you're really gonna go there ?
Going to go where? are you actually that angry you cant actually use logic anymore? sims dont matter, this convo doesnt matter, neither strat matters btu it doesnt change the fact one is slightly better than the other.
why argue? just play dw next round and stomp jones, lynog and flaze out. or continue arguing here, wasting your time and allow them to troll you more.
If someone pisses me off enough that warrants even one reply with over 5 paragraphs, they are fucked next round. I can't imagine what 9 pages of fury will bring lol, an aneurysm?
Edit; Only one thing I'll give them that they have over you is that you were a selfish whore. But every last one of them are hypocrites in that matter.
Comments
Would i play it? No. Mainly because of the reasons that have been stated.
What i am TELLING you, is flazer had less land than me and slightly more income at numerous points throughout the round when we was both turtleing (i was 50% sms at this point also). I know this because i kept telling him to fuck off.
Noobs
the exact same scies, the exact same defense (lets say full turtle) the exact same research, the exact same everything besides the fact that you have lower pop due to having sms and i have all res, lets say neither kd has pfs so robs wont affect the comparisons, then my kd would have everything your kd has but more income than you, this is a stone cold mathematical fact, no other factors come into play but these two kds, my kd is better than yours due to having higher income.
this was already explained earlier on or dont you read because your a moron?
we are talking simmed kingdoms here without any outside factors, also what flazer lost in rax due to needing more scies he gained in needing less Res (due to his pop bonus being alot higher) i dont see you factoring in that either, he dropped in land due to consta mobi and not having control of sector states not because of having more scies and not being able to afford it, you literally wont open your eyes and see that, instead you are choosing to insult instead which shows me you have lost, its a mathematical fact that all res is better than all sms with no outside factors included, 2 identical kingdoms minus the two factors of one being all res with lower pps and one being a mixture of sms/res then the all res wins, it may not win by much but its still the superior build, it just holds alot higher risks. Let your stubborn brain process that then come back and apologize for all the insults, thanks.
Assuming land is pretty low here by the scis count ~10k...very easy to max explore at that stage.
Pie > All.
Once you put that into you equations, you will finally arrive at the proper solution.
In a normal round it is easy to explore 10% at that stage....so again, you wont be exploring the extra land.
Then again we wouldnt have this thing you guys have now
Continue to argue this all you want, il take the word of people who have proved themselves to be far superior.
why argue? just play dw next round and stomp jones, lynog and flaze out.
or continue arguing here, wasting your time and allow them to troll you more.
If someone pisses me off enough that warrants even one reply with over 5 paragraphs, they are fucked next round. I can't imagine what 9 pages of fury will bring lol, an aneurysm?
Edit; Only one thing I'll give them that they have over you is that you were a selfish whore. But every last one of them are hypocrites in that matter.