Author |
Message |
trevor1601
|
Post subject: Re: alliance subs Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:51 am |
|
Captain |
|
|
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 1:45 pm Posts: 939
|
mmmhh meatshield. probly the best pro argument i have heard so far. "any noob can fire a nuke", i agree with this completely. i used to hate subs but there is nothing like a hive with a sub that can help send nukes protect hive and whatnot. 24 members protecting hive is alot better than 12
_________________
best round-SAGE E2 -312 power most conquers at one point-122
|
|
Top |
|
simmen
|
Post subject: Re: alliance subs Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 4:05 am |
|
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:32 am Posts: 15987 Gender: male
|
but then again, u've just lost 12 conquers who could give u units to build better defence
_________________
Code: http://battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=4690 Thank you Michael http://www.battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=15076 Thank you developers (^-check out the topics)
|
|
Top |
|
javierbs
|
Post subject: Re: alliance subs Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:37 pm |
|
Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 9:37 pm Posts: 555 Gender: male
|
And probably those 12 nubs will take other conquers from you. AND they could attack a target same ETA as you making you waste troops.
_________________
|
|
Top |
|
trevor1601
|
Post subject: Re: alliance subs Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:37 pm |
|
Captain |
|
|
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 1:45 pm Posts: 939
|
yes 12 less conquers but if they are a good sub like i have they will have well over 4k units that can help defend fight and help out with nukes.
12 less conquers or 4000+ units that help u out. i think its obvious what one is better
_________________
best round-SAGE E2 -312 power most conquers at one point-122
|
|
Top |
|
simmen
|
Post subject: Re: alliance subs Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 5:23 am |
|
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:32 am Posts: 15987 Gender: male
|
if you got a good sub then it's one of tousands xD ive played alot, and i've just been in 1 good sub, and thats like 2 years ago xD
_________________
Code: http://battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=4690 Thank you Michael http://www.battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=15076 Thank you developers (^-check out the topics)
|
|
Top |
|
trevor1601
|
Post subject: Re: alliance subs Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 5:40 pm |
|
Captain |
|
|
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 1:45 pm Posts: 939
|
i actually have just of an active sub as the main. and they would be more than active to send nukes and wat not plus send those 4000+ units to where the leader wants.
_________________
best round-SAGE E2 -312 power most conquers at one point-122
|
|
Top |
|
simmen
|
Post subject: Re: alliance subs Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 6:29 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:32 am Posts: 15987 Gender: male
|
nice just keep an eye on that sub, good subs usualy end up wanting more then just being a sub xD
_________________
Code: http://battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=4690 Thank you Michael http://www.battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=15076 Thank you developers (^-check out the topics)
|
|
Top |
|
mrducky
|
Post subject: Re: alliance subs Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:16 am |
|
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:06 pm Posts: 781 Gender: male
|
i played back in the old school days of AUA on earth 4.
AUA main could camp tasmania.
back then i think alliances were a lot smaller, i forgot how small... not even close to 12 though.
anyways, tasmania has the main. the ENTIRE AUSTRALIA going up to malaysia (other then a couple conquers) were completely subs. im talking about 6-8 subs here. which is equivalent to maybe 4-5 full subs in the newer BD. AUA was attacked and won purely from attrition. there were at minimum 4 nukes in the air at the enemy at any one time. people have to sleep and i forgot who was going at us, but they pulled it off somewhat and managed to land somewhere in australia. a couple thousand units were wittled down to a couple hundred even with the best barracks hopping. of course the trash talk about subs started before that. "AUA has too many subs" which i had to agree. "subs is cheating" which i didnt agree with. i was part of AUA* and i think we were either 2nd or first best alliance without relics. probably 4-5th overall if relics didnt give top spots.
as i mentioned before, there is no difference between a good ally and a good sub. meat shields work excellently, i could sleep safe even with several hundred squads about 10 ticks north because the sheer number of targets and the 3 ticks fly and 3 ticks back mean nukes would land destroying their shiny army in the process. subs do give your alliance a degree of protection allowing a large majority of your units to poke elsewhere. but isnt that the same with an ally?
subs are tactical, will you risk a backstab so you have a meatshield?
_________________
-~~Retired Spammer~~-
~Agnostic atheist pastafarian~
Discussion+debates and World Events.
|
|
Top |
|
Ryan
|
Post subject: Re: alliance subs Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:51 am |
|
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 1:29 pm Posts: 1609 Location: In Seth's back yard under a rock Gender: male
|
haha... i became what i hate. i am in a sub alliance.
_________________ Retired Sr.mod
|
|
Top |
|
simmen
|
Post subject: Re: alliance subs Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 11:24 am |
|
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:32 am Posts: 15987 Gender: male
|
hahahha xD
_________________
Code: http://battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=4690 Thank you Michael http://www.battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=15076 Thank you developers (^-check out the topics)
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
|