Conquer Club

With the odd exceptional exception (you know who you are!) a non responsive team-mate is a doubt filled goblet of wine from a vineyard on the west facing slope of mount failure.

You just totally pointed out every single problems in the world...


....

Is WS the exception that you are talking about? Because he never said a thing and still menaged to bring us victory.

I had a guy who never talked, we dominated, he knew what to do without me telling him and I knew what he wanted to have done. It was creepy. Wish it was a woman...

I think he said gg or something at the end. We probably should have become a permanent doubles team. Oh well, missed opportunities...

PS: And I shouldn't chat on the forums after drinking, I have made the weirdest errors in my posts tonight.

jiminski wrote:With the odd exceptional exception (you know who you are!) a non responsive team-mate is a doubt filled goblet of wine from a vineyard on the west facing slope of mount failure.

I actually love my partners that are silent.......when they are good

Coleman wrote:I had a guy who never talked, we dominated, he knew what to do without me telling him and I knew what he wanted to have done. It was creepy. Wish it was a woman...

I think he said gg or something at the end. We probably should have become a permanent doubles team. Oh well, missed opportunities...

PS: And I shouldn't chat on the forums after drinking, I have made the weirdest errors in my posts tonight.

posting that was one of them

Coleman wrote:I had a guy who never talked, we dominated, he knew what to do without me telling him and I knew what he wanted to have done. It was creepy. Wish it was a woman...

I think he said gg or something at the end. We probably should have become a permanent doubles team. Oh well, missed opportunities...

PS: And I shouldn't chat on the forums after drinking, I have made the weirdest errors in my posts tonight.

ha i do it all the time. and I think it's great.

AAFitz wrote:

jiminski wrote:With the odd exceptional exception (you know who you are!) a non responsive team-mate is a doubt filled goblet of wine from a vineyard on the west facing slope of mount failure.

I actually love my partners that are silent.......when they are good

Is this a life philosophy or only applicable to CC?

C.

AAFitz wrote:

jiminski wrote:With the odd exceptional exception (you know who you are!) a non responsive team-mate is a doubt filled goblet of wine from a vineyard on the west facing slope of mount failure.

I actually love my partners that are silent.......when they are good

And you certainly know what you are doing Fitz.
i would of course much rather have a couple of no talkers who know how to play than a couple of gibberrish talkers who don't (i at least in part fall into the latter category) And communication is not just about typing, i play regularly with a silent communicator who exudes team-work and skill. you know he'll fort you where you need it.. attack the right spot and sit when you need cover; through experience you know he can be rellied upon.
But you can be there, expecting a fine and harmonious tussel, wind beneath you (pardon me) partner at your side, only to find that you have a no talker. this is not a rank thing.. hehe i have been ignored by every echelon.
This guy could be a genius for all you know.. the strategy could be the finest since gandhi decided to fight fire with a kiss but how can you tell? if it is a stategy cunning enough to be hidden from the enemy perhaps it is hidden to all.

The problem with non responsive partners is that u are never sure they will do as u ask when u fort them. Are they reliable or not. I'd sooner have a partner who told me he intends doing different things. at least that way you know not to trust them and can plan accordingly

Nothing worse than leaving a border entirely open knowing your partner goes before the player threatening the border - and then he fails to defend it! At least if u knew that was gonna happen u would move armies from another position to defend the border.

you should never really trust your partner. eventually they will stab you in the back. you will have to fight them in the end anyways. so why not fight them in the begining. if you wont fight them in the begining use them to your advantage.

The Dragon wrote:you should never really trust your partner. eventually they will stab you in the back. you will have to fight them in the end anyways. so why not fight them in the begining. if you wont fight them in the begining use them to your advantage.

Er - you only have to fight them if you're being a multi... methinks someone needs to refer this to the Cheating forum?

C.

yeti_c wrote:

The Dragon wrote:you should never really trust your partner. eventually they will stab you in the back. you will have to fight them in the end anyways. so why not fight them in the begining. if you wont fight them in the begining use them to your advantage.

Er - you only have to fight them if you're being a multi... methinks someone needs to refer this to the Cheating forum?

C.

Give the poor guy a break, he's still a new recruit and since he can't join team games, probably has no clues how it is played.


Dragon, team games ( doubles, triples ) are won even if your partner is still on the board. Attacking your team in team games is VERY stupid, unless very specific reasons.

thanks freezie. sadly i just started

freezie wrote:

yeti_c wrote:

The Dragon wrote:you should never really trust your partner. eventually they will stab you in the back. you will have to fight them in the end anyways. so why not fight them in the begining. if you wont fight them in the begining use them to your advantage.

Er - you only have to fight them if you're being a multi... methinks someone needs to refer this to the Cheating forum?

C.

Give the poor guy a break, he's still a new recruit and since he can't join team games, probably has no clues how it is played.


Dragon, team games ( doubles, triples ) are won even if your partner is still on the board. Attacking your team in team games is VERY stupid, unless very specific reasons.

Apologies... I didn't check for newness.

C.

screw you yeti

The Dragon wrote:screw you yeti

hehehe, did you see yeti's appology?

The Dragon wrote:screw you yeti

Just a tad harsh.

C.

yeti_c wrote:

The Dragon wrote:screw you yeti

Just a tad harsh.

C.

i don't think your appology was spotted.. hehe, it did make me chuckle though.

jiminski wrote:

yeti_c wrote:

The Dragon wrote:screw you yeti

Just a tad harsh.

C.

i don't think your appology was spotted.. hehe, it did make me chuckle though.

Yeah me too - it's more amusing than anything else!!! I might have made someones ignore list though!!

C.

lol - YETI the multi hunter.

Stick to the day job mate

hulmey wrote:lol - YETI the multi hunter.

Stick to the day job mate

Wish I could - this damn game just keeps me away from it all the time!!!

Good job I don't have performance based bonuses!!!

C.