Village Being Raided Live

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OzAudi

No I didn’t misunderstand anything.

This is simply a bad idea, as explained in several posts.

Besides, it would be great if you answered my question. Perhaps YOU didn’t understand ?

---

Also I think he was referring to the others XD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GabeL

No need for the attitude bud.

---

Seriously ? Attitude ? My “attitude” is the OP needs. to answers questions put to him/her inside their own thread.

If it’s such a great idea and worthy of continued supported, surely all dissenting views need a response and not just a (paraphrased) “you can’t read”. Especially when it’s a POLITE and VALID question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OzAudi

Seriously ? Attitude ? My “attitude” is the OP needs. to answers questions put to him/her inside their own thread.

If it’s such a great idea and worthy of continued supported, surely all dissenting views need a response and not just a (paraphrased) “you can’t read”. Especially when it’s a POLITE and VALID question.

---

Who has said this is a great and worthy idea? Lol I beliece no one. The creator just mentioning an idea doesn't automatically make them think this idea is to to go just something they look forward. I agree he should have answered your question but there is no need to demean them for not doing so.

GabeL, you are taking this thread more and more OT, to what point I have no idea, but I will bite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OzAudi

No I didn’t misunderstand anything.

This is simply a bad idea, as explained in several posts.

Besides, it would be great if you answered my question. Perhaps YOU didn’t understand ?

---

How is this a bad attitude ? I assume you mean bad, as attitude in this context can be both good/bad, positive/negative. It is a response confirming I understood the OP, and a clarification in case the OP thought it was a rhetorical question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OzAudi

Seriously ? Attitude ? My “attitude” is the OP needs. to answers questions put to him/her inside their own thread.

If it’s such a great idea and worthy of continued supported, surely all dissenting views need a response and not just a (paraphrased) “you can’t read”. Especially when it’s a POLITE and VALID question.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GabeL

Who has said this is a great and worthy idea? Lol I beliece no one. The creator just mentioning an idea doesn't automatically make them think this idea is to to go just something they look forward. I agree he should have answered your question but there is no need to demean them for not doing so.

---

The OP edited the thread and post to add information, after several posters countered it. I’m pretty sure this isn’t a case of starting a conversation for the sake of conversation.

Nobody is demeaning the OP. My reference to a polite and valid question was a dig at you GabeL. It was in response to your comment to.me, not the OP. as you seemed to think I was being rude.

You, however, are pretty demeaning in your attempts to stifle other people. If anything YOUR off-topic posts have derailed the thread and discouraged the OP from engaging.

Everyone just stop fighting. Fine, then it's a bad idea. You don't have to fight.

I personally don't like this idea, but why are you people hating on him so much?? Mulch of the hate is because they don't want you dropping "5 pekkas" or "5 dragons". Did you read the thread!??!? You guys are making fools of yourself, way more foolish than the person who made the thread. Even though the person who made the thread has a foolish idea.

I think this would cause the game to be way to imbalanced consider gowipe. Let's say the attacker was not very skill full and all the wizards died to splash damage and big bombs. Only the queen can attack air(if attacker brought one and isn't upgrading) Having some ballons in the camp can now cause some serious damage, while being unharmed. It is was a cool idea just wasn't thought out very well that is all.