Man stop whining Zeta it was defended and well so defences are hard atm, big deal attacks have been like it for years, things will be worked out as they always are.
There is nothing hard about defenders just swopping in the sweet spots just good teamwork, so forts change hands a lot... good theres nowhere near enough of them anyway and since last year its been almost a waste of time for smaller alliances as they never get a look in.
Perhaps the big guys should be avoiding the small forts and leave em to the smaller alliances to have fun in.
One thing ive noticed is that when things start to turn they do so drastically .. either your on the ball or your not.
Mediums are the easiest to attack and take .. always have been. I see a good defence and an attack that waited too long to mount the adven which was an opportunity missed.
Come on battles are supposed to be hard won and they have been for years see no reason why they should'nt be hard to defend now, the strong survive and those that adapt will prevail. Just have to think a bit different than before thats all.
When crits get fixed itll be different again, have patience.
victor i was in the attack, and am actually happy we didn't win, that 1 (look at round 20 or so if we wanted a rush was right open it was the leaders choice to have a bit of more fun first) since it saves us from some defence where we attend and at the end it results in a 90 vs 0 los, all teamwork we can do, hp is just unbeatable.
look at a fight, is it normal that a team that has massive offliners, that has almost 1.8k per person on average less hp then all those online defenders, nearly win or in other words coulda won?
just numbers: 100 attackers 5.7k hp per person average, with loads of offliners that been without los as well,
vs
84 defenders nearly 7.5k hp average per person mostly online and swapping.
you think its normal that such an attack, which wasn't even greatly or close to it executed smashes up the defence totally? the defence who swapped like hell and teamplayed a lot but still lost almost all defenders?
you refer to the past, but you could win attacks with good leads despite small hp advantages vs poor defences, but you needed excellent teamwork and good leads
and in opposite defenders could win vs an defence vs a way higher on hp attack, by awesome teamwork and swapping and tactics.
now get enough hp, and defence can do what they like, attackers can run all about but its barely if not impossible to defend.
thats what i am whining again, i agree attacking might have been to hard, but let me remind you also of the goals the admins wanted:
less importance in hp, more focus on skills, which should cause more teamwork and tactics. all of these aren't true, only way to win a defence is with a massive hp advantage or facing a horseload of offliners you can block off, and to win any attack, set sensible offline orders and make sure you got enough hp and numbers.
its just not good, and there no new worlds, but who would build a fort they can never defend? whats the point, you can only win defences if you are sure the other alliance outhp's the other alliance massively. these days its normal that attackers on the ground end up with as high or atleast close to the top dodges of defenders on own class towers, not to mention that most attackers do more damage from the ground then defenders from the towers?
and just swapping win defences? watch the next fight, they swapped all they could attack had some with bad offline orders, and quite a few offliners, but a full online defence could swap all they wanted but they still all died:
http://www.westforts.com/en15/battles/battle/21768
and i can show you enough examples of online defences that swapped all they could and still got shots to pieces, all teamwork and effort they tried failed,