![Trollface ¦]](./images/smilies/troll.gif)
popfor wrote:jessy bby u r so bootiful u r a little princess from hevin and all thiese grodi men just want to use ur running skills in reel camberts. bby. its ok. I love you.
ChildhoodObesity wrote:why would juukin lie
Ozzy123 wrote: We are better at this game than you, we won, end of story.
Patchouli_Knowledge wrote:If the kingdom is malicious, you are less likely to be targeted especially if the effort to reward ratio is low. If the kingdom is beneficial, while they grant kingdom bonus and perhaps some positive, they cannot prevent attack from raiders and can only avenge you if willing to.
Kaios wrote:So basically good people = shit players and shit people = good players. Not saying that statement is inaccurate but is a game that follows that sort of philosophy really going to attract many players at all?
Patchouli_Knowledge wrote:If the kingdom is malicious, you are less likely to be targeted especially if the effort to reward ratio is low.
Patchouli_Knowledge wrote:If the kingdom is beneficial, while they grant kingdom bonus and perhaps some positive, they cannot prevent attack from raiders and can only avenge you if willing to.
Aceb wrote:It doesn't matter how big defenses I will built up, if I have to leave from time to time to restock on things. Also, as I mentioned, recently-appearing horse-raiders with visible weapons are a bit scary.
Atamzsiktrop wrote:
Infectedking wrote:
dafels wrote:I like to be under Frosty's command.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 86 guests