ADude

Cant say I care too much about that old and beat up thing, they are welcome to it if they really like though.

No, not at all.

I do like this, very legit DoW. Mostly just glad you guys aren't pulling an OP here, I was worried for a little while.. :popcorn:

Looking back now, this is pretty hilarious.

It's not troll :p Also, I'm not sure how it's possible for anyone to not see where the money is.

Must have missed that :) (Fixed, he was 6k the 15th and 5k on the 16th. Which isn't exactly better, but whatever.) But.. Even with saying that you are just adding more of a disadvantage to an already uneven nation match up, this is true for the entire war.. You yourself said you had an advantage in the upper ranges (which is all that really matters, maybe some in the mid but not much.) and when you say "oh they just need to work a little harder or change some things", it doesn't change anything, the stats are still the same and an uneven war is going to be nothing but an uneven war. Also I hate bringing this up, but I've personally been on both ends of it, with defending and declaring in gov and not in gov. You need to take some consideration towards reputation, you cannot honestly say that already coming in with an advantage and knowing what Skaro does militarily you felt OK with this war, over other possible AA's.. Discard that if you want, I don't care because the fact is that you were still walking into this with an advantage and you guys knew that. Now let me be clear, do I care that Skaro and Misfits are being rolled? No, not at all. I just want to make sure people see if for what it really is, a downdelcare.

Wasso: was 14.2k NS on 15, declared on Rathouse (8K) Antonia: Was 12k on 2/16, declared on jon elway (7k) Alabama (5k) Blackstorm: 12k on 2/15, declared on barrybondo (6k) jon elway (7k) Do you really want me to keep going? Also there is no !@#$@#$ slight about it, as I told you on IRC. It's a BS war. The nation ranges never don't match up. Also besides in "coalilition" war I've never actively looked for a downdeclare. Lastly, You seem to give some kind of !@#$% about past rounds to have gone along with this.

Really depends on what they want out of the game.

You've already got a "coalition" for it, what more of a response could you want? :)

Holy !@#$@#$ christ.. Because they should give a !@#$ about what you think of them. Let me get this straight, you are !@#$ posting in response to a poorly written but still vaild response. Good job Paul. Also, LOL at your "OP thread" comment, get off your pedestal. Few key words here. 1: Coalition 2: Previous rounds Responses.. 1: There shouldn't be a coalition, yes I will be the first to admit that I was part of a few. This was when TE was twice if not three times as large (Larger the further we go back). All you are doing now with your "coalition" is making things stale in the long run, how do you think we got here? 2: Who gives a !@#$? Again, I can say that I did this in the past, do I regret it? Yes. It's not worth it, just stop grudging over stupid things. Also, again. They don't give a !@#$ about how you view mass recruiting, stop being a dick about it. They have different views on membership than you do, and yes I'm sure that they should be sorry their larger nations of 8k NS weren't able to withstand your downdeclares, same goes for Misfits. (Also looking at your wars bro, nice down declares.) Also, if you doubt me on this, I will pull stats directly from your war pages. Sometimes your posts physically cause me pain.

Because LoNN and Della Luna were doing that right?

If you wanted to hit money, you should have hit TPC.

You know what it means. Nations/Total NS/ANS/Nukes Them: 43 227,378 5.2k 2 OP: 22 180,730 8.215 22

Who is using post update numbers?

Updeclare on paper, downdeclare in nation ranges. Although that is just a trick everyone has been using for forever, so I can't blame you too hard for that. That's all I have to say :)

Sounds legit.

Kiwi is too cool for that.

As one of the RE nations that will be nuked to hell and back, this should be good. :popcorn:

No..

You have responded in similar fashion in the past. :v: :v: :v: :v: :v: :v: :v:

DAT SPIN! Yes, sounds like some small newbish alliance that has no idea what its doing.

Good luck

No, because it has been this way since round fucking 2. Alliance(s) declares > Alliance(s) declared on cry's "not fair" for a different asinine reason every time. Also don't pretend that you've never declared a war that has been in some way seen as unfair, everyone has.

You would lose a lot of focus with waiting a week. Also go back to the 60 day round but increase starting cash? :awesome:

This doesn't work.