[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1357617366' post='3072656']But Clash, you intentionally started a thread talking about the spy attack, an act of war, against tW by RE.
[...]
Two questions, why the thread and why no response to the Act of War, other than negotiating with the AA that attacked tW?[/quote]
First of all. As the two biggest alliances I would rather have waited for a while and made this our highlight war of the round, sometime just after mid round maybe. But here we are going at it now, so whatever. I know all the rest of the alliances would rather we just fight to death, and each other, all round long so you can cherry pick whatever YOU want to do. I do hope you'll understand that we're going to do what WE want to do, not what YOU want us to do. I give you the same respect I wish you'd give us.

There were no negotiations, please don't overstate stuff like that. When you guys hit SUN it was obvious that RE and tW were going to fight. So why !@#$% around on it? "Well Stelios, looks like we're going to war." "Yep Clash. Might as well ASAP I guess." "This update?" "Sure." That's pretty much it. Not exactly the fiscal cliff.

I love all this "You should have dropped your lives RIGHT NOW and immediately war each other, doing what we tell you do!" crap. There were football games on Sunday, Innocence and I were going out on a wench hunt saturday night, I had family stuff going on, and whatever else. I'm pretty sure my members have lives too and I dedicate a lot of my time to this game as it is. Sorry I've got a life, I expect my alliance members to do so as well, and we don't dedicate them to living by the precepts of everyone else.

Anyways, RE got caught and we didn't. That was why i started the thread, I was trying to goad them into attacking us. We've done all the attacking the last couple of rounds and it's good for an alliance to get attacked from time to time. You have to learn to defend as well as attack. It's pretty much that simple. This was the best we were going to get.

Well, I actually did get caught, but only after we knew for sure we were going to war, and their spy ops picked up at that time as well. Just because we don't noise about this stuff on the OWF doesn't mean stuff wasn't going on. I hate this stupid place, half the posters here live under a bridge in a van down by the river. Pfft, I go weeks at a time without posting anything here except DoWs and I hope this place burns down in a fire.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='dockingscheduled' timestamp='1357602395' post='3072595']
1. just for clarification clash, u keep referencing the WD-MH war but to be genuinely frank, the problem with that war was that WD just didn't fight back. we had no way on knowing that when the war was declared. we hardly put any of them in anarchy off the blitz cause we simply didn't have enough nations to cover 14-15 of them with our 8-9. their small retaliation wasn't anything we could help, and we certainly couldn't help that their limited counters were basically all on our inactive 10th nation. numbers were good, we just had no way of knowing they 1. wouldn't counter with wars, 2. didn't have great warchests 3. didn't coordinate

anyway, you keep referencing PS as if it was some bully that down-declared and kept things safe when truth is PS was almost always the underdog fighting an up hill battle. PS accomplished everything it really wanted to do. flags, civil wars, success in the face of overwhelming odds, lots of fun was had. i think the amount of time we dedicated to TE wore a lot of us out, and quite honestly these grudges grow old too. our involvement in this is nothing more than a grudge, and that isn't very entertaining for me anymore.
[/quote]

1. YES! This war has none of those problems.

2. NO! Never said any such thing about PS. I did say that most of them aren't around anymore. Whatever reasons they have for that, I doubt they quit playing ALL games, they just quit playing THIS game. As previously stated, with all games, it's like a fun/time ratio. "Is this game enough fun to spend my precious real life time on?" For most of PS, the answer is not anymore. Well the Warriors are still having enough fun for the time we spend. Most of us have not quit, and to me that's a measure of long-term success - perhaps the ONLY measure that matters there. If I didn't have to waste my time answering stupid sniving little wenches and their stupid ridiculous [s]little[/s] long obnoxiously bs posts, I'd be having even more fun. Not yours, of course lol.

The grudges really do grow old. I hate that crap and I honestly believe it's what has driven so many people away. They are NOT fun, not for the bulk of people who just want to play a game. There will be no grudges between the alliances of this war though. Certainly not between RE and tW - although for others, it's apparently more fun for THEM if we did.

Edited to add: I missed part of your last paragraph. I had no idea Stelios was going to include you until the last moment when I showed him a copy of this DoW, and he told me to put you in it. If I had to bet it's because your compadre trolls him constantly across all threads, just like he is doing to me in this thread. That's not fun for most people either and it's not a coincidence that Stelios hit him personally. I think he threw you in just so he could do that lol.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357600147' post='3072578']
When you can't debate actual point, I guess you just say the other guy is whining. [/quote]

I debated all your stupid points many posts ago and beat the crap out of them. Your war was a big down-declare where you hit and nuked an alliance without nukes, etc etc etc. This war will have more wars going both ways than your stupid down declares ever do, etc etc etc. This war will have more fun for more people involved than your wars ever do etc etc etc. Nothing you have babbled about contradicts any of that.

That you continue to constantly snivel means nothing to me, but yeah all you have done so far is cry and !@#$%* and snivel some more and whiiinneeeee some more. That is literally the only thing not fun about this war - your incessant sniveling like a spoiled little child mad because someone did something you don't like. No wonder so many people quit this game if that's the way you and so many others want to play it. Grow a pair, quit your repeated crying and pull up your panties, or quit and go away. Either way makes this war more fun.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='hartfw' timestamp='1357584081' post='3072490']stuff[/quote]

I don't even think we are using terms the same. You seem to think a blitz means one side getting killed by another side at update. To me, a blitz is attacking right before update, then attacking again right after update. There is no logic at all to thinking that a blitz going both ways is safer than a blitz where you just pound on someone who wasn't paying enough attention. You guys always take the safe route. We try to be braver than that.

OK finally this one lol

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1357590137' post='3072514']
For me personally I remarked about fighting to win rather than merely to have fun because, like PS, OP has always been smaller than many of the other big massive AAs. This has made us evolve to make blitzing an artform and something we take pride in, the PS blitz on MI back in the day was a thing of beauty and an inspiration for us. To be on the recieving side of an OP blitz, no matter if you hate us or not, is devastating and our bread and butter, we rely upon doing that intial damage to overcome numbers. Prearranged wars for fun, nothing wrong and I am not knocking this war at all, takes away from our strength and we will never do one.[/quote]

Now take everything you just said here about why you love a blitz - and double it, because there were two alliances blitzing instead of one. It's double the blitz and double the fun! It wouldn't take away from your strength at all, if anything it highlights it. Can you out-blitz the other alliance? When there are wars going both ways I guarantee you it's more exciting than when they are just going one way.

According to your war screens you have around 83 offensive wars and 8 defensive wars. While you guys clearly do this better than most, it's definately not uncommon for the attacking alliance to have twice as many (or a lot more if they got a lot of anarchies) attacking wars as defensive wars. MH's WD war was just like that, almost no return wars. Well, not in this case! We have as many defending wars as we do attacking wars.

I'm sure you are having more fun than SUN is. Wouldn't you be having even more fun if you got incoming wars as well as offensive wars? More war = more fun? The more wars you have the more stuff gets blown up? All alliances are going to get blown up, not just one side.Top to bottom, across all alliances involved, there will be more fun had here than in any other war of the round. I don't care what any sniveling little "we have to win at all costs cause my self-esteem is involved" weasels have to say, I think thats a fact.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='dockingscheduled' timestamp='1357587739' post='3072500']people didn't quit cause they were bored. people just moved on.[/quote]

I didn't say bored. People play games because they are fun. This is why they are called games and not real life. This game happens to be down to a fraction of what it once was. You can come up with a thousand little reasons why, but all of them add up to this: The fun/time ratio in this game wasn't worth it anymore or else they would still be playing. You are exactly right about that last part, they moved on to something else they found more fun, and for them, worth the time spent from their lives.

When someone down-declares and beats the crap out of someone in an easy war - MAYBE they had fun. The ones who they hit though, usually didn't. This is what SE has become, where all they want to do is curbstomps and win no matter what. I don't find it much fun on either of those sides, and that so many fewer people play the game now says to me most of them didn't either. This is what TE used to be, and for some people, still is. People quit playing a game when it's not enough fun for them anymore.

Well, we are still haing fun over here. This is why so many Warriors keep on playing.
For me, the only part that isn't fun right now is all the crying, whining and sniveling.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='scytale' timestamp='1357598451' post='3072562']I think it was just added literally as stated in the OP. [/quote]

Thanks and exactly. We had about 10 extra little crappy inactive nations more than RE and I wanted to give them someone to fight. You guys happened to have 11 (mostly) smaller nations. I literally tacked you onto the bottom of the target list the last second before sending it out, after I ran out of RE targets to assign.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

I'm not even going to bother reading all that stupid crap. You really like this whiny little go back and forth huge post bs, and I hate it.This is exactly why I don't post here most of the time. Geez dude, are you really only good for crying like an immature wench when someone tries to do something different?

I'm not going to waste any more time on your ridiculous posts. You used to be respectable. Not anymore, apparently all you do these days is whine like Napa valley. So $%&@ off. You're a waste of space and time.

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357595939' post='3072545']
But, Clash has been working on a pre-arranged war since the start of the round. He even asked us if we wanted to be in one earlier this round. (We declined, obviously.) I'm guessing he wasn't looking to be on the defensive end (he still could have been in a pre-arranged war), he was just looking to have a pre-arranged war. It's a cowardly move all around.[/quote]

If you aren't looking for an offensive war, then you HAVE to be waiting for the defensive, idiot. We waited for someone to hit us after giving great provacation, and no one did. You can't control someone attacking you, someone just has to gather up the guts to do it. No one did.

I try to do what makes things fun for the members of my alliance. I think the fact that my alliance is still here, going strong, growing, getting better and having as much fun as ever - while most of yours quit the game - means I'm better at that then you are. You failed to evolve. This game is down to a fraction of what it once was because of sniveling little clowns just like you.

The idea that your weak punk down-declare was somehow "more courageous" than what we've done here - in a stupid game, no less - is absolutely moronic at best and barking mad at the worst. I offcially no longer give a !@#$ what you think. I still have slots open, You got a problem with me, come get me. Send someone you pathetic clown.

I think you're a crying little !@#$%* who lacks imagination and can only fight down anymore. I have already repeatedly beaten the crap out of your stupid little war where you were afraid to fight anyone who would threaten you. This war is a lot better by every measure possible. Most importantly - in a game - fun. Are you really going to just cry and complain everytime someone does something you don't like?

Since it seems sniveling is what you love most about this game, then I guess we've given you the most fun you've had in rounds.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

What Komplex said! Those who have done it know how much fun it is

[quote name='hartfw' timestamp='1357581394' post='3072469']
1. The WD war was a terrible war. But not because it was guaranteed to be lopsided, again they had more NS, more nations and the ANS advantage wasn't large.

2. ANS, nations, and nukes were all closer then this current affair. And a good portion of our nations hadn't done TE before. It was terrible because they didn't fight back except where they found the least amount fo resistance at all, making what could have been a decent war into something considerably less so.

3. This war hopefully will be a great war, you two can really have at it if you let yourselves. But at least to me, there is a clear softness and safety of having your nation not attacked until you know exactly when it will be. If that softness and safety is needed for you to enjoy TE, well then I guess I'm glad you found someone who is so eager to have the same for them. But its not a trait I look up to or would brag about like you have been.
[/quote]

1. The avg NS was not remotely as close as you guys are trying to make it out to be. Include your two blitzes into the equation. More Ns and nations doesn't mean crap when you have bigger ones by nearly 50% right after the opening attack. How is that close?

2. No they were NOT. You nuked them four times and they never nuked you. You guys did most of the wars, you guys blitzed them twice, the list goes on and on. I love that your idea of "close" is you having clear definate advantages. You admit they didn't fight back - well we made absolute sure that RE would fight back. You guys ended up with a very safe war. We chose differently.

3. I think the clear softness and safety is knowing you will be doing the attacking and not being attacked back, that you will be dictating the wars not your opponents, etc, etc. We had nations flying back and forth at each other, that was a lot more exciting than just the same ol' suckershot that everyone usually does.

It's pretty simple, the build up for the war was for most of both sides not just one.
Thats not safer. That's tougher. A lot more fun too, for both sides not just yours.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='Prozenz' timestamp='1357572745' post='3072425']Ah, the planned 5 days of war, this is so RE, Clash. I expected better from tW. [/quote]

Where the heck have you been? Did you quit the game because it wasn't fun anymore?
Well, we are actually trying something different from the way that bored you off the planet.

Seriously people. Evolve.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

I'm getting tired of stupid long posts, and I'm sure most everyone else is too.

[quote name='hartfw' timestamp='1357577157' post='3072443']
I think your making my point. The initial blitz was where considerable damage was done. Instead, both tW and RE choose to assure that the one other AA that could initially blitz them and do that much damage wouldn't. Its pretty simple.

Its much safer to have your alliance hit when you know its coming, you can't bother arguing otherwise. Its much safer to keep building knowing that this won't come until the prearranged time. tW and RE made sure to make sure that neither got sucker punched. Instead, they told their opponents when to line up defending troops, collect before hand, swap in as much military improvements etc.

You took the safe route. Don't pretend otherwise. Your blitz you sent out and yoru blitz you received wasn't a blitz. It was lines of soldiers with muskets waiting to fire in turns. Maybe better for casualties, but not intended for maximum damage -- how can it be when its arranged to coincide with maximum defense?[/quote]

We appear to have very different ideas of "safe." I think safe is hitting an alliance you know you are going to kill, when you have much bigger nations, and you are suckerpunching them when they aren't looking. That's the safe move. It's what everyone does. According to bcortell you do 500-1000 ns damage to the other guys before they do any to you. THAT is safe.

By your own count you had a lot fewer defensive wars than offensive wars. Again, that's safe to me. You aren't going to take as much damage as the other nations are. You chose the wars, not them. Well, in this war the number of offensive and defensive wars should end up about even. There was no safe advantage like you took - TWICE.

You are not going to convince me that a straight up war is safer than suckerpunching someone twice. You guys nuked and didn't get nuked, that's safe. I don't think you even remotely putting in a good argument. Like, don't talk about muskets, that's just cluttering things up. There were no "turns" in this war, it happened all at once. There were turns in YOUR war - you took first turn, twice.

We really do appear to have diferent goals in TE.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

Jeez I hope I lined this crap up right.

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357571782' post='3072419'][quote name='Clash' timestamp='1357561398' post='3072392']1. YOU used nuclear weapons against nations you knew absolutely could not nuke you back.
I expect to get nuked repeatedly in the wars I declare. Can't say the same, can you? tW > MH[/quote]When we blitzed, it was 1 nuke to 0 nukes. Our guy's nuke was spied before the first update (he should have known better). So 0 to 0 nukes by midnight of the first night. I wasn't in the top 5% at the time of the blitz.

Either way, a nuke is just an extra powerful CM. There is nothing wrong with using all the tools available to you to beat someone. We don't play the bull !@#$ you do with non-nuclear scuffles and crap like that.[/quote]

This one was about YOU, not MH. I should have made the difference clearer.

YOU used nukes against nations you admit were a lot smaller than you. Wow you gotta suck and I think that makes you a big fat wimp. That CM stuff is always just stupid too, especially since you were doing the nuking and weren't takling any. Have you ever seen the damage comparason? LOL A CM doesn't put you in nuclear effects. I bet they had no warchest to begin with and you felt like a big tough guy nuking 'em and trying to make 'em reroll. It just underlines your down-declare.

...and yes you DO play non-nuclear scuffles. [b]YOU DAMN WELL DO.[/b]
Well, for YOU, not the other alliance. The nuke screens don't lie.

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357571782' post='3072419']You just tried to use this point above. Once again, we only had 1 nuke at the time of the blitz and 0 nukes by the time midnight hit. Neither of our AA's had nukes. I was just able to get into the top 5% because of other wars (not by yourselves, of course. You wanted to sit in the top 5% loading up on nukes before warring).

[quote name='Clash' timestamp='1357561398' post='3072392']2. YOU fought an alliance with no nukes.
WE are fighting an alliance with twice as many nukes as us. tW > MH[/quote][/quote]

This was about the alliance, not you specifically. Your alliance had nukes. Theirs did not. You dropped nukes. They did not. All your excuses don't change this. In this war our opponents have twice as many nukes as we do. Compared to your war, there is no comparison.

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357571782' post='3072419']
Like I said, this pre-arranged stuff is ridiculous. You knew either they would come for you, or you would go after them. Instead of trying to outsmart your opponent, you make a deal with them about the war. Here's one for ya... Will there be peace before a winner and loser of the war is decided? Of course not, you guys aren't men. You don't fight to win. Go ahead, prove me wrong. Fight until there is a clear winner in the war. When was the last time you've done that?

[quote name='Clash' timestamp='1357561398' post='3072392']3. YOU started your war with a blitz against apparently unprepared opponents.
WE started our war against people who knew the exact second we were coming for them. tW > MH[/quote][/quote]

We aren't your puppets either. I do not WANT to fight all round long just to make YOU happy. What kind of stupid is that?

[u]Everyone[/u] fights to win, even those who suck at war. However, we have always fought to win as evenly matched wars as possible, or even updeclares - whereas ALL you do is fight to win, any way possible. You guys were all flag huggers too, something we never did.We appear to have very different goals in this game. My goal is for as many people as possible to have as much fun as possible. That's winning for me, and I don't give a flying !@#$ whether you like it or not. Got it?

Games are for fun, thats why they are games after all. You appear to just want to curbstomp someone and win no matter what, and if they don't have any fun in your stomp well screw them. I don't think that makes you good. I don't think that has been good for CN, and I don't think it's good for TE.

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357571782' post='3072419']
This is how I know you're full of !@#$. Your statement is completely wrong. Minutes after TE came back online, we were declaring wars. We had 9 of the first 10 wars declared after TE came back. The only other war was one of your guys on a tech raid, because of course, you were still just sitting around.

We continued to fight until peace was reached. Peace hadn't been reached before TE went down nor was it once TE came back. We filled our slots with wars until peace was reached, which was 1/6/2013.

[quote name='Clash' timestamp='1357561398' post='3072392']4. YOUR war was stopped after a couple days. Three maybe? Not your fault, but still true.
OUR war goes at least 5 days under much tougher conditions. tW > MH
[/quote][/quote]

...so you got in TWO blitzes on them?! You are complaining about this war with a mutual even blitz, and your war you had TWO of them? You took that 500-100 ns advantage damage thing you were talking about TWICE and you think that as a good war and use stats that hide it? What the hell is wrong with you? Can you not even do MATH!?! Wow. Nicely underlines what I meant about "much tougher conditions" for this war than you had.

We are very far apart in what we want from TE.
No wonder most of PS quit - and most of tW has stayed. We are still having fun.
Which underlines my point the best way possible.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

This post was pretty much silly long. I'm breaking it in two lol

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357571782' post='3072419']
True, no one DoW'ed you. That doesn't mean you couldn't have DoW'ed someone long ago. Instead, you chose to just sit back for the first two weeks of the round. Don't complain when people pass on you if you're going to do that.[/quote]
Yeah we could have blitzed someone is a big down-declare like you guys did but we ended up with a much harder fight. No one was complaining. I love this trend where pointing out the truth is twisted as a complaint. Hell all you have done is complain all night long. You are whining like the south of France over there.

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357571782' post='3072419']We had 9 guys active to their 17 (really 16 if the 3 NS nation didn't build up, but he did, so 17). Those stats were after the blitz, where it's entirely possible to lose 500-1000 NS per nation. They hovered around 12K total NS higher than us. With our small AA's, it isn't difficult to have the number of nations actually matter more than ANS. [/quote]
Again, my point in the differences between our wars and why yours sucked. THEY lost 500-100 per nation and you didn't. This is why the stats I provided are more accurate. There was no such imbalance in this war between RE and tW. it was straight up. That last line is BS. I can take down multiple nations that are smaller than me by myself if I have better planes and they don't have the nukes to kill them. They must coordinate together just to win grounds - which isnt always possible, all it takes is conflicting life schedules.

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357571782' post='3072419']I believe we had 18 wars in our blitz. We anarchied 5 out of 17 nations. They countered with 6-8 of their own declarations. Hardly few returns considering the AA sizes.[/quote]

Yeah there was a big difference between the amount of wars you recieved as opposed to the ones you declared. This is why your post about how them having more nations makes a difference is wrong - because it did NOT make a difference. In this war it's pretty much even. I'll take a straight up mano-y-mano fight against your blitz down-declare every time.

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357571782' post='3072419']This is really what shows me how pussified TE has become. Fun is now fighting pre-arranged wars, most likely for only five days, and then peacing them without caring who won or lost. It used to be coming up with a plan for the round, executing it while kicking the !@#$ out of everyone along the way, doing whatever you needed to win wars. You're more worried about a "total fun" index than winning. Truly a womenly thing. Take the kids to soccer practice, Clash. Hopefully, they have fun.[/quote]

Just a big long string of stupid insults and circular reasoning, and not a point to be made. It sucks because it sucks and it sucks because I said it sucks and I'm going to whine a lot blah blah blah. It used to be that huge curbstomps were the norn and not the exception. I think TE is a lot better than that now, well at least over here. Over there all you care about is winning a fight, not the quality of the fight.

Taking the easy war doesn't make you good.
This war is a LOT harder than your WD war and you are insane if you think differently.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1357575487' post='3072437']
I do agree with Bcortel's point about fighting to win. [/quote]

Everyone fights to win. Hell, if all I want to do is win, we would have hit New league of Nations a long time ago and crushed hem. Sure we win. But I prefer a good fight to even winning. This war is straight up. It's a lot harder than the one you guys picked, and I'll match that up against anything you want to throw at me. After all, you guys blitzed an unwary opponent and we blitzed one we made sure was as wary as they could be. We pick harder wars than you do. It's not even close.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='Freddy' timestamp='1357568284' post='3072412']
Clash does it every round...takes minimal damage...[/quote]

Didn't I war you twice last round? Geeez you must have sucked LOL

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

So much to answer so I'm skipping parts of it.

[quote name='hartfw' timestamp='1357571449' post='3072417']
Those war stats still aren't very accurate for us.

12/28 Pre-war
W.D 16 nations, 13 built, 59,861 NS, 4275 ANS excluding 0 infra nations (numbers above are off)
M.H. 10 nations 10 built, 50,777 NS, 5078 ANS

To me, thats pretty close. Taking an 800 ANS advantage but giving up 3 extra nations and 9k NS.[/quote]

Those stats come before you sucker punch the other alliance with quads, make sure you pick all the intial wars, etc. So actually I don't think they are the most accurate at all. The stats I used come after you got in first attacks. You guys were already stronger and they were already weaker.

Each side in this war has fought back a lot harder than WD did with you guys. I hope you aren't going to try and argue that? Already in this war, each side has fought back much much harder than WD did in your entire war.

[quote name='hartfw' timestamp='1357571449' post='3072417']I won't say that the fighting back made it a great war because it didn't. War Doves centered all there counters on 2 smaller nations, adopting the strategy that they would rather win versus 2 lower nations and lose badly in 8 then fight all 10 close.[/quote]

Well I think was more like they were utterly unorganized and had no plan at all, which means they do almost nothing, except for a couple easy to win wars. Occam's razor hard at work. Those are all the counters you got, really? We have a lot more than that on a nation-by-nation basis.

[quote name='hartfw' timestamp='1357571449' post='3072417']
But the thing is, more then anything you are right that it was a blitz. Thats how you do maximum damage.

You can say you didn't blitz nations as an argument for how well your hung. But both of you did grab other AA's and blitzed them in this prearrangement, so its not entirely true. (Something I don't begrudge )[/quote]

What bcortell said, I just threw someone in so our little nations - who kind of sucks anyways and are usually inactive former unaligns - had someone to fight too. we had 9 molre nations than RE so I picked an alliance with 11 nations. Meh..

[quote name='hartfw' timestamp='1357571449' post='3072417']And while it sounds good to say we are presetting a war versus each other so the other person will be able to fight back more. [b]But the result is you also aren't blitzed[/b]. They aren't blitzed. And you can build without worrying about the fear of an incoming attack up to the minute before the war starts. [/quote]

What are you talking about? Did you not look at the war screens? We blitzed each other, it wasn't just one-sided. This argument that someow sucker punching an unorganized opponent first makes for a better war than hitting someone who is very organized, expecting you and hitting you back, is just silly. For competition's sake, it's not even close.

[quote name='hartfw' timestamp='1357571449' post='3072417']This is war, if your really going to do it why are you waiting for when they are set and not blitzing the pre-arrangement.[/quote]

I don't think there was going to be much of a surprise. Stelios and I were in the same channel watching the OP wars start. We knew we were going to be hitting each other. So what we should have hurried and blown off the football games to attack at noon? Blasphemous!

I think you guys think a good war is a curbstomp. Thats what you did against WD after all, and apparently it's all you ever want to fight. Well I think those are the wars that really kill the game. I'll stand by what i said: Across all alliances involved, from top to bottom, this war will be a LOT more fun than your war was.

Why are you guys so afraid of a straight-up fight?
That's the way I see it.

[Hellas Declaration of War on TPC]

[quote name='Lorlax' timestamp='1357557797' post='3072377']I ZIed 2 nations in 2 days then... Damn i'm good. Plus did serious damage to the TPC nation with most infra... all in 2 days[/quote]

...YOU, I heart. Even in a downdeclare. Just sayin'.

These are our stats from last updated: 1/7/2013 5:25:58 AM
Roman Empire: 53 nations | 46 active | 392,062 tot ns | 7,397 avg ns | 121 nukes
Warriors: 61 nations | 46 active | 364,994 tot ns | 5,984 avg ns | 58 nuke

Just also sayin' our war is better than yours

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

I heart scytale!

Y'all know, since every other alliance ducked the two of us up to now?
I'd have to say that this war was mostly arranged by all y'all lol

---

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357539986' post='3072324']Damn, TPC has been the most manly AA so far this round. They're the only ones that chose to fight after being stomped on for a little bit instead of just taking peace. I can't say I would see you or Stelios do the same. Paul used to, but I haven't been around for a couple rounds.[/quote]

Since you have questioned my manliness, and I happen to have stupid free time right now, and I'm a night person anyways who happens to be really bored for something to do, I shall now begin to crush you with the twin iron grips of reason and math. We shall begin by comparing your war with ours to see who is really more manly.

First of all, stats:
[quote name='Samwise' timestamp='1356764045' post='3069045']War Doves avg NS: 3,521
Muscle Hamsters avg NS: 5,078[/quote]

These are our stats from last updated: 1/7/2013 5:25:58 AM
Roman Empire: 53 nations | 46 active | 392,062 tot ns | 7,397 avg ns | 121 nukes
Warriors: 61 nations | 46 active | 364,994 tot ns | 5,984 avg ns | 58 nukes

Hey we've actually closed the pre-war avg gap a bit, wtg us. However, they do have 2x+ as many nukes as we do. I think our stats certainly look a lot better than yours does. This is pretty much an updeclare for us, and you pretty much declared down. As a matter of post-fact, the results of your war ALONE say you didn't fight people tough enough. The pre-war stats just back that up.

[quote name='President S O' timestamp='1357279398' post='3071165']
Annnnd still no return wars :\[/quote]

According to the war screens, you guys got very few return wars. However this won't be a problem in our war (even though Stelios won't send ME anyone to play with), seeing as how we will probably get about an equal number of offensive and defensive wars. I'm pretty sure you can't say the same about your war.

Yet more points:

1. YOU used nuclear weapons against nations you knew absolutely could not nuke you back.
I expect to get nuked repeatedly in the wars I declare. Can't say the same, can you? tW > MH

2. YOU fought an alliance with no nukes.
WE are fighting an alliance with twice as many nukes as us. tW > MH

3. YOU started your war with a blitz against apparently unprepared opponents.
WE started our war against people who knew the exact second we were coming for them. tW > MH

4. YOUR war was stopped after a couple days. Three maybe? Not your fault, but still true.
OUR war goes at least 5 days under much tougher conditions. tW > MH

On every scale ours is bigger than yours - but then you guys are hung like hamsters
My manly just slapped your manly upside it's food hole, didn't it?

Tl;dr: When all is said and done, our war will have been a LOT more fun than yours was. That goes for nations of all alliances involved and on every tier. Your war seems to have not even been fun enough for you, much less the alliance you hit down on. On the "total fun" index, this war slays every other war this round by a longshot. tW > MH.

[size=5]...also: [b]WE ARE MORE MANLY THAN YO[/b][/size][size=5][b]U. tW > MH.[/b][/size]
[size=5]Do the Muscle Hamsters know the meaning the of word "scoreboard?"[/size]






[size=1].....of course you do get to say you're in this war too...[/size]

[Hellas Declaration of War on TPC]

[quote name='Alexandros o Megas' timestamp='1357553093' post='3072368']Finally ... After been challenged you went to fight your first war in this round after 22 days ... not bad ... lol

Good luck! We will meet later during the round and then you will be able to prove yourself![/quote]

I saved these stats just for you, ol' fellow:

Current Time: 1/3/2013 11:33:20 PM
TPC: 903
Hellas: 5122

That's before update of the day after TE came back just a couple hours before that. We all got 3 days+ of free inactivty and you had only warred for about two days before the break. TPC sucks blah blah blah... but let's talk about what a humongous cowardly down-declare you made in this war. You ducked us. You chose TPC. This isn't complaining, this isn't crying, this is dark stark reality beating the crap out of you.

[Hellas Declaration of War on TPC]

[quote name='Alexandros o Megas' timestamp='1357536822' post='3072297']Clash cries here from morning till night ...

Stelios just about the same ...

[u]Hypocritically[/u] avoiding to look at the face one of the other ...[/quote]

...he said with tears in his eyes as his nations burn. You don't even use that word right.
What, are we RE's puppets now too?! I just killed all of Stelios's air force and I did it face to face

BTW just checked the war screens.
That's a nice move begging for help with TPC, I hope we didn't spoil it for you.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='dogbite' timestamp='1357541633' post='3072340']TW finds themself where TPC was last round.[/quote]

Well I dunno about THAT. This is a pretty even war. It might even be that RE has an edge since they have 2x our nukes, but whatever. We each hit other alliances just to make things weird. It should be lots of fun

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1357541308' post='3072335']Remember the old song, "American Pie"?

This war will be the "day TE dies".[/quote]

Pfft our wars are significantly harder than your war lol

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

I also notice the wars you declared were huge down-declares.

[quote name='shirunei' timestamp='1357542136' post='3072342']Heh. If I was a lesser man I might have acceded to that act of passion. I'll stick with destroying your boys though. Let the kings duel amongst themselves as is only proper.[/quote]

Translation: I talk it but I don't walk it

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='shirunei' timestamp='1357541435' post='3072337']I suppose one should be a little more somber and respectful when attending a funeral. [/quote]

I got defensive slots left. Come get some, son

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357539986' post='3072324']
So two rounds in a row now.. really hope this isn't the norm for tW, but after being asked if we wanted in earlier, I feel like it's going that way.[/quote]

Well, sorry you don't like it. We do. Once a round isn't so much.
Again, not every war will be like this, but under these circumstances it was a pretty obvious war.

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357539506' post='3072319']You guys (and actually, specifically tW (what is this 2 or 3 rounds in a row)) [/quote]

No just last round. I know you guys love and feed off the complaining and sniveling, but I actually don't. That crap keeps me away from the OWF for long periods at a time. This is also about the most even way to war possible - I don't like the cheapo down-declare wars either. It won't happen every war, but every now and then it's a nice break from all the craptalk.


Edited to add: And there are always sniveling exceptions, like shirunei

[b] [/b]

[A joint Roman Empire and Warriors Production]

[quote name='sir pwnage' timestamp='1357538865' post='3072314']How so? They're just as bloody. We just both know about it before hand so everyone's online at update. It's actually a lot harder than hitting someone with no warning.[/quote]

Yeah what he said. After all, we were the only two left. We were obviouslty going to hit each. So why not?
Besids, try it sometime they are a lot of fun and cut the sniveling to a bare minimum lol