Wired

Congrats to all!

Howl! o/ FTW o/ AW

Howl!

Howl! o/FTW

Good times were had, old friends are missed. My time in TPC was far too short for something so enjoyable, unfortunately we don't always get to choose our path forward. o/ TPC

Howl! o/ DK o/ FTW

Fun Fact: A freshly shaved Wereape creates over 50 high quality wigs and several dozen lesser quality toupees. Unfortunately the high degree of difficulty associated with shaving a fully grown Wereape means few have experienced the luxurious texture and unique odor a full mane of Wereape Hair offers. o/ FTW o/ DK

Yeah, that PM wouldn't be sarcasm would it? I mean after all, the dirty flag runner is pointing out that you and him have the same cash levels going on right? And since you are just a warrior and not a flag runner I guess he must be a pretty bad flag runner then right? If not he'd have way more than you right? You are correct, James has told you repeatedly we will handle it internally. Let me fill in between the lines for you - mind your own business and stay out of ours. If you honestly think any of these NEW guys are getting the flag you are delusional. Heck, it might be that some of them think they are...we don't. We will deal with them as members as we see fit, on our schedule. We don't take action based upon your assessment of your limited information, but thanks for your concern. So, back on point... Thanks for criticizing our members here and not privately, thanks for your continued concern over what we do with our members and thanks for making sure to criticize any props sent our way by others. We appreciate your continued efforts.

OK, let me more direct then, less political. You are not the only one responding to this thread, others are as well. The name calling is by them, and they are RE...RE Gov I might add. In addition to the name calling RE Gov also makes the claim that TPC is "endorsing" NEW hiding flag runners in COS. Interesting comments...from our friends. And you are correct, you spoke up to argue against this being an updeclare. Well, that might be something to argue if TPC was claiming it as such, we weren't. LE tried to give us a compliment and in no way even mentioned RE yet you still felt it necessary to point out that "in your opinion" TPC didn't deserve such props. Good to know you'll step in to suggest TPC doesn't deserve a compliment, even though LE's comments in no way degraded, or even addressed, RE. More to the point, it's nice to know our friends will make an unnecessary effort to suggest our actions have fault. Duly noted. There was no debate or argument until you started it. It is what it is, if you think this declare requires such scrutiny so be it. We see things differently.

Sorry if I took the "charm" comment the wrong way, I thought it implied the opposite of what you intended to convey. My bad. The point I was trying to make was that pre blitz stats are a better comparison than the numbers you took post blitz. I would hope you can agree that both AAs stats before either bought up military is comparing apples to apples. I would further hope you could agree that stats taken after blitz, with one AA fully militarized and the other not, are not measuring equal positions. With regards to 23 on 21 please note it says 21 "targets" and 23 "fighters", the assumption was some would not show for blitz and, as expected, they did not. It was also assumed that RE would have some nations grow NS quickly and expand the "targets" engaged in the first round of counters considerably. We never considered the projection of 23 on 21 to be an accurate number once actual wars were declared, it was a projection. The more realistic belief was that 25 hours into war the numbers would be closer to 20 TPC and 30 RE and that this growth would continue. At this time there are over 35 RE nations engaged. So, similar to your point that broad stats do not represent the whole picture I would suggest blitz stats do not represent the whole war. I can understand that from your perspective you see things differently then we do. From our perspective we see all of TPC/COS attacking your top and mid with the expectation more RE would enter the war, which they did. The closeness of the stats combined with the logical assumption that RE's larger nation count would have an impact made for a fair DOW IMO. I am sorry we can not agree on that point but I respect your position and we can simply agree to disagree. Again, in my opinion what is important is we focus on trying to have some fun playing the game and hopefully avoid any further name calling or any other aggressive comments towards each other.

/Begin Wall of Text There was no intent by TPC to down declare on RE. As the DOW states, this is a friend-with-benefits war, at least from our perspective. TPC wanted an offensive war with COS at our side to evaluate war performance, in consideration of our goals we felt RE was the best fit. It's really as simple as that. To suggest that "the third times the charm" implies that we tried something twice and failed, hoping the third attempt would work. We didn't "try" anything twice, RE attacked us in the first two wars, not the other way around. It also implies that TPC failed in the earlier wars. TPC and RE both dealt damage and both rebuilt and from our perspective it was simply some fun wars without any victory implied or confirmed. If RE wants to claim earlier victories I guess we'd have to look at some stats that support that position. It certainly doesn't matter enough to us to look up but afaik it was close, there was no clear victor. Similarly, we are not seeking any victory now, we are simply trying to have a fun war with an AA we have always considered friends. Our expectation was to have some fun and evaluate our members, that is all. With regard to numbers I will echo what I said to other AAs in previous discussions - [b]please compare apples to apples[/b]. The pre war stats show what both AAs looked like [b]BEFORE[/b] military buy up - this is an accurate comparison to assess the DOW. Using numbers from several hours after blitz compares our full strength to partial RE strength, many RE had not even bought back lost military let alone maxed their NS with full purchases nor had they countered yet and taken any NS away from us. Worse still, using stats several days into the war Clash does not give you a good comparison - you can compare pre war or post war, everything else provides tainted results. The only real value of mid war stats is for internal analysis of war performance or to argue the need for peace during a curb stomp. Expanded on the stats E posted earlier [b]let's take a closer look at the top nations only.[/b] These stats were also compiled one hour before blitz. RE 21 Targets 322,958 NS 15,378 ANS 133 nukes (15 nations) 5 MP's 12 SDI's 5 nations over 20k 6 between 15-20k 5 between 10-15 5 between 5-10 TPC/COS 23 Fighting 360,898 NS 15,691 ANS 159 nukes (18 nations) 6 MPs 6 SDIs 7 over 20k NS 4 between 15-20 9 between 10-15 3 between 5-10 As you can see the numbers were very close, we had more nukes and they had double our SDI count. Also, our larger navies bloated our NS/ANS but as many know navy has limited value in most wars, it certainly did in this war. As I said, this was never intended to be a down declare, we were very careful to make sure we were treating our friends fairly as I'm sure they were in their earlier DOWs on TPC. Beyond these very close numbers RE had more nations and would be capable of expanding their fighting force as the war progressed. We had no such option, what we brought was our entire effective fighting force. This is not our "upper tier", this is all of our fighters - 23 of our 28 nations. The remaining 5 nations are trade fillers and new recruits unprepared for war. Characterizing this as upper tier versus upper tier is incorrect. It would be more accurate to say this all of TPC/COS versus RE's best. Personally, I am disappointed when I see friends question our conduct or portray us as braggarts that down declare. As far as E's war actions I think when a single nation can tie up 45 nukes by putting 3 targets in anarchy [i]by himself[/i] that's just good strategy. As jraenar pointed out earlier, Romans being in Defcon 5 with no GCs created this opportunity, don't hate because we took advantage of it. I am sure it is always possible to come up with some criticism on any DOW, I am sure TPC could have criticized RE's first two DOWs if we really wanted to come up with something. We didn't feel it was necessary to try to find fault with our friends actions and even if we had we would have discussed it privately, not criticize their actions on the OWF. With regards to NEW I suggest you consider their reputation in SE, they are known as fighters...very capable fighters. I am sure if they were at all concerned with flag running in TE they could bring much more force to bear than the few NEW nations in COS. COS is more a crucible than a training AA, it exists to test and confirm member's desire and ability to fight. After this war some may be cut, others may be promoted to TPC having proven themselves as warriors. There is no automatic pass for any member, certainly not for members of any particular SE AA and certainly not for any flag runners. Some seem to think they've uncovered some grand plan to hide flag runners in COS, all I can say is thanks for the epic lulz! With regard to DM - he is not in COS, he is not in TPC. We have no idea what his intentions are this round, we don't even know what nation he is. You can believe this or not, I doubt TPC or DM will care either way. In closing I would just like to say good luck to all fighting. I thank those that support our actions and regret seeing some criticize us using distorted data. Most of all I hope that our intention to have some friendly war will not lead to hurt feelings by any involved. Hopefully we can focus on why we are here - to have fun! /End Wall of Text

I never said you did all down declares Owney, just saying your third declare on randy kj got you the results you should have expected, and it was a down declare. As far as his activities I would have thought your complaint about turtling involved the guy you were fighting? If so, and if he is firing nukes then what are you complaining about to begin with? All I know is he doesn't answer my PMs and I wouldn't consider him to be fighting back, I would have thought you saw that the first two times you fought him this round. My intent was to point out you shouldn't complain about what you get when you should have known what you went after. With regards to Les Poisson Paul - I contacted him tonight (we're RL friends). He has tomorrow off and said he'd hop on at update to fire off some nukes. Pretty sure that's about all he's done for days, and with his new job he won't be active for sure. So, my example of nations and why they might turtle is still valid - they don't have time to play for 27 days in a row, and they aren't. You pointing out they fired a nuke tonight at update doesn't change the fact they were turtling and/or they will be turtling. Also, his TE cash is still no incentive for him to remain active and fight as perhaps you expected he would, or the way anyone should. As far as the text amounts Thomas what can I say, it doesn't take me much effort, maybe you struggle with writing or typing, I do not. My point was, and is, anyone that complains when long wars creates turtles and then implies that because the enemy has cyber cash that means they should be online and clicking buttons isn't thinking clearly. The distorted view is thinking others must this game so serious that [b]everyone[/b] will play for 27 days straight and then complain when they don't and offer up [b]any[/b] reason why they should. If you think me taking a few minutes to type out a few words equals that then you sir aren't getting the point. As far as your other point Thomas I will refer back to my earlier statements - the normal procedure was talk and peace was a done deal. Did we make OP "ask" for peace in the first war? You suggested wrapping it up and moving on, done deal. We suggested wrapping it up and moving on, no deal. So again, did you expect us to ask pretty please with sugar on top? This isn't grade school, grow up and stop splitting hairs in attempt to spin the clear fact you refused to grant peace. Con, what can I say. I can understand you being "all in". Many don't see it that way. There is no requirement to fight war for 27 days in a row, you don't have to quit the game if you can't fight everyday. Everyone plays as much or as little as they want. Anyone complaining that others won't keep fighting in a long drawn our war needs to realize this. Anyone that wonders why nations with money don't fight in a long war should bear this in mind also. They don't have to quit, they don't have to fight, they don't have to [i]care[/i]. Deal with that. [i]Edit to add: OK, I'm done, I have to leave early for the city to take my aunt for Chemo and won't be able to continue with our wonderful discussions, hugs and kisses girls![/i]

So let me see if I get the ethics involed here... You shouldn't build and save WCs becauase that [b]has to [/b]mean you are focusing [b]soley[/b] on a flag run and focusing on the flag is wrong? But you can look at the flag run and focus soley on it as justification to hold people to 27 days of war and then an AA that sat on the bench for 30 days can jump anyone to clear out [b]perceived[/b] flag runners? Funny how an OP nation that was afk for 36 hours somehow woke up to hit me at exactly the same time a PS declared and hit me. I guess fighting back and not turtling for my 14 days of war didn't make it clear enough I am not a flag runner. Maybe someone was worried I could hit a flag runner? Wake up folks. It started with OP dragging Syn into hitting TPC in a planned long war and now we see the next part of the master plan.

[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1321852615' post='2847814'] On the other hand, you guys do have full interest in rebuilding and hugging money for [b]27 days[/b] [i]straight[/i]. [/quote] The point is Paul implies if we had peace some would come back to life. My response was that even if true this is irrelvant to my original point - few TPC are serious enough to fight for 27 days in a row. Peace now does not mean 27 days of us rebuilding Con, come on, you know better than that. Doesn't really matter now that PS jumped in too. Looks like the amount of turtles will go up and many will be left doing nothing for the rest of this round.

Doesn't really have any bearing Paul, like I said few have the interest to go [b]27 days[/b] straight. You folks seem to keep missing that key point. Anyway, nice to see PS now jumping in on TPC too. All part of the master plan Paul?

Just because "I" have the time to make some posts doesn't mean all our members have the time to war for 27 nights in a row. You can't take my activity level and apply it to all - see the error of your assumptions now Darth? Based upon the comments of others I guess I'll have to add "has money" to the growing list of reasons this war is continuing. Let me see if I can explain something to you folks. Lets use quakers as an example. This TPC nation is not even trying to fight back. As an avid hunter quakers in enjoying deer season which means time in the tree stand every dawn/dusk and long weekends at the camp - his limited leisure time is being spent on other activities. Do you think he cares that he has TE dollars left? LOL! Now let's look at Les Poissons. Started a new job, has to be there bright and early and isn't going to be staying up late for 27 straight nights to click a few buttons. Should he risk losing his job because he has TE cash remaining? LOL! Some of you folks have a distorted view IMO - it's a game, nothing more. Don't expect others to care as much as you do, don't expect others to keep up constant vigilance because [b]you[/b] think they [i]can[/i] or [i]should[/i]. I already told you to expect the number of turtles to grow, the above examples should help explain why. You obviously thought you could dictate 27 straight nights of blissful button clicking but you were wrong, this simply won't happen. When you insist on continuing a war with higher numbers in every category and ignore peace requests with the stated intent of driving nations to delete or running them out of cash what do you call that Darth? I call it a curbstomp. The current numbers mean every new war declared is part of what [b]has become[/b] an overall down declare. Oh, more thing for Owney. You fought Final 3 times in this war so far - all you can muster is a down declare on someone you know is afk and not fighting back? What the hell did you expect? Please, just stop. Anyway, I have to go prep to take a sick relative to the city for Chemo and a check up, depending on how that goes I might be afk for awhile. If that happens go ahead and call me a turtle, it's not like I'm going to care.

Trust me Con, all of us old farts [b]get it[/b] and it is that funny when we see young fellas like yourself going all eThug and getting bent out of shape so easily. We find it very amusing indeed. To be clear in response to your earlier question. Yes, that bet is the only issue I really have with you. I don't like welchers and once you make the bet you can't turn around an back out simply because you want to - you made your bed, lie in it. Like I said I think you are amusing and good for the game. I knew you didn't quit, at least I hoped you didn't - this place would be boring without people like you stirring it up all the time. And yeah, I know the spy op was for this round as much as for pay back, see, I do get it afterall. As far as you going after me next round good luck with that, I plan on taking a break for the holidays and won't be playing until next year. Either way, enemies today means friends tomorrow when you are involved, that process goes in reverse as well. We'll be best friends for ever someday!

So easily hurt, so quick to strike back...ah the passion of youth, I don't miss that.

OK, the first thing to do Con is back away from the Thesauras - trying to use big words to look cool is not the same as communicating clearly. Next, you must realize you of all people have not earned the privledge of standing on moral high ground and criticizing the ethics of others. As E oftens points out we need to cut you some lack, your young and still have a lot of growing up to do. I agree, and because I find you amusing and overall good for the game I woulnd't want to see your growth and development stop. To aid is this development let me give you a good life lesson you can learn from. The diffeeence between an honorable man and a crying child can be seen in many ways, including how one honors his word. Making a bet is largely based on the honor of your word. You bet DM he wouldn't win the flag last round, you should be a man and honor the bet. Instead, you act like a crying child and ignore the loss by making excuses, in fact you make it worse by seeking revenge this round and spying DM's IRS in retaliation. You need to fix this flaw of youth, it's OK to be wrong. What's important is you try to do the right thing, not makes things worse because of your pride. Now back to the topic at hand, an issue 99.9% Confusion free.

I think you folks are missing a couple of the key points I was trying to make. I never said it was a downdeclare to begin with, I said it has [b]become[/b] a downdeclare now and the intent is to continue in what has [b]become[/b] for all intents and purposes a curbstomp. The reason I call it a curbstomp is our members really don't have any interest in fighting [b]anyone[/b] for 27 days straight, we simply don't take the game that seriously. So, whatever the intent, the functional outcome is you won't be fighting TPC for 14 more days, that simply won't happen. I noticed that Thomas doesn't like people questioning the original declare and labels it as revising history. TPC can sympathize with this, it happens with plenty of our declares. In a previous thread I listing our DOWs and pointed out nobody had issue with them at the time but still, here once again, we hear we don't do updeclares when our first OP war certainly looked like it, Devil Dog even pointed out it was a solid declare [b]before[/b] OP built their numbers up. Yet somehow, once again, we hear many make broad generalizations implying we never updeclare. Even with a clear example clearly visible people will ignore the evidence. I think the point ADude is trying to make is except for ANS this was a downdeclare in every category. Now add in the fact that OP stated in the leaked logs that they knew a huge part of that ANS was navy and they planned to avoid fighting this NS and the numbers change considerably. They were correct, our large ANS was navy, take it out and this [b]was[/b] a downdeclare. Also, ADude is correct in days out of war - OP and TPC both had the same amount of time to build back and save WCs. All the same, we never complained, we fought for 7 days and expected peace could be gained in the usual way. Apparently what has been normal in the past should not be expected in the future, duly noted. As far as these "peace offers" go from my understanding it has been normal for TPC/OP peace to largely be an issue of contact, short discussion and it's over. Certainly in the first war this round when OP contacted TPC about wrapping things up we never made anyone [b]ask[/b] for peace. To be honest, splitting this hair seems more than a little childish to me. Should we have said pretty please with sugar on top? Paul, you really do need to get a sense of humor sir, you didn't like the chocolate comment? Really? I am trying to pay OP a compliment and somehow you spin it as arrogance? I just don't get that. Even when E jokes about having dossiers it just goes right over your head and you take offense at our "arrogance" - do you honestly think we have files on every AA, he was joking around...lighten up. As far as that rogue being the worst ever, that's true. However, the involvement with others is not quite so clear. E already pointed out the rogue and Wes certainly appeared to be working closely on nuke/air/etc...coincidence? maybe, but highly doubtful. Add in who the rogue is trading with and Con spying and we start to get the idea there's more to this. Either way, it wasn't the only reason we put the idea of peace on the table at day 7. Usually that is enough to get peace and move on, not always but generally speaking that is how it works for most. Let me address this statement by Paul - [i]"we tried to end a feud with TPC last round with that cease fire. You laughed at us. Now we will end it the only other way we know how...war until the round ends."[/i] We never laughed at you because of our ceasefire, we laughed at the [b]situation[/b] and we laughed at both OP and Anon a little because both saw the AA numbers and we were sure both felt TPC had to fight the other. The humor was in us knowing the big picture. Paul, I'm not sure why you would think holding us in a 27 day war would "end" anything, you seem to think you can teach us a lesson - your bravado is misplaced. In the past the tensions built with each subsequent war, ratcheting up each time. In this case you've gone from one notch on the ratchet to 6 notches in a single move. I don't know what the future holds, it seems to me impossible to fight OP and do well without it turning into some ridiculous grudge match. We've been told this current war is due to a perceived intent to eliminate OP in our first war. We've been told it's because we're flag runners. We're being told it's because we laughed at you. These are just some of the reasons, there seems to be no end to "why" OP feels they have to stomp TPC. In the end none of this really matters to us, it's just a game to be played for fun. We're not going to get our panties in a bunch over anything anyone does in a game. I've made my case for why wars like this don't help this game, I've tried to be civil and even participate in funny poetry. I don't need to understand why OP is intent on having a grudge with TPC and I have no idea why Synergy would want to continue this war and build a grudge as well. This really doesn't matter, I don't need to know why, and nobody owes us a reason. Do as you like, expect others to do the same - for every action their is an equal and opposite reaction. If there was one thing I'd like to see change it's the broad generalizations that ignore clear evidence and the repeated double standards I see applied over and over again. PS hasn't been at war in over 30 days and there's no backlash. When LE was out for over 30 days the whole issue was why wasn't TPC hitting them. When we were out for 30 days (as was OP) the issue was TPC were avoiding war. I guess the only solution is to have an active propaganda department out here on the OWF throwing out posts and acting much like the ethics police do. It'd be nice if the self appointed guardians of TE applied their ethics equally and fairly but that doesn't seem to be the case. In the end I guess OP (and others) want TPC to be an evil that needs to be repeatedly called out, ridiculed, schemed against and any attempts to drive us from the game are justified. As Paul said their plan is to force us to collect in nuke anarchy, have our nations deleted from inactivity or self delete until next round. This is unfortunate but not of great concern. We must now decide how to deal with chocolate, apparently it's bad for us. We can ignore it and avoid any chance of an allergic reaction. We could attempt to destroy it and jump on any sign of life from chocolate. We could set hidden traps to contain chocolate and makes it's live miserable. One thing is certain, chocolate is very serious...and it's out to get us.

The ball is in your court OP, peace was put on the table 6 days ago and the outcome of this conflict rests with you and Synergy. Let's take a look at the current numbers: TPC: 35 nations (17 still fighting back) 199,056 total NS 5687 ANS 139 nukes OP + Synergy: 53 nations (50 still ready to fight) 326,49 total NS 6,153 ANS 327 nukes We never complained about this declare, it looked like a good fight. When Confusion and his rogue showed up on Day 7 it was clear there was more at play here and at that point we'd all had a fun war so TPC opted to end this and move on, OP refused. This was not portrayed as an "end of round war" in the original DOW, it would have been silly with 4 weeks left to go. Seven days into the war it was equally ridiculous to suggest 3 more weeks of war was the [b]only[/b] available option. Even now there is time to rebuild at least a bit for a few involved and have some war fun with others in the last 7 days. It's pretty clear there is no TPC nation threatening to win a flag, OP and Syn have all the intel they need to know this is true. It's your move OP and Synergy, you decide if continuing this war for another 2 weeks is reasonable. It may seem like fun now but I've never thought curbstomps were good for the game - it drives people away and this game needs more players, not less. I know one thing, you can expect lots of turtles, our members aren't serious enough to keep up 27 continuous nights of war. Some have already decided to take a break before the next round begins, few will be fighting back for much longer. I doubt any TPC will even try to wage war for another 2 weeks straight. War with OP is like chocolate, always a fun treat. Eating chocolate for 32 days in total during a 90 day round would sicken anyone. [i](Edit: Added actual nation count of those still fighting or ready to fight.)[/i]

There once was man with anger issues, rage filled nights producing tear-stained tissues. Tell Coach to send in a substitution, this one can't compete because of delusion. You failed at rhyme, give limericks a try before we move on to haikus!

A Wall of Poetry - An Ode to Paul In TE war is meant to be fun and amusing, never to be taken too serious, whether winning or losing. When fighting OP any TPC victory will surely turn bitter, for revenge they'll roll a curbstomp to try and make you a quitter. With a motto that states they never forgive nor forget, this usually means more "scheme" than actual "bring it". Their obsession with TPC is cloaked in the flag race, in truth it's an excuse for a four week war embrace. To neither forgive nor forget is out of step with accepted practices, their constant !@#$%^&* requires routine cleansing with strong mental laxative. Some suggest revenge, what they're doing is absurd, alas there's no clean war when you try to play with a turd. With Paul so easily frustrated and quick to get hot, you never know what will happen, the brightest he's not. Dare not keep it light and attempt to use humor, Paul's too sensitive and about as fun as a tumor. So be warned TE, never spank OP and heed what we say, TE's ethics police are overly sensitive and will turn vigilante. When their anger overcomes their senses walk away and be done, unless fighting the same enemy for 1/3 of round is your idea of fun. They claim to love war but keep half on their bench, their weak effort makes this feel like we've been fighting a wench. With their superior numbers we're not sure how they do scoring, this war of attrition is not brilliant, it's boring. Forcing others to fight in what is now a clear down declare, with ethics abandoned and vengeance in mind they simply don't care. When eager to end war they'll request peace and speedy reply, flip sides and after repeated attempts you're left high and dry. They say us beating them in our 5 day war was just wrong, their spin and propaganda has Synergy willing to continue along. They say our 5 day beating was more than they could take and hurt our relations, yet there is nothing wrong with Paul's !@#$ talk and daily IRC instigations. The cover story is end of round fun, that's how they make it sound, since when did the last 4 weeks become the end of round? Their motive and intent is clear for any that care to look, kamikaze vengeance and a curbstomp, it's as easy as reading a book. After 12 days of war and many good nights we've had much fun, with double our numbers this war should simply be over and done. This game is surely struggling and in need of a solution, with OP they don't care the damage, they demand retribution. Blinded by hatred OP would prefer good players quit, We just smile and laugh, we don't give a !@#$.

[quote name='SoADarthCyfe6' timestamp='1321114527' post='2843739'] I wanted to point out two specific things because [s]I really don't have an hour to sit here and respond to your massive wall of text[/s] I don't want to try and can only squeeze out two small turds right now. [/quote] I'll give you less to work on. From my post - [i][b]Don't for one second suggest we didn't try to find a war for over 30 days, that simply isn't true." [/b] [/i] You saying we sat on our asses for 30 days and didn't look for war is pretty foolish when we tried hitting you and two other AAs within those 30 days. With regards to the rest of your post you acknowledge you didn't do anything for the first few weeks while many other AAs had their first wars in the bag - LE, OP, Anon, SUN, Fark, WAPA, TPC, tW, DF, Black, RE, PS and RD. Once again, TPC and OP were into their second war while you were fighting your first and when you do the math [b]Syn had half as many days in war[/b] as TPC or OP did [b]before[/b] the fubared double [b]partial[/b] blitz on you. All wars hurt your economy and slow growth - they hurt when you prep for war, when you fight wars and again as you recover. When you factor in [b]our actual days in war[/b] and then add in the [b]prep and recovery[/b] it's clear both TPC and OP had much more growth restriction in the first 60 days than Syn did. It is also clear that in our current war both TPC and OP are better prepared for war. As Wes pointed out earlier in the thread it's pretty much a known fact Syn is not a top builder or a top war machine, that's not an issue I would normally call into play - I try not to judge others. However, when you slam TPC's efforts expect your performance to be scrutinized and when found to be lacking your judgmental behavior and propaganda will get addressed. My comments were directed at [b]you[/b] because [b]you[/b] were the one making the posts - [b]you[/b] slammed TPC. I have no reason to think other Syn feel as you do, I certainly don't see them acting as you are. [list] [*]Darth - [i]"Too much standing around and not doing anything this round"[/i] [*]Darth - [i]"TPC sat on there asses for 30 days after coming off an easy war with OP"[/i] [*]Darth - [i]"hitting a bunch of newbie micros and tW"[/i] [*]Darth - [i]"What an embarrassment and how even more obvious can Flag running be?"[/i] [*]Darth - [i]"I don't respect people very well when they are spouting !@#$%^&*"[/i] [*]Darth - [i]"we don't turtle the entire round like you do"[/i] [/list] Didn't you also make some criticism earlier about how someone represented their AA? Was there really any need of you slamming our AA with your posts when no one even provoked you? In fact, King James went out of his way to avoid engaging your BS but you just wouldn't stop. I replied to address many issues, including your posts. It's a fun war Darth, enjoy it. There's no need for this crap. Now go spend that WC and make some declares so we can beat on each other some more. Edit to add: You should really never refer to [b]any[/b] OP war as "easy" Darth, that's not how they roll. Props to all OP and Syn for a fun war so far.

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1320899081' post='2842570'] My point, however was that it appeared as though you guys went balls out to try and eliminate us from the round or at least that is the way we took it and now we are where we are. The attempt to prevent bad blood is in serious jeopardy of going down in flames. [/quote] I honestly hope that is not the case Paul. I think we need to avoid having people that play the game well (both TPC and OP) getting frustrated by politics and thereby negatively influencing people's desire to play TE - we don't need flame wars or perceived in-game injustices getting people pissed off, it can lead to no good. Hopefully I can offer some evidence as to why we never intended to "eliminate" OP from the round. If this had been our goal the best way to achieve it would have been to prolong the war, when OP suggested all wars end when the first began to expire we readily agreed. The fact that we rebuilt quicker (shown in our mixed up war 3v2 target selection) was due to our larger WCs. We spied each other enough to know we had more money, this is no surprise as we had the extra 4 day collect - you went to war on day 7, we went on day 11. Also, we didn't have nukes as early as you did so our collections were better. So, we had the money to keep going, I think we can both agree on that. Continuing would have hurt OP and greatly reduced the amount of "fun" OP could have playing the rest of the round, hopefully we can agree on that. Taking OP (or any quality players) out of the round is in no one's best interest, this game needs more strong players, not less. I sincerely hope you'll accept my assurance TPC will never strive to "eliminate" OP or any others from playing the game, I hope others would do the same. I don;t think it's a realistic goal anyone could easily take on but it's not a goal any should pursue IMO. After our first war left us unsatisfied we were immediately looking for a good fight and with OP presenting a viable option is was an easy decision - we can always count on OP to give us a good fight. It was really that simple.