Lorlax

ok i didn't win but mine was march not april :blink:

was inevitable o/ EQ

"Total War/Blitzkreig" I am sorry to say but they are completely different things :S, one putting everything into a war effort, full mobilisation of civilian population and economy, and the other is a military tactic of armour supported by infantry moving extremely quickly rather than fighting a static front. I disagree with adding things like this anyway

It did happen

I could have took you both if i had been active on update but sleep

i liked how much attention you paid to me just to keep me in nuke anarchy for a month, i want it again :wub:

actually i have been at war with 12 GOON nations :gun:

i think me and you both know more than 2 wars have been declared on GOONs by DB4D :psyduck:

i'm closing in on #1 attacking. will be very very very close though

most of the goons accounts fighting only appeared when war started... smells fishy To victory EQ o/

I didn't vote in favour of hitting TPC, i wanted to hit Clash and them damn pesky warriors

No Hellas worship OP haha... we knew we could hit TPC without RE or tW countering us in fear of them being countered by you

no it was to kneecap TPC early on so they wouldn't have chance to dominate the top 50 again

OP first war = attack an alliance that had came out of war that day. OP second war = Not much damage caused to them by RE OP third war = the first good war they really took any damage but by then it was nothing they couldn't recover from Hellas declared war on TPC at the start of this round because TPC did it last round

the same as TPC last round

i understand a war closing early after one side has taken all it can take but it appears Swazz's aim is to force WD to surrender after like 2 days of war, from the spy op i did on Patton he can't have a large enough warchest to fight 1 of the nations let alone 5 and i imagine that the rest of NAO are not in much better of a position so i can't see why WD would surrender especially at the very end of the round

Why would anyone surrender on TE? :S i thought it was all about war

Atleast you walk away from this with a glowing tan MW ;) O/

I like this thread

Attacking casualties are what matters!

I was ranked 50th, why no visit from OP :(

I don't think the majority of NAO nations actually follow the command of NAO's leaders, they certainly are not united under a sole ruling govt, until that changes i see no way i can consider it an alliance rather than a group of rogue noobs

GPA vs WTF

GOONS vs Rukunu

i would have single handed destroyed your entire alliance. I requested to attack Patton to which i was told no because his alliance has more members than we allow attacks against, to which i responded "NAO are more a grouping of uncoordinated noob nations rather than an alliance", i struggle to see how Patton could have took me on? i believe this is the only time i have commented on anything to do with NAO or you? and no i wasn't in SUN 2 rounds ago but that was with Cit who has a better quality of members than NAO. hear is how i see NAO; Your leader is banned. Your 2nd leader is new to the game and a rogue You were appointed MoD on what experience? i imagine it was something along the lines of "do you want to be our MoD?" or "Which govt position would you like?" You think that numbers of nations is worth more than NS and abilities of nations, i believe hellas removed all their inactive nations as they were also a mass recruiting alliance but having a large number of nations with low quality is the opposite to what you want. If i was to start up my own alliance i would rather have a handful of nations from SUN, OP, TPC etc than a large number. RE have more nations than OP yet OP tend to hammer RE when they fight, As for attacking SUN i think you have a long way to go before you are at that level