Jump to content

Das Blitzkrieger

Members
  • Content count

    238
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Das Blitzkrieger

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Nation Name
    Leistungsstarke
  • Alliance Name
    Umbrella
  • Resource 1
    Pigs
  • Resource 2
    Cattle
  • CN:TE Nation Name
    Garden of Eden
  • CN:TE Alliance Name
    Avengers

Recent Profile Visitors

526 profile views
  1. Das Blitzkrieger

    We come in pieces

    I didn't misquote you. What's the difference between recruiting nations (for the sake of score) one week out, two weeks out, or a month out? In each case, an alliance is manipulating the score of their alliance. The problem, then, seems to be the number of nations we pulled in last round. I find it highly incredulous that D1 members, if they were *really* motivated, couldn't ask family and friends to create nations and join D1 at a similar rate as we did last round.
  2. Das Blitzkrieger

    We come in pieces

    Ah, so if UN had a higher score earlier in the round, other alliances would have recruited nations to boost their score? That's the very tactic we executed last round—the one which is still being heavily criticized. Thank you for your honesty, KingBilly.
  3. Das Blitzkrieger

    We come in pieces

    The nations who were formerly in Dawners have been a part of the UN community for the entire round. Due to their inexperience and multiple wars at the beginning of the round, their nations were in shambles--most of them had to re-roll. Rather than plunge them into the same situation, we elected to keep them off AA in order to have better builds, so that the next time they fought, they would have more fun and more success. So, when D1 attacked, the Dawners came back to their original AA. It seems that several of you think these were underhanded tactics, but considering the animosity for UN this round, as well as their inexperience with the game, it seems like a fair strategy to me. Admittedly, I don't quite understand the complaints about boosting our score. If these nations had joined us before the war, we would hit the same score we did now (probably higher, since we lost NS at the initial blitz!). If we had asked these (and other nations who didn't return) to stay active at the beginning of the round instead of rerolling, our score would have eclipsed 70 after myself and other UN members joined the AA. Either way, we would have had the top score.
  4. Das Blitzkrieger

    Christmas Prayers

    My prayers are with you, the children, and their mother. Thank you for the care you bring to children as a foster parent.
  5. Das Blitzkrieger

    Extra Extra! Read About it Here!

    There are two ways we might understand "gunning for Stevie Squad." First, we might understand it as viewing a small group of players as one's primary opponents and fighting them each round. That's fine. Second, we might understand it as trying to push a small group of players out of any alliance in which they play, using whatever tactics possible. That has been HG's objective. Two rounds ago, he gave the leader of UN and ultimatum: kick "Stevie Squad" out or face a permanent war the next round. Last round, several of our members received pms from D1 that if the UN didn't harbor certain person's, they wouldn't have been attacked. The small communities which serve as alliances are all some people have, sadly. I have pursued flags, declared wars I shouldn't have declared, and boasted far too much. However, I have never, nor will I ever, resort to these bullying tactics in an attempt to push players out of an alliance or the game. If those are the kind of actions which you deem to exhibit character, then you should probably reassess your moral judgments.
  6. Das Blitzkrieger

    Extra Extra! Read About it Here!

    From whom, exactly, do you think the UN stole the award? What lies, exactly, did any of us tell? We held the strongest alliance score the entire round, up until alliances began merging to boost their scores, to which we responded by recruiting nations, many of whom are playing this round. Furthermore, we were the best economic performers, won every single war we fought, and fought as many wars as any other alliance. Sure, the award is rigged. But any alliance which claims that they, rather than the UN, deserved the strongest alliance award is being dishonest, both to themselves and the community. Your cause is neither new nor noble. Whenever an alliance succeeds, other alliances complain, and the success is always "unfair." So it goes. The only tears we'll shed over this declaration are tears of laughter at the guise of justice which hides a frustration at one group's continual success. Good luck.
  7. Das Blitzkrieger

    Strongest Alliance award

    I like the idea of reintroducing this award in the place of strongest aa, then.
  8. Das Blitzkrieger

    Strongest Alliance award

    I think (2) is a better option than (1). So, if the award became the top two nations in the alliance with ANS, would there also need to be a minimum number of nations in the alliance? If I recall correctly, an alliance put all it's members but the top 5 on pending in order to win that award in a previous round.
  9. Das Blitzkrieger

    Strongest Alliance award

    I'll take that as a "not any." I appreciate your constructive response.
  10. Das Blitzkrieger

    Strongest Alliance award

    I also think that this award should be removed, and possibly replaced. What, if any, award would people like to see instead?
  11. Das Blitzkrieger

    The Casualties Race!

    Thanks for updating this, HG!
  12. Das Blitzkrieger

    Blame Das

    Cf. Volatile Temperament In all seriousness, you're in my top 5 favorite TE players of all time. <3
  13. Das Blitzkrieger

    Blame Das

    o/ UN Foreign Relations Team!
  14. Das Blitzkrieger

    Oh Damn... IRON Inbound

    The point about WCs is that *we could have* done much more damage than we did. If our nations had spent down to the same levels as IRON's warchests, we would have had 2.5-3k tech WRCs. But what would be the point in doing that? You didn't even have enough nation strength for that to be a plausible option. We simply spent what we needed to spend to beat you. Even though you coordinated well, and even though our members were highly inactive, at least compared to previous wars, we had utter control over the outcome. I'd like to say that you'll see our WRCs later, but I don't think you'll be in our range.
  15. Das Blitzkrieger

    Oh Damn... IRON Inbound

    Lol, we're definitely trying to fill our slots in order to avoid IRON. I'm not saying you influenced him—this time, at least. But, he idolizes you and agrees with everything you say because you stroked his ego. My comment about giving IRON more time to build warchests was genuine. Take Sparta and Secor, for instance. They have 14 million and 20 million dollars left, respectively. They'll be near ZI after the war, without practically any chance at playing a major role in the end of round fun. None of us wanted that.
×