Veneke

[quote name='Jens of the desert' timestamp='1297464487' post='2629701'] I think you and I must have different definitions for hold off. And don't think you were the only ones fighting PC out there, because that would be just spitting on the fact that they have been vastly outnumbered in this war but still come out on top. [/quote] I think so. Whatever yours is though, its wrong. Here: http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=hold%20off : hold off (resist and fight to a standoff) http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hold_off : To delay someone or something temporarily; to keep at bay. http://www.audioenglish.net/dictionary/hold_off.htm : resist and fight to a standoff http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hold%20off 13 nations held off/resisted/kept at bay both Athens and Poison Clan for three week and a day. I am rather concerned that you think the context alters facts. Context informs facts, it does not alter them.

[quote name='Falloutboy' timestamp='1297391884' post='2628709'] So I'm guessing the ZI of that twenty day nation strategy didn't work out so well. [/quote] Pretty sure he was still ZI'd, and so was that other 100+ day nation. /me looks at screenshots again Yep, reckon those ZI's still happened.

Not bad for 13 nations to hold off two big alliances like these two for so long. Impressive fight from Poison Clan too.

[quote name='Lamuella' timestamp='1296953411' post='2621150'] Lam's post... [/quote] I chuckled. Would read again.

[quote name='bobo t baggins' timestamp='1296945974' post='2621037'] completely missing the point guy completely misses the point. it herps. then it derps. my war screen... is full of win. [/quote] Actually, no. Just wholly and utterly no. But hey, you want a long ass debate where neither of us agree on anything, take it to pms, I'll get 'round to answering your inane dribble eventually. In spite of your continuous attempts, amongst others, to drag this here into the realm of "srs bsns" as the phrase goes, I'm trying to keep this light-hearted. Quite frankly, I no longer have the patience for folk like yourself. I tell you what though, you want to keep harpin' on here be my guest. I know of a magic button that will make you disappear... how cool is that?!

[quote name='bobo t baggins' timestamp='1296933414' post='2620765'] and that is fine if youre that pathetic a group. whats funny about it is running around patting yourselves on the backs about it like its an accomplishment and then trying to defend it like theres a point in doing so aside from utterly embarrassing yourselves in public. if that was your goal, then double win for you. [/quote] You're just jealous you haven't ZI'd anyone yet. Don't worry though, your secret is safe with me.

[quote name='bobo t baggins' timestamp='1296891203' post='2620243'] yes. you had the same idea to deflect from the point. come on kids, you guys dont even know how the war screen works. those little dates are when the war was DECLARED, not when it ended. and the charts screen does not account for what was lost and replaced, thus the draining of the economy of the nation you are looking at, which is what actually makes a difference in war, which was done before you declared, is not shown. [/quote] So, your argument is that the 57th took advantage of the poor strategic situation PANADOL put himself in and subsequently ZI'd him? Call me crazy, but I'm still chalking that up as a win for our side. [quote name='King Xander the Only' timestamp='1296891649' post='2620257'] If I don't get my own thread when I get ZI'd in a few days, I will be very, [i]very[/i] disappointed. [/quote] Pretty sure you will, if ES has anything to say about it. I did overhear something about fireworks earlier on in the day. Speaking of which, hard luck on those ground attacks this morning. I don't suppose I could trouble you to spy my DefCon back to 1 though could I?

[quote name='Mitch12120' timestamp='1296890758' post='2620229'] http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display_charts.asp?Nation_ID=440666 Those 3 evidently didn't do much. [/quote] Dude, I called it first...

[quote name='bobo t baggins' timestamp='1296890480' post='2620223'] no they did not. learn to read the war screen. [/quote] Learn to read the charts page. Thanks for playing though! http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display_charts.asp?Nation_ID=440666

[quote name='Timmehhh' timestamp='1296850822' post='2619472'] Yeah FOK is afraid for the mighty 57th Overlanders [/quote] Yeah, pretty much what LP said. I'm looking at the log of it right now. I'm basically telling ArneS to peace out or declare war, and Fok chooses the former. I was cool with it, he was cool with it. Nobody was happy about it, but everybody was in agreement. You must have missed the memo. Its alright, it happens.

[quote name='Hydro' timestamp='1296623028' post='2615647'] grats on attacking a 13 man aa? moving on to relevancy and out of this thread... [/quote] Try and keep up mate, attacking small AA's is Athens' battle strategy here. So its definitely congratulations, they're sticking to the plan. Can't fault 'em for that. Relevancy... well, that's relative.

[quote name='Timmehhh' timestamp='1296571742' post='2614650'] Good to see PC and Athens fighting together We also helped PC a bit against these people who conveniently jumped them while they were fighting Ragnarok and Polar. Also the big talk from 2000 NS 57th overlanders nations is quite amusing [/quote] I see you have yet to conquer the concept of time. Allow me to give you the short version of it. Ragnarok and the 57th declared war against Poison Clan, stay with me now, [i]at the same time[/i]. This means that they moved together, as a unit to declare war on Poison Clan. When that happened, it was only Rok and 57th hitting PC. So to claim that the 57th "jumped them" while Rok and Polar were fighting PC is just plain ridiculous. In fact, it boggles the mind. Ah yes, the day long war Fok had by declaring on a single member of the 57th... Want to know what's really amusing? The backpedaling that your alliance did when we talked about it.

[quote name='evilsquirrel' timestamp='1296522302' post='2613654'] [img]http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/884/57thchallengeaccepted3.png[/img] [/quote] lol Funny every time I look at it!

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1296422504' post='2611482'] You are really suggesting that us dogpiling an alliance just because they are bigger, would somehow make us more honorable and less cowardly? The whole sentiment is rather silly. I will point out for the 3rd time now, that in every one of our DOWs, there was someone, nearly our size, and unengaged, and allied to someone we are hitting , who just ignored us. [b]Dont blame us because peoples' allies dont counter.[/b] [/quote] I'm glad you agree with this part of my argument, "In short, you're picking on a bunch of small alliances in an attempt to play the MDP web and everybody can see it. All of us. Hell, I reckon even ye can see it. Its a reasonable strategy for an alliance to take after they've already hit at least one large alliance." Not sure where this notion that I disagree with the logic of the move is coming from though. But we appear in agreement, so I'll leave it slide.

[quote name='janax' timestamp='1296422289' post='2611477'] Easiest way to fix it? Don't be a small alliance playing big boy politics if you can't stand the heat. Either way, put your big boy pants on and quit whining, or surrender. War is not fair. This isn't an honor duel, this is a war. You don't box one handed just because you outskill your opponent. You don't fight on your knees because you are bigger than your opposition. You win, and you win by hitting harder and faster than your opponent can. Deal with it. [/quote] You're not the smartest one going here are you? I never said anything about the intelligence of the move, I said it generated bad PR, and it would be terrible if they lost to even one of those alliances. I stand by those comments. The rest of your post seems oddly inapplicable, so I won't respond to it.