Jump to content

Eyewitness to War


King James XVIII
 Share

Recommended Posts

[center][img]http://i736.photobucket.com/albums/xx9/xFR4NKtheT4NKx/sicklephoenixflag3.jpg [/img]

The terrifying sound of enemy planes arrive under the cover of darkness
Their silhouette appears, as exploding bombs light up the countryside
Women and children cower in the corner, men take up their arms
Bold, prideful, patriotic men, prepare to meet the Angel of Death

War has been brought to the once silent shore
Its inferno engulfs the cities once more
Invading shadows lurk around every corner
The smell of smoke a prelude for the future mourner

A bloody sunrise is certain
A quest for glory, guaranteed
A fight for the most fundamental--survival, begins

War is here. TPC and The Citadel declares war on OP and the raiders/rogues hitting them. Good luck, and lets enjoy this everyone.

King James XVIII
King Cobra[/center]

Prewar stats--Taken one hour before the blitz (raiders/rouges not included on OP side)

TPC/Citadel
Total Nations: 60
Total Strength: 198,727
ANS: 3,312
41 nations over 3k NS
25 nations over 4k
6 nations over 5k

OP
Total Nations: 44
Total Strength: 184,612
ANS: 4,102
39 nations over 3k
25 nations over 4k
12 nations over 5k

Edit: Rogue spelling.

Edited by King James XVIII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Typical down declare.

Typical down declare on an alliance that had a third of their nations in Anarchy.

Typical down declare without a DoW.

Well the gauntlet has been dropped.

Here we go!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GL to you all. Oh and if you could actually hit some of them raiders/rogues it would be much appreciated. :awesome:

Edit: Spelling

Edited by Mark8240
Link to comment
Share on other sites

---the following comment was censored by the user due to his inability to stick to rules---


nice attacks.. still a down declare by those stats, you have more people and still a higher NS, and put 3 people on targets? AND STILL fail to anarchy me with a quad... what are you guys doing over there?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='dy Cazaril' timestamp='1303881985' post='2700206']
[size="7"]ROGUE!!![/size]
[/quote]

Yeah, I have to restrain myself from breaking discipline and yelling at my leader for that one. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Alexander The Second' timestamp='1303881647' post='2700199']
good stuff I wanted to have a good go at OP


o/ TPC
[/quote]

I love your sig.

[quote name='dy Cazaril' timestamp='1303881985' post='2700206']
For heaven's sake, it's spelled [size="7"]ROGUE!!![/size]

I'm sick and tired of red cosmetics getting blamed for everything. :wacko:
[/quote]

Red cosmetics are the bane of TE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jeric76000' timestamp='1303882011' post='2700207']
nice attacks.. still a down declare by those stats, you have more people and still a higher NS, and put 3 people on targets? AND STILL fail to anarchy me with a quad... what are you guys doing over there?!
[/quote]

Yeah, we had to give up on the anarchy when we saw you rebought after the front half of the quad. Those were some good reflexes! At that point, I decided it was better to hold off and see if I could hit you after deploying, force your troops back home. Couldn't tell if that worked or not...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so should bad spelling be banned... really? really?? rouge?! its called spell check man...

well considering i had troops deployed to hit the 2 rogues im on and you sent them home id say it worked.. a return home for 10 soldiers and 200 tanks.. that sucked.

Edited by Jeric76000
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TBRaiders' timestamp='1303882646' post='2700219']
I'm pretty sure this might have spoiled some plans we had ourselves, but should be a fun war against great opponents.
[/quote]


What?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple things...

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1303881798' post='2700202']
Typical down declare.Typical down declare on an alliance that had a third of their nations in Anarchy.Typical down declare without a DoW.Well the gauntlet has been dropped.Here we go!
[/quote]

1. You only had 6 nations in anarchy before the war
2. Take a look at the stats again, we may have aggregate member numbers but you have more upper depth than us (hence the 3v2) and had a much higher ANS before war.
3. Anyone in TE knows that TPC under my leadership does not put a the piece of (OWF) paper everyone requires until the dust settles, that is my personal choice--its not as if we don't define who we are fighting as soon as we can, wars should be enough notice if that is your beef with no DoW exactly at 11:51

Why is there always some problem when one group declares on another? Its a war game, we take all reasonable efforts to choose an equal target, plan a fair war, and do things the right way. We're not sending rouges, we're not failing to post a DoW, and we're not going in outnumbering you by 1k NS and 100k total strength.

Also, this isn't part of some big conspiracy or proxy war--in case some were wondering.


[quote name='Mark8240' timestamp='1303881802' post='2700203']
GL to you all. Oh and if you could actually hit some of them raiders/rogues it would be much appreciated. :awesome:Edit: Spelling
[/quote]

Absolutely, we have had problems with our members being in range after declaring.

[quote name='dy Cazaril' timestamp='1303881985' post='2700206']
For heaven's sake, it's spelled [size="7"]ROGUE!!![/size]I'm sick and tired of red cosmetics getting blamed for everything. :wacko:
[/quote]

Thanks for calling me on it. You would think by this point in my life I could spell that. I made the change.

[quote name='Jeric76000' timestamp='1303882011' post='2700207']
---the following comment was censored by the user due to his inability to stick to rules---nice attacks.. still a down declare by those stats, you have more people and still a higher NS, and put 3 people on targets? AND STILL fail to anarchy me with a quad... what are you guys doing over there?!
[/quote]

Look, again, there will never be a perfect match up. We took a variety of factors into account to get the best war possible. Yes, we have more total numbers but I would argue that we don't have a distinct advantage that we would have without our blitz.

Hey, that is a testament to how great your people are at fighting and being active.

[quote name='Jeric76000' timestamp='1303882376' post='2700215']
so should bad spelling be banned... really? really?? rouge?! its called spell check man...well considering i had troops deployed to hit the 2 rogues im on and you sent them home id say it worked.. a return home for 10 soldiers and 200 tanks.. that sucked.
[/quote]

Hopefully we can give you some help with the person you were intending to hit.

[quote name='TBRaiders' timestamp='1303882646' post='2700219']
I'm pretty sure this might have spoiled some plans we had ourselves, but should be a fun war against great opponents.
[/quote]

That's the attitude. We're not in it because of malice or some hidden agenda...we want both sides to have fun.

Edit: Spelling

Edited by King James XVIII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well some of our guys aren't at full fighting strength, when I checked 2 days ago we had 16 nations in anarchy due to rogues. So the timing kinda sucks, but we will put up a fight for sure! Have fun, people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Owney OSullivan' timestamp='1303896638' post='2700270']
Well some of our guys aren't at full fighting strength, when I checked 2 days ago we had 16 nations in anarchy due to rogues. So the timing kinda sucks, but we will put up a fight for sure! Have fun, people.
[/quote]

Without a doubt the biggest wildcard in deciding to go to war with you guys was the standing of the rogues. While you were certainly impacted by them, the best information we had (the stats) suggested that you guys were capable of a fight. Again, before the war you guys possessed a number of statistical advantages over us--its not like we were coming in to pick at bones. I know OP never shys away from a fight. The timing may not have been perfect for you (timing is rarely ever perfect for war) but if there is any alliance in TE that can bounce back from our initial blitz (which we took very serious due to the respect we give your fighters) its OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1303883493' post='2700227']
Couple things...



1. You only had 6 nations in anarchy before the war
2. Take a look at the stats again, we may have aggregate member numbers but you have more upper depth than us (hence the 3v2) and had a much higher ANS before war.
3. Anyone in TE knows that TPC under my leadership does not put a the piece of (OWF) paper everyone requires until the dust settles, that is my personal choice--its not as if we don't define who we are fighting as soon as we can, wars should be enough notice if that is your beef with no DoW exactly at 11:51

Why is there always some problem when one group declares on another? Its a war game, we take all reasonable efforts to choose an equal target, plan a fair war, and do things the right way. We're not sending rouges, we're not failing to post a DoW, and we're not going in outnumbering you by 1k NS and 100k total strength.

Also, this isn't part of some big conspiracy or proxy war--in case some were wondering.




Absolutely, we have had problems with our members being in range after declaring.



Thanks for calling me on it. You would think by this point in my life I could spell that. I made the change.



Look, again, there will never be a perfect match up. We took a variety of factors into account to get the best war possible. Yes, we have more total numbers but I would argue that we don't have a distinct advantage that we would have without our blitz.

Hey, that is a testament to how great your people are at fighting and being active.



Hopefully we can give you some help with the person you were intending to hit.



That's the attitude. We're not in it because of malice or some hidden agenda...we want both sides to have fun.

Edit: Spelling
[/quote]
Come now, everyone knows what this was. By the look of your nations WC I would say this was in the planning for a few days and you guys would have seen our nations in anarchy. This crap about OP being great fighters is crap but I promise you that we will fight back.

Edited by paul711
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1303914829' post='2700352']
Come now, everyone knows what this was. By the look of your nations WC I would say this was in the planning for a few days and you guys would have seen our nations in anarchy. This crap about OP being great fighters is crap but I promise you that we will fight back.
[/quote]

I'd rather not get bogged down in this a la the PLOW/G-6 thread from last round--fighting on the battlefield is what counts. I expect OP to fight hard--that is the point of the war.

Of course our members were prepared to fight. In the last 4 rounds (holiday cease fire aside) TPC has been on the offensive or defensive side of a war in the first 5-7 days. In addition, in my experience, TPC tends to have a better warchest in relation to its opponent regardless of whether it is an offensive or defensive war.

Again, we looked closely at the fact that some of your members were fighting, and we had to make a call that would impact your entire alliance based on the information we had. The fact that you had a higher ANS, more top tier depth, equal middle tier depth, more infra and more tech per nation--along with past fighting experience, informed our decision. I do not believe it was a poor one.

I want to reiterate what I said earlier...The only advantage TPC would have had with or without a good blitz imo is aggregate member numbers and aggregate strength. Every other stat when we started this war was either a push or in OP's favor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1303914829' post='2700352']
This crap about OP being great fighters is crap...
[/quote]

Really? You think your AA is filled with crappy fighters? :P


[quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1303883493' post='2700227']
[quote name='dy Cazaril' timestamp='1303881985' post='2700206']
For heaven's sake, it's spelled [size="7"]ROGUE!!![/size]

I'm sick and tired of red cosmetics getting blamed for everything. :wacko:
[/quote]
Thanks for calling me on it. You would think by this point in my life I could spell that. I made the change.
[/quote]

Oh really? Did you now? :P

[quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1303883493' post='2700227']
We're not sending rouges...
[/quote]
;)

P.S. Please don't fix that one, because then it'll make my post look completely pointless. :ehm: Except to pick on paul, of course. Luv ya paul! :wub:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha, we get it now. TPC on OP last night. G-6 is buying GC's like crazy, so they'll probably be going in on LE tonight. That leaves DR, and RE, and Synergy as the only other confusion(that we know of)puppets left..... I assume one or two of them will be attacking PS soon? Amiright? Maybe throwing a dec or two at Wapa, too? It's just too easy.

Bring it. :)

Edit: Sp

Edited by Ferrie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1303922024' post='2700411']
I'd rather not get bogged down in this a la the PLOW/G-6 thread from last round--fighting on the battlefield is what counts. I expect OP to fight hard--that is the point of the war.

Of course our members were prepared to fight. In the last 4 rounds (holiday cease fire aside) TPC has been on the offensive or defensive side of a war in the first 5-7 days. In addition, in my experience, TPC tends to have a better warchest in relation to its opponent regardless of whether it is an offensive or defensive war.

Again, we looked closely at the fact that some of your members were fighting, and we had to make a call that would impact your entire alliance based on the information we had. The fact that you had a higher ANS, more top tier depth, equal middle tier depth, more infra and more tech per nation--along with past fighting experience, informed our decision. I do not believe it was a poor one.

I want to reiterate what I said earlier...The only advantage TPC would have had with or without a good blitz imo is aggregate member numbers and aggregate strength. Every other stat when we started this war was either a push or in OP's favor.
[/quote]
Did you have information that at least 4 of our nations had their offensive slots full and that a few others only had 1 open thereby severely limiting our ability to counter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ferrie' timestamp='1303926568' post='2700442']
Haha, we get it now. TPC on OP last night. G-6 is buying GC's like crazy, so they'll probably be going in on LE tonight. That leaves DR, and RE, and Synergy as the only other confusion(that we know of)puppets left..... I assume one or two of them will be attacking PS soon? Amiright? Maybe throwing a dec or two at Wapa, too? It's just too easy.

Bring it. :)

Edit: Sp
[/quote]


I'm amazed at your skilled insight to what is happening, It is like you have a crystal ball or something. :rolleyes:

Also 33 GC's from an alliance of 43 members is buying them like crazy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ferrie' timestamp='1303926568' post='2700442']
Haha, we get it now. TPC on OP last night. G-6 is buying GC's like crazy, so they'll probably be going in on LE tonight. That leaves DR, and RE, and Synergy as the only other confusion(that we know of)puppets left..... I assume one or two of them will be attacking PS soon? Amiright? Maybe throwing a dec or two at Wapa, too? It's just too easy.

Bring it. :)

Edit: Sp
[/quote]

your paranoia's showing....

G-6 has no plans for any war at this moment, it's flattering to have you think of us when ever [s]something[/s] anything happens around here though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...