jammar Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 We needed a challenge, so we're hitting the first on the list. Gay Rollers declares on TPC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einer Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 [quote name='jammar' timestamp='1305089413' post='2709984'] We needed a challenge, so we're hitting the first on the list. Gay Rollers declares on TPC. [/quote] Yeah, because it's not like we're a week out of our first war or anything... Your midtier is burning, by the way. Might want to put it out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aineshane Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 Got an extinguisher by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NationRuler Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 [quote name='Einer' timestamp='1305090644' post='2709993'] Your midtier is burning, by the way. Might want to put it out! [/quote] Who, MEEEE? Looking forward to a fun one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomasj_tx Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 (edited) Good Luck Y'all!! Have Fun. Looks like the [b]G[/b]low [b]R[/b]angers will light the fire. 83 Glow Sticks to 22. Edited May 11, 2011 by Thomasj_tx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einer Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 (edited) You know, after checking the stats, strike that comment of mine... Edit: Nevermind. Edited May 13, 2011 by Einer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBoy16 Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 I envision our environment going down a bit. Thanks GR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vespassianus Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 Time to spread some radiation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMuz Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 (edited) Nice updeclare, GR has 4 times the nukes, half as many nations, similar ANS, probably twice the warchest. Interested in seeing how it ends up. Edited May 11, 2011 by MrMuz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elric Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 Enjoying this. Not much rest around here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stelios Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 Kill them all TPC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoADarthCyfe6 Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 As if my collections weren't small enough... Thanks GR and TPC. Enjoy your war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King James XVIII Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 Great stuff. There is never enough war [quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1305114962' post='2710080'] Nice updeclare, GR has 4 times the nukes, half as many nations, similar ANS, probably twice the warchest. Interested in seeing how it ends up. [/quote] Agreed, this will be a different kind of challenge for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazaraus45 Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 (edited) seems more like mutually assured destruction as opposed war, should be interesting all the same though, not sure who to root for in this instance best of luck to both of you i guess Edited May 11, 2011 by lazaraus45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Glory Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1305091923' post='2710003'] Good Luck Y'all!! Have Fun. Looks like the [b]G[/b]low [b]R[/b]angers will light the fire. 83 Glow Sticks to 22. [/quote] Yeah, its actually more like 94 nukes to 13, and since we have a few ghost/flag runners its probably more like 94 to 6 nukes. [quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1305114962' post='2710080'] Nice updeclare, GR has 4 times the nukes, half as many nations, similar ANS, probably twice the warchest. Interested in seeing how it ends up. [/quote] Looks like quite a few peeps have noticed.....OVER 4 times the nukes, under half as many nations, at the very least triple the WC, but yeah very close the the same AVG NS Usually TE alliances have a certain honor, as there is a general unspoken rule and I can't remember the last time anyone violated it.....Do not hit AA's already at war/don't hit AA's less than 2 weeks out of a war. To add, far as I can remember, I don't really recall any alliance hitting another with less than 20% of the nuke count either...heck for that matter, I don't recall anyone hitting another alliance with less than 50%!! Seems funny that there are at least 2 or so alliances in the top 12 that have not war'd yet as of this round, I can think of one right off the bat. Not to throw you guys under the bus PS, as you know your good friends, but IF GR really wanted a fight, and far more fair than attacking an AA just barely over a week out of war, they would have hit PS, RIGHT? Close to the same nukes, close to same member count, just a higher AVG NS is all! They wanted a fight though, right? Just say'n is all BG. Edited May 12, 2011 by Burning Glory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcortell Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 [quote name='Burning Glory' timestamp='1305166141' post='2710397'] Usually TE alliances have a certain honor, as there is a general unspoken rule and I can't remember the last time anyone violated it.....Do not hit AA's already at war/don't hit AA's less than 2 weeks out of a war. [/quote] Not been paying attention recently? Here you go: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=99588 [quote name='Burning Glory' timestamp='1305166141' post='2710397'] To add, far as I can remember, I don't really recall any alliance hitting another with less than 20% of the nuke count either...heck for that matter, I don't recall anyone hitting another alliance with less than 50%!! [/quote] That would be here: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=100322 [quote name='Burning Glory' timestamp='1305166141' post='2710397'] Seems funny that there are at least 2 or so alliances in the top 12 that have not war'd yet as of this round, I can think of one right off the bat. Not to throw you guys under the bus PS, as you know your good friends, but IF GR really wanted a fight, and far more fair than attacking an AA just barely over a week out of war, they would have hit PS, RIGHT? Close to the same nukes, close to same member count, just a higher AVG NS is all! They wanted a fight though, right? [/quote] We did war. However, don't think you'll get much disagreement that it wasn't all that great, but it's hard to war when all your opponent does is turtle. Either way, you're not throwing us under the bus; we weren't the ones that DoW'ed. GR obviously could have hit us if they wanted to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King James XVIII Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 [quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1305172629' post='2710469'] We did war. However, don't think you'll get much disagreement that it wasn't all that great, but it's hard to war when all your opponent does is turtle. Either way, you're not throwing us under the bus; we weren't the ones that DoW'ed. GR obviously could have hit us if they wanted to. [/quote] Yeah, PS was at war already this round. You guys tend to be out in front when it comes to offensive and/or defensive war timing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul711 Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 [quote name='Burning Glory' timestamp='1305166141' post='2710397'] Usually TE alliances have a certain honor, as there is a general unspoken rule and I can't remember the last time anyone violated it.....Do not hit AA's already at war/don't hit AA's less than 2 weeks out of a war. To add, far as I can remember, I don't really recall any alliance hitting another with less than 20% of the nuke count either...heck for that matter, I don't recall anyone hitting another alliance with less than 50%! BG. [/quote] There is also the unspoken rule regarding downdeclares but you guys with Citadel's help did not bat an eye when it was in your in favor against us. Also, I recall G6 massively outnumbering OP/LE/PS and WAPA in the nukes department last round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aineshane Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 (edited) You had nukes. It's not our fault that you can't keep 'em safe. We spied away all of them but two guys'. E: and it's not like we'd just come from tumbling with DF ourselves, right? Edited May 12, 2011 by aineshane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King James XVIII Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 [quote name='paul711' timestamp='1305174451' post='2710494'] There is also the unspoken rule regarding downdeclares but you guys with Citadel's help did not bat an eye when it was in your in favor against us. Also, I recall G6 massively outnumbering OP/LE/PS and WAPA in the nukes department last round. [/quote] Not to beat a dead horse or anything but doesn't history show that the war we had ended up even--just as we knew it was when we declared? [quote name='aineshane' timestamp='1305178942' post='2710536'] You had nukes. It's not our fault that you can't keep 'em safe. We spied away all of them but two guys'. E: and it's not like we'd just come from tumbling with DF ourselves, right? [/quote] We did have nukes but I think the problem was (which imo is a legitimate concern) that you guys greatly outnumbered us in that area. That tends to be the great "equalizer" in the game. However, everything has to be taken into account when planning war so I am sure the fact that we were #1, had equal ANS, better aggregate numbers, etc. played a role. I think E has backed off his earlier statement and rightfully so. My point remains that same as it always has been...unless there is something [u][i][b]clearly[/b][/i][/u] wrong with a war, why does anyone bring it up on OWF? Its a war game and war in TE can never be 50 members v. 50 members with all the other stats exactly the same. This is TPC. We don't make our reputation through building or diplomacy--we do it through war. Big wars, small wars, offensive wars, defensive wars, wars that lean our way and wars that don't...We'll give it all we have, have fun, fight honorably, make friends and learn from that war once peace happens. With that said, best of luck to both sides and enjoy the war!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMuz Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 Nukes don't really count for much. You could just say "Hey, we're going to war in 5 days, everyone buy a nuke every day" and with 18 nuke capable nations, they'd get 90 nukes. Not unfair to be prepared. There will always be a strong attacker advantage, because they could get ready while their targets are buying infra. The warchest is probably the biggest disadvantage here. You rarely need much more than 3-5 days collection, but if you don't even have a day, you're dead right from the start, especially with the blitz anarchy. One reason why alliances like LE does so well in TE is because they prepare for a war early and don't get blindsided often. That first time that they were blitzed by G6, they were well prepared and turned the tide, with a good warchest, coordination, and great counter-attacks. The damage was enough to cripple LE the rest of that round, but they really pwned against the odds. Also, GR attacked PS last round (and didn't do so well even with better stats and more nukes). Maybe they want to try and hit someone else this round? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vespassianus Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 We hit PS last round, it was cool, but now we wanted someone else. TPC looked good, we could have declared on a bunch of "please don't hit me, i run for flag" alliances and nuke their peaceful ambitions, but declaring on 1 real alliance seemed to be a bigger challenge. Also since 30th April TPC gained NS so declaring on the 10th isn't so evil i think. And GR made a war against DF also, altough OP>DF. So stop crying and let's continue to fight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NationRuler Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 [quote name='Burning Glory' timestamp='1305166141' post='2710397'] Yeah, its actually more like 94 nukes to 13, and since we have a few ghost/flag runners its probably more like 94 to 6 nukes. Looks like quite a few peeps have noticed.....OVER 4 times the nukes, under half as many nations, at the very least triple the WC, but yeah very close the the same AVG NS Usually TE alliances have a certain honor, as there is a general unspoken rule and I can't remember the last time anyone violated it.....Do not hit AA's already at war/don't hit AA's less than 2 weeks out of a war. To add, far as I can remember, I don't really recall any alliance hitting another with less than 20% of the nuke count either...heck for that matter, I don't recall anyone hitting another alliance with less than 50%!! Seems funny that there are at least 2 or so alliances in the top 12 that have not war'd yet as of this round, I can think of one right off the bat. Not to throw you guys under the bus PS, as you know your good friends, but IF GR really wanted a fight, and far more fair than attacking an AA just barely over a week out of war, they would have hit PS, RIGHT? Close to the same nukes, close to same member count, just a higher AVG NS is all! They wanted a fight though, right? Just say'n is all BG. [/quote] Never in all my days have I seen such an enormous BAWW at the number 8 alliance hitting the number 2 alliance in TE. I mean, wow. I hate it when people complain to me, "why would you hit someone who doesn't have nukes, planes, WC, whatever"? Look. It's TE. We're all given the same resources to use to build our nations and advance our military. People that have nukes and a WC make a sacrifice to be there. A sacrifice you could have made as well. Our ANS was nearly the same. You had the opportunity to buy nukes and you didn't. We did. That's not unfair, that's preparation. Next time maybe we'll try to declare on an alliance with 3 times our members and the same ANS. Maybe that would appease you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBoy16 Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 [quote name='Burning Glory' timestamp='1305166141' post='2710397'] Usually TE alliances have a certain honor, as there is a general unspoken rule and I can't remember the last time anyone violated it.....Do not hit AA's already at war/don't hit AA's less than 2 weeks out of a war. To add, far as I can remember, I don't really recall any alliance hitting another with less than 20% of the nuke count either...heck for that matter, I don't recall anyone hitting another alliance with less than 50%!! [/quote] BG. I love ya man. You're a good guy, but very out of touch with things when it comes to TE. Since you're crazy busy with RL, I don't hold it against you, but- I was with you in TPF since almost the beginning and every single time I can remember, when it comes to a war, you've tried making TPF/TPC look like the victim or the underdog. I mean look- you're doing it now when y'all were the number one AA and you got attacked by an AA in danger of falling off the first page of the AA standings. For real?! Your attitude toward waring is a cancer to TPC. I'm glad KJ is up at the top, but I pray, for the betterment of TPC, that your attitude doesn't infect him. With as long as I stood by your side, you know that if there's anyone qualified to talk about this, its me. These very reasons, among others you already know about, were some of the reasons I had to leave TPC and didn't want to go back when I came back to TE. Lets stop whining about being the larger nation and start being the larger nation, huh? [quote name='Burning Glory' timestamp='1305166141' post='2710397'] Seems funny that there are at least 2 or so alliances in the top 12 that have not war'd yet as of this round, I can think of one right off the bat. Not to throw you guys under the bus PS, as you know your good friends, but IF GR really wanted a fight, and far more fair than attacking an AA just barely over a week out of war, they would have hit PS, RIGHT? Close to the same nukes, close to same member count, just a higher AVG NS is all! They wanted a fight though, right? [/quote] First, we have been in a war already. No, it wasn't much of one, but we can't help it if our opponents don't fight back very well. Secondly, you're right. GR could have hit PS and would have been perfectly just in doing it and yes, it would have been a very evenly matched war. That's where the problem lies though. Apparently, they didn't want an evenly matched war. That's why they went straight to the top of the pack. It looks to me like they wanted to fight against the numbers. Its unfortunate that TPC has recently gotten out of a war and that your nations aren't in tip-top shape, and I'm sure your war chests aren't either. With that said though, from being in PS last round when we were at war for the large majority of the time, its not impossible, and unless you want to win some stupid flag, the constant warring is fun. Lets stop whining and enjoy the fight shall we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArneS Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 (edited) Some of the posts in this thread look too much like SE. Edited May 12, 2011 by ArneS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts