Hello, Non Grata, how are you? We are fine.

[IYIyTh]

Then your opponents are terrible.

 

I can't control that. But on average, they should be able to do 500/day. Even then, you're losing tech worth far more than what's coming in. Add in some other fun tactics and I'd say that 6 aid package should last you on average 3-4 days.

 

If you're like most of the people who receive and decide it's a good idea to do ground attacks and you give that money away, even less.

Edited February 20, 2013 by IYIyTh

[Do Not Fear Jazz]

Then your opponents are terrible.

 

I can't control that. But on average, they should be able to do 500/day. Even then, you're losing tech worth far more than what's coming in. Add in some other fun tactics and I'd say that 6 aid package should last you on average 3-4 days.

 

If you're like most of the people who receive and decide it's a good idea to do ground attacks and you give that money away, even less.

 

I don't lose GAs, lol.

[King Louis the II]

supercoolyellow, on 18 Feb 2013 - 11:47, said:
Your coalition hasn't had a blitz on the lower end of mediocre in the past twenty days. I wouldn't be talking.

 
Huh? What are you talking about? Either way, good thing you decided to stop talking. 

I suspect he meant to say that Your coalition hasn't had a blitz on the lower end of mediocre in the past twenty days. Edited February 20, 2013 by King Louis the II

[Dre4mwe4ver]

Dear Randalla,

Get well soon.

Sincerely,
Dre4m

P.S. o7 NG and Apparatus, have fun

[supercoolyellow]

Poor GOONS, last time you just tried to fight a 20 man alliance, and all 20 nations of Kaskus dogpiled you!!!! Something should be done about this injustice.

 

Thread over. Omni wins.

[WorldConqueror]

Thread over. Omni wins.

Here's a pro-tip for all you mouthbreathers: virtually every =/= every. hth

[Rush Sykes]

haaa haaaa haaaaa, oh Sard I love you. Keep playing that one its really good. Perhaps we should erect a statue to your heroics during the weekly curbstomps you handed out to micro alliances every day of the year. Perhaps a national memorial to the 30:1 sieges you orchestrated against alliances like the NPL or Kaskus for example. You like to paint the picture of GOONs being the eternal underdog and yet in practice your alliance thrives on the exact oposite taking every oportunety to head hunt and destroy any small isolated or unprotected group of nations you can find. I'll wager a bet that within a week of this war ending you will have people on your boards (including many sub-5K NS nuclear veterans) rubbing their hands with glee on discovering some poor 10 man AA without a treaty so you can loot them senseless and force them to dance for you on your mercy boards for laughs.  

 

Of course they will.... As will every last other raiding alliance in CN. I fail to see your point, but considering the source, I am not shocked.

[Omniscient1]

Here's a pro-tip for all you mouthbreathers: virtually every =/= every. hth

So what was he referring to then my friend? Please enlighten us. In Karma they didn't fight, Bi-Polar they weren't dogpiled, they fought Ejay and some rogues certaintly not more than they could handle, they were attacked a lot in PB-Polar, and in TOP's per-empt they fought a one day war with former ally CSN and then hit FARK late with 8.... Yes 8 other alliances, then there is Kaskus , Dave war I imagine there front was mostly equal after reinforcements arrived, but even if not that is 2 out of six where they didn't have at least 10 to 1 odds. So it makes one wonder what the hell he means by "virtually all".

So here's a tip. Name calling and sarcastic comments does not change facts. If by "virtually all" he means what I mean by one maybe two then I guess he is correct. Otherwise he is wrong.

In other news, how you been man? Enjoying war? Edited February 20, 2013 by Omniscient1

[smurthwaite]

 I fail to see your point, but considering the source, I am not shocked.

Argument Ad hominem is a logical fallacy.  Logical fallacies, by definition, are illogical.  If they are illogical, they cannot be used to effect in an argument (to which I must believe you are trying to contribute based on where the comment was made).  The blatant use such dribble in the way quoted above is also a non sequitur.  Man, you have seem to be in need of a course in argumentation.

 

Next.

[WorldConqueror]

So what was he referring to then my friend? Please enlighten us. In Karma they didn't fight, Bi-Polar they weren't dogpiled, they fought Ejay and some rogues certaintly not more than they could handle, they were attacked a lot in PB-Polar, and in TOP's per-empt they fought a one day war with former ally CSN and then hit FARK late with 8.... Yes 8 other alliances, then there is Kaskus , Dave war I imagine there front was mostly equal after reinforcements arrived, but even if not that is 2 out of six where they didn't have at least 10 to 1 odds. So it makes one wonder what the hell he means by "virtually all".

So here's a tip. Name calling and sarcastic comments does not change facts. If by "virtually all" he means what I mean by one maybe two then I guess he is correct. Otherwise he is wrong.

In other news, how you been man? Enjoying war?

I don't remember the toughness of previous GOONS fronts off the top of my head, I was just making the general point that he did qualify his original statement, and that qualification was largely ignored. I would make the point though that in previous wars, even when GOONS were on the winning side, due to their NS spread they usually get hit fairly hard, either by virtue of a dearth of enemies in the lower tier or all the wonder heavy mid tier nations being knocked into their range.

Yeah it's been good, though I had spotty access at the beginning, missed a few days of attacks and whatnot.

[King Wally]

Of course they will.... As will every last other raiding alliance in CN. I fail to see your point, but considering the source, I am not shocked.

 

My point is very simple. Sardonic claimed that ...

 

"We've been dogpiled in virtually every conflict we've ever been in, even those we ultimately won."

 

This claim is not only factually incorrect its indeed the polar oposite of reality where the VAST majority of conflicts GOONs participates in are orchastracted in such a way as to guarantee incredible numeral advantages to themselves. 

 

Also if you really think that "every last other raiding alliance in CN" behaves in a way even similar to GOONs toward micro alliances then you either have not been paying much attention or you are strikingly unaware of how many alliances allow raiding but choose to exercise restraint and control toward the act.

[Sephiroth]

Nice to see more counters on NG. It would of been a tragedy if due to that NPO treaty NG ended up escaping the same fate as Doom House, despite having taken full advantage of their alliance with DH and PB to treat other alliances as they would not want to be treated themselves for so long. I'm a little surprised when I hear NG members saying it wasn't a sure thing they were going to assist DH, since I don't think they really had a choice. They could of claimed neutrality due to their NPO treaty, but I would be surprised if anybody wouldn't of seen that as them trying to distance themselves from Doom House as soon as it wasn't beneficial anymore. The only benefit NPO could of hoped for with their treaty was NG possibly staying out or assisting them (which are benefits which never came to be), now that NG is on the other side and isn't benefiting NPO at all with their treaty, it would be completely illogical for NPO or anyone on our side to try limiting how many alliances can hit NG. Since the treaty would only be helping NG despite them joining the enemy side if their tie with NPO helped prevent them from getting countered properly. If NG isn't getting hit hard enough yet, then I definitely think EQ should get on that until they are taken care of properly. NPO is actually strengthened the more damage NG takes, as NG isn't closer to them than DH and NPO shouldn't even want NG dragging them down by association.

[Lurunin]

 
My point is very simple. Sardonic claimed that ...
 
"We've been dogpiled in virtually every conflict we've ever been in, even those we ultimately won."
 
This claim is not only factually incorrect its indeed the polar oposite of reality where the VAST majority of conflicts GOONs participates in are orchastracted in such a way as to guarantee incredible numeral advantages to themselves. 
 
Also if you really think that "every last other raiding alliance in CN" behaves in a way even similar to GOONs toward micro alliances then you either have not been paying much attention or you are strikingly unaware of how many alliances allow raiding but choose to exercise restraint and control toward the act.

To be fair wally, raiding alliances are a dying breed and the only ones people really think of are Goons/NG and to a lesser extent, NEW. unfortunately the ones that do act with class with raiding aren't too known as they don't make the headlines for Fuck ups as often

So when someone talks about raiding alliances they're usually talking bout the two former Edited February 20, 2013 by Lurunin

[Stewie]

Nice to see more counters on NG. It would of been a tragedy if due to that NPO treaty NG ended up escaping the same fate as Doom House, despite having taken full advantage of their alliance with DH and PB to treat other alliances as they would not want to be treated themselves for so long. I'm a little surprised when I hear NG members saying it wasn't a sure thing they were going to assist DH, since I don't think they really had a choice. They could of claimed neutrality due to their NPO treaty, but I would be surprised if anybody wouldn't of seen that as them trying to distance themselves from Doom House as soon as it wasn't beneficial anymore.The only benefit NPO could of hoped for with their treaty was NG possibly staying out or assisting them (which are benefits which never came to be), now that NG is on the other side and isn't benefiting NPO at all with their treaty, it would be completely illogical for NPO or anyone on our side to try limiting how many alliances can hit NG. Since the treaty would only be helping NG despite them joining the enemy side if their tie with NPO helped prevent them from getting countered properly.If NG isn't getting hit hard enough yet, then I definitely think EQ should get on that until they are taken care of properly. NPO is actually strengthened the more damage NG takes, as NG isn't closer to them than DH and NPO shouldn't even want NG dragging them down by association.

Then they should just cancel on us if they hold us in such contempt.

[Sephiroth]

To be fair wally, raiding alliances are a dying breed and the only ones people really think of are Goons/NG and to a lesser extent, NEW. unfortunately the ones that do act with class with raiding aren't too known as they don't make the headlines for Fuck ups as often

 

There are raiding alliances who act with some restraint and allow their nations to fight in order to gain experience with the war system, which as long as they aren't abusive towards weaker nations just because they can nobody cares. However they still conduct themselves honorably for the most part, then there are alliances like NG/GOONS who completely take advantage of their numbers advantage to destroy smaller nations with them having no hope of putting up a fight and despite being the aggressors treat their victims like someone they can flex their strength advantage on to treat them in dishonorable ways and behave as if these nations they victimize owe them something if they want to gain peace. Such as needing to work towards it and forcing greater penalties upon them if they fight back.

[Sunny Side King]

I had completely forgotten how butthurt you guys were. I seriously haven't thought about you guys since the last war. It's nice to see we're still doing it right. You couldn't do it with 7 alliances last time, maybe you can do it with 20+ this time? I suppose only time will tell.

[salsabeast1]

Sunny, may I ask who specifically is butthurt?

[Kim Jaym Il]

I'd imagine there will be many butts in pain by the time NG is finished with those alliances.

[Rush Sykes]

My point is very simple. Sardonic claimed that ...

 

"We've been dogpiled in virtually every conflict we've ever been in, even those we ultimately won."

 

This claim is not only factually incorrect its indeed the polar oposite of reality where the VAST majority of conflicts GOONs participates in are orchastracted in such a way as to guarantee incredible numeral advantages to themselves. 

 

Also if you really think that "every last other raiding alliance in CN" behaves in a way even similar to GOONs toward micro alliances then you either have not been paying much attention or you are strikingly unaware of how many alliances allow raiding but choose to exercise restraint and control toward the act.

 

Oh, I see.. you are equating their tech raids with a conflict... despite clearly knowing that Sardonic meant globally inclusive conflicts. You are cute for trying though. Here is a protip... Tech raids are not conflicts. Kaskus going batshit like they do every 3 to 5 months, is not a conflict. 

[Rush Sykes]

There are raiding alliances who act with some restraint and allow their nations to fight in order to gain experience with the war system, which as long as they aren't abusive towards weaker nations just because they can nobody cares. However they still conduct themselves honorably for the most part, then there are alliances like NG/GOONS who completely take advantage of their numbers advantage to destroy smaller nations with them having no hope of putting up a fight and despite being the aggressors treat their victims like someone they can flex their strength advantage on to treat them in dishonorable ways and behave as if these nations they victimize owe them something if they want to gain peace. Such as needing to work towards it and forcing greater penalties upon them if they fight back.

 

Oh moralism, how I missed thee.

[Piejonk]

I had completely forgotten how butthurt you guys were. I seriously haven't thought about you guys since the last war. It's nice to see we're still doing it right. You couldn't do it with 7 alliances last time, maybe you can do it with 20+ this time? I suppose only time will tell.

 

You guys are dog piling us with 20 of your own AAs, so naturally, we had to return the favor.

[the rebel]

Kaskus going batshit like they do every 3 to 5 months, is not a conflict. 

 

 

 The English language disagrees with you, conflict is a state of open, often prolonged fighting; a battle or war.

[Saniiro Matsudaira]

You guys are dog piling us with 20 of your own AAs, so naturally, we had to return the favor.

What else did you expect to happen when you attacked TLR?

[King Wally]

Oh, I see.. you are equating their tech raids with a conflict... despite clearly knowing that Sardonic meant globally inclusive conflicts. You are cute for trying though. Here is a protip... Tech raids are not conflicts. Kaskus going batshit like they do every 3 to 5 months, is not a conflict. 

 

When an alliance systematicly goes to war against a micro alliance its a conflict. Sure its not a global war but I never said it was either.

 

Its like a school bully that beats up a dozen small kids a day and has one legit-boxing match a year claiming they always fight against larger oponents and that they are badass underdogs when in reality they spend every other day of the year beating down on who ever they can get away with. Its a hard positioning statement to swollow to be perfectly honest.

[Rush Sykes]

 The English language disagrees with you, conflict is a state of open, often prolonged fighting; a battle or war.

 

You are trying too hard my friend.