KingBilly1 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 so it's not a double ns downdeclare then? thank god for that :P my heart stopped and said dayummmm! good luck to all involved and put the war in warriors! :) o/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingBilly1 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 what's the stats on those involved? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul711 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Oh yeah yeah It takes the lot of you don't it!?! No wonder you don't want to talk about stats, ya weasels :awesome: I'll do the nuke stats for you, as of 10/30/2013 3:38:29 AM: Op: 100 RE: 55 Hellas: 58 TPC: 92 Pansies total: 305 Warriors: 345 That's not the average NS stuff of course, which you weasels are wayyy too lazy to figure out. I did my part, now get up off yer lazy stinkin' backside carcasses and go get the rest. Pfffftt, I've no tolerance for such slackertude. --- ....anyways, I, of course, am going out of town on vacation today for the next 4 days+ and will have perhaps my phone internet to use for war, unless there are roaming charges, in which case, no internet at all cause screw that silliness. So have fun y'all :) 4 OP nations totaling 26 nukes have no targets. The limited use of each AA in combination with each other is what is making determining stats hard. I do have a couple for you that I think bear noting. 37 days before first war. About 65% of warriors with nukes without MPs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDSupreme Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) B-) On One note...: So much about protesting for "new" things coming or done here at TE...(a limited War...eh?, and strange rules?) On another note...: Wow ... in deed, Unions and Pacts DO HAPPEN here!!! ...Well we all knew it... Isn't right, SUNnies,and the Rest? On just one more note...: This War needs a more Epic Name.... please...! :P May the best of the big 'n Fat Upper cats Push the most it's weight Down over the Others.. :frantic: :laugh: :popcorn: PD... : From now on, I would like no-more protesting New Things at TE...! OK? -_- Edited October 30, 2013 by HDSupreme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bombuator Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Considering the alliances involved in the war I don't care about anyone crying wolf about this being a down declare, it isn't. We aren't fighting Warriors lower tier, the area where we far exceed them in NS. While in the Upper Tier it was an even match, where Warriors had a sizeable Nuclear advantage. (Maybe not after our pretty amazing blitz) HD, we aren't creating a new thing in TE, we are simply protesting Warriors not fighting for this long, the alliance that did do something new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingBilly1 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 let's just call your guys the protest or something for now.... so, the protest has set a certain amount of nations that can attack, but the entire of warriors is free to counter these nations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingBilly1 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 The lack of information given to warriors is unfair though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDSupreme Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Considering the alliances involved in the war I don't care about anyone crying wolf about this being a down declare, it isn't. We aren't fighting Warriors lower tier, the area where we far exceed them in NS. While in the Upper Tier it was an even match, where Warriors had a sizeable Nuclear advantage. (Maybe not after our pretty amazing blitz) HD, we aren't creating a new thing in TE, we are simply protesting Warriors not fighting for this long, the alliance that did do something new. B-) Understood my friend...! But anyways, what is happening is happening...! What all the participants have done here is called a ...'Limited Pre-Emptive Strike' against a dangerously powerful Foe... :frantic: :nuke: :gun: :war: :excl: :popcorn: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewolfe2015 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) Looking around at the war slots, I see about a 40% NS advantage to the other side in nearly every single slot in my area. Awesome example of "They aren't warring, so let's down declare and really do some damage" when in reality this is the third time we've been unable to get a war in because something happens the day or day before... People just need to say they wanted to destroy an alliance and stop dancing around the morality of it, saying we only used x nations or we only matched up with these guys or something other excuse. Plain and simple "We thought you needed to be destroyed, so we got together and decided to down declare on you all so we didn't get destroyed ourselves." Shoot, this is just a real fine example: http://tournament.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?search=1000099&Extended=1 How do you even want to do a down declare like that? Those guys can't fight back, hell I can barely even hit him when I've got two other nations. http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000359 20k NS and you need to down declare on 2 targets and attack a third in your range which only has 2 nukes? I'm not bitter, but it is funny to me that it takes 4 groups of alliances to down declare and call it a war. I'd much rather up declare in TE if I'm going to fight anyone (provided my squad is active)... any other reason to attack just looks weird. Edited October 30, 2013 by lonewolfe2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polarbear Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Bout time someone took the fight to us. Wondered why it was taking so long for someone to attack us. As for those with their panties in a twist about us not warring for so long i will repeat what i have said many times. Not our fault no one ever attacked us, so next time dont gripe about us not warring if you have not attacked us. btw we were 1 day away from war so good job on the timing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasso Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) Looking around at the war slots, I see about a 40% NS advantage to the other side in nearly every single slot in my area. Awesome example of "They aren't warring, so let's down declare and really do some damage" when in reality this is the third time we've been unable to get a war in because something happens the day or day before... People just need to say they wanted to destroy an alliance and stop dancing around the morality of it, saying we only used x nations or we only matched up with these guys or something other excuse. Plain and simple "We thought you needed to be destroyed, so we got together and decided to down declare on you all so we didn't get destroyed ourselves." Shoot, this is just a real fine example: http://tournament.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?search=1000099&Extended=1 How do you even want to do a down declare like that? Those guys can't fight back, hell I can barely even hit him when I've got two other nations. http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000359 20k NS and you need to down declare on 2 targets and attack a third in your range which only has 2 nukes? I'm not bitter, but it is funny to me that it takes 4 groups of alliances to down declare and call it a war. I'd much rather up declare in TE if I'm going to fight anyone (provided my squad is active)... any other reason to attack just looks weird. If we really wanted to destory your alliance we would have done it . What you said doesnt make any sense with respect to this point . Anyway , the traget list might not be the perfect one , i never saw a good target list , eventhough i often do some for Hellas . So yeah there are couple of exceptions and errors . But it doesnt mean that the whole war thing is wrong . Now back to numbers , you guys been laying down for almost 40 days . 1 month and 10 days . Defcon1 , same thing . I do not blame you , but yes now we came for you all together , so do not blame us . I mean in 1 month i can have 50M of warchest and 20 Nukes . And fight 3 every week . Nevermind now . Current numbers and statistics : The number of nations involved in this war ( OFFENSIVE ) are (im lazy to write the names ) : - RE : 3 Nations - TPC : 6 Nations - Hellas : 6 Nations - OP : 16 Nations Total : 31 Nations Strength : about 573,000 Edited October 30, 2013 by wasso Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonshy Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Stats are irrelevant against the War Dodgers, you would think differently when they have War in their name. Btw, here's your stats http://i.imgur.com/NVMiqjs.png Thanks to Kurdanak for collecting them. My name has been left out. Kurdanak will dai. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul711 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 btw we were 1 day away from war so good job on the timing I know :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewolfe2015 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Current numbers and statistics : The number of nations involved in this war ( OFFENSIVE ) are (im lazy to write the names ) : - RE : 3 Nations - TPC : 6 Nations - Hellas : 6 Nations - OP : 16 Nations Total : 31 Nations Strength : about 573,000 So basically what you're saying is you attacked us with nearly 2x the average NS (spreading your nations to 3 attacking slots, but anarchying at a rate of 50% preventing many defensive slots) and held the bulk of all alliances but OP back to get 2+ weeks of no war so that when they fight next time your alliance with be much stronger, the same problem that the Warriors supposedly were hit for? It doesn't matter how long you've not been able to fight when the odds are that stacked against you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandros o Megas Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Does anyone remember any war that Warriors when in the Defensive didn't cry? While when they go to the offensive whatthey usally do? They pick a smaller NS alliance or one that exited before a week from a war and then they add a minor more and they go to the "glory" ... This time they sat for half the short round 27 and waited to do the same with a huge amount of nukes chsing again when they would be pleased a lower alliance with much less nukes and adding one more to cover their morality needs. Now what they do? Crying, turtling or ... going for vacation playing with their mobile phones. Sorry guys this does not work all the times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eljierro Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Warriors can stay in peace or downdeclare but we can't? Screw this. You merged the two strongest alliances... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therm Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 So basically what you're saying is you attacked us with nearly 2x the average NS (spreading your nations to 3 attacking slots, but anarchying at a rate of 50% preventing many defensive slots) and held the bulk of all alliances but OP back to get 2+ weeks of no war so that when they fight next time your alliance with be much stronger, the same problem that the Warriors supposedly were hit for? It doesn't matter how long you've not been able to fight when the odds are that stacked against you. caused by your own incompetence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewolfe2015 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 caused by your own incompetence. Can't speak for what anyone else had, but getting down declared on by 3 nations during update usually doesn't leave much room to not be anarchied, even if you have max troops, soldiers and GCs/Barracks. I can't be on at update to watch my nation, and I'm fine being hit/anarchied. Doesn't matter, just pixels. But ever since I started playing TE the same line has always been used in this game and people always try to take the moral high ground in wars. I was just hoping that after coming back last round and taking a hiatus for awhile things might have changed... I see they did not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GetaBeer Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Am I to take this to mean Clash is turtling? Because it looks to me like Clash is turtling... I'd say good luck to all involved but I think we all know luck has nothing to do with it in a dogpile this size. I know your more than likely just slagging Clash for fun because your always very good and entertaining poster(worth the read) Nick :smug: . That said Clash is one the best alliance leaders you can have, he does all the little things that make him great mate to have as leader of alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartfw Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) Can't speak for what anyone else had, but getting down declared on by 3 nations during update usually doesn't leave much room to not be anarchied, even if you have max troops, soldiers and GCs/Barracks. I can't be on at update to watch my nation, and I'm fine being hit/anarchied. Doesn't matter, just pixels. But ever since I started playing TE the same line has always been used in this game and people always try to take the moral high ground in wars. I was just hoping that after coming back last round and taking a hiatus for awhile things might have changed... I see they did not. I mean I hate to point out the obvious (as a general rule if you need to point it out, the other person will still not be able to see it), but you had 200 infra, 10-20 navy and 10-17 nuke advantage on two of the three nations that down declared you and all had warred and should be set back further than an uninterrupted growth. So that repeated line about being down declared by 3 nations would appear to be bunk. Now in terms of being prepared, we could go through a checklist: Soldiers -- check (good job) Tanks -- none (edit -- yes sorry for the correction although the other nations didn't making you easier to focus on) Planes -- none Defcom -- 5 Threat -- low So now that the facts have been dispersed with, go on and keep complaining. Complain to the world how it is just unfair that smaller nations were just being mean and down declaring you, despite your best prep. Edit: quoting system fail, and fixing tanks. Edited October 30, 2013 by hartfw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul711 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Speaking on behalf of OP ( I am sure others will agree) we did not set out to destroy warriors. Never once during our discussions did those words ever come out. We have been in the same situation where it is tough to find a war so this is our attempt to offer the best war we can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartfw Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) .... fff ... trying to fix my quoting above. Oh well. Edited October 30, 2013 by hartfw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eljierro Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 That's what happens when you avoid war for so long. You only have one leader? If Clash is busy then have someone else organize wars until he comes back. Merging wasn't the best plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owney OSullivan Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 No need to bicker gentleman, we're just putting the "War" back into "Warriors" for you. We thought you'd be getting bored with no wars for well over a month. I'd think you'd all be well prepared with so much time to build with no conflict. Have fun everyone! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesusfreak Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) Another note is we had a pretty good war being drawn up around Day 14. Unfortunately we had a ~25% NS advantage on the closest eligible targets by then (not including ANS and nukes), and we knew yall wouldn't like that ;) Edited October 30, 2013 by Jesusfreak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.