Over 1/3 of TOP has not yet fought this war

[Bob Ilyani]

Why would our coalition need to sow something that already exists?

 

Look over here, a NPO member telling us about coalition discord.

 

It's fine, I'll be honest. We've been trying our hardest to make this coalition a total clusterfuck, so we can achieve our master plan of cancelling all of our treaties, allying our former enemies, and then destroying the world once and for all.

 

Problem is, we just aren't doing a good enough job. The coalition just isn't fracturing the way we were hoping it would. Care to send Brehon and Farrin over to give us a few lessons? You guys seem better at this sort of thing than we are.

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

Why would our coalition need to sow something that already exists?

 

Current alignment of interests will end soon, and current short term interests will give way to new ones. Perhaps, this is just Hereno driving through his point from previous rather then an action of a coalition side where some dont even acknowledge their belonging to it. 

Or it won't and we will stomp the same people for years.

Who knows.

 

I find it absolutely delicious that we have a thread about us keeping tech farms in peace mode. Heck, even a few of us tech farms decided to fight.

Edited December 8, 2013 by Yevgeni Luchenkov

[Hereno]

Or it won't and we will stomp the same people for years.

Who knows.

 

I find it absolutely delicious that we have a thread about us keeping tech farms in peace mode. Heck, even a few of us tech farms decided to fight.

 

Who is "we"? Did you not read the OP? :popcorn:

[IYIyTh]

I'm not sure if the MI6 presence ITT is due to stockholm syndrome or just because I'm the OP

 

 

Don't worry your little bromance between you and Chimaera is still your own.

 

Please don't flatter yourself.

[Branimir]

Or it won't and we will stomp the same people for years.

You can hardly stomp someone if more then half of your alliance is in peace mode, 1/3 permanently.

 

OH YEAH GIRLFRIEND I JUST WENT THERE hurrrrr :P

Edited December 8, 2013 by Branimir

[IYIyTh]

You can hardly stomp someone if more then half of your alliance is in peace mode, 1/3 permanently.

 

OH YEAH GIRLFRIEND I JUST WENT THERE hurrrrr :P

 

 

Can't tell if serious 

[Rayvon]

You even allude to it in your own coalition Branimir.

Have you met STA? :P
Or read the insistence of some of their anti-coalition posts in recent announcements?

("a coalition side where some dont even acknowledge their belonging to it.") Edited December 8, 2013 by Rayvon

[TailsK]

"I'm on the side with a large advantage, why won't anyone declare on me despite being in nuclear anarchy? :("

 

Pfft. Your side has nations in PM as well. They can come out and hit if they want to.

[Dochartaigh]

Have you met STA? :P
Or read the insistence of some of their anti-coalition posts in recent announcements?

("a coalition side where some dont even acknowledge their belonging to it.")

 

That was the point of my post to Branimir. :P 

[Neo Uruk]

Pfft. Your side has nations in PM as well. They can come out and hit if they want to.

We have more strategic concerns with hitting people when we cycle. You blatantly admitted to sitting out of PM and not hitting anyone out of laziness more than anything else.

[Saladjoe]

 Heck, even a few of us tech farms decided to fight.

Guppy squad 4 lyfe

[Roadie]

Have you met STA? :P
Or read the insistence of some of their anti-coalition posts in recent announcements?

("a coalition side where some dont even acknowledge their belonging to it.")

 

Let it be known to all, the fractures in the NPO coalition are STA's fault.

[Neo Uruk]

Let it be known to all, the fractures in the NPO coalition are STA's fault.

You would think the little emoticon would tip you off that he was being facetious.

Unless you were being facetious as well, but we all know you like to point fingers at Rayvon.

[Rayvon]

You would think the little emoticon would tip you off that he was being facetious.

Unless you were being facetious as well, but we all know you like to point fingers at Rayvon.

He was being so as well

[Roadie]

He was being so as well

 Indeed I was.

[Crymson]

If we weren't amongst the top alliances on our side in terms of damage caused, then your post might have a logical basis. But we are, and so it doesn't.

 

By the way, these attempts to skew perception by using number of nations rather than the NS those nations represent are old, and these threads in general are tired and ineffective; you're only convincing those who would have agreed with you anyway (i.e. on your side of the war and not particularly interested in facts). That seems like a solid waste of time; but if it satisfies you, then by all means, keep at it.

Edited December 9, 2013 by Crymson

[Hereno]

If we weren't amongst the top alliances on our side in terms of damage caused, then your post might have a logical basis. But we are, and so it doesn't.

 

By the way, these attempts to skew perception by using number of nations rather than the NS those nations represent are old, and these threads in general are tired and ineffective; you're only convincing those who would have agreed with you anyway (i.e. on your side of the war and not particularly interested in facts). That seems like a solid waste of time; but if it satisfies you, then by all means, keep at it.

 

I mean, someone could always come up with some uh "less-skewed" statistics to show why I'm wrong, but I guess making arguments that allude to stats that haven't been gathered is a lot easier and doesn't risk sticking your foot directly into your mouth.

[Tick1]

 

I mean, someone could always come up with some uh "less-skewed" statistics to show why I'm wrong, but I guess making arguments that allude to stats that haven't been gathered is a lot easier and doesn't risk sticking your foot directly into your mouth.

 

You could always do your own work and come up with some "more-skewed" statistics to show why you are right, I mean this is your thread. Although that would require you to actually remove your foot from your mouth. I assume somewhere deep down in that thick skull of your's you actually know why nations on our side are in peace mode, but mosey on with your discussion.

[Hereno]

 

You could always do your own work and come up with some "more-skewed" statistics to show why you are right, I mean this is your thread. Although that would require you to actually remove your foot from your mouth. I assume somewhere deep down in that thick skull of your's you actually know why nations on our side are in peace mode, but mosey on with your discussion.

 

Considering 1/3 of TOP hasn't even fought the war I didn't feel a large onus to not be lazy myself in presenting these statistics. If you or anyone else wants to do some lifting to show that I'm wrong, I'd love to see more TOP stats or even stats of other alliances. Statistics are fun. Try-hards on the OWF... not so much.

[Crymson]

 

I mean, someone could always come up with some uh "less-skewed" statistics to show why I'm wrong, but I guess making arguments that allude to stats that haven't been gathered is a lot easier and doesn't risk sticking your foot directly into your mouth.

 

Your argument has been undermined numerous times in this thread already. If you're not aware of that by now, then I'm not sure what to tell you; you either suffer from substantial cognitive difficulties, or you've an enormous unwillingness to admit defeat. More, it speaks volumes that you have decided against responding to any post that factually challenges your assertions, instead opting to simply take potshots at less relevant posts so as to avoid implicitly acknowledging that your methodology is nonsensical.

 

Of course, the fact that you believed you could accomplish anything here in the first place makes a strong case for your inability to reason.

Edited December 9, 2013 by Crymson

[Hereno]

 

Your argument has been undermined numerous times in this thread already. If you're not aware of that by now, then I'm not sure what to tell you; you either suffer from substantial cognitive difficulties, or you've an enormous unwillingness to admit defeat. More, it speaks volumes that you have decided against responding to any post that factually challenges your assertions, instead opting to simply take potshots at less relevant posts so that you will not need to implicitly acknowledge that your methodology is nonsensical.

 

Of course, the fact that you believed you could accomplish anything here in the first place makes a strong case for your inability to reason.

 

If you had contradictory numbers that were 1/10th as impressive as your [unnecessary] verbosity, you could have wrapped this thread up a long time ago. My OP speaks for itself; I'm having fun now watching you [and others] do damage control on a thread you find "nonsensical" and unable to accomplish anything.

[Azaghul]

 

I mean, someone could always come up with some uh "less-skewed" statistics to show why I'm wrong, but I guess making arguments that allude to stats that haven't been gathered is a lot easier and doesn't risk sticking your foot directly into your mouth.

I've already posted with this info, but here it is again in a fashion that even you can't claim that it wasn't spoon fed to you:

 

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/119062-sugar-rush-war-damage-tally

 

Alliances on our side / damage inflicted

#1 New Polar Order 3,426,637.85

#2 Sparta 3,378,621.97

#3 The Order of the Paradox 2,469,327.26

[Tick1]

 

If you had contradictory numbers that were 1/10th as impressive as your [unnecessary] verbosity, you could have wrapped this thread up a long time ago. My OP speaks for itself; I'm having fun now watching you [and others] do damage control on a thread you find "nonsensical" and unable to accomplish anything.

 

I didn't know being bored was damage control.

[Hereno]

I've already posted with this info, but here it is again in a fashion that even you can't claim that it wasn't spoon fed to you:

 

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/119062-sugar-rush-war-damage-tally

 

Alliances on our side / damage inflicted

#1 New Polar Order 3,426,637.85

#2 Sparta 3,378,621.97

#3 The Order of the Paradox 2,469,327.26

 

Yeah I read the damage tally thread daily. I thought it was obvious that those stats have nothing to do with the ones presented in this thread. Yevgeni alone could personally destroy every nation in the NSO coalition above 10k NS and it still wouldn't change the fact that 1/3 of TOP hasn't fought.

[Azaghul]

 

Yeah I read the damage tally thread daily. I thought it was obvious that those stats have nothing to do with the ones presented in this thread. Yevgeni alone could personally destroy every nation in the NSO coalition above 10k NS and it still wouldn't change the fact that 1/3 of TOP hasn't fought.

Those statistics show that the 2/3rds that have fought have done more than enough to make up for the 1/3rd that haven't fought.

Edited December 9, 2013 by Azaghul