enderland Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Pacifica’s apparent inability to beat Republic of Roma is hardly an indication of any weakness on the part of the NPO. With near unparalleled discipline and organization, the New Pacific Order is no paper tiger. The rest of the Vox/FAN resistance hardly succeeding in their attrition, barely biting at the heals of Order’s boot; which only makes Republic of Roma’s current success even more incredible.As things currently stand: Republic of Roma>NPO>Vox uh, yeah, about that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KagetheSecond Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Propaganda? Perhaps. The truth? Without a doubt. Truth isn't fact, truth is what the majority of people agree on. Since the NPO holds the most political weight in CN today, they decide what truth is. Roma prepared quite well for the war and his military feats are quite impressive. He has some unfair advantages here, but to be perfectly honest, I am surprised that he is still faring this well. With all of the attention that Roma is bringing to these wars, one would think that the NPO would have their war horses, such as Arcades, in constant contact with the nations fighting Roma, telling them how to fight, etc. That's just my thought though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleh32 Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Good to see someone putting up a good fight against the NPO. Keep it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
applesauce59 Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 (edited) Pacifica’s apparent inability to beat Republic of Roma is hardly an indication of any weakness on the part of the NPO. With near unparalleled discipline and organization, the New Pacific Order is no paper tiger. The rest of the Vox/FAN resistance hardly succeeding in their attrition, barely biting at the heals of Order’s boot; which only makes Republic of Roma’s current success even more incredible.As things currently stand: Republic of Roma>NPO>Vox Oh Roma is winning? I am surprised because last night we destroyed him and i am starting to notice his war chest is gone. I know he stills wants his "war horse" but I don't think you would call smaller nations with few casualties "war horses". Yet that seems like who he wants to attack. I guess when it comes to the real thing it is hard to live up to ones ideals. I truly questions how his GGA target with the casualties of 7,005 Attacking + 21,063 Defending = 28,068 Casualties, could be considered a "war horse". Edited February 7, 2009 by applesauce59 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
droopyland Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 I truly questions how his GGA target with the casualties of 7,005 Attacking + 21,063 Defending = 28,068 Casualties, could be considered a "war horse". Let's be serious here, I don't think any GGA nation could really be considered a 'war horse' regardless of casualties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
applesauce59 Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Let's be serious here, I don't think any GGA nation could really be considered a 'war horse' regardless of casualties. Oh because your 0 casualties make you an expert on war? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
droopyland Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 I'd say so.. Immortal soldiers, hiiyaa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleh32 Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Let's be serious here, I don't think any GGA nation could really be considered a 'war horse' regardless of casualties. I somehow think this nation qualifies as that: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_d...Nation_ID=18098 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 I somehow think this nation qualifies as that: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_d...Nation_ID=18098 The casualty ratio is far from a "war horse" type ratio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleh32 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 The casualty ratio is far from a "war horse" type ratio. Fair enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Republic of Roma Posted February 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Oh Roma is winning? I am surprised because last night we destroyed him and i am starting to notice his war chest is gone. I know he stills wants his "war horse" but I don't think you would call smaller nations with few casualties "war horses". Yet that seems like who he wants to attack. I guess when it comes to the real thing it is hard to live up to ones ideals. I truly questions how his GGA target with the casualties of 7,005 Attacking + 21,063 Defending = 28,068 Casualties, could be considered a "war horse". You did a grand total of 300 infra in damage and you failed to pin me in anarchy with a 4-member attack before and after update. I anticipated that attack and it wasn't as deadly as I expected. Alone I could have destroyed more than 300 infra to one person. If that's the pinnacle of your warring, then NPO needs to re-tool you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Williambonney Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 You did a grand total of 300 infra in damage and you failed to pin me in anarchy with a 4-member attack before and after update. I anticipated that attack and it wasn't as deadly as I expected. Alone I could have destroyed more than 300 infra to one person. If that's the pinnacle of your warring, then NPO needs to re-tool you. Take away the MP you have you wouldn't do nearly that much damage. As Applesauce said earlier, if your looking for a warhorse bring your ns to a higher level then you'll find one. Nuking 10000 ns nations isn't really that much to be boasting about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
droopyland Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Take away the MP you have you wouldn't do nearly that much damage. No.. Serious? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
applesauce59 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 (edited) You did a grand total of 300 infra in damage and you failed to pin me in anarchy with a 4-member attack before and after update. I anticipated that attack and it wasn't as deadly as I expected. Alone I could have destroyed more than 300 infra to one person. If that's the pinnacle of your warring, then NPO needs to re-tool you. Ah Yes you could have destroyed 300 infra . I kinda of like how you lost both of your attacks on me and gave me $18 dollars. Its almost like there isn't much in the chest if you know what i mean.... Just as a note if you didn't have nukes i am guessing you wouldn't even scratched me. How do i know? You fail all your other attacks without nukes. Also i am glad you "anticipated" our attack. It makes it much better knowing not only did we win but you knew we were going to win. Edited February 8, 2009 by applesauce59 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 (edited) Oh because your 0 casualties make you an expert on war? Sup? If that's the standard we're going by, then I'm better than pretty much the entirety of the NPO at war. EDIT: Crohl and Arcades are really the only two that come to mind, and most of their causalities are not as a result of fighting with the NPO. Edited February 8, 2009 by MegaAros Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
applesauce59 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Sup? If that's the standard we're going by, then I'm better than pretty much the entirety of the NPO at war. Hehe, i am basically just saying its hard to be a expert at war if you never fought a war... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Hehe, i am basically just saying its hard to be a expert at war if you never fought a war... He could be a reroll you know. Anyway, war isn't that hard to figure out anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuardianofNewbs Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 You did a grand total of 300 infra in damage and you failed to pin me in anarchy with a 4-member attack before and after update. I anticipated that attack and it wasn't as deadly as I expected. Alone I could have destroyed more than 300 infra to one person. If that's the pinnacle of your warring, then NPO needs to re-tool you. Sure you could have..but oh wait you didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philp110 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 (edited) I somehow think this nation qualifies as that: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_d...Nation_ID=18098 ?? 70K casualties is nothing. In the "no CB war" I gained 600K casualties in less than 2 weeks. And my nation was only about 40K NS at the beginning of the war. edit: but I do LOVE that nation ruler! o/ gun lovers Edited February 8, 2009 by phillip110 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Republic of Roma Posted February 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 I don't even know why I'm wasting my breath with NPO. No matter what flaw or mistake I bring up of NPO, the alliance comes swarming in with defenses on what justifies how superior they are over everyone and everything. I honestly don't know how the rest of CN puts up with it. I put up a reasonable argument without flaming or trolling and here's GuardianofNewbs denying that it is possible to do 300 infra in damage to one person (even though his comrade said it is) in a before and after update attack, when in fact it is possible and have actually done it before. I did 250+ damage to you before update, imagine if I planned an attack before and after? Do the math before you say something like that, because I've actually done a much more deadlier attack alone on your comrades, not specifically you but your other friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Oh Roma is winning? He has apparently been beating his Pacifican opponents in battle for the year of 2009, I call that winning. While most of the NPO’s strength is derived from superior strategy, tactical victories are still victories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 I truly questions how his GGA target with the casualties of 7,005 Attacking + 21,063 Defending = 28,068 Casualties, could be considered a "war horse". Let's be serious here, I don't think any GGA nation could really be considered a 'war horse' regardless of casualties. The Grand Global Alliance is undefeated in battle with a combat record superior to Pacifca, the GGA even beat the NPO in a great war. Hardly an alliance to scoff at. If anything it indicates GGA’s superiority in this theatre of operations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuardianofNewbs Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 He has apparently been beating his Pacifican opponents in battle for the year of 2009, I call that winning. While most of the NPO’s strength is derived from superior strategy, tactical victories are still victories. Why don't you go ask him how he is doing now. :jihad: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crohl Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 (edited) Sup? If that's the standard we're going by, then I'm better than pretty much the entirety of the NPO at war.EDIT: Crohl and Arcades are really the only two that come to mind, and most of their causalities are not as a result of fighting with the NPO. Actually a little over half of my casualties occurred with NPO. Had 2 nuke rogues decide they hate me, and have engaged many nuclear nations. Archon for example, we lobbed nukes at each other during the last war. It was definitely fun. Edited February 8, 2009 by Crohl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
applesauce59 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 (edited) I don't even know why I'm wasting my breath with NPO. No matter what flaw or mistake I bring up of NPO, the alliance comes swarming in with defenses on what justifies how superior they are over everyone and everything. I honestly don't know how the rest of CN puts up with it. I put up a reasonable argument without flaming or trolling and here's GuardianofNewbs denying that it is possible to do 300 infra in damage to one person (even though his comrade said it is) in a before and after update attack, when in fact it is possible and have actually done it before. I did 250+ damage to you before update, imagine if I planned an attack before and after? Do the math before you say something like that, because I've actually done a much more deadlier attack alone on your comrades, not specifically you but your other friends. Let me guess you had a nuke thrown in there for the 250? Because so far every time you have attacked me without a nuke its a crash and burn. Like last night when your total attacks destroyed 32 infra and gave me some cash. Also we gave you the anarchy you wanted last night, i hope you enjoyed it. Also when i said you could destroy 300 infra i was using a literally tool called Sarcasm. It was like oh you could do that but in reality you didn't. Edited February 8, 2009 by applesauce59 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.