jackyseto123 Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Pff. More Anti-Legion !@#$. Unlike most people, I have the power of restraint, and I will implement it again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 What the Legion needs is a clever charismatic leader who will bring her up from her knees. A leader like myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rynka Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Pff.More Anti-Legion !@#$. Unlike most people, I have the power of restraint, and I will implement it again. Actually, those are what we call facts. I see that when you're faced with them, you simply brush them off as "Anti-Legion !@#$," or resort to making really lame (and warnable) jokes. Revanche probably wouldn't have had to embarrass you (and your alliance, for that matter) had you not mouthed off. Well, it's whatever, I'm sure you're used to it by now. By the way, you should really stop being proud of defeating inactive nations. It.. really isn't that much of an accomplishment. Do you also brag if you're able to beat a dangerously overweight person in a footrace? In any case, congratulations on three years of life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincongrad Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Ah, still classy as ever. You know, there have been zero problems between Vanguard and The Legion since the conclusion of the war, but since you have brought it up for discussion, I thought I may as well provide you with some enlightenment. Let us examine some statistics, shall we?The day prior to the outbreak of the Vanguard/Legion conflict, the 15th August: Total strength. Vanguard: 1,514,650 The Legion: 3,038,090 The day the peace settlement came into effect, the 22nd August: Total strength. Vanguard: 1,476,191 The Legion: 2,627,294 Losses between 15th August and 22nd August: Total strength. Vanguard: -38,459 (-2.54%) The Legion: -410,796 (-13.52%) Bit of a difference there, wouldn't you say? Now that we've examined the damage done during the war, let's take a look at how long both alliances took to recover following it. The relevant statistics can be found here and here. Keeping in mind the standings on the day prior to the war, the 15th of August: The day prior to the outbreak of the Vanguard/Legion conflict, the 15th August: Total strength. Vanguard: 1,514,650 The Legion: 3,038,090 The date Vanguard and The Legion regained their pre-war strength: Vanguard: 4th September (13 days after peace was reached) The Legion: 12th November (82 days after peace was reached) So, between the 15th of August and 12th of November, let's take a look at the gains by each alliance: Difference in strength between 15th of August and 12th of November: Total strength. Vanguard: +495,036 The Legion: +2,439 So, if you would like another round, jackyseto123, come and get it. I think it would be more correct to include the NS of the rest of nations we were engaged with, as well as the amount of nukes we took. I'm not claiming that Legion did well in this war (we did quite poorly overall), but please provide a full picture. As everyone knows, though, you can't say "Oh I did well in the most recent war sot hat must mean my alliance is superior." Combat is a group effort. And Tom Litler: Feel free to join and you'll be emperor in no time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northrend Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 What the Legion needs is a clever charismatic leader who will bring her up from her knees.A leader like myself. You can be Co-Kaiser of Nordreich with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denial Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 (edited) I think it would be more correct to include the NS of the rest of nations we were engaged with, as well as the amount of nukes we took. I'm not claiming that Legion did well in this war (we did quite poorly overall), but please provide a full picture. Of course, Vanguard was not the only alliance at war with The Legion, but nor were The Legion alone in attacking Vanguard, so these statistics do provide an insight into the military performance of both alliances. Somehow, I think it would only be more embarrassing for The Legion if I was to include the fact that the involved alliances in the full conflict were Vanguard/Universalis/PAIN vs The Legion/UPN/Invicta/Elysium. It would highlight the amusing reality that a coalition of under 100 nations entered the battlefield against The Legion, who had the support of allied nations numbering in the hundreds, and still came out on top. Further, how would including the amount of nuclear weapons you took lead to a more accurate result? I am not sure how it works within The Legion, but out here in the rest of the Cyberverse, statistics are not adjusted to offset your incompetence and complete lack of preparation for nuclear warfare. I could have also included the part where Vanguard paid for part of your reconstruction, and it still took The Legion months longer to return to its pre-war strength, while Vanguard built on its pre-war strength by over 30%. Edited February 18, 2009 by Revanche Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincongrad Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 (edited) Of course, Vanguard was not the only alliance at war with The Legion, but nor were The Legion alone in attacking Vanguard, so these statistics do provide an insight into the military performance of both alliances. Somehow, I think it would only be more embarrassing for The Legion if I was to include the fact that the involved alliances in the full conflict were Vanguard/Universalis/PAIN vs The Legion/UPN/Invicta/Elysium. It would highlight the amusing reality that a coalition of under 100 nations entered the battlefield against The Legion, who had the support of allied nations numbering in the hundreds, and still came out on top. Further, how would including the amount of nuclear weapons you took lead to a more accurate result? I am not sure how it works within The Legion, but out here in the rest of the Cyberverse, statistics are not adjusted to offset your incompetence and complete lack of preparation for nuclear warfare. I could have also included the part where Vanguard paid for part of your reconstruction, and it still took The Legion months longer to return to its pre-war strength, while Vanguard built on its pre-war strength by over 30%. Average strength (along with nukes) is a large percentage of combat effectiveness. The nations arrayed against Legion had a much greater number of nukes and a higher average Nation Strength. Therefore, the superior numbers and Nation Strength of the Legion were offset by the fact that Vanguard et all vastly outnumbered Legion in the top tiers. It's not so much of a lack of preparation for nuclear warfare (although there was some of that too) as a lack of an ability to buy nukes because of a lower average NS. Since Vanguard and allies primarily targeted Legion (PAIN and Universalis did, at least, don't recall whether Vanguard did), we were the recipient of most of the nukes and most of the damage. While the damage dealt by Legion and allies was just about averaged between Van/Uni/PAIN, the damage to Legion/UPN/Invicta/Elysium was mostly concentrated in Legion. One could say that this is because Legion are incompetent fighters, but I'd argue that it's more to do with the large numbers of nukes that we took and the fact that Legion was outnumbered in the top tiers. Just a little disclaimer here: Your points are certainly valid and I respect you for them. I like it alot when people trash Legion and actually use facts to back it up, as it can generate a fun and healthy debate. EDIT: Do you happen to have the numbers of nukes received by the various engaged alliances? Edited February 18, 2009 by Lincongrad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assarax Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 (edited) Actually, those are what we call facts. I see that when you're faced with them, you simply brush them off as "Anti-Legion !@#$," or resort to making really lame (and warnable) jokes. Revanche probably wouldn't have had to embarrass you (and your alliance, for that matter) had you not mouthed off. Well, it's whatever, I'm sure you're used to it by now. By the way, you should really stop being proud of defeating inactive nations. It.. really isn't that much of an accomplishment. Do you also brag if you're able to beat a dangerously overweight person in a footrace?In any case, congratulations on three years of life. I find it laughable that you think anything Revanche could say about that war or anything else embarrasses us, especially now. To put it frankly, we just don't really care enough to be embarrassed. And no, we don't brag if we beat an obese person in a footrace, but we do like to brag when we beat up kids with glasses. Edited February 18, 2009 by assarax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denial Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Average strength (along with nukes) is a large percentage of combat effectiveness. The nations arrayed against Legion had a much greater number of nukes and a higher average Nation Strength. Therefore, the superior numbers and Nation Strength of the Legion were offset by the fact that Vanguard et all vastly outnumbered Legion in the top tiers. Indeed, the average strength of an alliance's nations and their prowess with nuclear warfare plays a large role in military capability, but I am a little confused as to why you are using this as an excuse for The Legion's poor performance. It is the equivalent of saying "We performed poorly because we're just plain terrible at the preparation for, and execution of, large-scale warfare." Which was largely my point when writing up the statistics in response to jackyseto123's abhorrent comments, so uh, I'm glad we've reached an agreement. It's not so much of a lack of preparation for nuclear warfare (although there was some of that too) as a lack of an ability to buy nukes because of a lower average NS. Might I suggest a more efficient use of The Legion's aid slots to promote faster growth for its nations? The current statistic is that, on average, each member of The Legion is utilising only 1 of its aid slots. Granted, many of The Legion's aid transactions involve two Legion nations, but even if we generously double the active transactions, the average would still only reach an average of 2 aid slots utilised per nation. You may also want to organise a program that facilitates the purchase of additional Manhattan Projects, also. Since Vanguard and allies primarily targeted Legion (PAIN and Universalis did, at least, don't recall whether Vanguard did), we were the recipient of most of the nukes and most of the damage. While the damage dealt by Legion and allies was just about averaged between Van/Uni/PAIN, the damage to Legion/UPN/Invicta/Elysium was mostly concentrated in Legion. The damage was averaged out between Vanguard, Universalis and PAIN? So, if we take that as fact, the combined forces of The Legion and its allies only managed to inflict approximately 120,000 in total to the Vanguard/Universalis/PAIN coalition, despite the vast numbers and total strength in your favour? This number does not even come close to reaching half of the damage that was inflicted on The Legion alone. As for our alliances primarily targetting The Legion, that is not accurate. The alliances of the Universalis coalition were largely on the defensive due to being vastly outnumbered, and engaged our opponents equally, regardless of alliance affiliation. How The Legion and its allies chose to deploy themselves is none of our concern. I use the word 'deploy' there very loosely, as the "Purple Tsunami" declaration only brought approximately 10 new wars within half an hour of update time, with at least one of those new Legion coalition nations, my opponent, placing himself in anarchy before I could even counter-attack. EDIT: Do you happen to have the numbers of nukes received by the various engaged alliances? Unfortunately, no, but I would imagine the high number that was likely received by The Legion was partly due to the lack of SDIs. I find it laughable that you think anything Revanche could say about that war or anything else embarrasses us, especially now. To put it frankly, we just don't really care enough to be embarrassed. You do not care about a terrible military performance, nor an awful reconstruction effort afterward? And no, we don't brag if we beat an obese person in a footrace, but we do like to brag when we beat up kids with glasses. Just who are you referring to when you say "beat up kinds with glasses"? Considering the line of quotes you were responding to, should I be taking that as another petty insult towards one or more of my members? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assarax Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 (edited) You do not care about a terrible military performance, nor an awful reconstruction effort afterward?Just who are you referring to when you say "beat up kinds with glasses"? Considering the line of quotes you were responding to, should I be taking that as another petty insult towards one or more of my members? I do not need to point you in the direction of our score since the ending of that war. It may have taken us a little longer to re-grow, but we did it at our own pace. We do care about our military performance, and have made steps to better our military since then. My point was that Vanguard's opinion of The Legion is not our concern nor will it ever be. Simply put, you're just not worth it. As for beating up kids with glasses, you sir, are either way too thin-skinned or lack the ability to see a joke when it is presented to you. I was poking fun at a stupid analogy made by your member. If I wanted to insult your alliance/members, I would not be doing so in such a veiled manner, mark my words. Note: The opinions located within are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the Legion or her government's opinion. If you have a problem with what I say, tough, but you have a problem with me, not my alliance. Edited February 18, 2009 by assarax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dia Lucrii Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 If you weren't worth it, why are you and a few others going to great lenghts to say that the legion is better then everyone else and that Vanguard is a bunch of wimps? Seriously, it was a war that started stupidly, ended, and we all moved on. Why you guys are making it such a big deal that you stole lots of Vanguard, PAIN and Universalis tech and beat so many of their members? Who really cares? what happened is all said and done, we have all moved to building our nations back up (some faster and better then others, but still building just the same). I admit that the war caught me with my pants down because i was unavailable for two weeks and saw my nation getting attacked. Now i forget who attacked me, but when i told them my situation and that i had no part in the war, they understood and one even paid me back for the damage that he did. Im Damn sure the weren't from legion. It takes great skill to win a war, but an even greater person to be respectful of his opponent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megamind Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 If you weren't worth it, why are you and a few others going to great lenghts to say that the legion is better then everyone else and that Vanguard is a bunch of wimps?Seriously, it was a war that started stupidly, ended, and we all moved on. Why you guys are making it such a big deal that you stole lots of Vanguard, PAIN and Universalis tech and beat so many of their members? Who really cares? what happened is all said and done, we have all moved to building our nations back up (some faster and better then others, but still building just the same). I admit that the war caught me with my pants down because i was unavailable for two weeks and saw my nation getting attacked. Now i forget who attacked me, but when i told them my situation and that i had no part in the war, they understood and one even paid me back for the damage that he did. Im Damn sure the weren't from legion. It takes great skill to win a war, but an even greater person to be respectful of his opponent. Apparently you care enough to revive the topic after 9 days Personally I have no hard feelings toward any of the people I fought against...had some pleasant conversations with some of them...convinced one of them to get me nuked (yes I wanted to be nuked I'm that insane ) and then I moved on So uhm what do you say we end this here with a hand shake and a good fight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dia Lucrii Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I agree with that. *Dia Holds up a beer* Here's to a good fight. It was well fought, lets party sometime in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.Hubb Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I agree with that.*Dia Holds up a beer* Here's to a good fight. It was well fought, lets party sometime in the future. I second that emotion. Personally, I hold no ill will towards anyone in Vanguard. We fought. It ended. We move on. Hope we can meet in the future under more peaceful circumstances. I wish you guys the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dia Lucrii Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Same to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megamind Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 (edited) I agree with that.*Dia Holds up a beer* Here's to a good fight. It was well fought, lets party sometime in the future. I'll cheer to that *Megamind does the glass clinking thing* (what's the word I'm looking for?) Edited February 27, 2009 by Megamind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcadian Empire Posted February 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 Is the word you are looking for "Cheers"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozenrpg Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 I must agree with my good friend Dia. It was a blast; and I had a very good time. No hard feelings Melidan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrin Xies Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 I'm glad everyone could end this argument amicably. Back to the OP... congrats, Legion, on three years of being! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xineoph Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 3 years and nearly one month now. I bet we could keep this topic going to our next birthday. But thank you for belated congrats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megamind Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 Is the word you are looking for "Cheers"? I was looking for a word to more precisely describe the clinking of glasses...but if that word is cheers...well then we all must laugh at my limited English skills :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hymenbreach Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 (edited) Holy Cow, The Legion has infected this thread with its Immortality Gene. It will not die! Edited February 28, 2009 by Hymenbreach Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryskmania Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 Happy birthday Legion I've almost liked u :$ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcadian Empire Posted March 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 The clinking of glasses? The only word is but, "Clink!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KagetheSecond Posted March 1, 2009 Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 Alas, young pikachu, how would we know what was clinking? Im with Mega on this one lawl 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.