SilentKilla Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 While it is about gaining war experience...its also about the fun of going toe to toe with proportionate competition and awaiting the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George the Great Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Isn't the main point of TE to gain battle experience? Regardless of whether this is fair or not, it is useful. I've found that I've gained very useful insight by getting defeated, as much as, if not more than by being victorious. Isn't the point of whether this declaration is just kind of moot? Whether it is or not, we gain experience in battle that can serve us in future rounds and in SE and I would say that is what is important. lol, so now the war was so that we can all learn from it. Thank you master yoda. We all ready learned what a curbstomp was the first time Fark and friends rolled us in this same round. SWAT actually wanted to learn something different in this war, like fighting a fairly balanced war where there would most definitely be resistance. We didn't expect to be as successful in our update attack as we were. We though ADULT was a more active alliance than they turned out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CelenAzrael Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 It would be easy to argue then, that even if the competition isn't proportionate, there is still value. CN certainly has a factor of luck, but more so a factor of skill. Small alliances can defeat larger alliances with ease at times. I would certainly argue that defeating someone who is larger than you is just as fun so long as the competition spirit remains. This last war I threw myself wholeheartedly into a war that I knew I would lose. It was fun, attempting everything I had to forestall that and learning what types of actions almost assuredly led to defeat and what actions did not. I would further argue that there is fun no matter what the situation is. I have enjoyed being destroyed, just as I have enjoyed being the destroyer and every time it gives me very useful insight into the war system. It is unreasonable to think that every single war is going to be proportional, that won't happen in TE and it won't happen in SE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medicjoe95 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 It is unreasonable to think that every single war is going to be proportional, that won't happen in TE and it won't happen in SE. It seems unreasonable to think that a 250 vs. 60 person war is fair. Go pick on somebody your own size, like LE. That is how you will gain skill. The attacks targeted against my were very well coordinated and strategic, the kids attacking me clearly know what they are doing. Ransacking my nation already on the offensive is going to generate inherently less educational value than a raid against LE, or an alliance of your size. It is ignorant, at best, to claim that FARK generated any educational value especially relative to opportunity costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idsfa Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Hmmm ... Let's see: Fark and ADULT announce an agreement. SWAT attacks ADULT, in direct defiance of that agreement. ADULT asks Fark to honour their commitment. Fark does so. SWAT shiat-talks Fark rather than admit they waived a red rag to the bull. /Have I got the whole sequence there? Yeah, thought so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CelenAzrael Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 I did not say that this was fair for a reason: it isn't. Nor should it be. One of the first things I ever learned is that life is not fair nor is anything within it. Given that this game is part of existence and people's lives, it cannot, under any circumstances, be construed as fair. And even if I don't learn as much as I could under the circumstances, I am at least going to make the attempt to learn from any mistakes that I make. I have to wonder whether we would hear the same things from you if the roles were reversed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derka Derek Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 I'm glad I didn't give up after the initial blitz I'm disappointed that I wasn't around for any of the real fun. Tonight maybe... I like the way you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentKilla Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) Real life comparisons huh.......well then Then no offense to either SWAT or ADULT but this was the equivalent to some 12 year old picking on your 10 year old brother. And FARK the 25 year old walking up and punching the kid your brothers fighting in the face. Rather than acting in an appropriate way and seperating or defusing the situation.... I don't think anyone is questioning you guys honoring your treaty....merely the manner in which it was inacted Edited April 7, 2009 by SilentKilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CelenAzrael Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) Real life comparisons huh.......well thenThen no offense to either SWAT or ADULT but this was the equivalent to some 12 year old picking on your 10 year old brother. And FARK the 25 year old walking up and punching the kid your brothers fighting in the face. Rather than acting in an appropriate way and seperating or defusing the situation.... Fair enough. Not exactly an appropriate analogy, though. Let us say for an instant, that you are a huge imposing jock who sometimes, for some reason, hangs around with completely stereotypical nerds. This is equivalent to one of your nerd friends getting beaten by a slightly bigger stereotypical nerd. I don't feel like it is unreasonable for you to go to their aid simply because it is unfair that you do so. Also, keep in mind that while you may feel as though it was poorly enacted, it is not as though this was some hidden arrangement. You fully walked into this one, no offense to you. Edited: Edited for clarity. Edited April 7, 2009 by CelenAzrael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentKilla Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Think you proved my point for me. I'm not a part of this conflict...merely an outsider. However I'm pretty sure once the jock walked in and "flexed" his muscles via threats or small show of force, the conflict would have ended quickly. However you, the jock, saw fit to come in swinging. Which is completely in your right in doing so. I just think you would have earned more respect "flexing" in this situation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilhelm the Demented Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) Fair enough. Not exactly an appropriate analogy, though. Let us say for an instant, that you are a huge imposing jock who sometimes, for some reason, hangs around with completely stereotypical nerds. This is equivalent to one of your nerd friends getting beaten by a slightly bigger stereotypical nerd. I don't feel like it is unreasonable for you to go to their aid simply because it is unfair that you do so. Also, keep in mind that while you may feel as though it was poorly enacted, it is not as though this was some hidden arrangement. You fully walked into this one, no offense to you. Edited: Edited for clarity. This would be valid - if we were an imposing jock.We are more like a kid on crutches who still likes to play the game No politics, let's just have fun and fight this one out Edited April 7, 2009 by wilhelm the demented Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idsfa Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Did you know they were treatied to Fark? Yes Did you attack them anyway? Yes Is it your own fault you got counterattacked? Yes Refute or STFU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CelenAzrael Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 @Wilhelm: It might be best if you made sure you understood the entire analogy first. SWAT was the slightly larger stereotypical nerd in said analogy. @SilentKilla: That probably would be best, I agree. For the life of me, however, I cannot think of a single instance where that has happened aside from the cases where the larger entity was allied to both smaller entities. It may be that this is another case of idealism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentKilla Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) @Wilhelm: It might be best if you made sure you understood the entire analogy first. SWAT was the slightly larger stereotypical nerd in said analogy.@SilentKilla: That probably would be best, I agree. For the life of me, however, I cannot think of a single instance where that has happened aside from the cases where the larger entity was allied to both smaller entities. It may be that this is another case of idealism. Maybe the new #1 could have lead rather than followed in this instance. Again I understand this is TE and it's about war. I just thought this round was starting to get good in terms of the 1v1's.... Edited April 7, 2009 by SilentKilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idsfa Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Maybe the new #1 could have lead rather than followed in this instance. Again I understand this is TE and it's about war. I just thought this round was starting to get good in terms of the 1v1's.... Excuse me if I fail to parse your claim: Farkistan should not have honored their agreement because ADULT wasn't strong enough to stand up to the people who had a treaty with the folks they attacked. Did I miss part of your claim? Please feel free to expand ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CelenAzrael Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Maybe the new #1 could have lead rather than followed in this instance. Again I understand this is TE and it's about war. I just thought this round was starting to get good in terms of the 1v1's.... We probably could have. However, we decided to place our alliance with ADULT above our reputations, above our relationship with SWAT, and above any sense of fairness. I have yet to see any person from ADULT post in this and I have to wonder what their views are. We were asked to join in this war by them. Obviously they didn't see the battle with SWAT as worthwhile. Perhaps this could have been avoided if SWAT actually had asked ADULT, as unrealistic as that is. I agree fully that this may not have been the best move, but it is a reasonable move under the circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medicjoe95 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Your nation was attacked with a nuclear weapon on 4/7/2009 12:02:42 AM. This will have a devastating effect on your population happiness and economy until 4/12/2009. FARK, already destroyed my nation beyond belief, is launching nukes. I don't think anybody can argue for FARK fighting a fair or ethical battle. I sure hope somebody takes action against FARK and shows them what its like to be !@#$%bags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idsfa Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 FARK, already destroyed my nation beyond belief, is launching nukes.I don't think anybody can argue for FARK fighting a fair or ethical battle. I sure hope somebody takes action against FARK and shows them what its like to be !@#$%bags. Wait, wait ... I am losing the war ... that I declared ... this isn't *fair* ... waaahhh! /grep "care" anyone_with_a_clue || echo "no one" //no one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medicjoe95 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) Wait, wait ... I am losing the war ... that I declared ... this isn't *fair* ... waaahhh! /grep "care" anyone_with_a_clue || echo "no one" //no one Fail. FARK declared on SWAT. A for effort? Legitly guys, we came to play football with ADULT and with minutes left on the clock, FARK substitutes in for ADULT and throws double the amount of players on the field, larger and more prepared, attacking our nations already on the offensive. What do you expect? Pwnage. That is what is happening. I'm not worried. FARK will get what they have coming. Edited April 7, 2009 by medicjoe95 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idsfa Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) Fail.FARK declared on SWAT. Did you know they were treatied to Fark? YesDid you attack them anyway? Yes Is it your own fault you got counterattacked? Yes Refute or STFU. Edited April 7, 2009 by idsfa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CelenAzrael Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 I feel bad for you about the nuke. Though the logic of our attack still stands: ADULT is allied to Fark. ADULT requested our help, therefore, obviously, they would rather have not played football with you at all. It seems to me that this is pretty straightforward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentKilla Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) Excuse me if I fail to parse your claim:Farkistan should not have honored their agreement because ADULT wasn't strong enough to stand up to the people who had a treaty with the folks they attacked. Did I miss part of your claim? Please feel free to expand ... Looking at all your posts and the fact your completely hell bent on war....why expand.... We probably could have. However, we decided to place our alliance with ADULT above our reputations, above our relationship with SWAT, and above any sense of fairness. I have yet to see any person from ADULT post in this and I have to wonder what their views are. We were asked to join in this war by them. Obviously they didn't see the battle with SWAT as worthwhile. Perhaps this could have been avoided if SWAT actually had asked ADULT, as unrealistic as that is. I agree fully that this may not have been the best move, but it is a reasonable move under the circumstances. Understandable. But that would be "refreshing" to have happen as far fetched as it does seem. Edited April 7, 2009 by SilentKilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CelenAzrael Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Understandable. But that would be "refreshing" to have happen as far fetched as it does seem. I agree. Hopefully this is something that can be learned from so that this doesn't happen in SE where the stakes are higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentKilla Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Bah....got too many nukes with dust on them in SE. Think the warheads are duds now! Night gents....and happy hunting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derka Derek Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) Wait, wait ... I am losing the war ... that I declared ... this isn't *fair* ... waaahhh! /grep "care" anyone_with_a_clue || echo "no one" //no one Someone needs to learn how to conduct themselves. I have no problem getting stomped into the ground by a larger alliance. We stomped ADULT pretty good it's true. We sure as hell didn't rub it in when we did. We said we overestimated them and were sorry we did it. Did we deserve this stomping? Possibly, I'm not denying that we didn't. It's your words on here that get me. There's no need to act the way you're acting. All we've done is show our distaste in getting stomped for the second time by a force ridiculously larger than us when all we want is a good fair war and that is the reply that we receive? Thanks buddy, you're a real nice guy. Edited April 7, 2009 by Derka Derek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts