rtellez06 Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 As long as people keep trying to misrepresent what happened, I will correct them. I'm not trying to misrepresent us. The only reason we at Black agreed to attack you guys was because we were told you would not peace out with KoL. I even talked to a member outside of our alliances who spoke on behalf of KoL who told me Tito was the one who said no. can we all agree it was a draw and forget it. No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infidel Israeli Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 (edited) Edit: not helping convo, useless to post Edited September 13, 2009 by Infidel Israeli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King MyLife Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 To bad the WAR is over.. it was a interesting conflict.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooman33 Posted September 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 (edited) I'm not trying to misrepresent us. The only reason we at Black agreed to attack you guys was because we were told you would not peace out with KoL. I even talked to a member outside of our alliances who spoke on behalf of KoL who told me Tito was the one who said no. Well, as I've outlined repeatedly, you were misinformed. No This makes no sense... the peace literally ended in a draw. If you want to determine who would have won based on who did the most damage, PU came in first and UJA second. If you want to figure it by who suffered the least amount of damage, PU was first, Black second and UJA third. It cannot accurately be said, by any extent of the imagination, that UJA lost this war. Edited September 13, 2009 by Rooman33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtellez06 Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 Well, as I've outlined repeatedly, you were misinformed. Your missing my point. I was informed by KoL leaders, AI leaders, and someone outside of these 2 alliances that Tito said no. I have not seen Tito come in and say otherwise. So heres the thing, I am inclined to believe my allies over you, I mean, who wouldn't? This makes no sense... the peace literally ended in a draw. If you want to determine who would have won based on who did the most damage, PU came in first and UJA second. If you want to figure it by who suffered the least amount of damage, PU was first, Black second and UJA third. It cannot accurately be said, by any extent of the imagination, that UJA lost this war. I said no to dropping it. But lets look at it this way. UJA should have done more damage then Black as a whole, but per person, I guarantee we did more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Glory Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 Well, as I've outlined repeatedly, you were misinformed.This makes no sense... the peace literally ended in a draw. If you want to determine who would have won based on who did the most damage, PU came in first and UJA second. If you want to figure it by who suffered the least amount of damage, PU was first, Black second and UJA third. It cannot accurately be said, by any extent of the imagination, that UJA lost this war. Agreed, this is like beating a dead horse. Its over, let it die.... With that said, I would hope you understand that PU was the last to enter the war, thus giving it the best odds, also I think it was an over kill on their part. Meaning it was another curb stomp. UJA had more than enough members to take care of its self as all the other nations combined put you on equal grounds.....PU made this war a complete curb stomp. One of which i'm getting very tired of, and i thought every one else was as well. IF AA's can't handle loosing a war, get out of TE and go back to SE. Those who join a war that far out weigh the odds makeing it a curb stomp are not an honorable AA. For the record, had i know about this WAR sooner and before it got peaced, TPF would have helped even up the odds again. I don't care what AA it is, treaties or not, friends or not, I will not sit by and let any AA get curbstomped....TPF will join the war to even the odds of the beat down. A war is a war, that does not mean there should be no honor. 3 to 1 odds is greatly pushing a curb stomp, 4 to 1 is a curb stomp and a beat down. BG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooman33 Posted September 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 (edited) Agreed, this is like beating a dead horse. Its over, let it die....With that said, I would hope you understand that PU was the last to enter the war, thus giving it the best odds, also I think it was an over kill on their part. Meaning it was another curb stomp. UJA had more than enough members to take care of its self as all the other nations combined put you on equal grounds.....PU made this war a complete curb stomp. One of which i'm getting very tired of, and i thought every one else was as well. IF AA's can't handle loosing a war, get out of TE and go back to SE. Those who join a war that far out weigh the odds makeing it a curb stomp are not an honorable AA. For the record, had i know about this WAR sooner and before it got peaced, TPF would have helped even up the odds again. I don't care what AA it is, treaties or not, friends or not, I will not sit by and let any AA get curbstomped....TPF will join the war to even the odds of the beat down. A war is a war, that does not mean there should be no honor. 3 to 1 odds is greatly pushing a curb stomp, 4 to 1 is a curb stomp and a beat down. BG What are you talking about? UJA was outnumbered by 50% by three alliances. PU only declared on KoL, meaning UJA was still fighting 80+ nations (a larger number of nations than we possessed at that time) who were not fighting PU + ~45 who were. UJA was still, even after PU joined in, fighting at a disadvantage. They did not "uneven" the odds in our favor because 1) the odds weren't even for us to begin with 2) they factually did not even our odds. I find it hilarious that it was ok for three alliances to jump us with greater numbers, but the instant we help our odds it's a "curbstomp." No. Just... no. Did KoL get curbstomped? Yeah, for a single day, they did. But had they and PU bowed out of the conflict (as we had hoped would happen) THEN it would have been ~80 nations in the UJA vs. ~80 nations in AI + Black. THAT'S what we wanted, to even out the fight. Though we expected the anti-UJA forces to bring in more alliances, so we had more alliances lined up to engage as well. All these protests of unfair odds for the UJA are not only factually false, they wreak of whining that the UJA just didn't lay over and let itself get ganged up on. I don't know what you people expected, but we weren't going to get jumped by three alliances equaling 150% of our total force (based on an error-riddled CB) and just take it. That wasn't going to happen, and we weren't wrong for doing what was necessary to defend ourselves or our name in the passing discussions. Edited September 13, 2009 by Rooman33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonOfHoward Posted September 14, 2009 Report Share Posted September 14, 2009 I don't care what AA it is, treaties or not, friends or not, I will not sit by and let any AA get curbstomped....TPF will join the war to even the odds of the beat down. A war is a war, that does not mean there should be no honor.3 to 1 odds is greatly pushing a curb stomp, 4 to 1 is a curb stomp and a beat down. BG The odds were never 3:1 or 4:1 so TPF would never have needed to get involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts