Folger Soldier Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Now I'm confused?! Drink! i hope so. I hope you're drinking, too. Why would I be? No reason, just drink! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reroll Posted October 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Ooooh....you brought beer! Thank you kindly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Folger Soldier Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Ooooh....you brought beer! Thank you kindly. Hahaha, naaaaa, its whiskey... Jameson whiskey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reroll Posted October 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Hahaha, naaaaa, its whiskey... Jameson whiskey. Uh Oh....I can't handle hard liquor! Reroll has a few shots.... Woooooooooo! Wooooo! Reroll moons post.... Woooooooooooooo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Royale Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 yeah good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenb Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 wow... such epic failure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reroll Posted October 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 (edited) GDA has 36 nations over 2K ns...WAPA/Pri has 29 GDA has 23 nations over 3K ns....WAPA/Pri have 22 GDA Average ns is 3K....Pri/WAPA Average ns is 2.7K ns Things are even wouldn't you say? We wouldn't participate in a curb stomp I assure you. Edited October 14, 2009 by reroll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andymac64 Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Switching to WAPA still sounds good to me, as I imagine Priapism isn't exactly the popular girl at the party right now. Sounds good to me. Mayzie, get your drunken fat arse over here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andymac64 Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Ladies, Shall we just get on with fighting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerahoam Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 GDA has 36 nations over 2K ns...WAPA/Pri has 29GDA has 23 nations over 3K ns....WAPA/Pri have 22 GDA Average ns is 3K....Pri/WAPA Average ns is 2.7K ns Things are even wouldn't you say? We wouldn't participate in a curb stomp I assure you. what kind of statistics you using . as of right now GDA has 51 nations, WAPA has 54, and Priapism has 22. I think you just made up numbers . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reroll Posted October 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 what kind of statistics you using . as of right now GDA has 51 nations, WAPA has 54, and Priapism has 22.I think you just made up numbers . GDA has 36 Nations out of their 51 that have 2K NS or more....23 Nations of those 51 have 3K NS plus. Pri/WAPA have 29 Nations out of 77 that have 2K or more......22 out of 77 with 3K ns or more. The numbers don't lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Glory Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 (edited) Incorrect.Bandwagoning would be if WAPA jumped GDA and we jumped GDA as well. Thus joining the bandwagon. Instead, the ones doing the jumping are the ones being jumped. If anything, we are the anti-bandwagoneers, or reverse bandwagoning. Just like last round when OB jumped us, and we pee'd in their cheerios for it... and then TPF was name-dropped all over the place by the 3rd day when it was obvious we were the ones winning. Had TPF joined the fight that their alley started, (all treaties aside, lets pretend there are none for arguments sake) THAT would've been bandwagoning. So, that said, it cant kinda seem like a bandwagon, because bandwagoning doesnt work like that. AP. No if wapa and you both would have jumped GDA, that would have been a curb stomp Since GDA attacked WAPA and there was a war going on already, just like in your Defination...You jumped in regaurdless of who was assured a win, in CN thats a BW Now thats cool if you guys have a MAP, or something but GDA was just reminding WAPA what comes around goes around...As in if you attack an AA in a round the chances are high that they will be returning the favor later on in the round So i guess this isn't getting peaced? GDA has 36 nations over 2K ns...WAPA/Pri has 29GDA has 23 nations over 3K ns....WAPA/Pri have 22 GDA Average ns is 3K....Pri/WAPA Average ns is 2.7K ns Things are even wouldn't you say? We wouldn't participate in a curb stomp I assure you. Your figures are lacking a bit there buddy. For one your not taking into account that between Priapism and WAPA there are 34 nukes to GDA's 10 plus Priapism avg NS is 5,043 and WAPA's is 1,694 to GDA's 2,972...Truely you see that GDA is the way under dog here. Also Priapism has 15 nations over 4 k NS and of those 15 nations 11 are over 5k and 9 of those are over 6k and 5 are over 7 k NS. GDA has 6 nations over 4 k NS and of those 4 are over 5k and of those 1 is over 7 k NS. Clearly you see the writing on the walls here, with out including WAPA's top nations Priapism alone has the war in the bucket So anything else you want to add BG. Edited October 15, 2009 by Burning Glory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reroll Posted October 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 (edited) yes....wapa was priapism original target....gda hit before priapism then priapism decided to go after gda.... secondly....I don't give a rats $@! any more about this war or Priapism for that matter....so this is my last comment on the matter. Edited October 15, 2009 by reroll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Glory Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 yes....wapa was priapism original target....gda hit before priapism then priapism decided to go after gda.... WOW are you serious Priapism was planning on hitting WAPA? After looking over Priapism past wars this round, it appears that they are attacking or planning on attacking the weak AA's of TE. TF was well below them on NS and had just started recovering from a WAR, then to plan on hitting WAPA who would have buckled under attacks from the top 10 nations, only to turn around and hit GDA. Well I never...... BG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asa Phillips Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 No if wapa and you both would have jumped GDA, that would have been a curb stomp Since GDA attacked WAPA and there was a war going on already, just like in your Defination...You jumped in regaurdless of who was assured a win, in CN thats a BW Now thats cool if you guys have a MAP, or something but GDA was just reminding WAPA what comes around goes around...As in if you attack an AA in a round the chances are high that they will be returning the favor later on in the round So i guess this isn't getting peaced? You are more than welcome to make an independent poll leaving the political bs out of it asking for the general opinion of CN players regarding the matter. As you are the only one who can't understand this is hardly a bandwagon, maybe the overwhelming opinion of others will help you understand a bit better. Jumping in on the side who is assured to win is bandwagoning, spin it how you like, but you cant redefine something to suit your needs. As you know, I've proved you to be incorrect before, why you can't just accept the fact you are wrong once in a while and capable of making mistakes is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchboy00 Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 WOW are you serious Priapism was planning on hitting WAPA? After looking over Priapism past wars this round, it appears that they are attacking or planning on attacking the weak AA's of TE. TF was well below them on NS and had just started recovering from a WAR, then to plan on hitting WAPA who would have buckled under attacks from the top 10 nations, only to turn around and hit GDA. Well I never...... BG. so i take it that it we wont be your millionth TE treaty partner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchboy00 Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 You are more than welcome to make an independent poll leaving the political bs out of it asking for the general opinion of CN players regarding the matter. As you are the only one who can't understand this is hardly a bandwagon, maybe the overwhelming opinion of others will help you understand a bit better. Jumping in on the side who is assured to win is bandwagoning, spin it how you like, but you cant redefine something to suit your needs.As you know, I've proved you to be incorrect before, why you can't just accept the fact you are wrong once in a while and capable of making mistakes is beyond me. see Asa I told you last round when RE the #1 alliance jumped on us we needed to come on the forums and moan about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Glory Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 You are more than welcome to make an independent poll leaving the political bs out of it asking for the general opinion of CN players regarding the matter. As you are the only one who can't understand this is hardly a bandwagon, maybe the overwhelming opinion of others will help you understand a bit better. Jumping in on the side who is assured to win is bandwagoning, spin it how you like, but you cant redefine something to suit your needs.As you know, I've proved you to be incorrect before, why you can't just accept the fact you are wrong once in a while and capable of making mistakes is beyond me. Sure i can, i just did Plus no matter what the majority of TE thinks, even though i think they would side with me When you attack an AA already at war, with out a treaty....Its a band wagon. ie. 1 vs 1 you jump in = BW If 2 AA's attack one aa and one of the AA's of the 2 are far strong and would win even with out the other AA joining in on the attack, its a curp stomp. so i take it that it we wont be your millionth TE treaty partner? nah, sorry! and its only 9 hundredth see Asa I told you last round when RE the #1 alliance jumped on us we needed to come on the forums and moan about it. Yeah but didn't they hit you with like only 8 nation lol! BG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabryal Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 nah, sorry! and its only 9 hundredth 901st Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popsumpot Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Sounds like balls. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtellez06 Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Sure i can, i just did Plus no matter what the majority of TE thinks, even though i think they would side with me When you attack an AA already at war, with out a treaty....Its a band wagon. ie. 1 vs 1 you jump in = BW If 2 AA's attack one aa and one of the AA's of the 2 are far strong and would win even with out the other AA joining in on the attack, its a curp stomp. nah, sorry! and its only 9 hundredth Yeah but didn't they hit you with like only 8 nation lol! BG. What if lets say, Alliance1, a 30 man alliance was at war with a 200 man alliance. Then another 160 man alliance hits said alliance1 (with 30 members.) Would they be bandwaggoning? And what if lets say a 60 man alliance hit the 160 man alliance to help out the 30 man alliance. BW? j/k I u Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayzie Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Sounds good to me. Mayzie, get your drunken fat arse over here. I'm not fat and today I'm not drunk, I'm hungover. o/ WAPA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asa Phillips Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 (edited) Yeah but didn't they hit you with like only 8 nation lol!BG. Hardly. For someone who speaks so confidently about things there memory serves them so poorly on, its amazing someone hasn't picked up on that till now. For every Priapism nation involved, there was at least 2 RE taking up our defensive slots, I myself had 2 offensive and 3 defensive slots occupied at the height of things and got recognized publicly by my attackers for their necessary coordinated efforts to anarchy my nation. I think the resounding lack of support for your definition of bandwagoning in this topic is overwhelming to say the least. You should at least contact your alliance mates and treaty partners so they can blindly rush in here and support you before you look worse. Bottom line? if you decide to jump someone at a bar, and I decide to whoop your tail after you do so because it seems like a fun thing to do... that's all its is, just a fun thing to do. Edited October 15, 2009 by Asa Phillips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Glory Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Hardly. For someone who speaks so confidently about things there memory serves them so poorly on, its amazing someone hasn't picked up on that till now. For every Priapism nation involved, there was at least 2 RE taking up our defensive slots, I myself had 2 offensive and 3 defensive slots occupied at the height of things and got recognized publicly by my attackers for their necessary coordinated efforts to anarchy my nation.I think the resounding lack of support for your definition of bandwagoning in this topic is overwhelming to say the least. You should at least contact your alliance mates and treaty partners so they can blindly rush in here and support you before you look worse. Bottom line? if you decide to jump someone at a bar, and I decide to whoop your tail after you do so because it seems like a fun thing to do... that's all its is, just a fun thing to do. LOL, guess you didn't pick up on the fact that i was being sarcastic In reality it was a squad of RE that hit you, and they were just a bit bigger than you in members, however your NS should have been enough to make up the difference. For the record, and even though you may have been doing ok the rest of your AA lost, and i was opposed to this kind of tactics by RE...Just thought you should know And i still stand by my original statement that your band wagoners, only worse cause your cowards as well...pretty much every AA in TE attack up, as in a higher NS or member count AA while you and your AA on the other hand have only attacked down with either lower members and or lower NS. This time you not only went down on lower NS, you also attacked an AA already at war. So please while your bragging about your ability to not be anarchied by 2 or 5 RE nation, remember the rest of TE see's you as I do, COWARDS and Bandwagoners! BG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabryal Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Sounds like balls. Good luck. This amuses me just cause sippy is not only a great leader but one of the games few females to play it. She's also talented and beautiful ( see my posts about aesthetic beauty vs. physical beauty, I am not "hitting on" sippy, but expressing admiration for her in a complimentary way. ) However Pops is dead on here, sippy is tough as nail and absolutely will defend GDA to her last breath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts