Sexy Grannies - I declare war | R30

[darkmane]

That's right. Bring it on.

There is no reason I'm declaring war.... but boy is it fun. This is more of me just showing off battle reports :P The ones I am attacking are all SG.... the ones attacking me are all of TBA.

By the way - I only included battle reports with 250 billion in value killed.... only battle reports where I had lethals present.


[range] 41,562,931 allied Siren sang out, freezing in place 21,298,284 hostile staff.
[range] 10,367,303 hostile Harrier attacked, killing 6,451,457 allied staff.
[range] 225,938,284 allied Sorcerer attacked, killing 480,732,894 hostile staff.
[range] 127,141,625 allied Dragon breathed fire on and melted 100,167,990 hostile staff.

Stunned: 21,298,284 [£1,145,090,415,500] enemies stunned.
Died: 6,451,457 [£301,985,019,500] friendlies dead. 580,900,884 [£9,739,346,243,000] enemies dead.

You gained 557,413 effectiveness.
You earned £159,799,671,380 bounty.


[close] 30,000,000 hostile Political Mastermind attacked, distracting 121,469,489 allied staff.
[range] 151,111,111 hostile Secret Agent attacked, killing 91,249,144 allied staff.
[range] 37,392,831 allied Siren sang out, freezing in place 38,883,762 hostile staff.
[range] 24,105,675 hostile Assassin attacked, killing 6,516,722 allied staff.
[r/m] 187,951,100 allied Sorcerer attacked, killing 860,915,808 hostile staff.
[m/c] 12,121,074 allied Iron Golem attacked, killing 39,071,537 hostile staff.
[close] 14,977,566 hostile Hippy Van attacked, distracting 4,714,786 allied staff.
[r/c] 124,197,185 allied Dragon breathed fire on and melted 376,059,975 hostile staff.
[close] 1,814,579 hostile Marine attacked, killing 976,417 allied staff.
[range] 263,893 hostile Tyrant Drone attacked, killing 1,176,210 allied staff.
[close] 838,619 hostile Seed Thief stole 25,077,731 stored seeds. [1,973,704] tree. [6,000,536] bush. [4,810,496] flower. [12,292,995] grass.
[close] 856,861 hostile Geo-Phys Thief stole 2,216 land. [545] tree. [1,185] bush. [244] flower. [242] grass. [0] uncultivated.

Stunned: 38,883,762 [£2,066,780,399,000] enemies stunned.
Distracted: 126,184,275 [£2,025,137,131,200] friendlies distracted.
Died: 1,276,047,320 [£15,792,144,044,300] enemies dead. 99,918,493 [£4,805,943,350,000] friendlies dead.

You gained 26,109,692 effectiveness.
You will soon be receiving £1,682,080,172,500 insurance.


[close] 214,618,576 hostile Political Mastermind attacked, distracting 275,247,254 allied staff.
[close] 11,180,599 allied Iron Golem attacked, killing 782,992 hostile staff.
[close] 128,583,037 hostile Hippy Van attacked, distracting 36,596,117 allied staff.
[close] 102,825,506 allied Dragon breathed fire on and melted 30,582,147 hostile staff.

Distracted: 311,843,371 [£12,345,193,169,000] friendlies distracted.
Died: 31,365,139 [£2,066,272,066,000] enemies dead.

You gained 3,139,685 effectiveness.
You earned £74,358,410,936 bounty.


[range] 1,000,000 hostile Harrier attacked, killing 1,505,092 allied staff.
[range] 8,701,333 allied Dragon breathed fire on and melted 87,974,816 hostile staff.

Died: 87,974,816 [£290,833,610,400] enemies dead. 1,505,092 [£31,484,591,900] friendlies dead.

You gained 206,102 effectiveness.
You will soon be receiving £9,977,148,475 insurance.


[middle] 246,946,442 hostile Political Mastermind attacked, distracting 307,885,614 allied staff.
[middle] 13,887,324 allied Siren sang out, freezing in place 120,983 hostile staff.
[middle] 14,678,148 allied Witch attacked, killing 180,041 hostile staff.
[middle] 87,681,428 allied Sorcerer attacked, killing 40,948,409 hostile staff.
[middle] 10,403,698 allied Iron Golem attacked, killing 674,170 hostile staff.
[middle] 128,751,228 hostile Hippy Van attacked, distracting 34,849,271 allied staff.
[middle] 199,256 hostile HQ Humvee attacked, killing 152,472 allied staff.
[middle] 140,560 hostile HQ Challenger 2 attacked, killing 1,438,512 allied staff.

Stunned: 120,983 [£182,781,536,000] enemies stunned.
Distracted: 342,734,885 [£13,574,163,965,500] friendlies distracted.
Died: 1,590,984 [£89,307,673,500] friendlies dead. 41,802,620 [£2,045,136,671,000] enemies dead.

You gained 3,214,765 effectiveness.
You earned £100,761,668,578 bounty.


[range] 100,000,069 hostile Political Mastermind attacked, distracting 150,774,873 allied staff.
[range] 38,333,333 hostile Secret Agent attacked, killing 41,170,445 allied staff.
[range] 34,440,618 allied Siren sang out, freezing in place 39,594,929 hostile staff.
[range] 5,195,067 hostile Assassin attacked, killing 1,462,733 allied staff.
[range] 202,330,021 allied Sorcerer attacked, killing 98,725,736 hostile staff.
[range] 98,985,856 hostile Hippy Van attacked, distracting 28,692,939 allied staff.
[range] 123,810,841 allied Dragon breathed fire on and melted 69,360,639 hostile staff.
[range] 408,463 hostile HQ Humvee attacked, killing 318,909 allied staff.
[range] 231,537 hostile HQ Challenger 2 attacked, killing 2,540,883 allied staff.

Stunned: 39,594,929 [£2,370,828,265,000] enemies stunned.
Distracted: 179,467,812 [£6,391,543,497,000] friendlies distracted.
Died: 45,492,970 [£2,305,843,647,000] friendlies dead. 168,086,375 [£8,349,882,350,500] enemies dead.

You gained 13,040,099 effectiveness.
You earned £621,761,549,344 bounty.
You will soon be receiving £757,584,744,175 insurance.

[IceOfFire]

Hahahaha.

Nice work! Keep it up

[pinpower]

Fair play to him he's done alot of damage.
BUT, we've done at least 6tril damage to him that he hasnt shown up there. ;)

Like i said on IRC, if you are going to paste BRs...paste them all!
Good luck!!!
x

[darkmane]

[range] 1,135,714,285 allied SAS completely totally and utterly killed 1,237,278,808 hostile staff.
[range] 122,954,865 allied Riot Police used tear gas and electrified batons, stunning 30,603,454 hostile staff.
[range] 18,434,707 hostile Psychopathic Android attacked, killing 5,715,558 allied staff.
[range] 40,765,571 allied Siren sang out, freezing in place 4,521,294 hostile staff.
[range] 258,726,195 allied Sorcerer attacked, killing 85,617,006 hostile staff.
[range] 92,907,862 hostile Cybernetic Warrior attacked, killing 54,838,039 allied staff.
[range] 123,717,338 allied Dragon breathed fire on and melted 44,534,463 hostile staff.
[range] 831,941 hostile Tyrant Drone attacked, killing 2,197,430 allied staff.

Stunned: 35,124,748 [£2,275,565,520,000] enemies stunned.
Died: 1,367,430,277 [£37,534,914,693,600] enemies dead. 62,751,027 [£2,205,557,785,700] friendlies dead.

You gained 16,050,488 effectiveness.
You will soon be receiving £398,528,478,250 insurance.



[middle] 1,105,810,338 allied SAS completely totally and utterly killed 70,958,611 hostile staff.

Died: 70,958,611 [£7,523,140,860,000] enemies dead.



I acknowledged that I didn't post battle reports less than 100 billion OR ones I didn't send lethals at.... I wasn't trying to hide it :P

[LAFiN]

Hahah! FeR is a noob!

Also like to note that Darkmane has been landraped from 32.6k acres down to ~6k.

Good damages though, has been fun :P

[IceOfFire]

FeR = Naab

[DarkSider]

2 months of no action to suicide with a couple days left :$

[f0xx]

Gutted.

[darkmane]

Well... I've had no action for like two weeks... before that I did have some targets.

I've had fun throughout this round... I've been thinking about doing this for three weeks and... it sounded fun.

Two weeks ago I just about did it when only one other person was online.

I was busy last week... this weekend the opportunity presented itself again (one active person online) so I decided to give it ago.


I didn't intend to keep my land or I would have snuck into sleep mode w/o attacking. I didn't intend to make it until the end of the round. I just wanted to have some fun... I did and still am!

[LAFiN]

[range] 14,696 allied F-117 attacked, killing 29,510 hostile staff.
[range] 20,000,000 allied Siren sang out, freezing in place 21,003,268 hostile staff.
[range] 35,922,856 hostile Siren sang out, freezing in place 42,800,335 allied staff.
[range] 104,721,053 allied Sorcerer attacked, killing 105,170,990 hostile staff.
[range] 164,724,120 hostile Sorcerer attacked, killing 145,540,165 allied staff.
[range] 99,223,222 hostile Dragon breathed fire on and melted 47,474,531 allied staff.

Stunned: 21,003,268 enemies stunned. 42,800,335 friendlies stunned.
Died: 105,200,500 enemies dead. 193,014,696 friendlies dead.

Died: 105,200,500 [£4,994,647,390,000] enemies dead. 193,014,696 [£6,930,513,352,000] friendlies dead.

[Tombi]

way to go brevity... not! :P you missed a free tick on a pom, what a douche

[darkmane]

my "free tick on a pom" was a fake mob.... what i think is really funny is that biddez sent out 30 million rangers and leeroy sent a tick early on defense. bye bye sorcerers!

that battle report was definitely my worst. 3:2 ratio! i guess that happens when you attack your own route.

[LAFiN]

Leeroy should have been smart and recalled, like I suggested he do, but I guess 45 seconds wasn't enough time for him to read the message and recall. Ahh well, win some, lose more :P

[darkmane]

[range] 69 hostile Political Mastermind attacked, distracting 381 allied staff.
[range] 52,605,571 allied Political Mastermind attacked, distracting 404,781,306 hostile staff.
[range] 90,666,492 hostile Secret Agent attacked, killing 66,084,394 allied staff.
[range] 23,244,524 allied Siren sang out, freezing in place 28,016,806 hostile staff.
[range] 142,791,984 hostile Assassin attacked, killing 41,193,524 allied staff.
[range] 174,117,491 allied Sorcerer attacked, killing 1,079,051,273 hostile staff.
[range] 4,042,694 allied Hippy Van attacked, distracting 981,258 hostile staff.
[range] 98,456,935 hostile Dragon breathed fire on and melted 220,199,414 allied staff.
[range] 40,053,007 allied Dragon breathed fire on and melted 89,138,375 hostile staff.

Stunned: 28,016,806 [£1,667,146,049,500] enemies stunned.
Distracted: 381 [£4,858,100] friendlies distracted. 405,762,564 [£3,294,606,608,600] enemies distracted.
Died: 327,477,332 [£14,947,556,219,400] friendlies dead. 1,168,189,648 [£9,205,403,065,200] enemies dead.

You gained 15,789,138 effectiveness.
You earned £734,565,721,394 bounty.
You will soon be receiving £5,020,663,624,550 insurance.


EDIT: I concede :P

[LAFiN]

Clearly you haven't conceded:

Died: 68,976,158 [£2,482,253,298,000] enemies dead. 381,516,274 [£1,194,247,608,900] friendlies dead.
Bribed: 3,264,832 [£117,748,684,000] enemies bribed.

[Steve_God]

Note to self and to others - Darkmane isn't a reliable trustworthy ally player.


If you're going to declare war on us and make our lives hell, then fair enough, but to join us mid-round, score-queen yourself up to a high score, and THEN leave and attack us? Well I won't be recommending you anymore...

[Steve_God]

Us defending:
Died: 73,568,828 [£2,624,306,076,500] enemies dead. 5,659,896 [£218,424,576,000] friendlies dead.

[timtadams]

lol, totally awesome Darkmane

i saw those BRs and was like: thats a solo pawning SG?! Ofc i realised you had left, but you still pawned

I cant believe only one person has had the balls to do it, rather then hide behind the 'i dont backstab friends, and anyway, theres no point' crap. lol, seriously? *cough*scorequeens*cough* ;)

lol, i would relish the idea of backstabbing my friends. The whole game (minus the nooblock) would love you. And any 'real' friends would forgive you and laugh about it. I would.

[Steve_God]

If he was one of the original members from the start, and wanted to leave earlier in the round after not realising that we would be working as a group, then fair enough.

But instead, he joined us mid-round, knowing full well that he was joining into:
Thu 8th Sep, year 2. Evening Member Joined 08th Mar 22:02
Darkmane [ID] has been accepted into the alliance by X [X]

[timtadams]

Note to self and to others - Darkmane isn't a reliable trustworthy ally player.


If you're going to declare war on us and make our lives hell, then fair enough, but to join us mid-round, score-queen yourself up to a high score, and THEN leave and attack us? Well I won't be recommending you anymore...

Only if youre in a nooblock! :D

Dont be sore Steve_God. He has actually given you guys a bit of action, i thought the round was boring? Why the hard feelings? Did he kill a heap of your troops?

[Steve_God]

Nah, he's barely touched any of my troops.

I've had masses of uni work this week followed by my g/fs birthday this weekend... I wanted a quiet last week without getting woken up to defend :P lol

[timtadams]

Nah, he's barely touched any of my troops.

I've had masses of uni work this week followed by my g/fs birthday this weekend... I wanted a quiet last week without getting woken up to defend :P lol

well, then, i guess i can understand your irritation:P

[darkmane]

I already admitted this to you several times:

I am being selfish and having fun myself at the cost of others. I have absolutely no emotional commitment to the alliance. I joined half way through the round to score queen and now I'm bored. I wouldn't have done this if I was with you from the start.... I didn't earn anything.

Yes, you see me getting owned in BRs now. I told you I gave up. Now I'm sending out and heading to my friends house.... going out to eat.... grading papers.... sending suicide missions.... post them all if you want to feel better about yourselves :P

I've had more fun that I could have imagined!

[Dark_Angel]

In my personal opinion it's a contemptible and dickheaded thing to do to backstab an alliance that took you in and gave you the best cover in the game so you could grow to whatever size you wished, only to backstab them with the army you'd amassed while we protected you :/

I for one won't be playing with you again.

Darkmane has now been killed by S_G; and whilst he did do a reasonable amount of damage the threat has been dealt with appropriately by the alliance.

It is noteworthy that the damage you did do, at least your "best" attack you only did well on because you purposefully and strategically waited until most of our members were offline/inactive before you left and made your attack.

You'd have had no such success if you'd have been outside our walls, and its for that reason I had to laugh when I saw you gloating about the "success" of your attack. At least tell people the sordid reason your attack was successful ;)

[lavadog]

You guys are the most sore losers I ever met. So what he back stabbed you, you should be damn glad he did. First all the whining you don't have any targets, then one presents himself to you and you whine again? At least someone is trying to spicen up the round a bit, because we all know we don't have to expect that from you guys.

You still have your precious land and ranks, so shut up and be glad you had something to do after about 40 extremely boring days.

[timtadams]

In my personal opinion it's a contemptible and dickheaded thing to do to backstab an alliance that took you in and gave you the best cover in the game so you could grow to whatever size you wished, only to backstab them with the army you'd amassed while we protected you :/

I for one won't be playing with you again.

Darkmane has now been killed by S_G; and whilst he did do a reasonable amount of damage the threat has been dealt with appropriately by the alliance.

It is noteworthy that the damage you did do, at least your "best" attack you only did well on because you purposefully and strategically waited until most of our members were offline/inactive before you left and made your attack.

You'd have had no such success if you'd have been outside our walls, and its for that reason I had to laugh when I saw you gloating about the "success" of your attack. At least tell people the sordid reason your attack was successful ;)

when you say it like that, i think: lol, in my opinion its totally awesomely funny.

and DA, please censor your post before another mod has too. It doesnt look good for you ;)

[Dark_Angel]

My post doesn't need censoring, there's nothing wrong with it - we're in the politics sub-forum, I'm not going to sugar coat everything I say :P

And that is my opinion, and I stick by it :)

You just don't backstab an alliance who has allowed you to join and grow freely without fear of getting inc. I told the guy he was free to stay low and gain as many acres as he wants, because I'd defend him all out if he had inc. The guy wouldn't have had anywhere near the troops if S_G hadn't allowed him to stay low, have no-LETs (because he didnt need to defend), and basically waltz in and out of targets with nothing but flak.

I'm repayed for that by him zeroing one of my guys and being a royal pain in the ass :P

My frustration, mainly, is down to the fact that I was the person who recruited him to S_G - which I know deeply regret given he went all Crazy eyed on us :/

Leaving the alliance, killing off a member at a time he knew nobody was online, all for what? Nothing - we're still rank 2, he's now dead and nothing else is changed. If he found that fun then he's one easily amused individual :P

[timtadams]

/me emits heaving sigh

i was referring to the word DICK in your post. Im not one for sugar coating either

If he found that fun then he's one easily amused individual

I wouldve found it fun :P

But i do think you are taking it too seriously. Its not like he hates you or anything, and like you said, you are still rank 2.
It was simply a bit of harmless fun

[pinpower]

My opinion is similar to Steve's. It was just not very nice (:() to join us, use our ally for a few weeks to get yourself a good rank and some troops and then leave to attack us. Although tbh (and this isnt just having a go cos you've left) you weren't our best member by any stretch of the imagination, so i guess its our fault for not kicking you earlier ;).

Well played to you though, you've done some awesome damage and kept us on our toes for a couple of days. I thought it was pretty fun, sending defence mobs and not actually knowing whether your going up against 300m sorc, 140m dragons and what not or a bunch of flak....thats the fun of the game!! So well done to you on that front! :D

However, DA does have a point...you waited til not many were on, left and attacked so you did get that initial lucky hit. Like i said, still very fun and some nice BRs...

Anyway, tis all fun and games til someone looses an eye!
No hard feelings.
x

[Dark_Angel]

Aye, however if you look a bit more closely you see that I'm referring to his actions as "dickish" not Darkmane himself ;)

Arent we all guilty of taking this game too seriously from time to time ;)

[Turnip2k]

Very nice work mate - people take this game too seriously, it's good to see you throw a little curveball in there ;)

[Ahead]

Oh noes is he gonna stop you from getting your top 10 best player in the world called DA award, DA?!

He didn't backstab you.
Everybody in the game apart from you idiotnoobs in SG have tons of respect for him now.
You are all boring sods, and it shows that you don't have enough skill to defend against one person.
I would have done the same, hell I actually thought about joining SG, then organising a whole resistance while I was in there and making them hit you when you had nobody online :P It's the least you deserve.

Also the quotes from this thread.. wow :D

If you're going to declare war on us and make our lives hell, then fair enough, but to join us mid-round, score-queen yourself up to a high score, and THEN leave and attack us? Well I won't be recommending you anymore...

Lol @ taking the moral high ground whilst you're in a powerblock of half the active players in the game. I don't think you need to worry about what people think of your recommendations anymore, people generally have to respect you to take note of them. And there's a lot of players here that wont be recommending you anymore..

You'd have had no such success if you'd have been outside our walls, and its for that reason I had to laugh when I saw you gloating about the "success" of your attack. At least tell people the sordid reason your attack was successful ;)

Thank you for providing me with that quote DA :P That is epic! Let's alter it very very slightly..
"SG would have had no such success if they'd been outside the TBA walls, and its for that reason I had to laugh when I saw you gloating about the "success" of your attacks, how you have earnt your rank more than rank 1, and how SG has been a "successful" alliance. At least tell people the sordid reason your round/attack/noobyface was successful ;)"

That is all you sad SQing dick! :D


P.S Kudos to darkmane!

[Dark_Angel]

Oh noes is he gonna stop you from getting your top 10 best player in the world called DA award, DA?!

He didn't backstab you.
Everybody in the game apart from you idiotnoobs in SG have tons of respect for him now.
You are all boring sods, and it shows that you don't have enough skill to defend against one person.
I would have done the same, hell I actually thought about joining SG, then organising a whole resistance while I was in there and making them hit you when you had nobody online :P It's the least you deserve.

Also the quotes from this thread.. wow :D

If you're going to declare war on us and make our lives hell, then fair enough, but to join us mid-round, score-queen yourself up to a high score, and THEN leave and attack us? Well I won't be recommending you anymore...

Lol @ taking the moral high ground whilst you're in a powerblock of half the active players in the game. I don't think you need to worry about what people think of your recommendations anymore, people generally have to respect you to take note of them. And there's a lot of players here that wont be recommending you anymore..

You'd have had no such success if you'd have been outside our walls, and its for that reason I had to laugh when I saw you gloating about the "success" of your attack. At least tell people the sordid reason your attack was successful ;)

Thank you for providing me with that quote DA :P That is epic! Let's alter it very very slightly..
"SG would have had no such success if they'd been outside the TBA walls, and its for that reason I had to laugh when I saw you gloating about the "success" of your attacks, how you have earnt your rank more than rank 1, and how SG has been a "successful" alliance. At least tell people the sordid reason your round/attack/noobyface was successful ;)"

That is all you sad SQing dick! :D


P.S Kudos to darkmane!


1. - No he isn't. He was huge but my TLs would have wiped his troops before he had time to blink.

2. - Skill to defend one person? He's dead - and we still have a very steady rank 2. He didn't kill the entire alliance, he caused a reasonable amount of damage and is now dead. But if you wanna join his fanclub, be my guest ! :)

3. - This whole "I lost so I'm just going to flame the winners" line is getting very very sad Ahead/Farvie/Fardie, or whatever you like to call yourself these days. Grow up, and try again next round ;)

Perhaps we should invent a new award for you :D The sore loser award. I can think of nobody more worthy :p

[Silence]

Note to self and to others - Darkmane isn't a reliable trustworthy ally player.


Note to self, those involved in a power block have lost any respect from me =)

On a second note he did show he was kinda good as he *did* do a fair bit of damage. He proved that he was a better player than I first thought (although he did die like a noob, sheesh how did you not see that SA defence coming?!?!)

[Silence]

1. - No he isn't. He was huge but my TLs would have wiped his troops before he had time to blink.


Darkangel, THIS IS WHY YOU GET THE DARKANGEL AWARD. ZOMG YOU ARE TOO GOOD. WE CANT EVEN BLINK :O:O:O

[Dark_Angel]

1. - No he isn't. He was huge but my TLs would have wiped his troops before he had time to blink.


Darkangel, THIS IS WHY YOU GET THE DARKANGEL AWARD. ZOMG YOU ARE TOO GOOD. WE CANT EVEN BLINK :O:O:O

Thank you , thank you, you're too kind, too kind :D

DA award ftw.

[Silence]

1. - No he isn't. He was huge but my TLs would have wiped his troops before he had time to blink.


Darkangel, THIS IS WHY YOU GET THE DARKANGEL AWARD. ZOMG YOU ARE TOO GOOD. WE CANT EVEN BLINK :O:O:O

Thank you , thank you, you're too kind, too kind :D

DA award ftw.

I blinked and missed your brilliance. It was over too fast. Honey you never let *me* finish you come too early :(

[Dark_Angel]

What can I say "Silence", I can't help being cooler' than you :( :/

btw, I've been meaning to ask you.

All this contempt for powerblocks/wings etc, weren't we together in Valhalla a few years back? Do you only hate 3 wing powerblocks? Do 2 wing powerblocks not count?

Interesting o.o

[Steve_God]

Note to self and to others - Darkmane isn't a reliable trustworthy ally player.


Note to self, those involved in a power block have lost any respect from me =)
Silence's Alliance History:
Round 18 - Member of the Powerblock alliances Cappuccino & Surreal.
Round 17 - Member of the Powerblock alliances Symbiosis & Valhalla.

Nuff said ;)

[f0xx]

Note to self and to others - Darkmane isn't a reliable trustworthy ally player.


Note to self, those involved in a power block have lost any respect from me =)
Silence's Alliance History:
Round 18 - Member of the Powerblock alliances Cappuccino & Surreal.
Round 17 - Member of the Powerblock alliances Symbiosis & Valhalla.

Nuff said ;)

You should learn your bush history lessons Steve. Those were not powerblocks.

Nuff said ;) ?

[Dark_Angel]

Note to self and to others - Darkmane isn't a reliable trustworthy ally player.


Note to self, those involved in a power block have lost any respect from me =)
Silence's Alliance History:
Round 18 - Member of the Powerblock alliances Cappuccino & Surreal.
Round 17 - Member of the Powerblock alliances Symbiosis & Valhalla.

Nuff said ;)

You should learn your bush history lessons Steve. Those were not powerblocks.

Nuff said ;) ?

I was in Valhalla. And though my memory sucks, I can quite clearly remember working very closely with Symbiosis.

How was it not a powerblock? - Oh, they didnt come under the banner "TBA" :P Ofc, how silly of me ;)

[f0xx]

Note to self and to others - Darkmane isn't a reliable trustworthy ally player.


Note to self, those involved in a power block have lost any respect from me =)
Silence's Alliance History:
Round 18 - Member of the Powerblock alliances Cappuccino & Surreal.
Round 17 - Member of the Powerblock alliances Symbiosis & Valhalla.

Nuff said ;)

You should learn your bush history lessons Steve. Those were not powerblocks.

Nuff said ;) ?

I was in Valhalla. And though my memory sucks, I can quite clearly remember working very closely with Symbiosis.

How was it not a powerblock? - Oh, they didnt come under the banner "TBA" :P Ofc, how silly of me ;)

Your memory serves you right. You seem to have deliberately forgotten though, that at that aNAPs still existed, so two alliances working as one group was the norm. If we draw a parallel from this round to that round and create a powerblock equal to TBA, Sym and Valhalla should have had 6 alliances working as one ;)

[Dark_Angel]

Ofc they were aNapped, but they were a powerblock regardless :P

I only mention it because we all too often forget that powerblocks' used to be the norm, and people who should know better make out that TBA is the first and only powerblock that has ever existed.

Bring on round 31 ;)

[Steve_God]

Norm or not, it was a powerblock of 40 members both times.
They could have easily split and warred with each other to secure the 'Rank 1 win' with the other.

I'm not denying that our current powerblock is in anyway 'good' - I'm just making a point about Silence trying to take a moral high ground against something that he was involved with for 2 rounds running previously :)

[f0xx]

Now you guys are getting really hilarious.

When ANY group is made out of 40 players, and the group that wins the round is made out of 40 as well, then that is not a powerblock.

When any group is made out of 20, and the winning group is made out of 60, then this is a powerblock.

[Dark_Angel]

I don't base my definition of a powerblock on numbers. I base it on the effect it has on the rest of the playerbase.

As such - in my view a powerblock is a formation of alliances that undermines the value of skill and relies more on brute force than strategy.

I refer you to a quote from one of the leaders of the Sym/Val powerblock back when, as you quite rightly pointed out such blocks were "legit":

so that left Welshie running the Sym/Val attacks while I ran the attacks for NRAA. No matter what we did, we encountered no defence, from anywhere. Every attack gained land or killed a player off, it was

A powerblock is, by and large, an unwelcome and overwhelmingly powerful force in the game that ruins gameplay for the mid-lower ranks.

aNapped powerblocks of days gone by fit this criteria quite nicely, as you can see from even the leader's description of the seamless nature of brute force attacking. I see little difference between those days and today. TBA has a formation of 3 alliances, not 2, being the major difference. However again the effect is similar to that of a 2-wing powerblock.

And whilst I'm not denying that TBA is, horribly "wrong" - to criticise it so heavily when you've been involved in one yourself - is to me rather preposterous. (Yes they were an everyday thing back then, but as Steve has pointed out, why didnt these alliances split and fight when they'd won? That is the main criticism of TBA..)

[Steve_God]

When ANY group is made out of 40 players, and the group that wins the round is made out of 40 as well, then that is not a powerblock.
Winning Alliances in those rounds were made of 20.
Winning Groups in those rounds were made of 40.

The fact there was an A-Nap system in place is irrelevant - Two alliances, two separate leaders, two groups who could potentially want to be the 'Rank 1 alliance'.

Same situation as today, but with two instead of three.
Again, not saying it's right - just backing up my previous point :)


Edit: I really should refresh after typing my replies up before posting - it's just getting silly with me seeing DAs post AFTER I've written mine up - lol :P

[f0xx]

A powerblock is, by and large, an unwelcome and overwhelmingly powerful force in the game that ruins gameplay for the mid-lower ranks.

That can basicly be said about ANY winning alliance, even TGA, which was exactly the opposite of a powerblock.

Your definition skills, my friend, suck, and are sadly again nothing more than an unseccessful attempt to justify your pathetic powerblock by using a logic that is flawed.

You never sieze to amaze me, DA, and sadly, Steve...

[edit]

@ Twigley: the only difference is that back then there was an IN GAME SYSTEM which encouraged the use of 2 alliances as means of winning, unlike now, when such system is not only NON EXSTANT, but you also had the game creator himlself saying that powerblocks in general (powerblocks like TBA, not like the ones you are trying to make them be) are hurting the game.

[Dark_Angel]

f0xx, where am I justifying TBA?

TBA is wrong, it was a silly idea and its one I won't be involved in again. Done, dusted, already admitted it.

What I have a problem with is hypocrites who criticise TBA at every opportunity, mainly because they didnt split up when they had a clear lead, when they've themselves been involved in a powerblock(s) that failed to do the same.

That is my opinion, like it or not ;)

[edit] And with regards to your first point, as you well know I'm referring to a formation of alliances, not one by itself.

[f0xx]

when they've themselves been involved in a powerblock(s) that failed to do the same.

And that is exactly what is wrong, because the example you gave, Sym and Val, Cappucino and Surreal, WERE NOT POWERBLOCKS.

They were a group of 40, fighting other groups of 40. The ratio of the numbers is 1:1. Back then 2 alliance = 1 group. AND THAT WAS THE NORM.

Now the norm is 1 group = 1 alliance. Not three. Your attempt to compare TBA to Sym and Val is just... like trying to compare a lightweight boxing champion to heavyweight one.

[Dark_Angel]

And tell me, f0xx, did the game mechanics at the time prevent aNapped alliances dropping their aNaps and fighting it out for rank 1?






I didn't think so >.>

[f0xx]

And tell me, f0xx, did the game mechanics at the time prevent aNapped alliances dropping their aNaps and fighting it out for rank 1?






I didn't think so >.>

So just because an ally which wins can kick half of its player and land rape them and in the end still wins means that they should? Just because an ally can win with 10 players means that if they win with 20 then it's a powerblock?

You don't seem to understand. If Man United faces my town's football team, they will not go against them with 6 players, instead of 11, even though they don't need 11. They might face them with their reserves, but it is still 11 vs 11.

Different times define what is appropriate behaviour. Back then two alliances working as one was the norm. That is what was appropriate to do. Now it is not.

[edit] We've had powerblocks in the past too, I am not saying we never had them, but the rounds which you use as example were not powerblocks.

[Ahead]

1. - No he isn't. He was huge but my TLs would have wiped his troops before he had time to blink.

2. - Skill to defend one person? He's dead - and we still have a very steady rank 2. He didn't kill the entire alliance, he caused a reasonable amount of damage and is now dead. But if you wanna join his fanclub, be my guest ! :)

3. - This whole "I lost so I'm just going to flame the winners" line is getting very very sad Ahead/Farvie/Fardie, or whatever you like to call yourself these days. Grow up, and try again next round ;)

Perhaps we should invent a new award for you :D The sore loser award. I can think of nobody more worthy :p

1 - Why didn't you kill him before he did all that damage to your alliance that made you cry then?
2 - He may be dead now but he obviously made a big enough impact for you to come on here and moan about it. I am already a member.
3 - Sorry I hope you're not calling yourself "the winner" here? From where I'm sitting you're in the rank 2 alliance..? Or is everybody a winner nowadays? Who said I even want to go ftw next round?

I have won rounds in the past, I don't care it's nothing new for me. I don't care that I didn't win, I care about the methods that you used to win, and the way you prevented a proper 1 on 1 on 1 battle for rank 1.

[Garrett]

'oh ow my sandy vagina hurts' is what I get from S_G outta this thread.


I'm just mad at FeR for dying after all that work of putting DA from 2nd to 3rd with less than 100M troops.

Now me being a severe underdog and doing that? That is skill. Sitting on acres to a top 10 finish is not.

Thank you, drive thru. :D

[Dark_Angel]

1 - Why didn't you kill him before he did all that damage to your alliance that made you cry then?

I've been offline this weekend, spending some time with my gf.


2 - He may be dead now but he obviously made a big enough impact for you to come on here and moan about it. I am already a member.

Just the principle really.

3 - Sorry I hope you're not calling yourself "the winner" here? From where I'm sitting you're in the rank 2 alliance..? Or is everybody a winner nowadays? Who said I even want to go ftw next round?

I'm very pleased with S_Gs finish - rank 2. And I'm referring not to your opportunist flaming of S_G, rather your flaming of TBA as a whole.

And do you know what Ahead, I wouldn't even be bothered by it if it was a normal amount of flaming. You're entitled to moan that TBA ruined the round. Just not at the slightest opportunity and on an almost daily basis :/ That is what I'm saying is sad - given that this is, after all, a game.

[Garrett]

1. - No he isn't. He was huge but my TLs would have wiped his troops before he had time to blink.

2. - Skill to defend one person? He's dead - and we still have a very steady rank 2. He didn't kill the entire alliance, he caused a reasonable amount of damage and is now dead. But if you wanna join his fanclub, be my guest ! :)

3. - This whole "I lost so I'm just going to flame the winners" line is getting very very sad Ahead/Farvie/Fardie, or whatever you like to call yourself these days. Grow up, and try again next round ;)

Perhaps we should invent a new award for you :D The sore loser award. I can think of nobody more worthy :p

1 - Why didn't you kill him before he did all that damage to your alliance that made you cry then?
2 - He may be dead now but he obviously made a big enough impact for you to come on here and moan about it. I am already a member.
3 - Sorry I hope you're not calling yourself "the winner" here? From where I'm sitting you're in the rank 2 alliance..? Or is everybody a winner nowadays? Who said I even want to go ftw next round?

I have won rounds in the past, I don't care it's nothing new for me. I don't care that I didn't win, I care about the methods that you used to win, and the way you prevented a proper 1 on 1 on 1 battle for rank 1.


DA cares about rank the way self absorbed people think your paycheck is the only measurement of peoples value.

There is no arguing with him. You serve yourself well by letting it go.

[edit] However, anyone not caring about their value finish and wanna suicide their troops with me again on ANY target. Let me know and my sa are at your disposal.

[Dark_Angel]

1. - No he isn't. He was huge but my TLs would have wiped his troops before he had time to blink.

2. - Skill to defend one person? He's dead - and we still have a very steady rank 2. He didn't kill the entire alliance, he caused a reasonable amount of damage and is now dead. But if you wanna join his fanclub, be my guest ! :)

3. - This whole "I lost so I'm just going to flame the winners" line is getting very very sad Ahead/Farvie/Fardie, or whatever you like to call yourself these days. Grow up, and try again next round ;)

Perhaps we should invent a new award for you :D The sore loser award. I can think of nobody more worthy :p

1 - Why didn't you kill him before he did all that damage to your alliance that made you cry then?
2 - He may be dead now but he obviously made a big enough impact for you to come on here and moan about it. I am already a member.
3 - Sorry I hope you're not calling yourself "the winner" here? From where I'm sitting you're in the rank 2 alliance..? Or is everybody a winner nowadays? Who said I even want to go ftw next round?

I have won rounds in the past, I don't care it's nothing new for me. I don't care that I didn't win, I care about the methods that you used to win, and the way you prevented a proper 1 on 1 on 1 battle for rank 1.


DA cares about rank the way self absorbed people think your paycheck is the only measurement of peoples value.

There is no arguing with him. You serve yourself well by letting it go.

[edit] However, anyone not caring about their value finish and wanna suicide their troops with me again on ANY target. Let me know and my sa are at your disposal.

I play to win Garrett :s

It just so happens playing to win means caring about your value :/

I apologise if that offends you, but I'm entitled to have a playstyle :P

Furthermore, if you can name me a round in which someone has done well, value wise, without caring about their score, do let me know... (think carefully about your definition of doing well.)

[Garrett]

1) not talking to you. I was trying to advise ahead.

2) i said nothing about your playstyle. if you think I did, then you missed the point of my post entirely. which is my problem with you to begin with.

3) thank you and have a nice day.

[Dark_Angel]

1 - Well you're discussing me, so I'm talking to you ;)

2 - Oh right o.0

Also, you should probably edit your first post to "my remaining SA" :P :D

[Garrett]

It's ok troller, I said what I said.

It's not my fault you don't understand.

[Silence]

Note to self and to others - Darkmane isn't a reliable trustworthy ally player.


Note to self, those involved in a power block have lost any respect from me =)
Silence's Alliance History:
Round 18 - Member of the Powerblock alliances Cappuccino & Surreal.
Round 17 - Member of the Powerblock alliances Symbiosis & Valhalla.

Nuff said ;)

Ah yes powerblock when a "group" was *designed* to be 40 players. The groups of 40 players would war against other groups of 40 players. Understand? I hope so. Lets not also forget the size of the player base was larger too so drawing comparisons is redundant.

And "Darkangel" I hate power blocks in a round where groups exsist as 20. Groups in roud 17/18 were 40. How can you not see the difference, its fundemental. Are you just retarded? Its so obvious

[Dark_Angel]

I suggest you read my previous posts if you want an explanation why, in my opinion, TBA shouldn't receive criticism in the quantities you provide it.

[Tombi]

Well basically this is how it goes: tba will get flamed for anything and everything.
Par example if we attack someone and then pull out we get called 'chickens' and 'scorequeens' if we attack someone and stay then get killed were called 'n00b's' if we get to the top we are called 'scorequeens' if we send out alot of attacks and keep our score low we are called 'n00b's'

F0xx a 2 wing powerblock is virtually the same as a 3 wing powerblock and yes continue with your argument of us being 'n00b's' but tba was set up with the idea of giving new players to the game a chance at being at the top without being bashed by you and all your highly 'skilled' friends and because us 'n00b's' are at the top you will argue that black was white...basically your just arguing because this powerblock has 3 wings not 2 but 2 wings at the top is really very little to 3 wings, all the alliances below suffer just get on with it.

[f0xx]

F0xx a 2 wing powerblock is virtually the same as a 3 wing powerblock

Do you even READ my replies? A group made of 2 alliances is not powerblock when EVERY group is made of 2 alliances and when there is an ingame mechanic which encourages it.

Now, when one alliance actually means one group, you come up with 3 alliances who are snapped and try to compare that to the old times of ANAPs and say it is the same? Are you really being serious? Do you realise how *STUPID* is the point which you're trying to prove?

I am not mad I got beaten. I am mad that I got beaten only because we had to fight 3 times the amout of players we had. I am mad that those people claim they won because they are skilled. I am mad because they think that just because they are top 10 they are better than us, while the only thing they can do is pick an ID from the ID list on the topic of their combined channel and send at the given LT and then recall/stay if they are told to. But I guess that is also classed as "skill" by TBA's standards.

[Ahead]

Well basically this is how it goes: tba will get flamed for anything and everything.

You won't get flamed for attacking each other, or for leaving to join a proper alliance. Just look at darkmane, has he been flamed by anyone apart from SG noobs? No.

[Tombi]

I haven't seen chance hit WH? i haven't and won't see TDL hit TDT stop trying to take the moral highground, you have done the same powerblocking but oh no we have 3 wings that means we are morally wrong and shouldn't be doing it oh no tough toodles for you guys.
You come out with some wild idea every time that has no relevance to the way that tba work(s) you encourage us to attack each other, that would be suicide, you tell FeR off for being a 'n00b' and suiciding he is in no way shape or form a score queen, if he was he wouldn't have sent out that attack then gone afk 'cos thats not what 'scorequeens' do.
There is no way i can argue against you Ahead and partially F0xx your comments about what we should do and what TBA have done contradict each other, not directly but they do and have you not read the replys to other threads? There is chance of a war now with all of 4 days left of the round noone wants to do it because it would just mean you guys getting ontop and then we could flame you for being 'scorequeens' or even better 'highlyskilledqueens'

[Changer]

i haven't and won't see TDL hit TDT

Sorry, just have to correct you there. We hit TDT and killed many of them. It was never a group of such, just more people to chat to. We never sent on attacks with them and jokingly hit them sparaticaly until we decided to finish them



And to be fair the reason why there have been no major wars as such is cause we are being score capped by you guys. No point going to stealing loads of land if we will just end up losing more than we steal.....

[f0xx]

There is chance of a war now with all of 4 days left of the round noone wants to do it because it would just mean you guys getting ontop and then we could flame you for being 'scorequeens' or even better 'highlyskilledqueens'

That's the most stupid claim I've ever heard. Two days ago one of your players asked me if we were having a place in our ally for him. I told him that we don't, but even if we did have he would be the last person to join. Then he said, "If I join I will give you all the info so you can kill TBA". It made me laugh hard.

Now your comment shows that even in stage where the top 3 players are bigger than WH, you are STILL SCARED.

You don't seem to understand that killing an alliance takes time. Last round there was a VERY well organised resistance which fought Twigley's ally made of thugs for a whole week before it crumbled. And that was still like 3-4 resitance alliance which fight one, which is not that much bigger.

My point is, that at this stage, THERE IS NO ****ING WAY for WH or Chance, or TDL to come on top. We just don't have the resources, even if you guys start fighting each other. The most we can do is piggy here and there, gain some land and then lose it to you.

And please, drop that "there is a chance for TBA to fight each other". That is getting really lame. Everyone knows that the chance for TBA to fall appart is as much as not existant.

[Ahead]

Agree with all Changer and f0xx said, but also just to add to what Changer said - we also have to keep staff home to defend a lot more than if it was just one alliance "on top" (although you already know my opinion on whether SG/OL are on top). Having a group of 60 people sending at you means more potential incs. And you think if Chance warred with WH there wouldn't be some noobs from TBA piggying the attacks and sending along? You are stupid tombi cos I know that you'd be one of the people doing that.

[darkmane]

Here is what half of the thread need to do:

Take a break from the internet. This is getting waaaaaaayyy too serious for most of you. Lighten up a bit - you'll have some fun! I went from a lock top 25 finish to bottom of the pile and couldn't be any happier.

Quit your crying. All I saw after page 1 was *****ing and moaning. What do you really think you're accomplishing.

Get back on topic. This is supposed to be about me. :P


To address one point: I was wiped by secret agents like four times:
1. All flak
2. All flak
3. I had a man on the inside that told me all the SA's were on an attack sent ETA 4 instead of the ETA 5 attack.
4. I went out to a movie with the fiance.... I might have recalled with my mobile a couple ticks too late.


What happens in real life when things don't go your way? When a friend tells you he cant make it to your party.... when you were picked last for the kickball team at recess.... If you handle disappointment as bad as when you're on the internet, you must be sad little pandas.



Oh... and while I enjoyed attacking SG, my favorite moment of the round was cleaning up after the SAS on FeR :P

[Tombi]

There is chance of a war now with all of 4 days left of the round noone wants to do it because it would just mean you guys getting ontop and then we could flame you for being 'scorequeens' or even better 'highlyskilledqueens'

That's the most stupid claim I've ever heard. Two days ago one of your players asked me if we were having a place in our ally for him. I told him that we don't, but even if we did have he would be the last person to join. Then he said, "If I join I will give you all the info so you can kill TBA". It made me laugh hard.

Now your comment shows that even in stage where the top 3 players are bigger than WH, you are STILL SCARED.

You don't seem to understand that killing an alliance takes time. Last round there was a VERY well organised resistance which fought Twigley's ally made of thugs for a whole week before it crumbled. And that was still like 3-4 resitance alliance which fight one, which is not that much bigger.

My point is, that at this stage, THERE IS NO ****ING WAY for WH or Chance, or TDL to come on top. We just don't have the resources, even if you guys start fighting each other. The most we can do is piggy here and there, gain some land and then lose it to you.

And please, drop that "there is a chance for TBA to fight each other". That is getting really lame. Everyone knows that the chance for TBA to fall appart is as much as not existant.

typo on my behalf, it should have read there is no chance of war, stop getting so wound up, jeeze

[Tombi]

Agree with all Changer and f0xx said, but also just to add to what Changer said - we also have to keep staff home to defend a lot more than if it was just one alliance "on top" (although you already know my opinion on whether SG/OL are on top). Having a group of 60 people sending at you means more potential incs. And you think if Chance warred with WH there wouldn't be some noobs from TBA piggying the attacks and sending along? You are stupid tombi cos I know that you'd be one of the people doing that.

and i know that if there was a war between the allies you would piggy on it so you cant claim for me to be stupid :/

[tobapopalos]

Well basically this is how it goes: tba will get flamed for anything and everything.
Par example if we attack someone and then pull out we get called 'chickens' and 'scorequeens' if we attack someone and stay then get killed were called 'n00b's'

That's why you're supposed to stay and WIN. Get it? That's kinda the point of attacking.

[Matthew]

I haven't seen chance hit WH? i haven't and won't see TDL hit TDT stop trying to take the moral highground, you have done the same powerblocking but oh no we have 3 wings that means we are morally wrong and shouldn't be doing it oh no tough toodles for you guys.
You come out with some wild idea every time that has no relevance to the way that tba work(s) you encourage us to attack each other, that would be suicide, you tell FeR off for being a 'n00b' and suiciding he is in no way shape or form a score queen, if he was he wouldn't have sent out that attack then gone afk 'cos thats not what 'scorequeens' do.
There is no way i can argue against you Ahead and partially F0xx your comments about what we should do and what TBA have done contradict each other, not directly but they do and have you not read the replys to other threads? There is chance of a war now with all of 4 days left of the round noone wants to do it because it would just mean you guys getting ontop and then we could flame you for being 'scorequeens' or even better 'highlyskilledqueens'

You havent seen TDL hit TDT? Are you blind mate?

[Tombi]

I haven't seen chance hit WH? i haven't and won't see TDL hit TDT stop trying to take the moral highground, you have done the same powerblocking but oh no we have 3 wings that means we are morally wrong and shouldn't be doing it oh no tough toodles for you guys.
You come out with some wild idea every time that has no relevance to the way that tba work(s) you encourage us to attack each other, that would be suicide, you tell FeR off for being a 'n00b' and suiciding he is in no way shape or form a score queen, if he was he wouldn't have sent out that attack then gone afk 'cos thats not what 'scorequeens' do.
There is no way i can argue against you Ahead and partially F0xx your comments about what we should do and what TBA have done contradict each other, not directly but they do and have you not read the replys to other threads? There is chance of a war now with all of 4 days left of the round noone wants to do it because it would just mean you guys getting ontop and then we could flame you for being 'scorequeens' or even better 'highlyskilledqueens'

You havent seen TDL hit TDT? Are you blind mate?
we were banned from attacking each other when i was in there cos we were a 2 wing ally so thats perfectly fine..but as things went sour tdl raped them for all theyre worth?

[Garrett]

how does so much sand wind up on the internet?

if there are no females on the internet, how is there this big gaping vagina?

Anyway Steve_God, your night cover is nonexistant. 2x I've sent to suicide on you guys without ever being hax'd/spied until af3 (that's by watching my stats, not by stuff showing up on my news) both times!!!

It's hard to believe that Darkmane broke any trust as it's piss easy to land mobs on you guys for damage. It's just a shame that everyone let you get so big before they bothered to attack you.

Now had darkmane rallied a bunch of people to hit you is one thing, but for him to split apart and attack you by himself for his fun is hardly much of a betrayl and only served to make peoples round more interesting in the last few days.

:fist:
Like there is some unwritten rule that no one should attack during the last few days so everyone can get as much score as possible.
:fist:

DA for instance goes on and on about 'how little' i hurt him, but I've changed his buying habits and playing style of his troops of the past couple weeks. If it didn't bother so much, he wouldn't keep talking out about it nor would he be buying different troops. Saying one thing but doing another is the epitome of hypocrisy.

The game is more than a game because it involves a community of people.

However, Steve, I think most people not in TBA or at least not in your alliance, are upset with you and your group talking out of one side of your mouth in one instance and instead of saying 'fair play' when the tables are turned you all ***** and moan about how unfair the game and it's players are to you. 75 days later, you all still are doing it. I could be wrong in trying to sum up the sentiment, but it's how I feel and it's the general feeling I get from posters.

You've been apart of winning alliances before, so you know what it's like to be the round 'villan'. It shocks me how much you forget the days of old and act like this is all new and how dare anyone say anything in your general direction.

Kudos to Darkmane for having fun.

[harriergirl]

then we could flame you for being 'scorequeens' or even better 'highlyskilledqueens'



okay - this thread is lulz, but this line above. Please flame someone for being highly skilled. Please ... pretty please... :silly:

[LAFiN]

Anyway Steve_God, your night cover is nonexistant. 2x I've sent to suicide on you guys without ever being hax'd/spied until af3 (that's by watching my stats, not by stuff showing up on my news) both times!!!

Garrett, the reason you don't get hacked is because I am the night cover and I know what route you are and generally know you can't do anything.

[darkmane]

LAFiN you're about the only one on at night. Ever. Props to you for a few reasons:

1. Your good sense of humor about the whole thing.
2. Your defense.
3. Your activity.
4. Getting everyone online and taking care of me :)

[Dark_Angel]

DA for instance goes on and on about 'how little' i hurt him, but I've changed his buying habits and playing style of his troops of the past couple weeks. If it didn't bother so much, he wouldn't keep talking out about it nor would he be buying different troops. Saying one thing but doing another is the epitome of hypocrisy.

Lol. Don't flatter yourself Garrett. I didn't even know you were playing until I mailed H_G and she told me her accomplice that "night" was you.

I've been massing TLs for about 6 weeks :/

Furthermore, when I spent 20 tril the other week if you really had altered my playstyle/buying habits I'd presumably have opt for mass terrors if I wanted to kill any number of SAs before they fired (I'd have had 1bn terrorists by the time you attacked me).

I didn't bother reading the rest of your post, I only picked up on the part about me. I've already no doubt the rest of it is as inaccurate and foolishly assertive.

[LAFiN]

LAFiN you're about the only one on at night. Ever. Props to you for a few reasons:

1. Your good sense of humor about the whole thing.
2. Your defense.
3. Your activity.
4. Getting everyone online and taking care of me :)

Thanks Darkmane. Whilst you caused me a lot of trouble (and money to text people :P) you did in turn provide me with 3.9k acres :P

I'd have wished you hadn't left, but oh well. Just a game. You certainly gave me something to do :P

[pinpower]

Tbf to DA, i can vouch that he hasnt changed his troop set up because of you. Ive been trying to make him get certain units for weeks and he hasnt listened, the lure of TLs is too great...So he's unlikely to change anything cos of 1 half successful rush.
x

[harriergirl]

actually he bought up 10m more terrorists immediatley after the attack, the tl's wouldnt really matter one way or the other as he already had more than enough to zero us if it weren't for the hoolies that saved a smidge.

I'm not saying this is because of us. Just something I noticed.

[blockatiel]

I am mad that I got beaten only because we had to fight 3 times the amout of players we had. I am mad that those people claim they won because they are skilled. I am mad because they think that just because they are top 10 they are better than us

f0xx is mad for some rather strange reasons:

1) Chance and W?H? were working together when the round wasn't yet "over" -- that's 1.5x the amount of players. TBA's existance was public knowledge MONTHS before the round started -- you can't claim that we "took you by surprise". Also, many of the players in TBA (Especially SG) were new or very inexperienced. Frankly, I find it surprising that two groups of active, experienced, skilled players were incapable of dealing with TBA. W?H? was definitely more active than any group in TBA, and Chance was at least as active as Inimical, who, quite frankly, were much more active than SG or lude.

2) Who claimed that TBA won out of skill? I'm really curious where you're getting this from.

3) We claimed that we were better than you because of top 10 positions? I don't believe i've seen anyone claim that either.

You can ***** and whine about the powerblock and assume that nobody within the powerblock has any skill whatsoever solely because you're upset that the situation was unfair to you, but spewing random bullshit with no actual logic behind it is not the way to make a proper argument.

in b4 mindless flaming

[f0xx]

Yet more false "facts" coming from TBA members.


1) Chance and W?H? were working together when the round wasn't yet "over" -- that's 1.5x the amount of players.
Firstly, there is one thing in temporary working together to defeat a powerblock. We've never shared same channel. We've naver had safelists. The times we've attacked together I can count on the fingers on my one hand and that was only as resistance. Not only that, but there have been many cases in which WH have attacked chance, be it for land here and there or for bounty/bribes. I personally have mails from Chance asking me if I don't have anything better to do. The fact that you are comparing WH+Chance to TBA is hilarious.



TBA's existance was public knowledge MONTHS before the round started -- you can't claim that we "took you by surprise".
That is true, although Twigley and Steve were spreading lies all over the place how this powerblock was only between SG and Overlude. We tried to split Inimical from them without knowing that the whole powerblock was planned as 3, not 2 alliances, which backfired badly.


Also, many of the players in TBA (Especially SG) were new or very inexperienced. Frankly, I find it surprising that two groups of active, experienced, skilled players were incapable of dealing with TBA. W?H? was definitely more active than any group in TBA, and Chance was at least as active as Inimical, who, quite frankly, were much more active than SG or lude.
Now lets be honest here. The TBA trio has been working together since day 2, back when the flak war between Inimical and WH began, which Inimical were losing badly, so they decided to call their buddies and in addition to that to form an early resistance. TBA came on top because when they start attacking it is 3 attacking alliances vs 1 defending. Having in mind all alliances are of somewhat same size and with 3-4 good organisers to lead the herd, it doesn't take long to land rape an ally that doesn't have LETs. After both WH and Chance were land raped, only then we somewhat started working together and still it was nowhere the level of which TBA were.



2) Who claimed that TBA won out of skill? I'm really curious where you're getting this from.
I never talk without prooves. There are many cases of players in TBA claiming that they are skilled only because they are high ranked.



3) We claimed that we were better than you because of top 10 positions? I don't believe i've seen anyone claim that either.

FeR and DA are just two recent example. And while those two have some skills atleast, claiming that you are better than someone else just bacuse of your rank is stupid. There have been players who literally have their first round and still make claims like that.



You can ***** and whine about the powerblock and assume that nobody within the powerblock has any skill whatsoever solely because you're upset that the situation was unfair to you
Life ain't fair too, I ain't expecting the game to be fair. If your victory was a cheap one though, then have the guts to come in front of everyone and say, "Hey, we can't beat you with skill so we needed three times more players", because that is the truth and that is what any honest player will admit. "I want to win but I ain't good/active enough to be in an ally like yours, that's why I joined TBA". That is what I've heard atleast 5 times from players who have been in TBA at one time or another.



but spewing random bullshit with no actual logic behind it is not the way to make a proper argument.
My **** is NEVER random and illogical and I enter arguments only if I have *solid* prooves or logic behind them.

Next please.

[Twigley]

Now lets be honest here. The TBA trio has been working together since day 2, back when the flak war between Inimical and WH began, which Inimical were losing badly, so they decided to call their buddies and in addition to that to form an early resistance.


Since 20 days before ticks*

[Garrett]

Tbf to DA, i can vouch that he hasnt changed his troop set up because of you. Ive been trying to make him get certain units for weeks and he hasnt listened, the lure of TLs is too great...So he's unlikely to change anything cos of 1 half successful rush.
x

he even put it in his posts about his changing terrorist levels as they've gone from 30 to 100 to 50 to now 60+ so step back. it's this automatic sycophantic crap that is so darn infuriating.

also this would be the 2nd time i hit him, terrorists always going up in # after the fact.

[harriergirl]

Life ain't fair too, I ain't expecting the game to be fair. If your victory was a cheap one though, then have the guts to come in front of everyone and say, "Hey, we can't beat you with skill so we needed three times more players", because that is the truth and that is what any honest player will admit. "I want to win but I ain't good/active enough to be in an ally like yours, that's why I joined TBA". That is what I've heard atleast 5 times from players who have been in TBA at one time or another.

I think this is the most accurate statement I've seen so far. You wonder why people flame tba when thier members sit in IRC and whine about a lack of targets and an inability to hold on to certain statistics. You won fair deal, but SG in particular have no room to whine back about a situation they've created for themselves.

[blockatiel]

Firstly, there is one thing in temporary working together to defeat a powerblock. We've never shared same channel. We've naver had safelists. The times we've attacked together I can count on the fingers on my one hand and that was only as resistance. Not only that, but there have been many cases in which WH have attacked chance, be it for land here and there or for bounty/bribes. I personally have mails from Chance asking me if I don't have anything better to do. The fact that you are comparing WH+Chance to TBA is hilarious.


Did I ever say that WH and Chance formed a powerblock? I never once compared those two alliances to TBA. It's also not my fault that you were in a piss-poor resistance, and didn't properly organize with the other alliance. You had SG zeroed while you were out of range of most of inimical, and you STOPPED TRYING because we swapped a couple members with them. That's your failure, not ours



Now lets be honest here. The TBA trio has been working together since day 2, back when the flak war between Inimical and WH began, which Inimical were losing badly, so they decided to call their buddies and in addition to that to form an early resistance. TBA came on top because when they start attacking it is 3 attacking alliances vs 1 defending. Having in mind all alliances are of somewhat same size and with 3-4 good organisers to lead the herd, it doesn't take long to land rape an ally that doesn't have LETs. After both WH and Chance were land raped, only then we somewhat started working together and still it was nowhere the level of which TBA were.


First of all, Inimical wasn't "losing badly." Inimical was at it's most active during the flak wars, and sadly, SG and Lude were, for the most part, nowhere to be found. Yes, we did lead an "early resistance" against WH, and it certainly wasn't just TBA who were in it -- another example of political manipulation that other alliances should have seen right through :P

Yes, TBA won through numbers. Yes, early on, it was 3 attacking alliances vs 1 defending. (After the first week or so though, most of inimical was not capable of sending on anyone outside of TBA.) To say that you both got land raped and had no lethals is quite incorrect, however. WH remained a military threat for most of the round. Chance, however, did not have the same level of coordination that WH did, and did not hold up as well against our attacks.

Also, TBA didn't have 3-4 organizers. For the most part, a couple people would send, and find that another 3 or 4 noticed and followed them in. The only time there was any real organization was for a few of the big waves, mostly earlier in the round. The only person who organized this was DA, whom everyone seems to love to bash :P


I never talk without prooves. There are many cases of players in TBA claiming that they are skilled only because they are high ranked.


Can you reference some examples for this? Not so much that I don't believe you as I want to see it myself


FeR and DA are just two recent example. And while those two have some skills atleast, claiming that you are better than someone else just bacuse of your rank is stupid. There have been players who literally have their first round and still make claims like that.


I won't comment on any skill comparison between the people in WH/Chance and the two people you have mentioned, but a few things are certain here:

1) DA's been trolling all round, not only since he's entered the top 10. Needless to say, as much as you may dislike DA, he's not without skill.

2) FeR was rank 1 for the majority of the round, because he managed to pull ahead of everyone else on his own merits. He's an extremely active player, and he's not bad at what he does.

Just because they've talked **** doesn't mean that they're doing it for the sole reason that they're (or were) in the top 10, and that they feel that being in the top 10 means they're skilled.


Life ain't fair too, I ain't expecting the game to be fair. If your victory was a cheap one though, then have the guts to come in front of everyone and say, "Hey, we can't beat you with skill so we needed three times more players", because that is the truth and that is what any honest player will admit. "I want to win but I ain't good/active enough to be in an ally like yours, that's why I joined TBA". That is what I've heard atleast 5 times from players who have been in TBA at one time or another.


Yes, the TBA victory was a cheap one. I don't deny that. However, you're saying that "since your victory was a cheap one, you (everyone in TBA) should come out and say that you're less skilled than anyone in WH/Chance." This is inhernently flawed; Just because (as I admitted) there are many people in TBA who are new or inexperienced, does not mean that EVERYONE in TBA lacks any skill whatsoever. Fighting dirtily does not mean that someone is incapable of winning without doing so.

[Dark_Angel]

actually he bought up 10m more terrorists immediatley after the attack, the tl's wouldnt really matter one way or the other as he already had more than enough to zero us if it weren't for the hoolies that saved a smidge.

I'm not saying this is because of us. Just something I noticed.

I bought back what I lost and continued to mass TLs. At this stage in the round I'd no chance of massing enough terrorists to kill a rush without being hurt.

Not sure what significance this has atall tbh. I don't need ratios anymore, I don't attack and we don't get inc. I could mass geos without question :S

[timthetyrant]

i wish i had the chance to backstab TBA, i only have the chance to frontstab them, but then they'll see it coming :(, and i wouldnt do much anyways since i've been on their menu for a while, and they have eaten me all up. i hope they all get salmonela

[Steve_God]

F0xx; Garratt; Anyone else it applies to:

Just a quick reminder that this thread in within the 'Politics' section.
Much of what I say in this section can be regarding as piffle :P


Deep down I agree that there is very little comparison between this round, and previous powerblocks, but I'll still argue it out just for the sake of it for this round, because that's the side of the fence that I'm currently in.

Same with Darkmanes action, deep down I think it's quite brave of him to do what he did, annoying as a Leader, but I can see his reasoning - but I'm still going to fight back at it when it's posted as a 'war' against my alliance.

As for forgetting previous rounds? I can remember the arguements I've had in the past VERY clearly with me being the underdog complaining about other powerblocks. Am I a hypocrite for keeping my alliance as part of the group after we'd clearly won? Yes. But I have my reasons for doing so which I've previously given.

Anyway... that's my reminder done... back to the arguements ;)

[timthetyrant]

its alrite steve, we are all hyprocrites

[Ahead]

Did I ever say that WH and Chance formed a powerblock? I never once compared those two alliances to TBA. It's also not my fault that you were in a piss-poor resistance, and didn't properly organize with the other alliance. You had SG zeroed while you were out of range of most of inimical, and you STOPPED TRYING because we swapped a couple members with them. That's your failure, not ours.

Rofl, clearly you have never organised a resistance. Persuading people to send against the rank 1 ally is one thing, but persuading them to send against the rank 1 ally when they know one of the resistance allies will be retalled by 2 other alliances ranked higher than them is another thing. Yes, if it had been organised better, the resistance probably could have taken down SG within another day or two. But you seem to think that that's the end? That's the resistance over and successful?

Do you not understand that after SG had fallen and the resistance had lost some staff, that there were TWO MORE alliances bigger than SG to take down? Considering that a good successful resistance will usually take 3-5 days to take down an ally enough to hit individually and split targets etc, that's another 2 entire weeks worth of resisting before the whole of TBA would be taken down. And in that 2 weeks, SG would be free to attack and gain land again without being harmed as the resistance's efforts would be focused on the other two alliances. It would have been nigh on impossible to take down three alliances and keep them down. So before you jump on the "BUT ITS ALL YOUR FAULT - WE MADE A POWERBLOCK BUT YOU COULDNT KILL IT YOU ARE SO RUBBISH" bandwagon, maybe think next time. Resisting against one alliance is one thing, resisting against 3 is another.

[timtadams]

wow, i didnt take long for this thread to descend into a big pile of steamy ****.

i lol at some peoples arguments

[Matthew]

Did I ever say that WH and Chance formed a powerblock? I never once compared those two alliances to TBA. It's also not my fault that you were in a piss-poor resistance, and didn't properly organize with the other alliance. You had SG zeroed while you were out of range of most of inimical, and you STOPPED TRYING because we swapped a couple members with them. That's your failure, not ours.

Rofl, clearly you have never organised a resistance. Persuading people to send against the rank 1 ally is one thing, but persuading them to send against the rank 1 ally when they know one of the resistance allies will be retalled by 2 other alliances ranked higher than them is another thing. Yes, if it had been organised better, the resistance probably could have taken down SG within another day or two. But you seem to think that that's the end? That's the resistance over and successful?

Do you not understand that after SG had fallen and the resistance had lost some staff, that there were TWO MORE alliances bigger than SG to take down? Considering that a good successful resistance will usually take 3-5 days to take down an ally enough to hit individually and split targets etc, that's another 2 entire weeks worth of resisting before the whole of TBA would be taken down. And in that 2 weeks, SG would be free to attack and gain land again without being harmed as the resistance's efforts would be focused on the other two alliances. It would have been nigh on impossible to take down three alliances and keep them down. So before you jump on the "BUT ITS ALL YOUR FAULT - WE MADE A POWERBLOCK BUT YOU COULDNT KILL IT YOU ARE SO RUBBISH" bandwagon, maybe think next time. Resisting against one alliance is one thing, resisting against 3 is another.

You cannot really defend the incompetence of the resistance. The resistance or lack of it was probably the only thing this round that annoyed me more than TBA. It was just indecisive and unwilling to make any form of effort to impact anything.

I am not pointing the finger at you or any individual alliance, as it is everyone outside of TBA's fault. Everyone seemed to be convinced that the round was over far before it was.

[blockatiel]

I never said that "resisting was easy", I said that the resistance was terrible.

And honestly, with the state SG was in early round, I doubt they would have made a comeback. At that stage, they weren't even a top 5 alliance, yet alone top 3.

[Martin]

Did I ever say that WH and Chance formed a powerblock? I never once compared those two alliances to TBA. It's also not my fault that you were in a piss-poor resistance, and didn't properly organize with the other alliance. You had SG zeroed while you were out of range of most of inimical, and you STOPPED TRYING because we swapped a couple members with them. That's your failure, not ours.

Rofl, clearly you have never organised a resistance. Persuading people to send against the rank 1 ally is one thing, but persuading them to send against the rank 1 ally when they know one of the resistance allies will be retalled by 2 other alliances ranked higher than them is another thing. Yes, if it had been organised better, the resistance probably could have taken down SG within another day or two. But you seem to think that that's the end? That's the resistance over and successful?

Do you not understand that after SG had fallen and the resistance had lost some staff, that there were TWO MORE alliances bigger than SG to take down? Considering that a good successful resistance will usually take 3-5 days to take down an ally enough to hit individually and split targets etc, that's another 2 entire weeks worth of resisting before the whole of TBA would be taken down. And in that 2 weeks, SG would be free to attack and gain land again without being harmed as the resistance's efforts would be focused on the other two alliances. It would have been nigh on impossible to take down three alliances and keep them down. So before you jump on the "BUT ITS ALL YOUR FAULT - WE MADE A POWERBLOCK BUT YOU COULDNT KILL IT YOU ARE SO RUBBISH" bandwagon, maybe think next time. Resisting against one alliance is one thing, resisting against 3 is another.

You cannot really defend the incompetence of the resistance. The resistance or lack of it was probably the only thing this round that annoyed me more than TBA. It was just indecisive and unwilling to make any form of effort to impact anything.

I am not pointing the finger at you or any individual alliance, as it is everyone outside of TBA's fault. Everyone seemed to be convinced that the round was over far before it was.


Why oh why are people always so naive about these things?? The resistance was 'poor' from your end because SG got battered and we were still too crap to kill them, omg we are teh n0000bz. From our perspective we had to work out who was in what wing, because you cannot take on 3 wings at once, you focus on one, take it out, then focus on another etc. Now when members are being swapped constantly it's so so difficult, every wave we sent they had new members defending them. We had 3-4 allies taking on the defence of 3 alliances way bigger than us.

Cyrus organised the resistance and he did a brilliant job, but would you have the motivation to fight an almost impossible fight against 3 wings? IF they were public, IF they didn't member swap then it wouldn't have been a problem. Don't get me wrong, I commend TBA for their resliliance, BUT that is why SG survived.

[pinpower]

Now when members are being swapped constantly it's so so difficult, every wave we sent they had new members defending them.

Members were not being swapped constantly. The first wave came. 2 SG members went to Inim. 1 Good inim player and 1 low/inactive Inim player went to SG. 1 SG player went to lude, 1 lude player went to SG.

Then later that night 1 more inim player went to SG.

[Matthew]

Did I ever say that WH and Chance formed a powerblock? I never once compared those two alliances to TBA. It's also not my fault that you were in a piss-poor resistance, and didn't properly organize with the other alliance. You had SG zeroed while you were out of range of most of inimical, and you STOPPED TRYING because we swapped a couple members with them. That's your failure, not ours.

Rofl, clearly you have never organised a resistance. Persuading people to send against the rank 1 ally is one thing, but persuading them to send against the rank 1 ally when they know one of the resistance allies will be retalled by 2 other alliances ranked higher than them is another thing. Yes, if it had been organised better, the resistance probably could have taken down SG within another day or two. But you seem to think that that's the end? That's the resistance over and successful?

Do you not understand that after SG had fallen and the resistance had lost some staff, that there were TWO MORE alliances bigger than SG to take down? Considering that a good successful resistance will usually take 3-5 days to take down an ally enough to hit individually and split targets etc, that's another 2 entire weeks worth of resisting before the whole of TBA would be taken down. And in that 2 weeks, SG would be free to attack and gain land again without being harmed as the resistance's efforts would be focused on the other two alliances. It would have been nigh on impossible to take down three alliances and keep them down. So before you jump on the "BUT ITS ALL YOUR FAULT - WE MADE A POWERBLOCK BUT YOU COULDNT KILL IT YOU ARE SO RUBBISH" bandwagon, maybe think next time. Resisting against one alliance is one thing, resisting against 3 is another.

You cannot really defend the incompetence of the resistance. The resistance or lack of it was probably the only thing this round that annoyed me more than TBA. It was just indecisive and unwilling to make any form of effort to impact anything.

I am not pointing the finger at you or any individual alliance, as it is everyone outside of TBA's fault. Everyone seemed to be convinced that the round was over far before it was.


Why oh why are people always so naive about these things?? The resistance was 'poor' from your end because SG got battered and we were still too crap to kill them, omg we are teh n0000bz. From our perspective we had to work out who was in what wing, because you cannot take on 3 wings at once, you focus on one, take it out, then focus on another etc. Now when members are being swapped constantly it's so so difficult, every wave we sent they had new members defending them. We had 3-4 allies taking on the defence of 3 alliances way bigger than us.

Cyrus organised the resistance and he did a brilliant job, but would you have the motivation to fight an almost impossible fight against 3 wings? IF they were public, IF they didn't member swap then it wouldn't have been a problem. Don't get me wrong, I commend TBA for their resliliance, BUT that is why SG survived.

Indecisive: characterized by lack of decision and firmness.

Did I say it was easy? No

Did I question the effort made by Cyrus? No

Did I say anything about switching members? No

Did you defend your indecisiveness? No

The resistance failed due to it being unable to act on the powerblock early enough. Which is what I said above when I said you were "indecisive and unwilling". At no point did I even adress your counterclaim.

[Silence]

Did I ever say that WH and Chance formed a powerblock? I never once compared those two alliances to TBA. It's also not my fault that you were in a piss-poor resistance, and didn't properly organize with the other alliance. You had SG zeroed while you were out of range of most of inimical, and you STOPPED TRYING because we swapped a couple members with them. That's your failure, not ours.

Rofl, clearly you have never organised a resistance. Persuading people to send against the rank 1 ally is one thing, but persuading them to send against the rank 1 ally when they know one of the resistance allies will be retalled by 2 other alliances ranked higher than them is another thing. Yes, if it had been organised better, the resistance probably could have taken down SG within another day or two. But you seem to think that that's the end? That's the resistance over and successful?

Do you not understand that after SG had fallen and the resistance had lost some staff, that there were TWO MORE alliances bigger than SG to take down? Considering that a good successful resistance will usually take 3-5 days to take down an ally enough to hit individually and split targets etc, that's another 2 entire weeks worth of resisting before the whole of TBA would be taken down. And in that 2 weeks, SG would be free to attack and gain land again without being harmed as the resistance's efforts would be focused on the other two alliances. It would have been nigh on impossible to take down three alliances and keep them down. So before you jump on the "BUT ITS ALL YOUR FAULT - WE MADE A POWERBLOCK BUT YOU COULDNT KILL IT YOU ARE SO RUBBISH" bandwagon, maybe think next time. Resisting against one alliance is one thing, resisting against 3 is another.

You cannot really defend the incompetence of the resistance. The resistance or lack of it was probably the only thing this round that annoyed me more than TBA. It was just indecisive and unwilling to make any form of effort to impact anything.

I am not pointing the finger at you or any individual alliance, as it is everyone outside of TBA's fault. Everyone seemed to be convinced that the round was over far before it was.


Why oh why are people always so naive about these things?? The resistance was 'poor' from your end because SG got battered and we were still too crap to kill them, omg we are teh n0000bz. From our perspective we had to work out who was in what wing, because you cannot take on 3 wings at once, you focus on one, take it out, then focus on another etc. Now when members are being swapped constantly it's so so difficult, every wave we sent they had new members defending them. We had 3-4 allies taking on the defence of 3 alliances way bigger than us.

Cyrus organised the resistance and he did a brilliant job, but would you have the motivation to fight an almost impossible fight against 3 wings? IF they were public, IF they didn't member swap then it wouldn't have been a problem. Don't get me wrong, I commend TBA for their resliliance, BUT that is why SG survived.

Indecisive: characterized by lack of decision and firmness.

Did I say it was easy? No

Did I question the effort made by Cyrus? No

Did I say anything about switching members? No

Did you defend your indecisiveness? No

The resistance failed due to it being unable to act on the powerblock early enough. Which is what I said above when I said you were "indecisive and unwilling". At no point did I even adress your counterclaim.

You miss one key fundemental issue. How can one be decisive without being certain? So failing to address issues such as the ability to switch members made it impossible to *be* decisive.

The resistance *could* have been decisive but THEN would have been critisised for being innacurate. And what's the point in sending attacks on multiple wings?

With hindsight its easy to pick holes in actions. Where were you at the time? As you are obviously brilliance we could have used your fantastic insight *sighs*

Your logic fails Matthew. Your opinions are redundant as as I mentioned earlier, it didn't address fundemental issues as to *why* it was indecisive.


K thanks.