World At War

[One Last Shot...]

Way to derail a meaningful thread with bunches of pointless statistics of dead tribes.

 

[pokemonEX.co.UK]

they arnt dead, ko3ata is actively defending against our attacks

 

[One Last Shot...]

they arnt dead, ko3ata is actively defending against our attacks

They aren't a part of the world war, as they are not working with either side in the war. And so, those statistics have no relevance to this topic.

 

[pokemonEX.co.UK]

ohh im sorry.

 

[DeletedUser]

On a side note, to compare W51 to any other world is utterly pointless as the difference in settings requires a different set of tactics. On that same note, I'd prefer war discussion be kept to world 52, even if ukawa drunk posts :icon_wink:

 

[pokemonEX.co.UK]

They aren't a part of the world war, as they are not working with either side in the war. And so, those statistics have no relevance to this topic.

the title doesnt say:

BUSH, SOHK vs MIKE, -SWAT-

it says world at war. which my stats has can go here and they are not pointless, as we are at war with them.

 

[One Last Shot...]

As you wish.

I've made a thread for the purpose of discussion of the Bush/SOHK, MIKE/-SWAT- war.

Feel free to continue posting up statistics of every player or tribe you happen to noble off from time to time on this one - as you so rightly pointed out, this is a thread that could be about any individual or tribe. The new thread can be about a topic that actually is of some interest to most people on the world

 

[DeletedUser97381]

ko3ata and phat are definitely part of the world war, I mean u've been using dunc's stats whenever you wanted to ... hypocrite much? lol

 

[One Last Shot...]

u've been using dunc's stats whenever you wanted to ... hypocrite much? lol

Duncansco co-ordinated and worked with us in an Op, and joined us at the same time. So, fairly evident that for the past month he's been working alongside us.

There's no hypocrisy in having someone who is working with the alliance in the statistics during the time he is co-ordinating with us, and not a player (kokata) who has never been working alongside Bush or SOHK, to the best of my knowledge. Fairly standard logic there.

Include people who are a part of one side of the world war. Don't include people who aren't. Simple, surely?

 

[DeletedUser97381]

that's total BS and everybody knows it :icon_wink: you can post stats in whichever manner that wld make you happy, as far as we're concerned anyone who's phat or ex-phat is right there with you, like one of you guys put it before, we see all of you with the same color on our maps


[spoil]but just for curiosity, is sgt not part of the world war either? or is that another exception to the rule? :lol:[/spoil]

 

[One Last Shot...]

If it's total bullshit, how come a member of Phat started trying to noble villages from me just before christmas when and after I solo-opped a CCH member near him? I even lost a village during a cross-nobling, when he was trying to stop me expanding in that region - so the proof there is easy enough to see. People on the same side don't deliberately try to attack each other :icon_rolleyes:

 

[DeletedUser]

If it's total bullshit, how come a member of Phat started trying to noble villages from me just before christmas when and after I solo-opped a CCH member near him? I even lost a village during a cross-nobling, when he was trying to stop me expanding in that region - so the proof there is easy enough to see. People on the same side don't deliberately try to attack each other :icon_rolleyes:

Did you not infact stack phat players ?

 

[One Last Shot...]

Did you not infact stack phat players ?

1 who was recruited.
and 1 who is a friend of mine.

We also have been attacked by Phat.

So, logically, it is impossible to put them on the same side as either tribe. It would also be a bit of statistical fixing to include Duncansco for anything beyond this year, as Duncansco only began working with Bush and SOHK in 2012. And sgt@arms I do not believe has worked with either tribe?


You have been supporting warrior1978, or at least MIKE has for sure. We wouldn't be including him in the statistics for this war either - as it is merely MIKE and -SWAT- versus SOHK and Bush.

The -SWAT- + MIKE vs Phat war was, and is, a separate one.

 

[DeletedUser]

1 who was recruited.
and 1 who is a friend of mine.

We also have been attacked by Phat.

So, logically, it is impossible to put them on the same side as either tribe. It would also be a bit of statistical fixing to include Duncansco for anything beyond this year, as Duncansco only began working with Bush and SOHK in 2012. And sgt@arms I do not believe has worked with either tribe?


You have been supporting warrior1978, or at least MIKE has for sure. We wouldn't be including him in the statistics for this war either - as it is merely MIKE and -SWAT- versus SOHK and Bush.

The -SWAT- + MIKE vs Phat war was, and is, a separate one.

It is a well known fact you supported both duncansco and sgt@arms so really.

As for stats these are fabricated already -SWAT- is its own tribe no other tribes statistic's should be piled on to -SWAT- list our stats on there own is all i ask nothing less nothing more.

 

[One Last Shot...]

As for stats these are fabricated already -SWAT- is its own tribe no other tribes statistic's should be piled on to -SWAT- list our stats on there own is all i ask nothing less nothing more.

MIKE is your ally. Just like SOHK is ours. All that needs to be said. You joined the war with MIKE ingame, so you shouldn't expect to not have them included here, as we aren't just focusing on -SWAT-, but the entire alliance.

 

[DeletedUser97381]

oh for cryin' out loud who cares? there's you and there's us ... not like stats are gonna sway the general public ... we are the general public and heck only a handful of ppl from that "general public" even check the externals ... so put stats whatever way you want to put them and we'll put them whatever way we want to put them ... what's the big deal rly?

once phat started losing and u took in their members that put you in the same boat as them, we've always seen it that way, I honestly don't care if the ones you left out to die had a falling out with you and sent a cpl of attacks your way ... you're all the same and are to be counted that way :icon_wink:

 

[One Last Shot...]

If you wish to do so, by all means do.

I just don't see any logic, or point, in including what are essentially dead tribes such as Smile and Phat who died out in past wars. Or excluding tribes actively involved in this "world war" so to speak. I'd like to see the reasoning behind such a viewpoint, if you would be so kind as to humor me with said logical explanation that I am unable to see

 

[DeletedUser97381]

if you would be so kind as to humor me with said logical explanation that I am unable to see

technically this war is a continuation of our war with phat, since you took in the refugees ... so you can call it a past war but for us it's the same one.

^ that's the last of me being kind and humorous for the day tho, I'm too sleepy for this crap :icon_redface:

 

[DeletedUser]

technically this war is a continuation of our war with phat, since you took in the refugees ... so you can call it a past war but for us it's the same one.

^ that's the last of me being kind and humorous for the day tho, I'm too sleepy for this crap :icon_redface:

Just in a tribe with active leadership and actual players, you know, playing.

The big, big difference is quite clear. Phat ain't fighting back, unless sat or one that is an exception to the rule.

 

[DeletedUser97381]

well if we put players that are inactive in a separate tribe since they don't fight back, would you be willing to not count them as part of the war?

with dunc and sgt, 40% of phat was an "exception to the rule", is bush coordinating with 40% of sohk or vice versa? let's not kid ourselves here, you don't need to coordinate with every member of a tribe to be considered on the same side of the war as them. And like I said, bush and sohk joined phat's side of the war when they recruited almost all their members.