I can't believe people are complaining about the opponent spending PP when being attacked. That is literally the only good thing about P2W, that on top of making them miserable and draining their stamina in real life, you are also draining their bank account. One of my few pleasures left in the game is ruining players who have clearly put a lot of money into the game.
Good way of looking at it!
###
In case anyone's interested, I was looking at some figures earlier, and it seems that since the 18th of January TEA's net recruitment has been +2 million points, whereas their net size change has been +9 million points. For BiP the figures are +578k and +10.9 million respectively. By that measure, TEA is growing their accounts at only
68% the rate of BiP. The advantage of that approach, for them as cares about such things, is that it includes accounts which have left or quit both as losses to TEA and (if they were nobled) as gains to BiP.
Alternatively, looking at only at villages conquered, TEA's total conquests since 18/1 minus their losses to BiP are are 5.692 million points, while BiP's total conquests minus losses to TEA are 8.142 million points; by that measure TEA is growing at
70% the rate of BiP. The advantage of that approach is that it weighs conquest of good villages much more heavily than getting tiny villages then building them up.
The advantage of
either approach is that if indeed a vulnerable account like King Silva's was recruited partly to slow BiP down, those losses/gains are properly counted but kept in proper perspective.
Obviously TEA are still growing strong, but BiP are doing better still. Bit over two weeks into the war, so a significant result... but of course it's still only two weeks. (For comparison, over the past month TEA's growth has been 9.3%
faster than BiP's by the second method.)
And having written the phrase, I cannot resist...