Sich, some of those were some great points which i would agree with. But the ones i disagree with:
I *do* know how to "bounce armies". You just haven't seen me doing so against you. For a number of reasons. But i have done so, in the past. With at least passable skill. In different tactical situations. For example, when i waged war on smerge, and was kinda attacking two of them (iamintangible and later a bees fellow, both roughly my own size). And bees counterattacked me. I indeed used limited local mobile defence, to defend against the same tactical series of attacks (many attacks, over the course of a half day or so, to multiple targets of mine). Bees faced the same troops of mine, at multiple locations, at multiple times. Because he planned his attacks poorly enough that he left me with enough time to do so, to move them around quickly enough. But you see, this situation i am in, does not call for the sort of tactics you *think* i should be using against you.
And second, your claim that i *only* capp against crappy people that i have made quit, simply isn't true. I took vills from skilled (semi at very least) and active players. Your claim simply isn't true. At very least, not "entirely" true. *Only* being the functional word. Once you said "only", you proved yourself wrong. But you *are* correct that more of my noblings occured against enemies that my *proper use of long term economic destruction of the enemy* had first caused to quit or go relatively inactive. Perhaps it could be said that i use high activity level and good tactics, which allows me to get by with no or little skill? No logic in developing a muscle you never will use.
Tomato, tomatoe. You do it your way, i'll do it mine. I had success. You use skill? And i'll use better tactical strategy. Should i cite an example? You yourself, sich, backtimed me once, fairly recently. Very expertly timed. The same second my noble and escort, that i had sent against you, that had allready helped capp a couple of vills in your possession, and eventually capped a ville himself... you expertly backtimed that noble, so that i had less than a second to dodge. Yes, great "skill". Good on you.
But your foolishness, that helps me illustrate how i use better tactics and less skill? Was that the tiny nuke you sent, was so small, that the actual *escort* for the noble (it was over 1,000 swords), could easily crush your backtime, even assuming i had a level 0 wall (which it wasn't, was much higher than that), and you had +25% luck. And zero other defenders (and i can assure you, not only did that village itself have well over 10,000 other swords defending, but because it was a noble ville, i had like 5D or so stacked there, so that even 10 full nukes would have been useless against it. But my point is.... as you sent your "skilled" backtime, you didn't even have the common tactical sense, to know that the teenie partial nuke you were using, had zero chance of success. Because you would have seen the report, of the size of the escort for the noble. The escort alone, was all that was needed. But you sent it "expertly" anyways.
Stupidly. But expertly.
So perhaps we could agree, that you lack tactical skill, but good tribal wars backtiming skill?
Same with your "inroads" into nobling my vills. As a second example of your tactical stupidity. Your first few dozen or so capps against me. You carefully selected offensive vills, and spread like wildfire taking only them. Fine.
But tactically, didn't realize that, this presented a great many tactical flaws. First, you were stupid enough to not stack more than about 2-3 of them. If it were me? I would have been stacking all of them with at LEAST 3D or so. Before i progressed any further. Second, the defensive techs would be low at ALL of them. Making it even easier for me to counterattack. And third, not even bothering to rebuild walls at most of them. And fourth, leaving tons of large D stacks, at my D vills all surrounding your new acquistions, without clearing them out. And D stacks, swords and HC at least (though not spears), counterattack decently well. As you learned at great expense at my hands soon after.
So, you invited your own losses. Due to poor tactical decisions.
May i say you have greater game skills than me? Yes i will. But i witness you making huge tactical blunders. Many of them. All the time.
Tomato, tomatoe. We each have our flaws.
And on top of those things, when forg tried to salvage the situation for you, i hosed the two of you. I'd take a ville from you, see his stacks of D coming to reinforce you, intentionally leave the D techs crappy and the walls at zero, and sent my own nukes, staggered at intervals, as his D arrived, to attack myself. His troops. My ville. So, while tactically counterattacking, i efficiently hosed a ton of forg D, especially his HC which were naturally most of what he was sending to you. This happened at several locations. I forget, was it 10D of his that i hosed in total, at minimal cost to myself? 20D? Whatever. I forget, but it was a lot. And i was getting great "ratio" losses. Like, losing a quarter of a nuke, to kill a full D of his.
Knowing all of this, i seriously considered counterattacking forg as well. As i knew his own D in the area was getting depleted. But that is another story, as to why i chose not to (see my comments below). Your piss poor tactical decisions, nearly got your mate into trouble in that area as well.
As i have been saying all along and my profile states, i am using "different tactics" and philosophy against you guys. I don't even bother to use common sense tactics like recapping. Other than the couple dozen or whatever i did against you. And even that, i actually regret. Yes, i *regret* that success against you.
Why? Hard for me to explain this in a way i think you will understand... but for each capp i put against you (or any of you), costs me more packets than it is worth.
Given my long term goals, why would i pay 1,400 packets (earlier) or 1,100 (roughly) now, to recap a ville, when i can spend 100 packets later on, to cap a barb that you otherwise would not have to take?
Why spend 1,400 packets, to force you to (yet again) take a 10K or even 6K point ville, when i can spend 100 packets later to force you to take a 1K barb?
You are STILL not realizing the tactics i employ. My goals here. You don't see me fighting in the way you yourself would fight, so assume i am having no success or using any skill of any sort.
And to step back a bit sich.... its funny, but really, all your "good points" you just argued, actually support what iiznub said. And i myself after said.
Here is what a gentleman might do sich. A reasonable person. Agree with iiznub. But "add" that fundamental is a crappy player. Yes, had great success (which is all iiznub or myself said). But lacking in many skills you yourself (and a great many game greats, some of which you mention) have and had. I guess what i am saying is, you should have stopped after you said "imo fundamental is anything but an elite player." What you said after that went too far.
And meanwhile, now that you forced me to say it, concede that you are a tactical idiot. Now that you made me go there. Though i had been biting my tongue up until now.
Post Script addition: In the interests of being fair, and bearing in mind how i attack your tactical skills above.. i will say this. Your focusing of your cats on my smithies and academies is actually i think tactically sound. Long term. All of AXES should be hosing my smithies and academies. But you are nearly the only one hitting them at all. Render me incapable of storing packets. Long term, you guys (and gals) save yourselves a ton of eating later. Common sense tactical strategy, given what i have stated publicly will be my future tactics. Yet oddly, you seem to be about the only one doing so. For whatever reason. Lucky choice?
