It would suggest their stance and their strategy to win the game was based on the fact that they could count on the people in the east to beat each other and they walk in and win the game. You have to admit it is a great strategy. You kill each other and they move in and mop up.
Sure, good enough strategy, if not common.
I would have to disagree with you about other tribes being better than Apoc as they won the world.
You're missing the big picture. Apoc was not alone. Wherever Apoc was, you could be sure Apoc-F and BA were always there as well. And, before the end phase, Apoc (known then as Apoc-D) had Apoc-C, F, W, R, H, and the BA family. Apoc as one tribe may have gotten most of the credit as the winning tribe (being the largest tribe in the alliance) but how much help did they have along the way? See my above list and you'll know. It was never just Apoc, it was always the entire Apoc Alphabet.
I disagree. If you would have combined to fight Apoc and then beat them and went your seperate ways it would not be viewed as hugging. When facing long odds you must do what needs to be done to beat those odds. The looming thought of Apoc winning the world should have been enough to let people put aside their differences to meet a bigger threat.
You can disagree with me all you want. I posted the truth, its up to the readers whether they believe it or not.
Aggression would
not help MM. Sure, a couple players maybe, but when is that ever enough? Besides, Aggression had a war going on with BA. (I know, BA at war with someone other than themselves, quite shocking, really)
On my world our enemies couldn't stand each other. They fought amongst themselves. At every turn they would go after each other. We knew this and we took advantage of it. When they were fighting we would run an op on both of the fronts we had with them and before you knew it they were losing villages without a fight. There were too focused on each other to see the bigger danger.
Well, the eastern leaders did not like eachother. At all. Perhaps Apoc saw this and started moving in. Sure, good enough strategy. And when you have hordes of players on your side, and will not fight someone unless you outnumber them 10 to 1, I suppose it helps, doesn't it?
It is my assumption about the respect they had because almost every thread about the best players or leaders has quite a few Apoc Dukes in it. Zain and Davidemeh always seem to be mentioned by not only the enemy but Apoc as well. Is my assumption wrong?
Honestly, Apoc whored out so many leadership positions, I still don't know half of their leaders. :icon_redface:
Zain is an incredible player, and a good leader. If you were looking for the best leader in Apoc, then you were looking for Zurtle. Apoc wouldn't have been possible without him, its been said many times. But, he saw the light and left the horde. That was quite late into the game though. It was still pretty much a given who the winners were. I've heard Poolboy was a respected leader as well. David was a great player, of that there is no question. But leader? I haven't heard enough about him as a leader to know, where I have heard much about other leaders in the UA.
So Wolfhunt1 ran the entire show? There were no barons or anyone else that did anything? I find it hard to believe that a Duke of the winning tribe could go rogue after 3 years of playing....now mind you this is just a guess on my part.
He'll tell you otherwise, but after Andrew, Wolfhunt was the one, active leader. It has been admitted that there was a drastic activity drop in the UA during the ladder stages of the world.
I think even you will agree that if they were so upset that they should have tried to have done something or said something when the world was still a few months from being shut down.
Yup, I do agree. It seemed strange, even to me, that they started bitching after it was all over. If you ask me, they had very good reason to, but the timing was way off.