DeletedUser
Guest
Ye but one side lost a war mate to the other side. And please don't give me "it was because of internal issues" we all know you had some problems but it was increased with your war with Ouzo.
- Status
Ye but one side lost a war mate to the other side. And please don't give me "it was because of internal issues" we all know you had some problems but it was increased with your war with Ouzo.
DeletedUser
Guest
Way to read between the lines their bud :icon_rolleyes: i said that even if axes was considered a failure, it is still only one war, you said i lost all wars i was involved in. This is not about axes war being a failure or not, obviously my opinion will be different to yours thats a given. It is about you saying that i have failed at every war, and that you have done nothing significant.
And for the record a failed war does not end in an NAP, it ends in a tribe disbanding a tribe being nobled out, or a tribe surrendering and accepting the conditions of the attacking tribe.
We did not surrender we did not disband and we were not nobled out. Like i said the stats show it was bad for ouzo i wont deny it, axes did a damn good job, but if you and your double teaming friends did not decide to jump on us while we were looking north i am sure we would of turned it around and given axes a better fight when most of our teams had better footing in k34.
Just remember kristianmd you can only pull the ' our tribe had internal issues we did not disband because of war card ' once in each world. It is not re-usable, so i am really excited to see what excuse you use this time.
DeletedUser
Guest
Oh my... did they change that rule? :icon_confused::icon_surprised:
DeletedUser
Guest
That`s where you are wrong. A failed war means that you lost a lot more villages that you took.
Well see that`s where you are wrong. Ouzo did disband. The players went to OCD. Similair to how MaccyD disbanded and the members went to SCC. Would you say that while we were in sixth we were still at war with you?
Oh, and you can`t tell me why MaccyD disbanded, I`m the one who disbanded it. :icon_wink:
DeletedUser21386
Guest
^ errr.. the orginal Ouzo (even before the merge with Sexy) was dying from inactivity.. hell, it was dead the moment the merge with Sexy happened (thats before the MaccyD and Dsqd war). Look at the ranks of OCD and tell me how many of the orginial members are still around.. not many at all.
DeletedUser
Guest
Jeez stop all the bitching guys.
Both sides called for a cease fire in in the war of OCD vs. AXES because after OCD was formed there were like 2 takes on Axes part and 1 on OCD's part in like 3 days meaning the war would help neither side.
MaccyD essentially lost the war for whatever reason and the ESCAPE players ran but were lifted as refugees by the Ouzo leaders back then. OCD isn't Ouzo though because as said before it was full of inactives and dead weights and man does it feel good to have them lifted off our shoulders. Anyways why don't both sides show their skill on the battle field I want to see what happens.
Both sides called for a cease fire in in the war of OCD vs. AXES because after OCD was formed there were like 2 takes on Axes part and 1 on OCD's part in like 3 days meaning the war would help neither side.
MaccyD essentially lost the war for whatever reason and the ESCAPE players ran but were lifted as refugees by the Ouzo leaders back then. OCD isn't Ouzo though because as said before it was full of inactives and dead weights and man does it feel good to have them lifted off our shoulders. Anyways why don't both sides show their skill on the battle field I want to see what happens.
DeletedUser
Guest
thats where you are wrong, by your synopsis (nice big word not sure if it is applicable but i will use it anyway to attempt to make me look cool and intelligent) if a tribe declares war takes 10 villages in the first day befor the enemy is even really aware they are at war, and then disbands. They have won!?? haha what a joke:lol: effectively they took more villages , but they disbanded befor proper counter actions were in place.
so tell us why you disbanded it, and then you might be able to redeem your ' our tribe had internal issues we did not disband because of war card ' so that you can use it for this war.
Randalthor78
Active Member
- Reaction score
- 4
To KristianMD and The Cracker I would like to say that you are both right and you are both wrong.
To decide who is a winner and who is a looser in a war we need to look at both gained territory and who is still around.
Lets take Ouzo as the example and 3 of there wars:
Ouzo vs MaccyD
I would consider this to be a Ouzo win because they gained territory in K45 and MaccyD did disband due to internal issues or not the fact that they disbanded led to Ouzo gaining more control and that MaccyD could not get it back
Ouzo vs DSQD
I would not consider this a war even so you would not get a win on this one.
The first one was like a declaration and they disbanded so soon after that you did not ave time to plan one op even. the second one ended in a merger so cant get a win on that one either.
Ouzo vs Axes
I would give axes the win here because they set out to control K34 and did so with ease and it does not matter that they did not go for a total kill on ouzo because the did get the lad area they wanted and Ouzo that turned into OCD did not want to fight for what they lost in K34.
To decide who is a winner and who is a looser in a war we need to look at both gained territory and who is still around.
Lets take Ouzo as the example and 3 of there wars:
Ouzo vs MaccyD
I would consider this to be a Ouzo win because they gained territory in K45 and MaccyD did disband due to internal issues or not the fact that they disbanded led to Ouzo gaining more control and that MaccyD could not get it back
Ouzo vs DSQD
I would not consider this a war even so you would not get a win on this one.
The first one was like a declaration and they disbanded so soon after that you did not ave time to plan one op even. the second one ended in a merger so cant get a win on that one either.
Ouzo vs Axes
I would give axes the win here because they set out to control K34 and did so with ease and it does not matter that they did not go for a total kill on ouzo because the did get the lad area they wanted and Ouzo that turned into OCD did not want to fight for what they lost in K34.
DeletedUser
Guest
your coments do make sense randalthor and i agree with you except for this part.
By your estimation because axes reached their goal they won the war? what was Ouzo's goal in this war? you did not consider the other side of it. Because you do not know Ouzo's goal you assume they did not have one or have not achieved one and therefor have failed. So your theory on Ouzo losing the war is an assumption and not fact. (is that making sense? let me know and i will clarify it :icon_wink
Randalthor78
Active Member
- Reaction score
- 4
your coments do make sense randalthor and i agree with you except for this part.
By your estimation because axes reached their goal they won the war? what was Ouzo's goal in this war? you did not consider the other side of it. Because you do not know Ouzo's goal you assume they did not have one or have not achieved one and therefor have failed. So your theory on Ouzo losing the war is an assumption and not fact. (is that making sense? let me know and i will clarify it :icon_wink
Out from this i had Ouzos goal at keeping there territory and/or grow in K34.
But then again i have never been a member of Ouzo so i dont know what there goal was.
DeletedUser
Guest
I agree with your post, all but the AXES war. We were literally hours away from launching our coordinated offensive and it was called off at the very last moment. At that time, the stats had evened out. AXES had more noblings in total, but we had stopped the rot and we were fully rebuilt and ready for the next wave of coordinated attacks.
It was then a matter of launching the next offensive and the war would have turned. People forget that Mohua was happy to have a NAP put in place. Why? Mohua is not silly. He knew that they were low on defense and we had full nukes again. This meant a massive offensive was heading his way with no way to hold it back.
Ultimately, AXES won the war as they got to hold their homelands and they removed Ouzo, but another offensive would have meant serious trouble for AXES. In essence, ~SCC~ won the war for AXES by making us call off our offensive.
DeletedUser
Guest
If I remember your last op on axes you had like 5 caps and you gave Axes big ODD boost. Ofcourse, the next op would even things out. To bad you called it off at the last minute :icon_rolleyes:
DeletedUser
Guest
Too bad your tribe will be feeling that offensive now...
How is that noble train village coming along? Got it built yet?
DeletedUser
Guest
jeez this one better not be called off I was lining up my trains and everything then I got word to stop so I did so now I have even more fun toys to play with *looks at SCC and Escape*
DeletedUser
Guest
Nah, not there yet. How about you, nobled any 1.8K villages?
DeletedUser
Guest
DeletedUser
Guest
Your entire sentence makes you look like a fool lol.
And it said 3 tribes when I commented. Nice edit job to whomever did so. ;3
DeletedUser
Guest
Ouzo lost 50ish players lol. And we rimmed cb5, escher and gbfan4 (they use to be in one of those tribes that later merged into ouzo).
DeletedUser
Guest
I am on ~SCC~/Escape's side on this war tbh but i have to bring up the fact that cb5 quit before you rimmed him......
He wouldnt have gone so easy if he had have wanted to stay :icon_wink:
Kriegselend
Guest
Hmmm, a lots been said and I couldn't continue the arguement even if I wanted to. So I'll stick to this bit:
Wardyuc, you say I joined Smack! with the intentions of nobling out Sir Victor? Puh-lease.
When I joined Smack!, I had no intentions of nobling Sir Victor. However, after being shown proof that Sir Victor had tried to frame me as the person who supposedly "hacked" his account when he dismissed 2/3rds of the tribe. I decided, that, heck one way to quit the world would be to noble him out. My co-player and I were bored to tears and I hadn't been able to farm in weeks, if you do remember that. So we decided to quit the world by taking out Sir Vic. Of course, the attack failed due to the amount of support he got in such a short amount of time. -.-" But it is not the point, you and/or him, had attempted to frame me as the hacker of your account. So don't go around and say I'm two-faced when you and sir vic were the ones pretending to be my friends!
As for the other related backstabbing accusations. Please show me one time, where I have backstabbed an ally. Just one time, show me how I have backstabbed a tribe ally and I will quit w41 instantly. Why do I ask you of this? Because I know you can't. I hold tribal diplomacy in a very high sense. Once a tribe backstabs another tribe, whether it be ally or NAP, they are permanently seered with a black mark on their diplomacy. Only a fool would trust the tribe again after they backstabbed someone. So no, I am not a backstabber, I have although, been backstabbed on many, many occasions.
Wardyuc, you say I joined Smack! with the intentions of nobling out Sir Victor? Puh-lease.
When I joined Smack!, I had no intentions of nobling Sir Victor. However, after being shown proof that Sir Victor had tried to frame me as the person who supposedly "hacked" his account when he dismissed 2/3rds of the tribe. I decided, that, heck one way to quit the world would be to noble him out. My co-player and I were bored to tears and I hadn't been able to farm in weeks, if you do remember that. So we decided to quit the world by taking out Sir Vic. Of course, the attack failed due to the amount of support he got in such a short amount of time. -.-" But it is not the point, you and/or him, had attempted to frame me as the hacker of your account. So don't go around and say I'm two-faced when you and sir vic were the ones pretending to be my friends!
As for the other related backstabbing accusations. Please show me one time, where I have backstabbed an ally. Just one time, show me how I have backstabbed a tribe ally and I will quit w41 instantly. Why do I ask you of this? Because I know you can't. I hold tribal diplomacy in a very high sense. Once a tribe backstabs another tribe, whether it be ally or NAP, they are permanently seered with a black mark on their diplomacy. Only a fool would trust the tribe again after they backstabbed someone. So no, I am not a backstabber, I have although, been backstabbed on many, many occasions.
- Status
