PCP vs *RS*

[himotep]

The point, as you apparently could not conceive from reading prior posts, was that *RS* now Unknown, HAD to noble smaller villages than 4k points, because your tribe had few. In this case, 1/7th or 10 of your current 70 villages are over 4k points. I'm not going into logistics such as location either as I really don't care to put that much time in it. On the other hand, Unknown, formerly *RS*, has approximately 33 villages over 4k points with many more just under the 4k mark. Obviously just to hit a few of these would mean you would be able to exceed in the conquer points category.

:icon_eek:. Well, aren't we just so nubbish for taking better villages :icon_redface:


Side 1:
Tribes: PCP
Players:
Side 2:
Tribes: [-.-]
Players: erykroom
Timeframe: Forever
Total conquers against opposite side:
Side 1: 2
Side 2: 5
Difference: 3

Points value of total conquers against opposite side:
Side 1: 8,328
Side 2: 12,871
Difference: 4,543

/stat posting win :icon_cool:

 

[DeletedUser23191]

The point, as you apparently could not conceive from reading prior posts, was that *RS* now Unknown, HAD to noble smaller villages than 4k points, because your tribe had few. In this case, 1/7th or 10 of your current 70 villages are over 4k points. I'm not going into logistics such as location either as I really don't care to put that much time in it. On the other hand, Unknown, formerly *RS*, has approximately 33 villages over 4k points with many more just under the 4k mark. Obviously just to hit a few of these would mean you would be able to exceed in the conquer points category.

Oh, I see what you're saying ... we're noobs for taking better villages. I get it now, thanks for clearing it up for us dumb PCP player. :icon_rolleyes:

 

[DeletedUser]

No you are noobs for not being able to grow your villages at the same pace as us, I thought that was pretty obvious.

If you noble 3 x 5k point villages for argument sake and we noble 5 x 3k point villages then we have both nobled 15k points from each others tribe, however with that said, we have still nobled more of your players opposed to that which you have nobled from us = we are winning village / noble ratio.

I didn't realise points won wars these days. Was there an update I didn't notice that stated points of nobled villages = winner?

Basically you cheer because you have nobled 2 villages worth 8k points... Well if your tribe had all 4k point villages like ours, then I guess we would have nobled 5 villages worth 20k points.

So please cheer that you noble villages with greater points than we did. We will cheer that we have nobled more of your tribe than you have of ours.

Who do you think is winning? Those who nobled the "big point" villages or those who nobled the most villages?

Please justify your logic if it differs from mine.

Regards,
LordAOE

PS. If you are going to come back with some childish remarks I won't even bother with you. I have an immense disdain for small people.

 

[DeletedUser]

The stats show PCP is losing ....

edit:

Reading LordAOE post i have to agree nobling more villages shows the opponenets failed to defend more villages. It also shows they are not nobling abandons/easy targets but attacking enemies. Nobling few high point village is not an excuse to not noble more than 2 villages. If you are not nobling because of low points you can at least show reports that you are farming those low point villages.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't think so. There will be a MAJOR turn in events based on 1 persons decision. : ) . I am keeping it a secret and wont mention it if it is a negative response. But if it's a positive response I'll mention it, then [-.-] will be stuffed. : ) :axemen::axemen::axemen:

 

[DeletedUser]

Its all good and well to throw up fanciful ideologies. I wouldn't be talking about "possibilities" though, I prefer to know my hand before I play the game (yes, that's an analogy)

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't think so. There will be a MAJOR turn in events based on 1 persons decision. : ) . I am keeping it a secret and wont mention it if it is a negative response. But if it's a positive response I'll mention it, then [-.-] will be stuffed. : ) :axemen::axemen::axemen:

No more hugs :icon_confused: .Using diplomacy to gang up would be good move but if PCP can take on unknow alone that would show w37 that PCP is a decent tribe. Anyways as i said diplomacy is a smart move and part of tw. Tribe failing to do so will fail eventually. Could this turn into a big war ? i guess that would depend on unknown diplomacy move...

 

[DeletedUser]

All we need is 2 yes answers then it is 100% bye bye [-.-].

That is no possibilty. It is the future of [-.-]. : )

Edit: We have are ranked 1 in K45 where [-.-] is also located. Which could become very troublesome.

 

[DeletedUser]

"All we need is 2 yes answers, then its is 100% bye bye" - Sounds like a possibility to me.

This statement from you is not a one-way event. There are the possibilities of 2 events transpiring.

Do you not know what possibilities are?

 

[DeletedUser]

Nah... I usually tune out when we do that in maths. : )

 

[DeletedUser]

Already claiming defeat from this 2-way banter? Tsk. I understand you have seen what you say is flawed and now have no way to revert this to your favor. I will let you go back to your corner.

Thanks for trying.

~ LordAOE

 

[DeletedUser]

Naww... Man I didn't even get to use my Krow.bar. : (

But I can say that many members of | RA | do wish to help out PCP with K45.

 

[DeletedUser]

Since I left out [-.-] in my top twenty map;

 

[DeletedUser]

WoW, PCP don't have many members in K54. They could struggle unless the K53 support members with good amounts.

 

[DeletedUser]

I've never seen PCP's name written out in such style o_o thanks Admiral.

No you are noobs for not being able to grow your villages at the same pace as us, I thought that was pretty obvious.

If you noble 3 x 5k point villages for argument sake and we noble 5 x 3k point villages then we have both nobled 15k points from each others tribe, however with that said, we have still nobled more of your players opposed to that which you have nobled from us = we are winning village / noble ratio.

I didn't realise points won wars these days. Was there an update I didn't notice that stated points of nobled villages = winner?

Basically you cheer because you have nobled 2 villages worth 8k points... Well if your tribe had all 4k point villages like ours, then I guess we would have nobled 5 villages worth 20k points.

So please cheer that you noble villages with greater points than we did. We will cheer that we have nobled more of your tribe than you have of ours.

Who do you think is winning? Those who nobled the "big point" villages or those who nobled the most villages?

Please justify your logic if it differs from mine.

Regards,
LordAOE

PS. If you are going to come back with some childish remarks I won't even bother with you. I have an immense disdain for small people.

Bragging rights wise, yes you are winning. However, does it really matter whether your villages we conquered were higher points because you were able to grow them faster? Either way, we get better villages, that can be put to much better use than the small villages you have been nobling. The reason we have them is of little concern; The fact that we have them is something worth cheering for. You can not argue logically based off what would've happened; To be honest, you are not that smart.

Thus I have no need to justify my logic; The laws of common sense need no to be justified to those who attempt to defy it. I utterly despise failures who believe they are smarter than others, when the act of revealing their high-horsed logic is in fact child's play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Btw, anyone have any idea why *RS* changed their name? My personal theory is that their leaders were struggling to spell "Rabid Squirrels" (They spelled it Rabid Squarels) correctly so much that they just said "screw it, let's changed it to something we don't need english skills for" and thus "[-.-]" was born.

Any other thoughts?

 

[Wertin701]

I agree with Jax on that subject...

 

[DeletedUser]

Bragging rights wise, yes you are winning. However, does it really matter whether your villages we conquered were higher points because you were able to grow them faster?

Yes it matters when your tribe is using it as the basis of their argument to claim "victory" at the current point in time.

Either way, we get better villages, that can be put to much better use than the small villages you have been nobling. The reason we have them is of little concern; The fact that we have them is something worth cheering for.

You get better villages yes, that you can put to better use, correct also. However that is only if your tribe uses the villages correctly - which I highly doubt.

You can not argue logically based off what would've happened; To be honest, you are not that smart.

I only used that as an example, not as something that would have happened (primarily because your tribe doesn't have many villages of said size, it's ok you guys are trying your best, so kudos for that), I guess it's ok for your tribe to use what would happen though, right? Double standard much?

Thus I have no need to justify my logic; The laws of common sense need no to be justified to those who attempt to defy it. I utterly despise failures who believe they are smarter than others, when the act of revealing their high-horsed logic is in fact child's play.

That's because there is no logic to what you say. Common sense is something I've put forward, you haven't yet, but that is also ok as you have tried your best.

To say you "utterly despise failures who believe they are smarter than others" would mean you despise yourself. You take yourself to be a smarter person than I. That is quite evident from how highly you speak of yourself as displayed though the line "Thus I have no need to justify my logic". Why is that? Is it because you can not? I justified my logic and it is clear and concise. The reason why I ask for you to justify your logic if it differs from mine is to see how you percieve things, nothing more.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Btw, anyone have any idea why *RS* changed their name? My personal theory is that their leaders were struggling to spell "Rabid Squirrels" (They spelled it Rabid Squarels) correctly so much that they just said "screw it, let's changed it to something we don't need english skills for" and thus "[-.-]" was born.

Any other thoughts?

Your attempt of a cheap-shot makes you look like a very small person. Any respect as an individual I had for you is now gone. Pathetic.

Just on a side note, your English isn't 100% either jax.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes it matters when your tribe is using it as the basis of their argument to claim "victory" at the current point in time.

And when we have we claimed victory? You see, you can't argue with things that didn't actually happen, either.

You get better villages yes, that you can put to better use, correct also. However that is only if your tribe uses the villages correctly - which I highly doubt.

Your own opinion is not an argument, as it is not a fact nor standard.

I only used that as an example, not as something that would have happened (primarily because your tribe doesn't have many villages of said size, it's ok you guys are trying your best, so kudos for that), I guess it's ok for your tribe to use what would happen though, right? Double standard much?

What are you trying to say? Spit it out in a sentence, not little broken down fragments. Then we can actually understand your point.

That's because there is no logic to what you say. Common sense is something I've put forward, you haven't yet, but that is also ok as you have tried your best.

There is logic to what I say; The whole existence of the argument you just tried to make means you are trying to side step what is fact: And the fact is, we nobled better villages. You can't deny it, you can explain and excuse it, but you can not nullify it, other than attempting to defy Common Sense.

I remember trying to explain this to you on in-game mail, and it was frustrating how long it took to get it into your skull, and in the end we just walked around in circles again, because your capability for understanding perspective and logic is minimal. I guess this is going to go in the same direction.

To say you "utterly despise failures who believe they are smarter than others" would mean you despise yourself. You take yourself to be a smarter person than I. That is quite evident from how highly you speak of yourself as displayed though the line

Wrong, I despite failures who consider themselves smarter, when they certainly are not. Thus I do not despise myself.

"Thus I have no need to justify my logic". Why is that? Is it because you can not? I justified my logic and it is clear and concise. The reason why I ask for you to justify your logic if it differs from mine is to see how you percieve things, nothing more.

Your is not justified, because you have given no justification; Saying it is justified and attaching some common positive adjectives does not mean it is justified (And that is all you have done to justify it).

Mine is justified due to, once again, the laws of Common Sense; Where when something is fact, the only way to disprove it is through counter-example (Which you have not provided), and not counter-argument (Which you have been trying so hard to provide).

Your attempt of a cheap-shot makes you look like a very small person. Any respect as an individual I had for you is now gone. Pathetic.

Just on a side note, your English isn't 100% either jax.

The whole "My respect for you is gone" is a very non commital and flexible argument (And a cheap shot in itself); It also has no effect on me when it is utilized by someone on the opposing side. Try again. Oh, and by the way, I don't actually care if you consider me small; The same way a gardener is indifferent to an ant.

 

[DeletedUser]

When I am at home, I will sit down and deconstruct every invalid point you have portrayed.

Also, this whole "common sense" argument is nullified, when is common sense common?

There is logic to what I say; The whole existence of the argument you just tried to make means you are trying to side step what is fact: And the fact is, we nobled better villages. You can't deny it, you can explain and excuse it, but you can not nullify it, other than attempting to defy Common Sense.

I have admitted you nobled better villages than we did, the reason for that wasn't anything other than the fact your tribe doesn't have villages of that calibre, so naturally we would have to noble worse villages, that or wait for your tribe to build them up to the same point levels as us.

Thats pretty logical and straight forward.

I remember trying to explain this to you on in-game mail, and it was frustrating how long it took to get it into your skull, and in the end we just walked around in circles again, because your capability for understanding perspective and logic is minimal. I guess this is going to go in the same direction.

Oh you mean that in-game banter we had where it took you approx 50 messages back and forth to realize I was playing you for the fool you are? Oh you mean that mail. I remember now. Yes this will go in the same manner, but only because you need to believe your lies and make others believe your tribe is doing better than it actually is.

 

[DeletedUser]

Oh and just a thought...

Your whole argument is your tribe is doing better than ours because you have nobled villages of greater points than us (even though accumulated points of all villages we have nobled off you is still higher than the accumulated points of all villages you have nobled off us), correct?

So does that mean, in your eyes if Tribe A nobles 1 (one) 12k point village and Tribe B nobles 100 3k point villages that Tribe A is winning the war? Basically thats what you are saying in all of your posts by saying your tribe has nobled better villages.

Don't come on the forum saying outlandish remarks like "common sense" and "I have logic" if you are not willing to back them up with actual evidence.

I can see you are a stubborn person who only thinks they are right, while I am flexible in my train of thought... as long as you can prove you argument to be substanciated.