I don't understand the link. If JGWT was losing villages to Wisdom, he might have been gifting them. The WAR player was in MOJO, never Wisdom, so it isn't like he left Wisdom and then started losing villages to ROMA. Trying to link his losing villages to ROMA to showing that ROMA is being successful makes no sense. If Jason moore was the one losing villages, I could see a link, but he has taken 12 villages from ROMA and lost none. ROMA made a bad decision attacking their allies, and they are paying for it.
Here is the link you're missing:
- MOJO has been allied to Wisdom, fought on the same side against the same foes. cglynn has been a MOJO refugee.
- Jason has been a refugee from Wisdom when made his own tribe, thus, the two refugees fully including WAR to the scores as a tribe of refugees.
Thus getting caps against former MOJO players/WAR players are as much valid caps against your side as counting caps against ROMA against our side. Also, it's pretty similar to previous Wisdom/HaV statements saying you might be heavily losing against us, but you're winning against someone else (who we are not allied to) thus you're not in a deep sh... crap. Why on earth the same statement couldn't be perfectly applied to ROMA (they are losing against you but winning against a third party, which is holding links to both Wisdom and MOJO), thus, ultimately having caps against your side?
Where the whole argument over such caps (both HaV caps against ROMA and ROMA caps against WAR) is getting pointless is the simple fact that none of these can save these tribes. ROMA won't be saved by taking out WAR, as their main issue is HaV. HaV won't be saved by taking out ROMA, as their main issue is 13th, Tao and [BA]. This whole HaV vs ROMA and ROMA vs WAR is just an attempt of eye-washing.
Last edited by a moderator: