The Resistance

the nemesis123

Guest
I am sorry to be the only one here to say that your analysis are a complete fail. Why? Because you didnt include Infamy who is also attacking us and i have reports to show.
So, pls be kind and incluse Infamy on those statistics, then we talk... till then, nice job but it is irrelevant. (no need to leave out the elephant)

and, on another note..you forgot to mention on "other factors" that we are hitted from others, aswell....like FARM. so, there is more pressure on us than u included in those statistics.
As far as I am aware at least, Infamy are not at war with you yet. I don't play the world but I haven't seen a significant ODA rise or exchange in conquers on their end yet. I suppose they are 1-0 up against you in the last 24 hours, it seems it was a crossnoble though. That said, being in TEA you are on the receiving end so would know before me unless I specifically asked and I did mention that I though Infamy would probably join in against TEA, so I'll have to look out in the stats for it.

I did also forget to mention that TEA is getting put under pressure by a single 500k player in a rim tribe. Will remember that for next time.
 

TheHans

Master Commander 2016
Thanks Ara, didn't know people send ram less nuke after nukes with rams. Pretty sure this is a Tea vs BiP thread. Your not at war with Infamy, there's just no diplomacy, there's a difference.

Good attempt though. Go BiP!
 
Last edited:

arabela

Contributing Poster
As far as I am aware at least, Infamy are not at war with you yet. I don't play the world but I haven't seen a significant ODA rise or exchange in conquers on their end yet. I suppose they are 1-0 up against you in the last 24 hours, it seems it was a crossnoble though. That said, being in TEA you are on the receiving end so would know before me unless I specifically asked and I did mention that I though Infamy would probably join in against TEA, so I'll have to look out in the stats for it.

I did also forget to mention that TEA is getting put under pressure by a single 500k player in a rim tribe. Will remember that for next time.
What exactly "not in war" means for you? Cause if u think only declaring war in public for the love of Pnp is enough to call it war, you are wrong. Any attacks in game are an act of war, for me at least. Declaring in game for stats and public Pnp for image and giggles is additional to real in game action.

about the rim...is not exactly a single player there who we got some attacks from, there are plenty. \It is about numbers, u know? I am sure you do, since u like statistics so much ;)


Thanks Ara, didn't know people send ram less nuke after nukes with rams. Pretty sure this is a Tea vs BiP thread. Your not at war with Infamy, there's just no diplomacy, there's a difference.

Good attempt though. Go BiP!
"attempt" for what? My post wasnt meant to insult candid confession account if this is what you are implying here. I just felt like Infamy attacks on us should be revealed and also their wishes for good luck can be a bit trolled... why? cause i can when i see a ramless nuke :)

yeah, for fun purposes. <3

Other than that, Candid Confession player is a dear friend of mine, that i treassure and i am sure he is less affected than u are right now.
Love you back, Bill ;*
 
Last edited:

TheHans

Master Commander 2016
Infamy attacks should be revealed to who? pretty sure everyone in the world knows it's a BiP vs Tea war, with Infamy being hostile towards Tea. I mean infamy only targeted 2 villas, I can't wait to see the reaction when it's a full scale war.

if it wasn't an insult why not post a ram nuke. It's like you've never sent a ram less nuke before.
 

arabela

Contributing Poster
Reveal to everybody, like nemesis here who hidded the elephant in the kitchen and not included it in statistics.

And why would i post the ram nuke when my intentions are to say good luck is not enough? Also, i post what I want, not what you want :p Exactly like you post what it is in YOUR favour not in MY favour. Right? ;) Or, again, TEA isnt allowed to post in THEIR favour? It is another "TEA-move" posting in our favour, Bill? :))
 

TheHans

Master Commander 2016
I have said you can't post what you want? All i said was that posting a ramless nuke was attempting to undermine Candid. You've admitted to them personally they sent rams before.

When it's not in your favor? Me and you both know a war can turn within an op or two. Pretty sure all sides have posted when it's been in their favour or not.

Atleast some are trying something.
 
Last edited:

arabela

Contributing Poster
I have said you can't post what you want? All i said was that posting a ramless nuke was attempting to undermine Candid. You've admitted to them personally they sent rams before.

When it's not in your favor? Me and you both know a war can turn within an op or two. Pretty sure all sides have posted when it's been in their favour or not.

Atleast some are trying something.
last time when i will reply to you about this.

my intention was not to undermine Cc, and i said it to him AND in public (no need for u to specify i told him this personal cause i already mentioned it here aswell). i found it funny to link that report to good luck wishes to send an indirect message that luck is not enough...i am sorry u didnt get it.
 

the nemesis123

Guest
I believe a war involves a concerted effort by one side to get rid of the other side militarily.

Infamy has an average ODA gain of around 2.1 million per day over the last week. BiP declared two days ago and they gained 10.8 million ODA, a gain far above average to be expected at the start of a war. Infamy's ODA on Wednesday and Thursday was 1.9 million and 2.3 million respectively. In essence, their effort against you, whatever it is, is not even enough to create a statistically significant deviation from the norm. This is especially curious since surely they lose the element of surprise and momentum if they don't put significant pressure on now. Furthermore, looking at their conquer stats, it is very strange that they are focusing an Op on some rim player on the day they declared war on you. That to me seems not a very wise move and a waste of resources if they wanted to war the rank 1 tribe.

In essence, if your definition of a war is that someone doesn't like you and doesn't have diplomacy with you, then Infamy were at war with you as soon as they accepted C9. In fact, probably before that, I know there are more than a fair share of people that thought it would be amusing to see TEA fail due to past world things. I'll wait until the nukes actually start landing.
 

arabela

Contributing Poster
I believe a war involves a concerted effort by one side to get rid of the other side militarily.

Infamy has an average ODA gain of around 2.1 million per day over the last week. BiP declared two days ago and they gained 10.8 million ODA, a gain far above average to be expected at the start of a war. Infamy's ODA on Wednesday and Thursday was 1.9 million and 2.3 million respectively. In essence, their effort against you, whatever it is, is not even enough to create a statistically significant deviation from the norm. This is especially curious since surely they lose the element of surprise and momentum if they don't put significant pressure on now. Furthermore, looking at their conquer stats, it is very strange that they are focusing an Op on some rim player on the day they declared war on you. That to me seems not a very wise move and a waste of resources if they wanted to war the rank 1 tribe.

In essence, if your definition of a war is that someone doesn't like you and doesn't have diplomacy with you, then Infamy were at war with you as soon as they accepted C9. In fact, probably before that, I know there are more than a fair share of people that thought it would be amusing to see TEA fail due to past world things. I'll wait until the nukes actually start landing.
I see you dont take criticism very well. But let me tell you something, critisism can make you improve your posts. So, don't be upset i dont share same opinion with you.

You are mentioning there "concerted effort"...see? this is not my problem if they threw 6 nukes or 100 nukes. Those are still nukes. And yes, in my opinion attacking the other one is an act of war...and yes, we will probably change more fire from now on. But this doesnt mean they didnt send anything. And no, we arent in war since they accepted C9, we are in war when we start to have attack incomings, and this happened, even if u want to admit it or not...3 nukes, 6 nukes, 100 nukes, ram nukes, ramless nukes, LCs...w/e it was sent, it is an attack :)

And it is not about someone "who doesnt like me or with who i dont have diplo with" lol...

So, let's return to your analize, you can include some other factors, in TEA advantage this time, like:

* Not hugging all small tribes around (yes, we have one single ally). I agree, maybe we should have hugged more.

Btw, i will stop for a bit on this one. It seems hugging is more appreciated than destroying tribes from inside (which is considered a dirty tactic). In my opinion when you destroy a tribe from inside, you are showing that tribe was weak. Links between players weren't strong enough to keep that tribe functioning. But, oh, well, let's all hug and gang bang, is much more easy to win this way...

* fighting on other fronts, too...and now am referring at warring Farm tribe, rank 6 tribe, who u didnt mention and some of their friends that i cant remember their names now lol. How this affect this Bip war? Well, obviously that rim is not secured for us, and we cant have all D on Bip FL, so, i think it is relevant.

and probably some other factors that you definitely should have included on "other factors".

And again, I am very much aware you are talking about TEA vs. Bip here. But you also had a section called "other factors". Which is very much incomplete. This is why my negative vote for your post.
Hopefully it is clear now.
 

The Jacal

Contributing Poster
Your face statement is rather illogical and far from the realism of war. Even in the most realistic sense, wars are done through a combination of other aspects such diplomatic trades, strategic recruitment and obvious brute force, saying a war isn't real simply because not only brute force was used is rather ignorant, in fact thats akin to saying that a tribe hasn't fought a real war if diplomacy was involved for instance.

P.S: I honestly don't understand how one could separate say recruitment for instance as if it isn't an acceptable mode of retaliation.If there are weaknesses and inefficiencies that prevent a tribe from being holistically stable then they should obviously be exploited this extends to not just recruitment but taking advantage of isolated fronts, weaknesses in a tribe's diplomatic relations; these are all related and indeed impacting on the success of a tribe. This is not simply confined within the dimensions of tribal wars but even to the real world...

Indeed, wars do include every possible card one is able to play. However, not all wars are able to be won by methods that do not involve breaking the enemy by force. If you have been around TW for some time, you will appreciate that what I was getting at by "real war" is by a war in which neither side was able to break by means of spies, tactical recruits, etc, leaving no other option but to prove superior in battleground strategy. When tribes are used to winning conflicts by means that do not involve the actual fighting abilities, then they get soft and used to this and many times find it hard when up against an oponent who is war hardened. We may call this "Diplomacy Softened" if you wish, just to get the gist of what i am talking about.

Therefore i think its rather petty to try to trivialize a tribe's success is such areas by saying 'uhh well there are no real wars cuz recruitment'. I'm not a spokesperson for Tea neither do I have an 'ego' to protect (anyone who knows me can attest to that), but I simply don't see the credence in your statement.

It is not petty to trivialize a tribe's success, because it is a natural interest of most everyone, to see how a tribe will do in a full scale hard war. Thus why i said it will be interesting to see TEA's counterattack. I am honestly curious.

Furthermore i would like to know how you define the term 'weak' in your statement above, 2hard declared on TEA; that's hardly from a position of weakness imo, so in that sense i would like to know your defining characteristics that determine whether you consider a tribe weak or not.

Come on man, now this is just cheap self propaganda. 2hard was not weak? 2hard only declared on TEA because they had no clue what else to do and the situation got the best of them. Doing something one is not even prepared to do is being weak, and the proof of this is 2hard buckled after their top player deflected to TEA, and the remaining top dogs fled to BiP. You cannot SERIOUSLY even remotely consider the fact that 2hard was not a weak tribe...

This is not a personal attack, this is merely pointing out facts. TEA has not proved themselves on the battlefield. TEA has proven they have a good ability to turn people on their tribes, recruit them, get accounts gifted to them (bigginger). THis is not an attack, as i say, it takes good ability..

Please Do reply.(anyone else is free to)
Hey bud, just now getting back to you, was having a glass of wine after dinner with the wife, so didnt really feal like dropping the good moment for TW.. haha

Posted my responses in bold within your quote.


@arabela. Infamy is not at war with TEA lol... what you consider to be a war is what has always been called a "Skirmish". Dont kid yourself :)
 

TheHans

Master Commander 2016
Hugging can be used for a variety of things. allying to defeat common enemy or recruit from every war a tribe has had. Either side could use that phrase.

Gents on w80 was a prime example, I can't comment on wobble as some people have mentioned as I wasn't there. but they also recruited from every war had a small academy too similar to Tea (Controlled the south too). They basically removed all their possible friends by recruiting and eating the rest, they were left alone with only hostile tribes around them.

This world though, you only need 60% for 7 days. Even Tea potentially fighting 2 large tribes could still get to that percentage.
 

arabela

Contributing Poster
@arabela. Infamy is not at war with TEA lol... what you consider to be a war is what has always been called a "Skirmish". Dont kid yourself :)
Call it how u want, then. as long as i suffer damages from it, u can add (w/e u call it) to those factors "anti-TEA".

Hugging can be used for a variety of things. allying to defeat common enemy or recruit from every war a tribe has had. Either side could use that phrase.

Gents on w80 was a prime example, I can't comment on wobble as some people have mentioned as I wasn't there. but they also recruited from every war had a small academy too similar to Tea (Controlled the south too). They basically removed all their possible friends by recruiting and eating the rest, they were left alone with only hostile tribes around them.

This world though, you only need 60% for 7 days. Even Tea potentially fighting 2 large tribes could still get to that percentage.
Well, allying to defeat a common enemy is used very often by some of you (see w83 where you hugged Any against NAM)....and gang bang NAM to get an easy win. And we dont bring this up so often as you bring the fact that we trying to defeat tribes from inside. All u do is clean and fair, all we do is dirty and unfair lol. And yes, you hugged for win in w83 (was NBD+Any+Golden vs. NAM). So, what we have here now: Bip + Infamy + ? (tell me here who to add...one or more tribes). I rly wish TEA will be more strong than NAM was, stay and fight all of you and beat up your asses. ;)

Alex shouldnt comment about wobble either as he wasnt in wobble (as far as i remember) :)) Tea is far from wobble, the only thing they can have in common could be some players that are playing in TEA atm (but probably there are others who play in other tribes). I have no clue about w80 history, so, i will not comment about it.
 

TheHans

Master Commander 2016
Say what you want about W83 but NAM also attempted the same deal, only to of been played by the tribe they backstabbed on w77. That comes down to poor planning. (We were defeating you as Golden+NBD vs Blue+NAM. Does the Blue merge not count as Huggy?)

We hugged for the win? And? I don't care what the enemies think. AM won that world. Tea arent the all-powering tribe that's at war with everyone as you think. Tea have put themselves in this position, and now they finally have a war that'll last longer than 1 op without recruiting.

If Tea win the world how it is set. Don't you think they fully deserve it?
 

the nemesis123

Guest
I see you dont take criticism very well. But let me tell you something, critisism can make you improve your posts. So, don't be upset i dont share same opinion with you.

You are mentioning there "concerted effort"...see? this is not my problem if they threw 6 nukes or 100 nukes. Those are still nukes. And yes, in my opinion attacking the other one is an act of war...and yes, we will probably change more fire from now on. But this doesnt mean they didnt send anything. And no, we arent in war since they accepted C9, we are in war when we start to have attack incomings, and this happened, even if u want to admit it or not...3 nukes, 6 nukes, 100 nukes, ram nukes, ramless nukes, LCs...w/e it was sent, it is an attack :)

And it is not about someone "who doesnt like me or with who i dont have diplo with" lol...

So, let's return to your analize, you can include some other factors, in TEA advantage this time, like:

* Not hugging all small tribes around (yes, we have one single ally). I agree, maybe we should have hugged more.

Btw, i will stop for a bit on this one. It seems hugging is more appreciated than destroying tribes from inside (which is considered a dirty tactic). In my opinion when you destroy a tribe from inside, you are showing that tribe was weak. Links between players weren't strong enough to keep that tribe functioning. But, oh, well, let's all hug and gang bang, is much more easy to win this way...

* fighting on other fronts, too...and now am referring at warring Farm tribe, rank 6 tribe, who u didnt mention and some of their friends that i cant remember their names now lol. How this affect this Bip war? Well, obviously that rim is not secured for us, and we cant have all D on Bip FL, so, i think it is relevant.

and probably some other factors that you definitely should have included on "other factors".

And again, I am very much aware you are talking about TEA vs. Bip here. But you also had a section called "other factors". Which is very much incomplete. This is why my negative vote for your post.
Hopefully it is clear now.
You are free to like or dislike my posts, to agree or to disagree. That at the end of the day is your prerogative and at least personally it matters to me not. As for the criticism, thanks, but I am not sure I really agree with your assertions so I'll continue to be me for better or for worse.

I don't really agree with your definition of "war". Conflicts between tribes scale in severity and I believe it is good to quantify these differing severities based on definitions I believe most people recognise. To give one example, one player attacking another player in a different but neutral tribe does not constitute a war in my opinion. That to me is a skirmish.

The factors that you mention apply to both sides. BiP have borders with P-W to give one example, but by far the biggest border issue for both sides is Infamy. A tribe of TEA's calibre can probably afford to take some troops away from the rim even if it is not fully captured. Similarly BiP have to deal with P-W and a bunch of other tribes, these factors though, for the most part will not determine the war outcome. I was talking about relevant factors, of which there is basically one major one militarily: Infamy.

I don't think TEA's issue is one of lack of hugging, but that's me personally. To put it one way, all the tribes were playing the same game but TEA's failure has put them in an unfavourable position diplomatically. That however is my personal opinion. There is nothing impressive about ripping apart a weak tribe from the inside and it is nothing to do with honour. The clue is in the word "weak", no-one would be impressed about TEA beating a weak tribe in a war either.

Thought you were going to stop though.
 

Raavna

Still Going Strong
I would like to quote my old post again-



This is with special reference to all the gifs posted in the thread where humans are trying hard to gag on a banana. But in reality, if you try it - you may actually choke to death. :p;):D

TEA starts choking and it shows in their reaction and responses.



My answer why i love Cats :)
 

arabela

Contributing Poster
You are free to like or dislike my posts, to agree or to disagree. That at the end of the day is your prerogative and at least personally it matters to me not. As for the criticism, thanks, but I am not sure I really agree with your assertions so I'll continue to be me for better or for worse.

I don't really agree with your definition of "war". Conflicts between tribes scale in severity and I believe it is good to quantify these differing severities based on definitions I believe most people recognise. To give one example, one player attacking another player in a different but neutral tribe does not constitute a war in my opinion. That to me is a skirmish.

The factors that you mention apply to both sides. BiP have borders with P-W to give one example, but by far the biggest border issue for both sides is Infamy. A tribe of TEA's calibre can probably afford to take some troops away from the rim even if it is not fully captured. Similarly BiP have to deal with P-W and a bunch of other tribes, these factors though, for the most part will not determine the war outcome. I was talking about relevant factors, of which there is basically one major one militarily: Infamy.

I don't think TEA's issue is one of lack of hugging, but that's me personally. To put it one way, all the tribes were playing the same game but TEA's failure has put them in an unfavourable position diplomatically. That however is my personal opinion. There is nothing impressive about ripping apart a weak tribe from the inside and it is nothing to do with honour. The clue is in the word "weak", no-one would be impressed about TEA beating a weak tribe in a war either.

Thought you were going to stop though.

See, what you call there TEA's failure cause we didnt hug another big tribe to fight on our side, i call it hugging, and i dont call it failure, i call it balls. ( i don't say i would have done this diplo, i am just saying how i see it). Ripping tribes from inside is not impressive, you are correct, but i never mentioned it as being impressive, so, dont trying to mess my words. ;)

A skirmish, as u call it, close to Bip tribe and that you have with an elephant, as you called Infamy, it has implications, my dear, and should be mention aswell. :)

Anyway, too many calories lost already typing for externals..your analyze is incomplete in my opinion, but thx a lot for putting up an effort. Hopefully next time will be less biased.
Now, to make you feel better, i appreciate posts like yours more than some stupid trollings.

<3