Quote:
Originally Posted by booji
How else were we supposed to end a war? Unfortunately a ceasefire is how it is normally done. No point stopping a war if it does not actually stop. We wanted tick 800, Ult wanted tick 900 and would not budge. If we wanted agreement we had little choice.
|
I dont know what you are talking about.
You were looking to end the round with NAPing Ult, and there was no other way to end it at that point?
The whole initial reason for alliances like BowS/CT wanting to give Ult some incs was to avoid total and complete domination that early on in the round, what would be the point to hit Ult initialy if we were all gonna NAP our way out of it afterwards?
Did you not know the consequences of your action when you agreed to a tick900 deal?
Didnt we just go over this shit in numerous thread last round?
Quote:
Originally Posted by booji
I have edited my post above to reflect this. You said this on a Thursday, we decided to give up the next day. Three more days, then we could "talk" to you, nothing about whether you would actually consider helping us again. Not exactly something to inspire us to keep up the fight is it? If you were interested in balance you should have been more explicitly with us; you knew the consequence if we gave up as well as we did.
As lovely as that might be your reasoning did not enter into our calculations, I am not sure we knew of your reasoning. Having re read the logs I see you wanted us to hit Kittenz but there is not much about why.
|
We were pissed with CT/ND/p3ng deciding to go for FAnG without discussing it, and telling us to go "gal raid" meanwhile you were all feeding on their roids for some moral/growth.
CT/ND said it was because they were apart of the Ult block, so we wanted to hit everyone that was apart of the Ult block if that was how we were gonna do things.
And usualy these type of 4-5 man blocks has 4 diffrent parts talking to you outside the "public room".
You had been warning us about Kittenz looking to hit us, and ND announced that they had struck a deal with Norse/Faceless for a full NAP, while Norse were trying to FC one of our planets.
As p3nguins had run out of roids after Ult/KittenZ/whatever had been hitting you while "the block" as hitting FAnG, we realized we were better off staying grounded for the upcomming weekend as we expected "heavy incs", wich turned out true as KittenZ was ptargetting us and Norse hitting us the same evening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by booji
If people wanted to play in strong alliances surely there would be a natural inclination towards there being another ally like Ult but we dont see this happening. Whenever there is a challenger it is almost invariably pretty weak compared to full size ult. I suspect you are drawing on the phenomena of Ult and assuming that you can apply it to two allies at once. But what if it is only true for ult?
|
My theory is that it will be less tempting to actualy attempting to stay as a "small tag" if the bigger tags can just take you down using quanity over quality.
If BowS was 80 members and p3ng was 40 members we could easily just get you fleeted by throwing raids at you.
If being a small tag is less sustainable with heavy incs it will be less favourable.
Also, its much easier to organize a block with 2 big alliances instead of 5 smaller ones, as the most alliances have their own initial deals and their own agenda, so keeping it together is harder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by booji
Munkee sends out very long and detailed mail!
|
Unless you have a relay bot that keeps delivering messages to munkee, how the heck would he know what was at all times in the "block channel" as he wasnt in there?