DeletedUser
Guest
Wait-wut? Cowering. The opening stats we were winning and towards the end we were undoubtedly catching back up. Not sure where you got 'cowering' from... apart from your hopeful imagination.
Wait-wut? Cowering. The opening stats we were winning and towards the end we were undoubtedly catching back up. Not sure where you got 'cowering' from... apart from your hopeful imagination.
DeletedUser
Guest
DeletedUser
Guest
At the beginning. Yes.
DeletedUser
Guest
Vital were NEVER winning against Bi!, stop lying. We were and would continue to eat you like the cannon fodder you were. And if you had merged with =FATE=; GREAT! Then we'd be able to offset Bi!'s losses against =FATE= more easily too.
=FATE= take pride in their stats against Bi! but bear in mind that Bi! were facing =FATE=, Vital and BOBB all at the same time, so =FATE='s lead is only against 1/3 of Bi!'s firepower anyway... as proven by how easily Vital were demolished at the hands of Bi!...
DeletedUser8534
Guest
Haha
I was picturing you having a big strop when reading it. 'I will deal with this when i get home'
HAHAHAHAHAHA
DeletedUser
Guest
i think he was cutting classes again 
DeletedUser
Guest
Maybe you don't remember what happened at the beginning... Vital were winning. And Cannon Fodder? Stop talking out your ass. We were never cannon fodder. :icon_rolleyes: We were losing yes, but also gaining back towards the end. If Vital were cannon fodder to Bi! then PEST, WETLUV, HEROES are all cannon fodder to =FATE=.
Also:
Side 1:
Tribes: Vital
Players:
Side 2:
Tribes: Bi!
Players:
Timeframe: Last week
Total conquers against opposite side:
Side 1: 14
Side 2: 1
Difference: 13
Points value of total conquers against opposite side:
Side 1: 108,498
Side 2: 5,747
Difference: 102,751
Nice stuff here Vital, as far as we know 2 out of the 3 that have been taken belong to Vital again
Side 1:
Tribes: Vital
Players:
Side 2:
Tribes: Bi!
Players:
Timeframe: Last week
Total conquers:
Side 1: 54
Side 2: 87
Difference: 33
Total conquers against opposite side:
Side 1: 7
Side 2: 6
Difference: 1
Points value of total conquers:
Side 1: 294,615
Side 2: 616,358
Difference: 321,743
Points value of total conquers against opposite side:
Side 1: 49,306
Side 2: 47,032
Difference: 2,274
Side 1:
Tribes: Vital
Players:
Side 2:
Tribes: Bi!
Players:
Timeframe: Last 3 months
Total conquers against opposite side:
Side 1: 33
Side 2: 20
Difference: 13
Points value of total conquers against opposite side:
Side 1: 234,133
Side 2: 122,456
Difference: 111,677
Oh no, was posting it quick because...
:lol:i think he was cutting classes again
DeletedUser
Guest
*yawns* - well that was easy.
Updated Stats
Updated Stats
DeletedUser
Guest
Tbh, I think those stats are fake. Certainly the ones that show Vital to be doing well against Bi! over a long period of time. One week stats were Vital launch an OP on Bi! inactive aren't really a sign of skill.
Overall Bi! were always in the lead, and this was only set to continue. Thus, Vital were very much cannon fodder. Even now, when ex-Vital members are in =FATE=, they are still cannon fodder for ex-Bi! members.
DeletedUser
Guest
Erm... All those stats are quoted. One of them is even quoted from an ex-Bi! member. :icon_rolleyes:
All your posts involve something which didn't or hasn't happened. It didn't continue, Bi! fell, Vital & FATE won.
You avoided the point that if this (^^) is the case then WETLUV, +PEST-, HEROES are all =FATE= cannon fodder.
DeletedUser
Guest
Idk, I think the fact that =FATE= can't seem to touch some of +PEST-'s finest members seems to indicate that +PEST- aren't cannon fodder exactly.
Whereas Vital have NO players who were immortal against the might of Bi!.
I look forward to the ex-Vital members trying to actually do a lot of damage to +PEST-'s finest, because I don't think it will happen anytime soon.
Whereas Vital have NO players who were immortal against the might of Bi!.
I look forward to the ex-Vital members trying to actually do a lot of damage to +PEST-'s finest, because I don't think it will happen anytime soon.
DeletedUser
Guest
you guys are still at this,
DeletedUser6695
Guest
Im immortal? I decide your =FATE=
Ade's ego > space & Time
Argument over
Kthxbai
Ade's ego > space & Time
Argument over
Kthxbai
DeletedUser
Guest
Define 'touch' ?
Possibly not but you underestimated us & you know it. The whole world underestimated Vital and they payed for it. The pride of Vital lives because we weren't a tribe with the known members, the best members or the highest point members but we worked as a group of friends and tribe-members - something Bi! never had. We knew how to work as a team and that is the whole point of Tribalwars. I don't care if we weren't immortal as singular players. We were immortal as a tribe.
(Did you include SHERLOCK HOLMES as a Bi! immortal? If so then yes, I was immortal as SHERLOCK HOLMES couldn't scratch me.)
Obviously :icon_rolleyes: Ex-Vital aren't that close to many PEST members.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
Exhibit 1 :
Smile? losses against Vital.
Village Points Old Owner New Owner Date/Time
***** (469|491) K44 9,841 Smile? [WET] AvengerD [Vital] 2010-09-27 11:31:50
Out east (476|506) K54 9,841 Smile? [WET] Alv9 [Vital] 2010-09-26 23:53:04
097 Immortal Bi!! (480|509) K54 10,178 Smile? [WET] Notheragen [Vital] 2010-09-26 23:31:12
072 Immortal Bi!! (477|508) K54 10,178 Smile? [WET] Notheragen [Vital] 2010-09-26 23:26:21
(C.W.N.) Frown? Upside down! (479|513) K54 10,068 Smile? LJ-Jaks [Vital] 2010-09-26 20:51:24
186 Immortal Bi!! (489|509) K54 5,689 Smile? LJ-Jaks [Vital] 2010-09-26 20:33:43
(N.W.) Frown? Anansi! (474|506) K54 10,109 Smile? LJ-Jaks [Vital] 2010-09-26 20:02:58
I did ! (sticks) (474|496) K44 10,097 Smile? Alan Sugar [Vital] 2010-09-26 19:02:04
||Back4Fun (479|498) K44 5,496 Smile? [Bi!] Lord Greg [Vital] 2010-08-05 23:12:46
||Back4Fun (479|498) K44 5,504 Smile? [Bi!] Lord Greg [Vital] 2010-08-05 04:26:27
||Back4Fun (482|497) K44 4,603 Smile? [Bi!] Lord Greg [Vital] 2010-08-04 22:06:45
004 Immortal Bi!! (483|504) K54 6,588 Smile? [Bi!] TheSunOffABeach [Vital] 2010-06-16 17:53:22
097 Immortal Bi!! (480|509) K54 6,196 Smile? [Bi!] TheSunOffABeach [Vital] 2010-06-15 20:56:19
The ones bolded are after I quit, therefore Smile? was completely inactive. I quit on the 23rd of August, Vital, in their pathetic ploys to take easy villas (cause they know they couldn't take villas off Smile? if Grant or myself were actually on the account), sought to try and recompensate their significant losses against Smile?. The ones after 23rd don't really count as you weren't fighting anyone, you were essentially targetting an inactive.
Before that, the ennoblements by TheSunOffABeach and Lord Greg are renobles. As proven by the fact that Lord Greg was rimmed by Smile? and CerberusX and TheSunOffABeach was barb nobling inactive waste of space of an account.
Immortal against Vital? I think so.
Exhibit 2 :
BattleAxe's losses against Vital :
Stats on TwStats show that BattleAxe has lost NO villages to Vital ever in the history of that account. Therefore BattleAxe is very much immortal. For those arguing that BattleAxe may not be near to Vital, allow me to highlight Matt's conquers record against Vital :
086 Immortal Bi!! (496|511) K54 9,575 TheSunOffABeach [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-09-23 10:58:11
006 Immortal Bi!! (485|503) K54 9,793 TheSunOffABeach [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-09-23 10:53:26
008 Immortal Bi!! (496|507) K54 10,019 TheSunOffABeach [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-09-23 07:05:02
062 Immortal Bi!! (495|511) K54 10,019 TheSunOffABeach [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-09-23 07:04:01
059 Immortal Bi!! (499|507) K54 9,013 Notheragen [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-09-16 08:18:54
021 Immortal Bi!! (500|503) K55 9,778 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-29 07:27:42
096 Immortal Bi!! (493|505) K54 9,993 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-29 07:19:12
017 Immortal Bi!! (502|504) K55 8,688 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-29 07:16:15
057 Immortal Bi!! (498|504) K54 9,993 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-29 07:05:16
106 Immortal Bi!! (498|505) K54 10,003 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-29 07:04:08
023 Immortal Bi!! (502|503) K55 9,328 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-29 07:04:08
022 Immortal Bi!! (499|504) K54 9,993 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-29 07:01:08
079 Immortal Bi!! (496|501) K54 9,791 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-17 12:15:31
082 Immortal Bi!! (501|502) K55 9,993 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-15 21:28:55
056 Immortal Bi!! (503|500) K55 6,446 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-15 18:45:22
075 Immortal Bi!! (487|504) K54 9,746 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-15 14:29:13
053 Immortal Bi!! (488|504) K54 9,746 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-15 12:03:09
094 Immortal Bi!! (498|502) K54 9,747 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-15 10:54:21
107 Immortal Bi!! (487|503) K54 9,622 bossweasel [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-08-15 10:23:40
071 Immortal Bi!! (492|500) K54 6,372 medievalizt [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-07-29 08:07:00
011 Immortal Bi!! (489|499) K44 4,871 medievalizt [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-07-29 07:45:43
061 Immortal Bi!! (489|496) K44 4,280 medievalizt [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-07-29 07:41:18
065 Immortal Bi!! (492|499) K44 6,680 medievalizt [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-07-29 07:25:44
016 Immortal Bi!! (490|499) K44 4,809 medievalizt [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-07-29 07:21:53
015 Immortal Bi!! (490|497) K44 5,573 medievalizt [Vital] BattleAxe [Bi!] 2010-07-29 07:12:27
And, as icing on a very sweet cake, BattleAxe's losses against =FATE= :
Village Points Old Owner New Owner Date/Time
087 Immortal Bi!! (495|513) K54 9,750 BattleAxe [+PEST-] Fendrel [=FATE=] 2010-10-24 14:09:07
087 Immortal Bi!! (495|513) K54 9,750 BattleAxe [+PEST-] neile [=FATE=] 2010-10-23 21:03:29
Both losses are the same village, and both are renobles. BattleAxe eventually kept that village, so for the purposes of this argument, BattleAxe has lost no villages to =FATE= either.
Smile? & BattleAxe were very much Bi! immortals when active, Matt is still alive and going strong, and its clear that went Grant decides to be even SLIGHTLY active on UK4 under Smile? he can raise hell once more on =FATE= which merely highlights the immortality of certain ex-Bi! players, that when they DECIDE to make an effort, their results are almost guaranteed.
Thus, my point is proven. Stop wasting your time arguing that Vital were anything more than cannon fodder food.
THIS ^^^
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
...Think I touched a nerve?Side 1:
Tribes: =FATE=
Side 2:
Tribes: +PEST-
Timeframe: Last 48 hours
Total conquers against opposite side:
Side 1: 26
Side 2: 8
Difference: 18
Points value of total conquers against opposite side:
Side 1: 243,780
Side 2: 74,832
Difference: 168,948
Can you please check those stats in more depth before trying to force a winning argument? I clearly said you have been taking inactives or members leaving. Its kind of weird how 25/26 villages you took off us within that time frame, were infact, members that had left...
And Mark, I never wanted your villages, or all of PEST to have them. Just those players that you respected and said you would give them to who are within PEST.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
Response to Adellion: Apart from a few of those nobles against TheSunOffABeach, they were all inactive conquers.
Response to iRev: Stop picking on the one point. Nevermind, all FATE seem to do is noble inactives. Shame really. Honestly, how much of PEST inactive... or is it just JP & yourself messaging each other?
Response to iRev: Stop picking on the one point. Nevermind, all FATE seem to do is noble inactives. Shame really. Honestly, how much of PEST inactive... or is it just JP & yourself messaging each other?
DeletedUser
Guest
Bossweasel was attacking us... unless you are suggesting inactives can send attacks back off their own accord??? And Notheragen has been growing since that ennoblement, so she is hardly inactive. Medialvilizt I don't know about because Grant did that OP entirely himself.
And convieniently ignoring BattleAxe's =FATE= exploits after your merge... were they all inactive too? Remind me, who is actually active in =FATE=?
DeletedUser
Guest
Another crazy debate. Taking villages from your rivals' inactive players is sensible. Having inactive players and not getting them internalled is poor management. Am I really the only one who thinks this?
DeletedUser
Guest
Its legitimate to take them, its not legitimate to boast about your skill when taking them. There is no skill in taking inactives. Some noobs need to realise that.
