Revenge of the Faithless

DeletedUser

Guest
I am glad I amuse you....I will make sure I stand up when writing my next post

The whole point of debating and this game is to have fun. I wasn't saying you specifically amuse me. :icon_razz:

14 mio is nothing really. Double members maybe, but you might want to count up how many have actually sent attacks yet.

Not sure how many sending attacks is relevant.

Well if that is you're unco-ordinated attacks, and those are ours. Then maybe we're just all round better than you :lol:.

Concerning Talon's conclusion on the stats I see otherwise. Considering this is the opening of the fighting, the K54 troops were mainly elsewhere etc. you've got a lot to see still :icon_wink:

The HEROES incident? Oh, you mean recruiting some Heroes players. We specifically said we didn't expect a declaration. If you want to see a declaration see other thread :), where Talon says he will continue to attack ex-Heroes players despite them being in WETLUV. That seems like a declaration to me. But let's keep off that road in this thread, because I believe each party has already agreed to disagree.

Attacking refugee's isn't considered a declaration of war usually. Recruiting them is.

PS. Atilla havin' fun banned? :icon_wink:
 

DeletedUser8534

Guest
The whole point of debating and this game is to have fun. I wasn't saying you specifically amuse me. :icon_razz:

That wasn't aimed at you mate. It was a response to mark



Concerning Talon's conclusion on the stats I see otherwise. Considering this is the opening of the fighting, the K54 troops were mainly elsewhere etc. you've got a lot to see still :icon_wink:

Again the counting of 4 M.S villas we took whilst still active(semi or otherwise) are being overlooked. And also attacks were already on the way with trains to his villas before he announced his retirement. I know this would not guarantee an enoblement but nevertheless its not like we started attacking him because he was inactive.



Attacking refugee's isn't considered a declaration of war usually. Recruiting them is.

We responded to Morning Star attacking bobberts who has been in the tribe since it began or at least almost.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
It was put on our forum FATE declared war on us because of Morning Stars actions of scouting and launching at one of our guys. That is why we responded and to be fair it was initially only on Morning Star himself.

Also yes I know M.S was considering quitting but if you read my post correctly you will notice I said our so called pathetic attacks as you put it would have went some way to hastening his decision to actually go through with it.

You guys are well drilled in your propaganda aren't ya?? An excuse for everything you seem to have.
Actually Morning star attacked your members because your members were scouting him before. So things actually happened the other way round. So no, WETLUV started this and like I have said are doing everything possible to make it look as though we started everything when in fact it's the other way round.

If ms had been properly active he would have owned your attacks. He chose not to. =FATE= had no control over this unfortunately and then he pressed delete as we all know for personal reasons. So no, nobling 4 villas off an "active" ms was no achievement but he was part of =FATE= so they are indeed losses.

We have an answer to everything because your comments are so bad they are asking to be corrected.

Concerning Talon's conclusion on the stats I see otherwise. Considering this is the opening of the fighting, the K54 troops were mainly elsewhere etc. you've got a lot to see still :icon_wink:

Again the counting of 4 M.S villas we took whilst still active(semi or otherwise) are being overlooked. And also attacks were already on the way with trains to his villas before he announced his retirement. I know this would not guarantee an enoblement but nevertheless its not like we started attacking him because he was inactive.

Attacking refugee's isn't considered a declaration of war usually. Recruiting them is.

We responded to Morning Star attacking bobberts who has been in the tribe since it began or at least almost.
You attacked us first, so it's natural that atm the stats show you as in front, it should be like that. Otherwise it would make you look like a very bad tribe ;)

We are nobling heroes. You recruit heroes. That makes them refugees. That forces us to attack their new tribe. That in the tw world is a known method to start a new war. Your recruiting them is a declaration of war, fact. Everyone knows this. So if you didn't expect us to keep on attacking them that would just make you guys dumb. So don't tell me you weren't aware of this. If you didn't want this war you would have not recruited them in first place, or dismissed them. But you did some strategic recruiting to try and stop our advancement because you wouldn't have been able to noble them as fast as we would have so you defeated them using the only method you know, by recruiting nearly all their members.

Don't for one second make =FATE= look like the bad guys who declared.
 

DeletedUser8534

Guest
Actually Luca

Nobody is trying to make you look like bad guys at all and from what I see we didn't want a war although to be fair it was inevitable by recruiting HEROES but that certainly wasn't the reason why they were recruited. To provoke action from yourselves.

You were still hitting the ex HEROES and WETLUV never responded because there was still talk on whether or not we made a mistake in merging them(something I have openly said was a bad move)

However once an original member was attacked then it provoked a reaction so there was a difference and we assumed at the time you had given the orders to take us on.

I am not bothered about all this whether MS villas should or shouldn't be counted because either way they are still in WETLUV hands even if you had acted quicker and kicked him earlier. As I have previously stated nukes and trains were already launched on him before he left and not as an op just on people reacting to help of their tribemate.

Obviously 2 side to every story and to be fair I think both sides are genuine in whom they think is at fault for this but I can assure you we never intentionally thought to ourselves lets recruit HEROES so FATE declare on us otherwise we would have had to strike earlier once we seen reports of some of the ex HEROES still being attacked.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Obviously 2 side to every story and to be fair I think both sides are genuine in whom they think is at fault for this but I can assure you we never intentionally thought to ourselves lets recruit HEROES so FATE declare on us otherwise we would have had to strike earlier once we seen reports of some of the ex HEROES still being attacked.

All it takes is a tad bit of common sense... shame really.

Side 1:
Tribes: =FATE=
Side 2:
Tribes: WETLUV

Timeframe: Last 24 hours

Total conquers against opposite side:

Side 1: 22
Side 2: 0
Difference: 22

chart


Points value of total conquers against opposite side:

Side 1: 165,519
Side 2: 0
Difference: 165,519

chart
 

DeletedUser8534

Guest
Seems we had our own MS problem with Dazzad going missing :icon_rolleyes:

Fair play on Fixtures conquers though.

Yes common sense should always come into play and I have to agree it has not with the merge of HEROES.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
In all fairness why would you need a army camp here 398|585 ....
 

DeletedUser8195

Guest
No problem mate :) good to see you back under your own name! :lol:

I think that's just a personal op someones got going :) don't think it really has much to do with you guys.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
He didn't ask what it was. :icon_rolleyes:


That's right Einstein. He asked:

In all fairness why would you need a army camp here 398|585 ....

and I answered that you would NEED an army camp to station troops in it. I didn't say he asked, "what it was?". I merely answered as to what it was needed for, as his question asked.

Now if he asked, "Why did you decide to position the army camp at .......?", then yes my answer would have been wrong.

Wrong time of night to get pedantic with me mate.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
and I answered that you would NEED an army camp to station troops in it. I didn't say he asked, "what it was?". I merely answered as to what it was needed for, as his question asked.

Now if he asked, "Why did you decide to position the army camp at .......?", then yes my answer would have been wrong.

Wrong time of night to get pedantic with me mate.


So you were just being plain stupid? It was fairly obvious what he meant.
 
Top