Top 12 Sink or swim

  • Thread starter total annihilation
  • Start date

DeletedUser

Guest
I had to read this a few times, not because I didn't understand what was written but because I kept laughing and had to start over. Ok, numbers don't mean a damn thing when you're spread out over 4-5 oceans and recruit anyone/everyone! I'd take 20 quality/active players that have density over 60 simmers that are spread out all over the damn place.

TBD would have run roughshod over the LOD family because they are organized and have density in 55; can stack a hell of a lot of firepower on targets in a reasonable time frame. LOD certainly had/has some quality players but were too spread out and you can't defend what you can't reach in time, especially when you're fighting a well planned OP. Love killing off bir support as it arrives at different times, easy BP and demoralizing.

When they would be outnumbered 3.5 to 1, it would mean something. And besides, they would not have been able to take AG. They weren't as ahead as how they are now.
 

DeletedUser5973

Guest
When they would be outnumbered 3.5 to 1, it would mean something. And besides, they would not have been able to take AG. They weren't as ahead as how they are now.

Tell you what, go get 2 more alliances and come at us then. We would more than welcome the BP. I say 2 because you already have that half sister/academy tagging behind you.

*This message is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have read this message in error please notify the system manager. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this message are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of TO BE DETERMINED.
 

DeletedUser12324

Guest
When they would be outnumbered 3.5 to 1, it would mean something. And besides, they would not have been able to take AG. They weren't as ahead as how they are now.

Maybe you haven't seen the numbers, or should we post them for you. Every time we come into a war, it's triple-digit losses for our opponents in a matter of 1 or 2 weeks. Rational's biggest "win" is against Knights of Honor in which you took a whopping 23 cities and lost 8. As much trash talking as you do on the forums, maybe you should put your big boy pants on and come at us...

Don't worry, we'll wait. ;)
 

DeletedUser10520

Guest
One day someone will grow a pair and stop making stupid excuses for attacking another alliance in a war game and just say....
Because your on the menu tonight and Im hungry
smiley_emoticons_irre.gif
Or something to that effect.
I mean really why do you need to justify attacking another alliance to anyone other than your close allys if it steps on their toes
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Maybe you haven't seen the numbers, or should we post them for you. Every time we come into a war, it's triple-digit losses for our opponents in a matter of 1 or 2 weeks. Rational's biggest "win" is against Knights of Honor in which you took a whopping 23 cities and lost 8. As much trash talking as you do on the forums, maybe you should put your big boy pants on and come at us...

Don't worry, we'll wait. ;)

I'm not even trash talking, I'm literally saying you guys would go into wars with more backup then your opponents, and get easy cities to become big, like the point to you are today, where no 1 alliance can challenge you. I'm not trying to talk down on your alliance at all. Chill.
 

DeletedUser9851

Guest
One day someone will grow a pair and stop making stupid excuses for attacking another alliance in a war game and just say....
Because your on the menu tonight and Im hungry
smiley_emoticons_irre.gif
Or something to that effect.
I mean really why do you need to justify attacking another alliance to anyone other than your close allys if it steps on their toes

I was thinking it, and you wrote it. thisisgrepolis
 

DeletedUser12324

Guest
I'm not even trash talking, I'm literally saying you guys would go into wars with more backup then your opponents, and get easy cities to become big, like the point to you are today, where no 1 alliance can challenge you. I'm not trying to talk down on your alliance at all. Chill.

Yes, other alliances have been involved in wars which we have been in. We're not getting easy cities. We're seeing more defense. While you're beating on the noobs, we're taking out their top players. In EVERY case, this is true.

So, you're welcome for the distractions, giving you easy cities to take, while we see the bir stacks and golded walls.
 

DeletedUser12333

Guest
I'm not even trash talking, I'm literally saying you guys would go into wars with more backup then your opponents, and get easy cities to become big, like the point to you are today, where no 1 alliance can challenge you. I'm not trying to talk down on your alliance at all. Chill.

the reason why you see so much response to this is because it wasnt until AG and LoD that we started to attack alliances that were also getting attacked by other teams. We killed multiple alliances before AG and LoD with no other alliance even touching them, and they werent "easy" targets. So would we have beaten AG and LoD with no one else attacking? hell yes we would have. would it have taken longer? yes but not because it was more difficult just because we would have taken even more cities which we would have required slots for. its at the point in the world that every war worth talking about is going to have multiple alliances involved. So are we going in to wars with more backup then other alliances, yes we are but that backup is in our very own alliance, if we are attacking you dont worry about any other alliance but us, we are our own back up
 

DeletedUser723

Guest
the reason why you see so much response to this is because it wasnt until AG and LoD that we started to attack alliances that were also getting attacked by other teams. We killed multiple alliances before AG and LoD with no other alliance even touching them, and they werent "easy" targets. So would we have beaten AG and LoD with no one else attacking? hell yes we would have. would it have taken longer? yes but not because it was more difficult just because we would have taken even more cities which we would have required slots for. its at the point in the world that every war worth talking about is going to have multiple alliances involved. So are we going in to wars with more backup then other alliances, yes we are but that backup is in our very own alliance, if we are attacking you dont worry about any other alliance but us, we are our own back up

So what you're saying is...

...you've dropped all pacts/naps/ceasefires/oba's and turned the world red? Because you don't "need" anybody else to have your back right?
 

DeletedUser12333

Guest
So what you're saying is...

...you've dropped all pacts/naps/ceasefires/oba's and turned the world red? Because you don't "need" anybody else to have your back right?

hahaah that sounds more like you guys, hard to drop pacts if you never had them in the first place
 

DeletedUser9651

Guest
R.I.P. to bad the world doesn't realize whats goin on haha no one can beat a world off people no matter how good you are numbers trumps talent if you got enough.
 

DeletedUser9287

Guest
if i do recall i have seen a single alliance of 50 take down an alliance that had 4 branches of 50 or close to it numbers dont mean jack squat its all about the members u have an how good they are
 

DeletedUser12324

Guest
if i do recall i have seen a single alliance of 50 take down an alliance that had 4 branches of 50 or close to it numbers dont mean jack squat its all about the members u have an how good they are

Amen. Just because you have 300 people, doesn't mean they are all quality. Right now, the top 4 alliances just have 1 branch.The only reason to have a 2nd or 3rd branch is you to eat the food internally instead of the way it should be done. Having too many people causes clutter in the forums, and doesn't allow for the quality players to be in the right position because you have noobs on islands they shouldn't be on. The two alliances that were once 2nd in rankings dropped like flies, not because they were outnumbered, but because the noobs cluttering the defense tabs made it where the quality players lost cities.

If you don't think it's possible to survive by overwhelming odds and come back, look at Imaginary Friends and Anastasis of Neb. They took a similar beating early on, and found a home on the rim. Why? They didn't have to relocate 300-400 players. They also didn't have that many people sucking the morale in the forums due to complaints of lack of defense.

If all 4 of the top alliance merged into one, then you could have an argument....Not going to happen though
 

DeletedUser12333

Guest


you said we dropped all pacts because we dont need anyone, that was you guys that just turned on your pacts we havent dropped any pacts, and every team we attacked we never had pacts with to begin with.

So I am very confused what your point is
 

DeletedUser12275

Guest
you said we dropped all pacts because we dont need anyone, that was you guys that just turned on your pacts we havent dropped any pacts, and every team we attacked we never had pacts with to begin with.

So I am very confused what your point is

ok don't fight for me girls...i love you both the same
 

DeletedUser9287

Guest
ye i find a good alliance is between 80-100 people which will give room for people to be eaten as the world progresses and players leave so by end game u have 50-70 people who should be experianced an ready to fight

or a starting alliance of 40-60 that you know will stick with it to the end
 

DeletedUser12333

Guest
ye i find a good alliance is between 80-100 people which will give room for people to be eaten as the world progresses and players leave so by end game u have 50-70 people who should be experianced an ready to fight

or a starting alliance of 40-60 that you know will stick with it to the end

ya for sure i agree 100%, and it takes a full world sometimes to truly see what someone will do, weather they will stick it out or not. Getting attacked hard also brings out the true players you can trust, when your on the up its easy to find friends, when your getting pounded not so easy to find people you can trust
 

DeletedUser723

Guest
ya for sure i agree 100%, and it takes a full world sometimes to truly see what someone will do, weather they will stick it out or not. Getting attacked hard also brings out the true players you can trust, when your on the up its easy to find friends, when your getting pounded not so easy to find people you can trust

This is precisely why (in most cases) picking up refugees or players who are in an alliance that is getting pounded is a no-no. Don't think for one second that they wouldn't do the same to you if/when the tables are turned...

*unless, of course, you are one of those sneaky types and the player was planted in the enemy alliance to begin with. That's a completely separate kind of bad.
 
Top