Lets do a game update

[DeletedUser23986]

Alex, really surprised that TR for all the support given hasn't just merged with RnR to try hold Clive off.
Now that would be interesting to see!

Its funny how wok fed on every alliance we cleared, and is now drying due to lack of new recruits. We don't believe in Mass recruiting like
wok to hold on the rank1. spot. We are capable of taking reds. We don't need anymore merges.

 

[DeletedUser]

whatever scale you want to use is fine with me...rather than poo poo..come up with something creative...all i know is..no matter what the scale...we are winning

 

[DeletedUser]

"firstly clive I haven't actually made any personal insult as thats against the rules I would be banned and you would have reported it cos u cant take any comments on your play."

this has to be the most laughable comment you ever made - your posts are filled with ad homien comments - you preface almost every post about me being ugly (cracks mirrors) / insulting comments on tactical play "cowardly" / my demeanor - grow a pair....

by and large you can't make a single post without some PERSONAL attack embedded somewhere....

but I take the higher road and just state the facts - again this morning you failed to take a city i had 400 brie in despite having so many cities around it - you send 60+ support waves over the next 6 hrs to help you hold the failed attempt - in the meantime of course i was in the midst of taking three cities simultaneously while you try to take that one city...

as i said..come up with a metric scale to demonstrate your overally objective plan and get away from the myopic vision you have of plodding one - three successes per month...i average about 20-35 successful conquests / month - losing a city is a small price to pay in comparison to your accomplishments

i even take cities right next to you and yet...you obviously don't use trip wires on your fellow players as i wipe them clean from the island...

your "call to arms" to attack fiz relentlessly has fizzled within 4 hours of the 100+ attacks down to a mere trickle and all it created was more slots for our players - i have to thank you for that stroke of genius for it has allowed us to grow and grow again...

we await your next plan to help us continue to dominate four alliances and got to wonder how you convince players that these plans have validity

 

[DeletedUser]

"firstly clive I haven't actually made any personal insult as thats against the rules I would be banned and you would have reported it cos u cant take any comments on your play."

this has to be the most laughable comment you ever made - your posts are filled with ad homien comments - you preface almost every post about me being ugly (cracks mirrors) / insulting comments on tactical play "cowardly" / my demeanor - grow a pair....

by and large you can't make a single post without some PERSONAL attack embedded somewhere....

but I take the higher road and just state the facts - again this morning you failed to take a city i had 400 brie in despite having so many cities around it - you send 60+ support waves over the next 6 hrs to help you hold the failed attempt - in the meantime of course i was in the midst of taking three cities simultaneously while you try to take that one city...

as i said..come up with a metric scale to demonstrate your overally objective plan and get away from the myopic vision you have of plodding one - three successes per month...i average about 20-35 successful conquests / month - losing a city is a small price to pay in comparison to your accomplishments

i even take cities right next to you and yet...you obviously don't use trip wires on your fellow players as i wipe them clean from the island...

your "call to arms" to attack fiz relentlessly has fizzled within 4 hours of the 100+ attacks down to a mere trickle and all it created was more slots for our players - i have to thank you for that stroke of genius for it has allowed us to grow and grow again...

we await your next plan to help us continue to dominate four alliances and got to wonder how you convince players that these plans have validity

What part did you not get we have no need to play your games you make personal goals I help my mates where is possible
and in actual fact I think you will find its working just fine the only reason you bring it up is that fiz isn't handling it which is why he sent fake attacks at me cos he was .

if it were true you were taking more bp you would shut up and soak the bp the fact is my plan is working and fiz is upset no matter.

you claim to take 3 cities lol stop taking cities that are easy takes I saw the city next door if I had know this was next door I would have cleared it myself it was so easy again it was a mistake by a player. how did my conquest fail well I guess it only failed cos u got to cast sea storm gee thats skill

 

[DeletedUser]

"firstly clive I haven't actually made any personal insult as thats against the rules I would be banned and you would have reported it cos u cant take any comments on your play."

this has to be the most laughable comment you ever made - your posts are filled with ad homien comments - you preface almost every post about me being ugly (cracks mirrors) / insulting comments on tactical play "cowardly" / my demeanor - grow a pair....

by and large you can't make a single post without some PERSONAL attack embedded somewhere....

if your are refer to this

I have done this I see myself in that mirror I am so sorry you cant do the same for every mirror you look at cracks wow you admit you took an idea off me shock you keep going into dead zones hope you enjoy that!!!

oh how many inactives have I taken lol very few as for enemies I always fight the top cowards fight the bottom. you try intimidation to progress.

I never said you were ugly u did that on your own I haven't made any personal attacks on you clive other than in game what comments do you see as a personal attack on you??? If you refer to this (I always fight the top cowards fight the bottom) it doesn't have your name on it I didn't use your name in the comment I was pointing out how I fight.

If you feel this is how you play thats not my fault that's your problem pls stop trying to make me out to be some moron. please point out a comment where I call you ugly of make the game personal

lol remember you once tried to tell me how to play the game oh no he didn't gee since I am taking your cities maybe I should teach you as for grow a pair gee can you not handle a little banter again not a personal attack its just pointing out how u like to take the easy route and attack people that are smaller than you or less active me myself I like to play the game how it should be a game of actives.

 

[DeletedUser]

obviously you have the inability to remember what you write or no ability to go back through the thread to remind you

"I have done this I see myself in that mirror I am so sorry you cant do the same for every mirror you look at cracks "

that's just one of many embedded insults you use - you can justify them as banter but many of those that have no ability to succinctly argue a point resort to these tactics instead of using logic to convey their point.

You keep think that there is some "glory" in attacking an active player makes you a better player - but in the long run it become inefficient and counter productive as the player that attacks weaknesses crumbles the alliance around you - so what are you left with - your self pride does not win wars - you may win battles but in the end - it is the more efficient alliance that ends up on top

again and again - our ten man alliance outperforms the four alliances we are attacking...we absorb their attacks and keep reducing their numbers bit by bit

I made this challenge a year ago - that we would take over 44 - it took far less time than that...now we have established a beachhead in 54...rather than fight our way in - which would have been inefficient - we chose to colonize 150 cities - now those cities are near completion - you will never be able to remove our presence from the ocean now...you had the opportunity to do so but you let us alone and now you will suffer the consequences

time and time again you try to take our cities - in a small percentage of cases - you end up with one when one of us is asleep..you have yet to take one single city from me when i am fully online - and yet you tout that you are such a skilled player - if so - why do you have to wait till i am asleep to take said cities - ...because it is more efficient - yes you embrace my philosophy but have too much pride to admit it works

taking a city from a player while asleep is no different than taking a city from a player that has left the game - once you are in - with thousands of ships and troops as support - you can gloat on your victory - but in the end - it is no different than taking a ghost.

 

[DeletedUser]

as far as the "insults"..there is a mathematical axiom that if A=B and B=C then C=A - this is a fact ...therefore if you say

I feel those that attack inactives are losers - you attack inactives - therefore you are a loser is empirically implied

you can try to dance around the issue that "i didn't say that" - but empirical reasoning brings one to no other conclusion

again..i return back to the premise - who is winning the war of TZU vs the other alliances - I have put forth some metric - is your taking of 2-3 cities a month going to win your war against us - are the three CS attempts you failed at today going to help you and/or hinder us - are the mass of "gnat bites" of micro attacks going to change the tide of the war

though the results are not in but time has shown we have survived much stronger measures than this

 

[DeletedUser]

as far as the "insults"..there is a mathematical axiom that if A=B and B=C then C=A - this is a fact ...therefore if you say

I feel those that attack inactives are losers - you attack inactives - therefore you are a loser is empirically implied

you can try to dance around the issue that "i didn't say that" - but empirical reasoning brings one to no other conclusion

again..i return back to the premise - who is winning the war of TZU vs the other alliances - I have put forth some metric - is your taking of 2-3 cities a month going to win your war against us - are the three CS attempts you failed at today going to help you and/or hinder us - are the mass of "gnat bites" of micro attacks going to change the tide of the war

though the results are not in but time has shown we have survived much stronger measures than this

lol typical you try justify your play with a silly analyses with out checking facts I don't go after inactives at all unlike you if you look at my stats I have taken very few inactives and I have never taken inactives in an enemy alliance there for your analyses is wrong which makes your silly equation wrong everyone knows if you want to break a alliance you go for there players ask anyone that can play. again with your game gee come on we said we weren't playing a mind game with you.

u know I thought of mentioning my conquests cos I knew you would brag about some skill used yet there was none used at all not even from fizpan however fiz has very limited cities in this area so little he could do by himself he is by far a better player than you clive but I am sure you know he has alot more potential. he was on all the way through and yeah I failed but I had little to no troops in the area which means I did very well considering in all of my 2 attempts today I only missed out by a hair you know it I know it.


As for my city takes I am taking cities in high risk areas they aren't in my core you have access to more cities than I do. There for I take where I need to and how I can I am sorry if you claim to be sleeping however over and over again we see you online at these times so either you are just saying this to get some sort of high ground again (more likely) or you have no desire to sleep. either way this doesn't change anything in game.

again I asked you to come with somewhere I made a personal attack on you u came up with the very same comment I highlighted which was this "I have done this I see myself in that mirror I am so sorry you cant do the same for every mirror you look at cracks " again this is a little in game banter the only comment u keep winning about I am sorry if this hit a nerve I am sure you can look in mirrors. Why everyone can I assure you there is someone out there that loves you for who you are. I say this as obviously u have a hang up in this area. I didn't expect to hit a nerve like that I retract this comment

 

[DeletedUser]

This whole discussion was about ALLIANCE play and strategy - again - i come back to the same starting point

show me where you and your alliance and all the alliances against us - are winning against us - when you are willing to answer that question - then we can have a discussion

to date - we have taken more cities off every single alliance than they have taken off us - it does not matter if its an active or an inactive - we took them and reduced your numbers and increased our own - you have indeed picked on smaller members in our alliance but in the final analysis - which alliance is growing and which one is not keeping pace.

i await your reply on this subject

 

[DeletedUser]

to date - you personally have taken 12 cities off us out of your total conquests of 255 or about 5% - the rest are all alliances you are pacted with since we are the only alliance you have had a war with from day one - u have taken approx 29 abandoned (ghost) cities so to say you don't take inactives is far from accurate when you have taken over twice as many ghost as you have taken cities from your number one enemy.

 

[DeletedUser]

to date - you personally have taken 12 cities off us out of your total conquests of 255 or about 5% - the rest are all alliances you are pacted with since we are the only alliance you have had a war with from day one - u have taken approx 29 abandoned (ghost) cities so to say you don't take inactives is far from accurate when you have taken over twice as many ghost as you have taken cities from your number one enemy.

wrong again gee dont know where u get you info. I have gone from 1 battle ground to the next I fought ooc, wotk, LR, nemesis, TT, DJ, and many more.

I am sorry I didn't see any need to enter 44 at the time u see I go for challenges I fought ooc for the sake of the alliance took a good amount of cities from them I got bored then we had peace I then was asked t join wotk in the ooc fight I didn't at the time I was steam rolling ooc so I offered to help ooc against wotk as to join them wold have been easy.

no player with that amount of cities lives on hand outs u did it again ghost cities lol key cities cant help if these go on the market when I needed to fill all the slots I had.

dont keep this up clive it looks bad on u ro:

 

[DeletedUser]

This whole discussion was about ALLIANCE play and strategy - again - i come back to the same starting point

show me where you and your alliance and all the alliances against us - are winning against us - when you are willing to answer that question - then we can have a discussion

to date - we have taken more cities off every single alliance than they have taken off us - it does not matter if its an active or an inactive - we took them and reduced your numbers and increased our own - you have indeed picked on smaller members in our alliance but in the final analysis - which alliance is growing and which one is not keeping pace.

i await your reply on this subject

again we take actives you take dead weight in a dieing world . around and around how many times.

oh but it does matter if its inactive or not ro: ask around. who are you trying to convince? when are you going to stop your childish games your a man yet you like to broad cast everything you do in any form you can in forum in game using alliance names and city names.

I have nothing further to say if you keep repeating everything. It gets old clive people require new info not same bore " we colonized over 100 cities in 54" anyone can do this if they could be bothered it doesn't make them any better player. now fighting your way through a battle ground where you don't out number your enemy and your fighting actives that deserves credit.

 

[DeletedUser]

"I have never taken inactives in an enemy alliance " - you certainly can't take any from us - there are no such players

but indeed your last three conquests are inactives - in pacted alliances - you can color it anyway you want but it still comes down to

WHO IS WINNING - AS AN ALLIANCE - is it the ten man alliance or is it the five alliances they are fighting...

I would bet on our alliance far outlasting yours - as they say - "the race is not always to the swift, nor the battle in the strong but in vegas - thats the way to bet"

take a look at the alliances you have been in - one by one - they slowly lose their way and crumble - why is this - 2 factors

a - leadership and
b - membership

according to our info - you are the main leadership in your current alliance and yet you

 

[DeletedUser]

several active players taken from the enemy alliances - not a one from ours - this week we are driving deeper into 54 and holding conquests on active players

 

[DeletedUser]

bye bye "THE resistance"...another failed alliance that just couldn't hold up under the pressure