MGGA War Roster

Notmad

Phrourach
At that time we were fighting Shady(35) Cartridge Family(35) Dost Teknesi Hanedan Family (Roughly 50-60) Sandels(70) Phalanx(70) Circus(35) and TF (30) Noobs(50)

Total: 315 players

So 315 vs 130

Your numbers were definitely off. By the way, I don't count vm or inactives. Also, you don't count MGGA's vm or inactives, only yours so that is one mistake in your post.
315/130 ~~ 2.5
210/30 ~~ 7
 

DeusVult

Chiliarch
Guys, this numbers debate isn't actually going to come to a correct answer, really. No-one knows how many players were inactive or VM on each side during the course of the war. And it's hard to factor in who was co-ordinating with who given that this changed over time in some cases. Also, who was actually "fighting" who is a bit tough, as some conflicts will have been minor skirmishes between a couple of members, or were simply a side turtling up and walling off another side rather than actively fighting them.
I only listed alliances that were the targets of full force ops, not minor skirmishes, otherwise, that number of players would be a bit bigger.

The exception being noobs. From your perspective, we seemed like turtles because you only had the limited view of a single world front. You didn't see the global stage as we saw it. In reality, we were fighting on every front almost, which is why we have more than double the BP of noobs and triple the BP of almost all our other competitors.

Tactical decisions have to be made, and you know what they call alliances who never back down from a fight with every world alliance? They call them losers.
 

Kal Gordon

Phrourach
The exception being noobs. From your perspective, we seemed like turtles because you only had the limited view of a single world front.
Actually, you used the same tactic against Shady/Cartridge for a long period, and only went on the offensive after basically doubling your numbers with the Synergy merge. That's two of your biggest long-term enemies.

In reality, we were fighting on every front almost, which is why we have more than double the BP of noobs and triple the BP of almost all our other competitors.
Okay, a couple of points here:
- You have more branches/players than us. So you would expect the total BP to be higher. Also, if I remember correctly, MGGA got their extra branches a while before Noobs got it's 2nd branch (which I don't think we filled). So you have had longer to gain the BP.
- Turtling defensively can lead to a fair amount of BP if people run headlong at the stacks.

I would like to point out that there was a significant period where Noobs was fighting every front (when we fought Black Dawn, Black Dawn's academy, Twisted Souls, Twisted Sisters and Hades Incarnate simultaneously). We had 1 branch of players and didn't hide or wall off enemies with new recruits, and we still came out on top of that war.
 

DeusVult

Chiliarch
Actually, you used the same tactic against Shady/Cartridge for a long period, and only went on the offensive after basically doubling your numbers with the Synergy merge. That's two of your biggest long-term enemies.


Okay, a couple of points here:
- You have more branches/players than us. So you would expect the total BP to be higher. Also, if I remember correctly, MGGA got their extra branches a while before Noobs got it's 2nd branch (which I don't think we filled). So you have had longer to gain the BP.
- Turtling defensively can lead to a fair amount of BP if people run headlong at the stacks.

I would like to point out that there was a significant period where Noobs was fighting every front (when we fought Black Dawn, Black Dawn's academy, Twisted Souls, Twisted Sisters and Hades Incarnate simultaneously). We had 1 branch of players and didn't hide or wall off enemies with new recruits, and we still came out on top of that war.
You also have to consider that neither shady nor noobs are noobish rim alliances. The fact you were able to defend against a bunch of rim alliances isn't very comparable.

Second. If you remember when MGGA won against Insomnia/WUC we were outnumbered and supposedly outgunned. Insomnia was #1 and MGGA #3. They folded after a few days of blitz ops. And a lot of their players became part of the core of our team, same with many of the other alliances we have fought against.

If you want to compare main branches, MGGA main branch has 13 million more BP than noobs.. so we still win in that category.
 

Kal Gordon

Phrourach
You also have to consider that neither shady nor noobs are noobish rim alliances. The fact you were able to defend against a bunch of rim alliances isn't very comparable.
If you look at the numbers, it sort of is comparable. Especially when you consider that these wars you were debating the numbers for happened when you had 4 branches, whereas Noobs was playing with just 1 branch for that war against 5 other teams. We only got our 2nd branch at the end of that war. And it wasn't all rim alliances. Most of that fighting was in O55, with the exception of Hades, which was 65 and parts of 55. I don't think O55 counts as the rim by any means. So Noobs fought all fronts with just 1 branch without hiding or walling-off enemies with new recruits. MGGA fights on most fronts with 4 branches and has to wall off enemies.
 

DeusVult

Chiliarch
If you look at the numbers, it sort of is comparable. Especially when you consider that these wars you were debating the numbers for happened when you had 4 branches, whereas Noobs was playing with just 1 branch for that war against 5 other teams. We only got our 2nd branch at the end of that war. And it wasn't all rim alliances. Most of that fighting was in O55, with the exception of Hades, which was 65 and parts of 55. I don't think O55 counts as the rim by any means. So Noobs fought all fronts with just 1 branch without hiding or walling-off enemies with new recruits. MGGA fights on most fronts with 4 branches and has to wall off enemies.
Ah ah ah. Walled off one enemy. We've been through this


Shady wasn't a wall off so much as a defensive war at first. And only for about 2 months.
 

Kal Gordon

Phrourach
Ah ah ah. Walled off one enemy. We've been through this


Shady wasn't a wall off so much as a defensive war at first. And only for about 2 months.
From what was being said, it sounded very much like you were walling them off and not attacking back. And you didn't counter-attack until you outnumbered them. So that's two major teams that you had to wall off. And those are just the two I can reference. Still, the point remains: you were losing heavily to Noobs all the way up until after WWs when a large proportion of our players left. You out-simmed us, I will admit that. But you sure as hell weren't beating us in the fight.
 

DeusVult

Chiliarch
From what was being said, it sounded very much like you were walling them off and not attacking back. And you didn't counter-attack until you outnumbered them. So that's two major teams that you had to wall off. And those are just the two I can reference. Still, the point remains: you were losing heavily to Noobs all the way up until after WWs when a large proportion of our players left. You out-simmed us, I will admit that. But you sure as hell weren't beating us in the fight.
Losing heavily huh? Your take count never went above 120 or so cities on us. And we are still winning. And

As much as you would like it to be, your team was nowhere near on the same level as shady.

They took over 250 cities while we supposedly were "Walling them off". Which is untrue, as even then we were still hitting them back and taking cities. Granted this changed later, and now they are completely stonewalled, we are on the offense against them.

I suppose that means Noobs really ain't much to talk about eh? Less complaining more doing. Keep that in mind next world kal. Good life advice too



By the way did I ever tell you about how shadys #1 player quit on the distraction phase of one of our ops? He wasn't even the main target we were shocked when he hit vm and quit lol
 
Last edited:

Kal Gordon

Phrourach
Losing heavily huh? Your take count never went above 150 cities on us. And we are still winning.
Considering that it was 4 branches of MGGA and 1 branch of Turtle for Hire vs 2 branches of Noobs, and it wasn't a tight score, I would say that is bad for you lot. And you only pulled it ahead after most of our players left. (And even then you lot seem to only be taking inactives).

I suppose that means Noobs really ain't much to talk about eh? Less complaining more doing. Keep that in mind next world kal. Good life advice too
Are you going to just sim, recruit and zerg-rush your way through the next world as well? :p
 

DeusVult

Chiliarch
Considering that it was 4 branches of MGGA and 1 branch of Turtle for Hire vs 2 branches of Noobs, and it wasn't a tight score, I would say that is bad for you lot. And you only pulled it ahead after most of our players left. (And even then you lot seem to only be taking inactives).


Are you going to just sim, recruit and zerg-rush your way through the next world as well? :p
A wise man once said inactives aren't my problem they are the enemy's problem. Oh, wait I believe that was ian, who is your top inactive hunter. If you want to discount inactive takes shall we also discount the 50 or so takes you got as a result of the traitor hand offs?

I don't know what this phrase "Zerg rushing" is. it sounds dumb but I'll assume it means blitzing.

In which case yes, what exactly is wrong with an op style that can fold alliances in a day or 2? We've done it a few times.
 

Kal Gordon

Phrourach
A wise man once said inactives aren't my problem they are the enemy's problem. Oh, wait I believe that was ian, who is your top inactive hunter. If you want to discount inactive takes shall we also discount the 50 or so takes you got as a result of the traitor hand offs?
I never said that inactives don't count. I merely pointed out that even after a bunch of our players left, you were mainly taking inactive cities. With most of Noobs gone or only playing part-time, we still aren't losing many active cities. Including inactives, you were losing for all of the time up until the end of WWs. Including inactives, you are winning now that a lot of our players have left.

I don't know what this phrase "Zerg rushing" is. it sounds dumb but I'll assume it means blitzing.
It's a fairly common term used around strategy games. It generally refers to getting lots of players/units and then attempting to overwhelm the enemy through sheer weight of numbers rather than skill.
 

MAC-9

Chiliarch
haha this guy still. Dr. kal people don't talk down to you because of a "superiority complex". its because you are amongst the adults, looking up and talking with a child's understanding of the topic. you criticize some of our strategies because you could not defeat them. lol this in itself is on its head. if you had any clue in the strategic portion of this game, you would know that ours was actually well more thought out and disciplined than you could possibly understand.

you see, fighting and how you fight are only parts of an overall strategy. we call them tactics. you focus only on the size of players and points fighting, and this makes you 1 dimensional, where in grepolis, to succeed, you must be multi dimensional and not let one part of the game blind you in the rest.
 

Kal Gordon

Phrourach
people don't talk down to you because of a "superiority complex"
Look back at the "logic" used by yourself and multiple other MGGA leaders (in fact, every MGGA leader who has posted on this forum, except for Silver Witch). It's always the same stuff: telling someone that their opinion doesn't matter because they are a smaller player.

you criticize some of our strategies because you could not defeat them
We pulled off the "fighting on all fronts" situation better than you did. By the time we were done, Hades Incarnate was the only surviving alliance out of the 5 branches that had joined forces against us. MGGA's strategy of turtling and walling off a major front didn't work nearly as well on a fighting level: they were losing against Noobs on the stats all the way up until many of our players quit after WWs, they were stalemated against Shady Hades, and their other fronts were still being fought (with the exception of True Fear, whom MGGA massively outnumbered).

if you had any clue in the strategic portion of this game, you would know that ours was actually well more thought out and disciplined than you could possibly understand.
I understand that MGGA relied on turtling, simming and mass-recruitment to achieve their objectives. And even then they were losing one major war and stalemated in another, each by forces no more than half their size. Simming and scooping up masses of players (including absorbing anyone you could get your hands on from the remains of Synergy) isn't exactly tactical genius. It's just standard MRA practice. It just so happened that most other teams weren't intent on simming their way through the server.

you see, fighting and how you fight are only parts of an overall strategy. we call them tactics. you focus only on the size of players and points fighting, and this makes you 1 dimensional, where in grepolis, to succeed, you must be multi dimensional and not let one part of the game blind you in the rest.
And you focus only on what you want to see. You ignore arguments that you can't win, and attempt to draw attention away from them with personal attacks. It would be a good technique if it wasn't the same one used by almost every other MGGA leader on these forums.