DeletedUser10984
Guest
Or you could consider the obvious fact that SF has fought far more and far harder wars than ORCA who has mostly coasted through the world.
DeletedUser
Guest
Cisfe your argument is boring, If you want to start a flame war then go ahead but the whole "I'm awesome and your alliance is terrible" is tiring.
I've also spied on many cities of ORCA, so that clearly means Quitelight and Yadi1 are inactive right?
You say that but then one of your leaders possibly? (Cisfe) Is calling SF cowards over an internet forum.... Like I said before hypocrisy runs deep.
However. I still do believe that there are some good players in ORCA but as Sacmaster said there are very few. Many of the players are below average, and now I'm not blowing my own trumpet, might ask cisfe for lessons on how to do that actually, but I would consider myself below average lol. There are still great player that play with SF and still are great players kicking about in Psi, but I do still stick to the fact that 4tress and the sudden infestation of branches killed the world. Oh and please do remember than 4tress and it's branches were made for the soul purpose of destroying SF.
P.s. You really need to stop going on about inactives, everyone does it. I just done it a couple of days ago, and I'm pretty sure if I went inactive I would be attacked for once
I've also spied on many cities of ORCA, so that clearly means Quitelight and Yadi1 are inactive right?
You say that but then one of your leaders possibly? (Cisfe) Is calling SF cowards over an internet forum.... Like I said before hypocrisy runs deep.
However. I still do believe that there are some good players in ORCA but as Sacmaster said there are very few. Many of the players are below average, and now I'm not blowing my own trumpet, might ask cisfe for lessons on how to do that actually, but I would consider myself below average lol. There are still great player that play with SF and still are great players kicking about in Psi, but I do still stick to the fact that 4tress and the sudden infestation of branches killed the world. Oh and please do remember than 4tress and it's branches were made for the soul purpose of destroying SF.
P.s. You really need to stop going on about inactives, everyone does it. I just done it a couple of days ago, and I'm pretty sure if I went inactive I would be attacked for once
DeletedUser
Guest
You mean your city in O66 not 76... Maybe if u were in 76 i would have.
What would You call colonizes 20+ cities... And only attacking weak.... But guess when the well will run dry "soon" and u will have no choice but to attack PLAYERS... We shall see how you fare then
Where did I blow my own trumpet... When I stated facts. I have never said I am a good player I dont need to I think my actions speak for themselves. Just as SF actions speak for themselves if you guys wanted a war i dont think colonizing would be the way to do it. I understand attacking the weak. My point is alot of ur players are trolls attacking ppl within hrs of ppl coming off VM I mean seriously do u just check that every hour.
DeletedUser25380
Guest
Flo, who are you in psi?
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
@rekoor. As lmaria has admitted, we have had to deal with more inactives than we would like, giving SF an advantage currently, and WG in the past. For the record, this is an old, carried over, problem, which has little to do with the current leadership of ORCA.
In any case, the point was that we target your active players overall, not your inactives.
BTW, your city in O66 has never been a real target. Hence it is still there. For now...
Let me share with you some thoughts on the recent attempt at taking our wonder city.
Many of your players, including mesomike and yourself, went for the city seriously. Sending many, real and good attacks.
(Quite a few 300 LS attacks from Spartan; what is the recipe for that? Maybe you could enlighten us "garbage" players on this one. :
While some of your main guns stayed on the sideline. Not sending anything or just a couple of attacks... hopefully they are good team players on other occasions. and don´t leave their mates out to dry too often. (BTW, these players were not on VM that day.)
One of your players sent almost all his attacks without any LS.
Another of your player attacked with triremes
(BTW, if you need ressources to rebuild after loosing more than 300 000 troops, let us know )
On other recent occasions, some of your players sent support to cities we had already taken from them and left that support sitting there for days.
And our recent favorite: one of your largest players sent 4 CS to one of our smaller players, but without even having revolted the city. We had many laughs with that one.
All this to show that, undeniably, there are some very good players in SF. But you too have your "funny" players.
And you are far from attaining victory.
And to end, as usual, some humor from Farg.
In any case, the point was that we target your active players overall, not your inactives.
BTW, your city in O66 has never been a real target. Hence it is still there. For now...
Let me share with you some thoughts on the recent attempt at taking our wonder city.
Many of your players, including mesomike and yourself, went for the city seriously. Sending many, real and good attacks.
(Quite a few 300 LS attacks from Spartan; what is the recipe for that? Maybe you could enlighten us "garbage" players on this one. :
While some of your main guns stayed on the sideline. Not sending anything or just a couple of attacks... hopefully they are good team players on other occasions.
and don´t leave their mates out to dry too often. (BTW, these players were not on VM that day.)One of your players sent almost all his attacks without any LS.
Another of your player attacked with triremes
(BTW, if you need ressources to rebuild after loosing more than 300 000 troops, let us know
)On other recent occasions, some of your players sent support to cities we had already taken from them and left that support sitting there for days.
And our recent favorite: one of your largest players sent 4 CS to one of our smaller players, but without even having revolted the city. We had many laughs with that one.
All this to show that, undeniably, there are some very good players in SF. But you too have your "funny" players.
And you are far from attaining victory.
And to end, as usual, some humor from Farg.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser10984
Guest
@Aylcon yes I sent a massive number of attacks but I did not truly go seriously as I rushed a bit as I'm sure most anyone else on this server would if they thought they saw a chance for victory.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
I understand that you had to rush as a window of opportunity had opened, or so it seemed, and that indeed you had to act quickly.
Some more. Thank you Farg.
DeletedUser
Guest
How sad, you left out Wargasm's other branches, 4tress and the branches oh and The chosen is it?I think SF are outnumbered by roughly 3 to 1, that is just an off the top guess but it seems that way
DeletedUser
Guest
Lol, I don't care about this whole discussion since it is all about ego's and how to present those best...But I care about stats and I just looked at the Psi attackers ranking.
Orca has one player in the top 15, Wargasm also has one. Oh yeah. 4Tress has one active player in there too, lol.
So help me please, what are you guys discussing here again?
Orca has one player in the top 15, Wargasm also has one. Oh yeah. 4Tress has one active player in there too, lol.
So help me please, what are you guys discussing here again?
DeletedUser
Guest
Appears to be nothing but circle-jerking over a moot point, but it also appears that what others have stated earlier about SF having a numerical disadvantage due to the numerous branches of ORCA/Wargasm/4TRESS, and then calling others turtles when they stack defence to the skies has unsurprisingly fallen on deaf ears. So Shadows Fall, Shadows Fall 2, and Bullseye are up against:
Wargasm: 86 players. Alliance and branches have higher DBP ratios and pacts.
ORCA: 59 + 12 players in a collapsing branch. Gloating while being far out on the rims, and despite their rising ABP, I haven't heard a single good thing about their offensive capabilities. Love to pact and play it safe despite gloating.
Mayatopia: 29 players + 7 players in a collapsing branch. Guess whether this one has pacts or not.
4TRESS: 68 + 3 in a collapsing branch. Higher DBP ratios except for one branch, and renowned turtles of Psi.
Lets not forget Tariq, or Maratto, a player whos sole idea of grand strategy is to back-stab allies for personal gain, yet fails at even doing that and is now in VM. Also says a lot about ORCA and friends. + 1 to the list.
Total players: 243 players with 22 maybes thrown in the mix. Who here wants to volunteer to figure out the ratio of players and compare them to that of SF 1, 2, and BE? ORCA and friends, don't bother with the tired line that you have inactives, so does SF and its allies. After all, your lot would know considering an understated few of your captures have been in that department.*
If SF and its allies have done badly despite their numerical inferiority, then that speaks volumes about the above pact-mongers and their need to over-recruit. Guys I think its time ORCA 9 and Wargasm 5 get created, no exaggeration implied. SF leads in ABP and is only hindered for active targets due to the multi-branch pacting alliances listed prior that are afraid to fight something their own size, and which stack anything and everything non-SF related for cheap DBP that it can get within earshot. **
* Note: This comparison openly omits Wilj Ai Psi, another multi-branch pacting group of turtles out on the rims who are fighting mainly BE.
** Note: We don't see Bangbros chest thumping in his usual tactful manner at any of these groups, but that is unsurprising because that is all BB is good at doing; proclaiming his greatness despite the evidence. As floace6 noted earlier, BB did similar in Bell and raged hard at people who didn't share his viewpoint.
DeletedUser
Guest
Haha very amusing. Coming from the biggest alliance by far who, wait didn't they pact with warg and BE the next 2 biggest alliances bc they couldn't handle us on our own...( Yes we had NO pacts then) So get off your high horse there. YOU WERE AFRAID OF US... or was it just good strategy using other alliances not a real pact just using them.
Also i guess taking cities from your active members isnt a good thing about our offense right? Whats ur in game name i can show u some of our capabilities in offense.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
I'm sure you pretty much summed that up
ro:DeletedUser
Guest
I find it of greater amusement that you did not take into account that:
A) When Wargasm pacted with SF, numerically speaking, the total players worked out even, more or less. I know a fair fight is beyond the capacity of most ORCA players, they prefer numerical supremacy than going head to head. This includes ORCA having more players during the phase you mention as it has cut down its membership since.
B) It is far easier to take active cities when you have a lead in terms of overall membership numbers, as opposed to matching said size with skill, organization, good leadership, and activity. One can simply use MRA tactics to overwhelm a defender, but it isn't necessarily a hallmark of individual skill, good leadership, activity, or even good organization necessarily.
C) ORCA lost plenty of cities, active and otherwise, to rival alliances at the stage you described. Which further proves my theory and actually takes away from the chest-thumping propagandists who make up the anti-SF league here in this thread.
D) When assessing the past, it is abundantly clear that since only SF inactives were captured during the period of which neither ORCA or Wargasm were pacted and the latter was attacking SF, this yet again loops back into previous points, and looks amazingly hypocritical.
So it is abundantly clear that you have taken actives only due to overwhelming size, as opposed to skill, and many of which from looking at the stats have been in local oceans like O76, O66, etc...
See above, you don't need an in-game alias to share reports, and why would I want to see them? According to the logic used by Alcyon and others here, you're using the experience of sitting in the receiving seat... so by logical extension, what would receiving reports from you achieve that would phase my view or be any different, or are you expecting me to be only objective with ORCA and take your words for it with SF?
Shift the goal posts more.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
Horus, I think that Cisfe is asking for your ingame name not to PM you battle reports, but rather to face you on the battlefield.
Could you please clarify what you meant with "According to the logic used by Alcyon and others here, you're using the experience of sitting in the receiving seat." ?
I am not sure I understand the meaning.
Concerning your comments, as lmaria and myself have mentioned, we are carrying over an old problem, the fact that ORCA being the merger of various alliances, has had in its past some MRA aspects incorporated. These decisions have nothing to do with the current leadership, though.
This means that our active attacking members, in numbers, is smaller than it looks, especially at the dates you mentioned. I wish you were right, though
Therefore, this means that our conquering cities of SF does not have to do with MRA tactics used to overwhelm you. This is totally incorrect, because the players proceeding from the MRA past usually do not take part in the offensive actions. In fact SF perfectly knows that already, because the ORCA attackers are always the same. One does not need to be a psychic to know that SF has catalogued/classified already most of our players and therefore are fully aware of the exact number of attackers/active players. So you already know for a fact that MRA tactics are not used to overwhelm you.
You mention that most of ORCA´s conquests have taken place in O66 and O76 close to our core. That is correct for two reasons, and you know that already:
1. Proximity of the Wonder Islands. These are priorities and must be protected
2. Most of our active players are too far from your core, but we are working on that
Could you please clarify what you meant with "According to the logic used by Alcyon and others here, you're using the experience of sitting in the receiving seat." ?
I am not sure I understand the meaning.
Concerning your comments, as lmaria and myself have mentioned, we are carrying over an old problem, the fact that ORCA being the merger of various alliances, has had in its past some MRA aspects incorporated. These decisions have nothing to do with the current leadership, though.
This means that our active attacking members, in numbers, is smaller than it looks, especially at the dates you mentioned. I wish you were right, though
Therefore, this means that our conquering cities of SF does not have to do with MRA tactics used to overwhelm you. This is totally incorrect, because the players proceeding from the MRA past usually do not take part in the offensive actions. In fact SF perfectly knows that already, because the ORCA attackers are always the same. One does not need to be a psychic to know that SF has catalogued/classified already most of our players and therefore are fully aware of the exact number of attackers/active players. So you already know for a fact that MRA tactics are not used to overwhelm you.
You mention that most of ORCA´s conquests have taken place in O66 and O76 close to our core. That is correct for two reasons, and you know that already:
1. Proximity of the Wonder Islands. These are priorities and must be protected
2. Most of our active players are too far from your core, but we are working on that
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
Wow Lie right out of the gate.... We at our peak have had roughly 86 players.... Sf/Sf2/warg/2able/TC/Be/ and Up at the time had much more than that..
Um this is an opinion by you which seems to be false since 4tress out numbered you guys and didn't take cities... Odd since the facts prove opposite...
OMG something that has some truth to it.... We lost cities when the number 1 alliance the number 3 alliance and nmber 4 alliance all hit us at the same time... Really we lost cities.... And SF didnt do the damage wargasm took 2 times as many cities but guess what U guys didnt revolt our wonder which was the goal
.I havent seen so much fact checking needed since the last time the 2 presidential candidates spoke... But hey you may make a good politician with all the webs u are spinning.... And yes i was looking for your in game name assuming you have one in PSI.... And we shall show you our offensive in-capabilities that you so confidently post on here.
DeletedUser
Guest
4tress shouldn't even be considered a "force", the only cities I've seen them take is legitimately all inactives and I can remember players still sending unescorted LS and defence units as attack....
you unfortunately haven't shown me your offensive capabilities :O
Oh and by the way, Just my opinion but defending is one hell of an easy thing. My hat goes off to you for having 41k and stacking it in that Lighthouse city, but clicking the support button and sending defence isn't hard. Probably one of the reasons 4tress lasted so long.
you unfortunately haven't shown me your offensive capabilities :O
Oh and by the way, Just my opinion but defending is one hell of an easy thing. My hat goes off to you for having 41k and stacking it in that Lighthouse city, but clicking the support button and sending defence isn't hard. Probably one of the reasons 4tress lasted so long.
DeletedUser
Guest
Didnt u lose a city to us?
DeletedUser
Guest
Yes, Intentionally. Like I mentioned before
DeletedUser
Guest
Pages of reports from others would dispute that claim.... you gave up after putting up a fight So dont try that... We took the city from you
DeletedUser10984
Guest
The stack of troops was my own after he posted in our chat asking whether anyone wanted to bp hunt.