DeletedUser20914
Guest
lol,
winners will race you both
funny u speak like they dont exist, thats the propaganda from the start here
winners will race you both
funny u speak like they dont exist, thats the propaganda from the start here
Coxwana
Phrourach
It's statements like above that show just how little you know. Has anyone that matters, have an opinion on the way this server will turn out.
Roni is gone and his drivel doesn't matter anyway.
Jog on Roni.
Next!!!!
DeletedUser41523
Guest
What do you mean? Pretty sure I referenced how incredible their rise has been just a week or so ago when you were loss raging in the forums to them.
DeletedUser51283
Guest
Just wanted to ask, but where did OWS come about from? Might of been away on VM when they rose.
DeletedUser20914
Guest
time will tell
DeletedUser41523
Guest
They were a merge between the original old war stories, what was left of Alliance X, Vendetta in O36, and prolly some other teams. Currently down about 30 cities to Tripact.
Man you are really clinging to this...
Coxwana
Phrourach
They merged with everyone in the south to create a big rim alliance of people playing sim city.
Never had a real fight and npw they have one, can't handle it.
DeletedUser54494
Guest
May I know the score mate?
Coxwana
Phrourach
Oracle down and intel down. Who knows. But the amount they've taken from us, we've nearly taken from 1 player alone of theirs let alone others.
If you or anyone else knows another site to get "legitimate" stats from, feel free to inform us please.
Last edited:
DeletedUser54865
Guest
So every post you make is about this so called "hug fest". And yet I'm sitting on the side with 49 players and an "academy" of 18 that we more or less use as a springboard when recruiting. That's it. Meanwhile you're sitting on the side with what, 7 alliances (OV, TT, Winners, Winners' Spirit, Winners II, Oceans Brotherhood and Alliance went AWOL lol) and 228 players? (forgive me if I miscounted).
We obviously had to get our members somewhere. Due to being further from the center of the world, good players are spaced further apart and thus joined from different areas at different times which is why we have a much more spread out area than you do. You obviously recruited players at some point, same as us, we're just being "accused" of merging our way to the top for it because it happened later, I for example started this world 5-6 weeks after you did and therefore joined a good alliance at a later point.
So all we've done is recruited players we thought were decent to great to reach our alliance cap and you've been in the so called Tripact forever and have been also working with Winners and all their academies for a while. So I either completely misunderstand the definition of hugging or you're just talking out of your *** ^^
The combined score against the 7 alliances mentioned above is 39-51. It is true we are down 25 cities to OV themselves.
Take those stats in as stats, before I talk about them. What I have to say aren't excuses, just facts I think are also relevant to them.
Chacka1 sadly left us about 2 weeks ago, because of a family situation irl. He was granted a 48h ceasefire by OV and its allies (thank you for doing the honorable thing) but unfortunately he was unavailable to hit VM. So the 20 cities OV and OB took from him after he went inactive are all fair game, It does however have to be mentioned they were taken without a fight so using them to make your stats look good isn't entirely truthful.
I'm sure there have been cities we took from the other side from inactives as well. Stats do say we are slightly behind in a contest where we are outnumbered about 3:1 and it seems a fair reflection of how it feels like it's been going. This is a war game, but the WW era isn't always about fighting so we have put efforts into different areas, not just the frontline with OV/Winners where, as said, we haven't exactly been winning.
While I don't really care whether you take us seriously or not, the only story spun about us on the externals so far is Coxwanas either extemely opinionated or just plain wrong version...so here's a view from the other side.
We have reached a boring phase of the game but I hope you can all enjoy it regardless. I'm here for fun and my friends and not to make myself look good on an internet forum ^^
Kind regards
.G0B0
DeletedUser41523
Guest
So for historical purposes (Next time put this rant in a Pnp or separate thread plz and tag cox) who do you feel OWS has beaten (that's relevant) that should make this merge claim untrue?
DeletedUser54865
Guest
to rant: "speak or shout at length in an angry, impassioned way."
The only point that applies here is the length. Why? Because I bothered to actually explain my points rather than throw my opinion around as a fact. This is a history of Olous after all, I hope it's built on the latter not the former. To me my post is pretty clearly not "angry" but open-minded and with a slight touch of humor, but of course that is open to interpretation especially if you're not reading it with an unbiased mindset
So I don't understand why my post is misplaced if posts like the first one I quoted are deemed adequate for this thread.
To our actual history:
In the first few weeks of the alliance, members were slowly recruited up to about 20. Then me and 7 friends joined up. We had already won our ocean as a very small team. Not long after, almost exactly 2 months ago, we took in the 8 good players from Legio after going 66-0 vs. their 2 branches. That put us just over 40 players at which point we hit #2 in the world. 5 weeks ago we hit #1. Shortly after that we took in 6 good players from Vendetta after taking 33 cities off their less good players. Mixed inbetween all that we recruited single players we thought were valuable to the alliance. So essentially we fought against everyone around us and because we were still few members and it's impossible to conquer multiple oceans with just 20 to 30 people due to slot limitations, we recruited the best players left. We may have had easier fights than people in the core, we are just a rim alliance after all.
Perhaps we should have recruited whole alliances as sister alliances instead. Apparently Coalitions are considered perfectly fine but when you're more selective in recruitment you're considered weak
If you know a good stats site that still works for this kind of thing, please let me know...this is from memory and browsing through alliance events so my numbers could be off here and there...
You can imagine how accurate history will be if you only ask one side of a conflict, which is why I felt the need to post in the first place. But if you'd rather keep only hearing your side's opinions, I'll leave you to it
I can only repeat what I've already said...
DeletedUser41523
Guest
First off while we're on the side of OV i'm pretty sure TT hasn't been involved enough in this one to be biased. Second, I only asked that if you want to argue with cox, make a new thread for it. If you want to get the facts straight feel free to pm them to me or list them in that thread and tag me. I'm happy to put your side of things here. But since you wanna compare facts and stats...game on. I'll make one for you @.G0B0
DeletedUser53503
Guest
According to matrix they are (w/l):
OV: 7/35
OV: Brotherhood: 0/11
Winners: 7/4
Winners' spirit: 11/8
Winners is a hugging alliance so not surprising they are doing ok against them, the OV scores however tell a different tale
DeletedUser54871
Guest
Drink your pils, noobAccording to matrix they are (w/l):
OV: 7/35
OV: Brotherhood: 0/11
Winners: 7/4
Winners' spirit: 11/8
Winners is a hugging alliance so not surprising they are doing ok against them, the OV scores however tell a different tale
Coxwana
Phrourach
According to matrix they are (w/l):
OV: 7/35
OV: Brotherhood: 0/11
Winners: 7/4
Winners' spirit: 11/8
Winners is a hugging alliance so not surprising they are doing ok against them, the OV scores however tell a different tale
you saying OV has won 7 and lost 35? Against who?
DeletedUser41523
Guest
I think he means cities OWS has taken off of OV on the left vs cities lost to OV on the right side.