Discussion in 'World Pagasae (en97)' started by oswinnorbert, Feb 16, 2017.
ahh Despicable? Dazzling? Deplorable? Desirable? wow........so many options.
From everyone in MRRA, our sincerest apologies. You caught us red handed, we;ve been deceiving you all with numbers. We now realize that after you pointing it out, Einstein.
Please just hit us harder, take the remaining 330 cities in 54 from us and you'll "win the war"
Patience my friend, you used to have 700 cities in 054........it's a marathon, not a sprint and we are having trouble keeping up with all of that silly colonizing. Couldn't find you on the roster, what name are you playing under?
He doesn't want to say ares he might get targeted for vm next
But remember....we only target the inactives........
LOL, I play under blackpest . I took note when the war broke out, we had 400 cities. Not really sure where you got that figure from, even shady 1 or 2 barely had that many cities a month ago!
So you say was 400 but we took over 200 and now theyre is 330 left? I think your math is a bit mis guided.Don't forget your group had a third alliance that got disbanded when war broke out.
You guys mainly target inactive players, players who have hit Vm due to RL and aren't checking, and players who have dropped out of vm. This is a commendable strategy when facing a larger alliance, hit them where they are weak.
You also diligently count the hours for when a player of ours comes out of vm, and that is fair play no denying that.
But the number of active contested cities you guys have taken is much lower. Id guess around 50-60. Maybe im wrong.
That being said I respect you as an opponent, and look forward to future battles.
You're kidding, right? Of course we will jump on players who run out of VM just as any alliance would but all of our op targets have been active and defending. Duke of Peace, DanLWar, TicTac, Clovic, Ismenian Dragon, Irish Peter, Mozzy,......should I go on? I think where your confusion lies is in the fact that your players hit VM after being a subject of an op and not before. We thank you for your words of respect but they are preceded by a lot of excuses as to why we are successful.
you are very wrong so your saying we are phychic we know people are having rl problems give me a break! every alliance jumps on vm players but we have taken off you active players on the reg, so if it helps you sleep at night to tell yourself that then i guess thats what you got to do.
i also like that you call the players we have hit not very active cas i know they are good players and have played with some before. thanks for the kind words but this is so far from the truth its not funny..
This is so well said. I agree that those are all legal and valid strategies, but you mainly expect to see them when an alliance takes on a much larger opponent. The much bigger alliances, full of strong, experienced, active players don't usually need to feast on low hanging fruit.
A couple things.. my intention was not to start a fight. But I will respond to a couple of things you(Shady) have said regarding the points I made.
You are correct, you guys have targeted those players listed and yet they are active and playing(Except Ismenian Dragon). And I gave you due credit for those active cities taken when i said "50-60 cities", but the vast bulk of your stated number of "over 200 cities" taken have not been active, contested targets.
There were no excuses made in my statement, simply facts. And not meant to be insulting in any way, in fact I would say you guys have done an admirable job in this war so far.
As for this, I never said you didn't take off our active players. I stated that you however have not taken anywhere close to 200 contested cities off them. The number would be as i said probably around 50-60 cities. And the people that were defending those cities are indeed good, and active players.
I don't consider this "starting a fight"......to me it is more on the level of enlightening banter that allows you into the mindset of your virtual foe and how you view this conflict. All I can say is that every single one of our ops has been against a live and hard target. The conquers in between are typically solo actions and if that means they beat you to your own inactive then they are doing their job. I really do not know how to defend against these comments that are attempting to downplay our accomplishments other than to ask you to outline how your own conquers of our cities are any different?
That is a legit tactic but I think that my close friend Denis underhanded tactics may have something to do with it.
One can not blame the opponent why he can not cut down dead weight.
I also love that comment about being afraid of revealing in-game name- I hope one day (if rl permits) we may have the chance to be close together
I love arrogant pricks
I don't blame shady for our flaws, and wasn't downplaying any accomplishments of theirs. Simply stating things as they are.
As for Denis we are well aware, but unfortunately not a whole lot can be done about it. We can't exactly go around asking whos the spy lol
So you're calling Denis a spy? Or am I misreading?
Regarding the rest of what's been said:
My question is: What constitutes a "contested" target for you. If you think a contested target means that we're going to run our offense into a 2300 Fast transport wall, while others that do not even receive 10% of that, how is that our fault? Playing smart grepo I guess is frowned upon nowadays. If you think my numbers are off regarding city takes, please blame the API of grepolis.
Websites track how many cities you have taken off other people, so under the "MGGA" name we have taken the said number and I always state that it does not include the number of ghosts we have taken off you guys. MGGA is usually fairly decent at timing their ghosts, but we've picked apart a few.
Lets face it, MGGA are losing in the city takes for one reason and one reason only, Bad leadership, (or is it missing leadership)... Shadies are just fighting and playing the game as it should and has always been played, taking advantage of their weak links is just a must do in amongst some great fighting. Dare I say, We put action to our mouths, we dont cry about how you managed to take cities off us, we just "carry on soldiers". Regardless of the city count which I believe T2 is accurate on, we are winning the fight against you all. Tarring a player as a spy wont dampen our morale neither.
Wait Denis is a spy? And I gave him a city! Give it back Denis!
Im not gonna get dragged into nonsense arguments, I'll just say its your job to secure your core ocean and us to secure ours and usually I dont look at what colour the banner is or if player is active or not to achieve that. We'll defend/attack with what we have and information posted in the forums. If you take a city kudos to you if we defend kudos to us, simple as that.
In regards to cities in 54, I'll repeat, I took note after the war broke an that was 400 (round up number, it was a lil over that) third branch has lil to do with number of cities since it was temporary and all or almost all players were filtered down to main groups as we opened space with internals and long term VM'ers.
Anyway, GL to all and let the fun continue without the need to stood down to vulgar propaganda. Anyone that has been around grepo long enough already know how this will pan out and how the oceans will look like coming Aug/Sep. Pity 55 is somewhat in split mode, it would make it more interesting a 4 way race
EDIT: And yes, T2 usually post the correct data and usually I keep track too.
as this afternoon:
I like faked stupidity and it is quite amusing to see someone who dumped the entire alliance for a spot in Muskets speaking about good or bad leadership.
For the faked stupidity - the use of spies by Denis toward enemies.
Not that he is spying his own alliance.
Never succeeded in correcting his habit lol
And do not deny it please since I know a bit more lol
It is a tactic in grepo and he is not the first nor the last to use them.
Now,it is also not a surprise to find Duke of Peace,Dan and Ismenian weak targets- for Denis (and myself) and for others their inability to handle pressure is no secret.
It is a good call by the planner.
I like the discrediting with correct numbers.
Still it is a victory.