Sexy Grannies - I declare war | R30

Matthew

BANNED
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
209
Did I ever say that WH and Chance formed a powerblock? I never once compared those two alliances to TBA. It's also not my fault that you were in a piss-poor resistance, and didn't properly organize with the other alliance. You had SG zeroed while you were out of range of most of inimical, and you STOPPED TRYING because we swapped a couple members with them. That's your failure, not ours.

Rofl, clearly you have never organised a resistance. Persuading people to send against the rank 1 ally is one thing, but persuading them to send against the rank 1 ally when they know one of the resistance allies will be retalled by 2 other alliances ranked higher than them is another thing. Yes, if it had been organised better, the resistance probably could have taken down SG within another day or two. But you seem to think that that's the end? That's the resistance over and successful?

Do you not understand that after SG had fallen and the resistance had lost some staff, that there were TWO MORE alliances bigger than SG to take down? Considering that a good successful resistance will usually take 3-5 days to take down an ally enough to hit individually and split targets etc, that's another 2 entire weeks worth of resisting before the whole of TBA would be taken down. And in that 2 weeks, SG would be free to attack and gain land again without being harmed as the resistance's efforts would be focused on the other two alliances. It would have been nigh on impossible to take down three alliances and keep them down. So before you jump on the "BUT ITS ALL YOUR FAULT - WE MADE A POWERBLOCK BUT YOU COULDNT KILL IT YOU ARE SO RUBBISH" bandwagon, maybe think next time. Resisting against one alliance is one thing, resisting against 3 is another.

You cannot really defend the incompetence of the resistance. The resistance or lack of it was probably the only thing this round that annoyed me more than TBA. It was just indecisive and unwilling to make any form of effort to impact anything.

I am not pointing the finger at you or any individual alliance, as it is everyone outside of TBA's fault. Everyone seemed to be convinced that the round was over far before it was.


Why oh why are people always so naive about these things?? The resistance was 'poor' from your end because SG got battered and we were still too crap to kill them, omg we are teh n0000bz. From our perspective we had to work out who was in what wing, because you cannot take on 3 wings at once, you focus on one, take it out, then focus on another etc. Now when members are being swapped constantly it's so so difficult, every wave we sent they had new members defending them. We had 3-4 allies taking on the defence of 3 alliances way bigger than us.

Cyrus organised the resistance and he did a brilliant job, but would you have the motivation to fight an almost impossible fight against 3 wings? IF they were public, IF they didn't member swap then it wouldn't have been a problem. Don't get me wrong, I commend TBA for their resliliance, BUT that is why SG survived.

Indecisive: characterized by lack of decision and firmness.

Did I say it was easy? No

Did I question the effort made by Cyrus? No

Did I say anything about switching members? No

Did you defend your indecisiveness? No

The resistance failed due to it being unable to act on the powerblock early enough. Which is what I said above when I said you were "indecisive and unwilling". At no point did I even adress your counterclaim.
 

Silence

Head Gardener
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
331
Did I ever say that WH and Chance formed a powerblock? I never once compared those two alliances to TBA. It's also not my fault that you were in a piss-poor resistance, and didn't properly organize with the other alliance. You had SG zeroed while you were out of range of most of inimical, and you STOPPED TRYING because we swapped a couple members with them. That's your failure, not ours.

Rofl, clearly you have never organised a resistance. Persuading people to send against the rank 1 ally is one thing, but persuading them to send against the rank 1 ally when they know one of the resistance allies will be retalled by 2 other alliances ranked higher than them is another thing. Yes, if it had been organised better, the resistance probably could have taken down SG within another day or two. But you seem to think that that's the end? That's the resistance over and successful?

Do you not understand that after SG had fallen and the resistance had lost some staff, that there were TWO MORE alliances bigger than SG to take down? Considering that a good successful resistance will usually take 3-5 days to take down an ally enough to hit individually and split targets etc, that's another 2 entire weeks worth of resisting before the whole of TBA would be taken down. And in that 2 weeks, SG would be free to attack and gain land again without being harmed as the resistance's efforts would be focused on the other two alliances. It would have been nigh on impossible to take down three alliances and keep them down. So before you jump on the "BUT ITS ALL YOUR FAULT - WE MADE A POWERBLOCK BUT YOU COULDNT KILL IT YOU ARE SO RUBBISH" bandwagon, maybe think next time. Resisting against one alliance is one thing, resisting against 3 is another.

You cannot really defend the incompetence of the resistance. The resistance or lack of it was probably the only thing this round that annoyed me more than TBA. It was just indecisive and unwilling to make any form of effort to impact anything.

I am not pointing the finger at you or any individual alliance, as it is everyone outside of TBA's fault. Everyone seemed to be convinced that the round was over far before it was.


Why oh why are people always so naive about these things?? The resistance was 'poor' from your end because SG got battered and we were still too crap to kill them, omg we are teh n0000bz. From our perspective we had to work out who was in what wing, because you cannot take on 3 wings at once, you focus on one, take it out, then focus on another etc. Now when members are being swapped constantly it's so so difficult, every wave we sent they had new members defending them. We had 3-4 allies taking on the defence of 3 alliances way bigger than us.

Cyrus organised the resistance and he did a brilliant job, but would you have the motivation to fight an almost impossible fight against 3 wings? IF they were public, IF they didn't member swap then it wouldn't have been a problem. Don't get me wrong, I commend TBA for their resliliance, BUT that is why SG survived.

Indecisive: characterized by lack of decision and firmness.

Did I say it was easy? No

Did I question the effort made by Cyrus? No

Did I say anything about switching members? No

Did you defend your indecisiveness? No

The resistance failed due to it being unable to act on the powerblock early enough. Which is what I said above when I said you were "indecisive and unwilling". At no point did I even adress your counterclaim.

You miss one key fundemental issue. How can one be decisive without being certain? So failing to address issues such as the ability to switch members made it impossible to *be* decisive.

The resistance *could* have been decisive but THEN would have been critisised for being innacurate. And what's the point in sending attacks on multiple wings?

With hindsight its easy to pick holes in actions. Where were you at the time? As you are obviously brilliance we could have used your fantastic insight *sighs*

Your logic fails Matthew. Your opinions are redundant as as I mentioned earlier, it didn't address fundemental issues as to *why* it was indecisive.


K thanks.
 

Matthew

BANNED
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
209
If you couldn't use spies to find out who was in each alliance you're more retarded than I thought.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Matthew

BANNED
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
209
You are actually useless aren't you?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top