round 43 - ANQ|FL|HC love triangle
- Thread starter willymchilybily
- Start date
Daso
Planter
yes i am hamilton
You must have indeed. At one point or another there were 2 snaps and 2 2 v 1's and a month long snap between two alliances.
http://bushtarion.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4717
There is a thread to remind you. It's scary how similiar that thread is to this one. Almost the exact same names just shuffled around a bit. Fairly comical.
Twigley this round your mouth lost you the round fl wanted to switch to fighting hc but your comments and the commitment your members had to starting a rush on us every time we were out vs hc made a war with them impossible but please reply with some crap from the past noone cares about as if you dont we wont believe its actually you talking
Tl:dr you are the cancer /noone really cares etc etc etc
I actually smiled when i read this post. You clearly havn't read any of the posts from ANQ at all this round. We didn't want to win we just wanted a 1 v 1 fight. We would never keep rank 1 with our route set up. It would be impossible ... we lose too far too much in defence. You really need to think before you try to contribute to a thread. The reason that i could run my mouth as much as i wanted is because we had nothing to lose and it was fun to point out how bad HC and FL were being. The damage had been done and nothing i said would change it. Not a good try, flame. 3/10.
Last edited:
Daso
Planter
Twig i added ya as a friend !
Your 'stupid' is showing. You might want to cover that up.
tobapopalos
Hydroponics Developer
This man is a shark. Sharks are winners because they don't look back. Because they don't have necks.
Be proud to be the shepherd of your herd of sharks.
Daso
Planter
think
think
think so dim ...
think
think so dim ...
Daso
Planter
Ed made no diff
qft
IceOfFire
Garden Designer
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2007
- Messages
- 932
Ed did 95% of the plans and him and Dachi led the ship. Dachi was the real leader all along, their was no leadership when we all joined in my opinion, due to RL stuff, to busy etc etc. But Dachi and Ed stood up and did a great job.
LuckySports
Landscape Designer
As I said, the core can set the stage.. but take the 19 people behind Ed away.. how far would he get without bodies to attack/defend?
If your really going to argue.. Think your point through!
Twigley - Thats just another thread of you saying 2 alliances are Napped when they aren't. It only continues to prove my point. There WAS A nap between FL and HC this round, for (exactly) 1 week, at the end of the 2v1. A cease-fire if you will, to allow both alliances to be free to attack on their own without fear of retaliation.
For all other rounds - There has never been a nap between my ally and another ally for any round I've played in YEARS..
But go ahead, make things up so you feel better about yourself. It's quite entertaining. ^_^ its like watching toby post.. I imagine him reading my posts and having a seizure when he posts his response.
If your really going to argue.. Think your point through!
Twigley - Thats just another thread of you saying 2 alliances are Napped when they aren't. It only continues to prove my point. There WAS A nap between FL and HC this round, for (exactly) 1 week, at the end of the 2v1. A cease-fire if you will, to allow both alliances to be free to attack on their own without fear of retaliation.
For all other rounds - There has never been a nap between my ally and another ally for any round I've played in YEARS..
But go ahead, make things up so you feel better about yourself. It's quite entertaining. ^_^ its like watching toby post.. I imagine him reading my posts and having a seizure when he posts his response.
LS the nap element is just one topic of that thread. The sub topic is the 2 v 1 element which nobody disputed and which happened. Twice. Nice try to wriggle out of it but it's not possible. R37 is your typical 2 v 1 im afraid. From the very first replies from Clem and Dachi it's shown. You're actually impossible to reason with.
You are truly outstanding to even deny it. You've picked up on the nap part and tried to defend that, ignoring the rest of the post. It's right there for everyone to see and everyone in this thread played that round. You're only kidding yourself lol. If you want to keep acting this way then it's very pointless me continuing to show you up for what you are because everyone else here knows it and if you're just trollling then thats the end of that.
To make it really easy for you: The same people (with a few shuffles around) 2 v 1 ALOT (And atleast every single time i've played) of the rounds they play and have some kind of questionable nap that they deny aswell. The nap is just a small thing. The real thing you should be ashamed about, and cannot be disproved, is the 2 v 1's. Every single bloody time. r37 was no different. You missed the point (as you usually do) of why i posted the link. Just to remind you of how you 2 v 1 then too and how some HC 2 v 1'ed and were even on the end and QQing about being 2 v 1'ed. Shame on you.
This arguement is futile. You are only trying to defend yourself against people who played these rounds and can remember all the 2 v 1's that have taken place. Unless you have something original to say then there is no need to post anything else as im pretty sure i've covered everything. Victory is achieved.
Edit: Something i used to realise when i tried to defend the undefendable in round 30. When you have everyone saying you're wrong ... you have to just take a step back, use reason and logic and realise ... hey maybe they're right about that afterall. I should maybe conceed some ground there and move on. Protip.
You are truly outstanding to even deny it. You've picked up on the nap part and tried to defend that, ignoring the rest of the post. It's right there for everyone to see and everyone in this thread played that round. You're only kidding yourself lol. If you want to keep acting this way then it's very pointless me continuing to show you up for what you are because everyone else here knows it and if you're just trollling then thats the end of that.
To make it really easy for you: The same people (with a few shuffles around) 2 v 1 ALOT (And atleast every single time i've played) of the rounds they play and have some kind of questionable nap that they deny aswell. The nap is just a small thing. The real thing you should be ashamed about, and cannot be disproved, is the 2 v 1's. Every single bloody time. r37 was no different. You missed the point (as you usually do) of why i posted the link. Just to remind you of how you 2 v 1 then too and how some HC 2 v 1'ed and were even on the end and QQing about being 2 v 1'ed. Shame on you.
This arguement is futile. You are only trying to defend yourself against people who played these rounds and can remember all the 2 v 1's that have taken place. Unless you have something original to say then there is no need to post anything else as im pretty sure i've covered everything. Victory is achieved.
Edit: Something i used to realise when i tried to defend the undefendable in round 30. When you have everyone saying you're wrong ... you have to just take a step back, use reason and logic and realise ... hey maybe they're right about that afterall. I should maybe conceed some ground there and move on. Protip.
Last edited:
I don't know why you're still surprised by 2v1's happening when there are 3 alliances in contention. It is never in any alliance's interest to sit back and watch one or the other of their rivals gain a massive land advantage by smashing the third contender. And it is also clearly the common sense response to gang up if one of the three is opening up a clear lead. About a week ago, when HC had not yet won but had opened up a commanding lead, I would have seen it as perfectly valid for ANQ and FL to go 2v1 on HC. I believe I said this in that round 37 thread as well. I am not biased towards my own alliance, or against you, so stop acting the victim. It is simply what makes sense.
I would also add that, both this round, and in round 37 which for some reason you've brought up, HC and the so called HC leadership of dRAGE, engaged in 1v1's whenever it was not an obviously un-winnable scenario. But, of course, you gloss over those, and claim it was 2v1 the entire round. 2v1's only happened when rank 1 was pulling away. Why do you not understand this? Also, round 33, your alliance was definitely engaged in a 2v1 on NOMW. Which was fine, 'cos NOMW were ahead. But you've conveniently forgotten?
I would also add that, both this round, and in round 37 which for some reason you've brought up, HC and the so called HC leadership of dRAGE, engaged in 1v1's whenever it was not an obviously un-winnable scenario. But, of course, you gloss over those, and claim it was 2v1 the entire round. 2v1's only happened when rank 1 was pulling away. Why do you not understand this? Also, round 33, your alliance was definitely engaged in a 2v1 on NOMW. Which was fine, 'cos NOMW were ahead. But you've conveniently forgotten?
tobapopalos
Hydroponics Developer
That's a coincidence, because I imagine a spastic slapping random keys on a keyboard and dribbling onto his mouse when you post.