SwordZ got off to a delayed start.

BSS is netting this set.

NBK lacks a viable opponent.

So I guess its KA vs...???

I will bet all will war at the same time.

NBK VS KA BSS AND SwordZ

False

That's a horrible guess for about 15 reasons.

KA isn't warring any time soon.

That's not to say that we won't....just not right away. OOP wars are for pussies, after all.

I like OOP wars :D
OOP wars the only thing that matters is activity, and ability to wall.
Later wars are decided almost by the Chem's the FS'ing side has at start.
Minus the chems, it is about country quality, which is another skill factor.

nbk will be killing bss if we do not get our weekly supply of m&ms VERY soon!

*glares at bss*

watch it be PANLV and TKO..

;)

*pings stale peanuts@gambit* :P

well both my ideas for FS were denied......


/me sulks...

OOP wars are lame because you rely on a disproportionate amount of kills due to small countries in a prayer that you can make enough impact on the other guy's that you can even the scores a little bit....completely forgetting that their restarts can be back in action in 72 hrs, and are only 3 days behind your originals in turns.

OOP wars are for people who can't win them later in the set. End of story.

PAN and TKO are already in a war. the netting war.

OOP wars are actually the most fair wars :P
Later on in set, whichever side FS's gets such a huge advantage it is nearly impossible to overcome assuming they are competent.

OOP doesn't really matter how many FS gets, all that matters is who can kill better.

I'd say the FS advantage in an OOP is actually MORE distinct, as you can kill 2:1 over a later war. That early in the set, 72 hrs behind can be a big difference if clans are evenly matched.

A later FS may get more chem kills, but I think the land kill/100 hit kill thing is a much bigger advantage to the FS'ing side.

Well kill count wise fs oop is more effective. But to replace all those countries killed by FS only takes a couple days.

Meanwhile in real FFA, if you get FS'ed by an equal sized clan, and you setup your attacks well, most of the countries killed takes weeks to replace, and in lots of situations cannot be replaced.

If we were oop, I would take anything on reguardless of FS or not. Later on in set, a clan loaded with say 7000 chems, and 100 more countries then you, can kill 2/3 of your entire clan within 3 days. There is no real coming back from that.

Interesting thoughts in this thread...

Controversy is always the beginning of things to come.



The Mouse Police, Never Sleeps... 7:^)
(Jethro Tull)



............(0 0)
.---oOO-- (_)-----.
NBK RocKs!!
'----------------oOO
........|__|__|
.......... || ||
....... ooO Ooo

*ponders an OOP war to get SWORDS back to killing*

I see lots of debate about the most effective time/fairness of an FS. I don't see many bets on who its going to be with who.

*hugs a tree*

I know something you don't know

nanna nanna boo boo

K4F - I'd agree that a well built alliance can inflict more damage....but then again, a well built alliance can defend against more. I think it tends to even out a bit with later wars. 7k chems aren't nearly as effective when your adversary has had a chance to build up %80 SDI....or buy up several million turrets.....or max their weapons tech.....etc.

Not to mention oop wars have a much lower hpk with landkills

and oop wars turn into a war of set long determination

fighting for 55 days straight blows ass

Sounds like fun :D

not really

It would be fun if you could do it with well built countries. But when both clans' ANW is hovering around 2-3 mil NW 30 days into the set, it gets rather lame. Been there, done that, lesson learned.

Well vs AoDT, NBK was lemminging built countries with startups for over 30 days, not really counting the 1.5 weeks of war when we had non startups. Killed about 90 of our best countries with chems alone.

So we know all about lame, but that doesn't mean we wouldn't do it again, lol.

I have a chem for you