LCN & SoL & MD vs RIVAL & SoF:
http://earthgraphs.com/...0fd869b0e4dd71398d9f8a3b3

DANGER vs TPA:
http://earthgraphs.com/...eea1e3471a43d47d1674b5903

NeoFed vs LaF:
http://earthgraphs.com/...007ef6a0e599f5ee3eb78d787

The 'ol AB FS...

I just had a revelation....I have forum perms...I can sticky this one and replace the old one! EUREKA!!!

http://www.automizeit.com/...0/guinness-brilliant.jpeg

55 hpm so far and the initial 24-hours isn't up. I'd say that's a good FS.

I was originally going to claim "OH fluff!"
Then I just had a revelation......It took tellarion this long to have his revelation.
/facedesk

Rival rolled, kill TIE for policing :p

One thing i can not understand. Rival had 9 Demos out of 24 countries. Low Sdi countries, no tanks - full netting status.

You guys really expected that, after rallying up with Rd against almost half of the server, you can peacefully net the next reset ?

HPK = 2,261

thats bad :(

You are talking like someone care about this game.

huh what?

So helping allies out or having allies help you out is suddenly an evil thing Alin?

Helping someone out that is already overwhelming their target just by # of members isn't helping allies out.. It's called being douchetards

It is helping out when RD was probably expected to help out elsewhere. Just because you didnt view yourself as part of a larger war doesnt mean those planning didnt.

if alin was suggesting that they had found themselves on the losing side of a right vs wrong argument and that the wrong would come to bite them in the ass, and they should have expected this, then he isn't really wrong.

even though by no fault of their own was rival ever in the wrong :(

Actually locket, they were helping you (RD) and elsewhere in the same time | - * |.

braden i am not sure if i get you right but in my opinion RIVAL were on the wrong side of events from the start till the end.

i will argue rival did no wrong.

if rd did bad so rival did bad; rd did bad and so norcal and i were friends so sol did bad, and by my being bad you and your ally is bad, my friend.. by this logic, you did bad..


no? then why do you blame word one against rival?

i think now, alin, i believe us to be aligned ;)

Rival of any alliance on the former RD/Sof/Rival/Laf side were the nicest and the best allies. They were also the least likely to ever have anything to do with cheating. So yah you sit here and fluff talk them for backing up their allies. Shame on them eh? Such a bad alliance to fight with their friends. If that was on your side you would be singing their praises.

I guess it is just too bad that your side lost every war for like 2 years except when Laf allowed you to win in a gangbang after Hanlong/TC things. And Laf still made that a heck of a fight. Perhaps if you had had allies that worked together in a fashion like Rival and others did you might not have lost every fight. I guess the sides are changing slightly lately but meh.

Pal you are but hurt for like 3 months now. Kudos to that side achieving server dominance while having outlaws gathering intel and all sort of fluff for them - Whatever. You cried us a river after RD fluff hit the fan - trying to justify fluff, i don`t even know why i bother answering you.

However, what i meant to say is, RIVAL joined a war that didn`t require them to be - and i think that wasn't even their call. I suspect it was Sof/Rd call in order to make a strong point to Evo/PDM/LCN : "if you ally either MD or SOL you will fight in 3:1 members ratio wars". Rival were Sof muppets since ever - they somehow managed to turn their selfs from a top 3 alliance into the most obedient alliance in 1A.
Furthermore, they also managed to disturb better alliances, alliances that said "fluff off" to Sof block pacts in the recent past and died for that. Now RIVAL just collects the "interest".

Rival is my enemy, I do however believe they are clean abd respectable alliance

looks like a good war. i like the stats so far. good luck to both sides. =)

Looks like a 25% TNW advantage on the SoF/RIVAL side right now... (507M vs. 410M as of this post).

Why is that? Roughly the same # of countries and I expected RIVAL would have lost some decent NW in the FS by LCN...

SoF jumped 107M in the past 3 days in the run-up to their FS. Is SOL still sitting on unspent stock?

The other way around, SoF has unspent stock, SoL hasn't.

I concur, why is that? Why hasn't the netgaining alliance got any stock?

Because netters don't stock until they hit their land goal. Still investing money in tech and building. It is clear you haven't netted in a while =)

High land Techers and Cashers I agree with...


Low land techers and All-Explore Farmers with max agri... not so much.

Any techer should have a stock in Sol but I doubt the rest would have had too much... the explorers perhaps should have.. depends on their country builds.

please update to reflect the gang bang :)

updated.

Is LaF getting involved, if not, I might actually return again.. for the 20th time. this game needs a political shift, not a crazy shift, just enough of one, where every side is even, and not lopsided.

Junky: Eugene has made it clear that he has shifted the direction of LAF politically away from 'pointless wars'. The political landscape is definitely shifting. Currently the opposition block to SOF/LAF/RD/Rival still exists but I assume that it will at some point break apart.

DANGER vs. TPA:

http://earthgraphs.com/...eb=TPA&warreport=Show

You mean he likes MD more than Sof and only fights clans half his size.

that too

well you 2 ( as RD and Sof) had no problems with Laf fighting clans half their size when it suited your interests. Not to mention those numerous war won with their FA.

Hypocrite much ? If there wasn`t your Laf dad you would have won close to 0 wars.

you assume that just because LaF and SoF are FDPs, and fought together in the past, that I agree with everything LaF, and specifically eugene, does.

Pal, you fighted "sides" half your size so many times it became boring at a point. Even the october-november war was planed as 200 ws 100 or so.

What i assume, and also know for a fact is that you should not bite the hand that feed.

Too funny reading SoF cry about LaF. Like LaF didn't bail you out literally every set since December of last year. What your leaders tell you about it matters little to me. But I can tell you that LaF isn't staying out because they're mean or because they like MD more.

You make some big assumptions Alin. They make an ass out of you.. but only you.

Right....that's how it all happened.

December-January: LaF attacks MD after MD attacks a much larger SoF.
Febuary-March: LaF signs a pact that is breakable only if MD attacks SoF. We're told that if we attack SoF, LaF will enter the war. Making us have to wait for your FS. Also that set, a SoL country jumps into the war, LaF maims it very heavily and begins sending untold amounts of FA to SoF.
April-May: SoF attacks LCN and DK. LaF comes to MD and tells us that if we enter to defend our allies (making the war even), that they have been asked to enter and will. They tell us this information regretfully.
June-July: I wasn't very active this set so I'll assume you didn't run to LaF for help for whatever you did.
August-September: SoF is attacked for bullying the entire server the set before. LaF enters to ensure the war is won.
October-November: SoF starts a war and needs LaF to come in and fight SoL.

5 of the last 6 sets LaF has had a direct impact in SoFs war efforts as outlined above. Oh and if you had your way they would be in this war as well. Just saying.

December-January: MD hits a mostly netting SoF during their reunion set. SoF was preparing a tagsplit to war a much smaller foe. SoF had no intention of hitting MD. You guys just wanted to ruin SoF's reunion set. Motion not granted, but I can give you half a point because LaF did come to our aide.

Feb-March: Everyone signs pacts with out clauses. SoF FSd a larger MD and won. it was MD that took massive FA from their allies and a fully stocked and prepped tagjumper. Don't try and lie to your members and AT about that nonsense. LaF was policing for SoF, ofc they would kill the tagjumper! Motion not granted.

April-May: I'm sorry that LaF has to honor their FDP. I'm also sorry that you guys didn't have the courage to help your allies....look at what SoF did this set. I'm surprised anyone pacts you. LaF, MD, and SoF all sign pacts with out-clauses to help their allies. The difference between LaF/SoF and MD is that LaF/SoF act on their pacts.

SoF took revenge on LCN and DK for being a part of your FA chains in Feb/March. SoF and MD went to war because MD picked on a much smaller alliance in iMag despite SoF's warnings….that's right, MD bullied iMag. The ball was in your court to skate away and not war SoF. Motion not granted.

June-July-Great so just throw it out there despite no knowing what went down. FYI, LaF went to war with TiVo and PDM. Motion not granted.

August-September: Wait, did you just reference the set before? Weren't you inactive the set before so why are you making a definitive statement on the prior set? You don't even know what SoF did the previous set! We were hit by Evo because of LaF! If anything LaF owed SoF for their aggression towards Evo. The Monsters issue was unfortunate. SoL's role was obvious and expected; they are always waiting in the wing to attack us and now they had their opportunity both politically (in their minds), and numerically. But…that was a gangbang oop. It wasn't an even war. Motion not granted.

October-November:
Actually, this wasn't a war SoF started. It was a coordinated attack by all of our allies that fell through for various reasons. Motion not granted.

So at best, I rate your claim .5/6.

As for your last line, I find it hilarious that you would fault SoF for calling in an ally to fight against a larger enemy. SoF is doing quite well this set without LaF. Moreover they always have.

Nowhere did you mention that LaF and SoF have been working in tandem to stop their opposing bloc. Never is it mentioned that SoF has aided LaF in the past two years. Never is it mentioned that one of the reasons LaF hasn't been gangbanged was because SoF pacted in tandem with LaF.

I'd like to end by highlighting what we saw in the June/July and August-September sets. You didn't even have the necessary information to make those two postings (and I'm using your own admission here). This is indicative of your PR machine; facts don't matter, just continue spinning this cute narrative.

That's a pretty big post. Unfortunately it only shows me that you completely missed my point. Why don't you go back and show me were I said anything about SoFs justification for LaFs aid every set. I'll give you a moment to look...

I never did, that's an argument I don't want to have because it's pointless and does nothing but add more stupidity to AT. It happened and I don't really care why it did. You're trying to discredit those facts because you're saying LaFs help almost every. single. set. was justified. I'm just pointing out how reliant on LaF you have been the past year, if you're seriously trying to say anything else, you're delusional. But thanks for confirming LaFs involvement for the last 5 out of 6 sets to help illustrate my point even better!

Oh come off it. Your post is nothing more than a cheap way of saying SoF only wins because LaF bails them out or as you say to ensure the war is won. That isn't the case at all.

Moreover LaF helping in a gangbang isnt something to be ashamed of. Why wouldn't SoF call in their ally when the numbers are against them?

You don't want to have a pointless argument yet your only point is that LaF honors their FDP or that SoF used their allies to not get gangbanged. doesnt everyone do that? Yea.....that's a worthwhile discussion. I guess when you compare them to MD it might be worthwhile ;)

Jesus, you guys really do live in your own little bubble. I gave 5 concrete examples of how LaF directly influenced your wars over the last 6 sets, and your response is to say they didn't help ensure you won those wars? You seem to be stuck on this idea that because you can attempt to justify why it happened, that it somehow means it never took place.

Let me give you an example:
MD asked for SoLs help last set. I can attempt to justify it by saying "We did so because we took the size and FS advantage you had on us and turned it around on you", but it doesn't change the fact that SoL came in and helped us.

Maybe a little honesty about the role LaF has played in your success over the last few sets is in order at SoF. That's not even mentioning the level of information that you had access to from hacked websites. If you want to stack the deck for yourself then that's fine, but don't play it off a year later like you stood alone in your accomplishments. Own what you are, a bunch of assholes who will try to win at all costs.

The last sentence is priceless !!!

P.S : This set you are doing ok because of the game changes. Otherwise you would have been tagkilled until this point.Actually With this >75% restart buff, anybody will be "in the war" for a long time. Look at DANGER - they have 10 mil nw restarts that will save full turns and ruin TPAs reset, an alliance 3+ times their size.

ROFL.
My third paragraph in my most recent post is a suitable response to what you posted.

You are shifting the argument.

"Like LaF didn't bail you out literally every set since December of last year."

Is not the same as:

"LaF directly influenced your wars "

In the first statement, you are implying SoF bite off more than they can chew (specifically as aggressors). That has never been the case.

In the second statement, you are merely pointing out that LaF has been good allies. That's not groundbreaking or anything to be ashamed of. It's not something anyone, including myself would argue.

Perhaps you meant the second when you said the first but your rhetoric matches the spin on AT. Moreover your justifications tend more towards the first rather than a generic observation.

Oh SoF only wants to win at all costs? You mean like when SoF didn't ask for massive FA or accept a fully stocked tagjumper? Or how about when they didn't FS SoL/LCN knowing what would happen? Stop projecting. Lastly, you still seem to not appreciate the idea of bloc politics....or rather i should say, you ignore that in your post. As much as SoF needed LaF, LaF needed SoF.

Maurice is Task1, I have confirmed this through his stupidity.

You can't make someone see your side of the story when that persons head is so far up his own sides ass. It's ok Maurice, we don't need your opinion nor do we need to justify the things we do.

You were destroyed last set, and you will again be destroyed this set. Your words of persuasion will not help Sof. I hope next set you and your leaders come at us again so we can destroy Sof yet again.

I'm also going to do a state of the server soon. HA HA HA :)

oh noes not my secret identity!!!!

And OMG NOT A STATE OF THE SERVER!!!!!!!!!!!!
SoF should surrender.

blah blah blah we'll be impressed when you beat us 1v1 or near enough. As of right now, given this set and last and your pride(lol), we are amused.

Lol, your name is ironic. Even with your pride, MD couldn't take on SoF 1 vs 1, you talk such a big game when you have an advantage. I am sure if you were on the other end you would be crying foul for some reason. This post sums up Earth political interactions in a nutshell.

1v1 with SoF would be fun! I've been asking for it for awhile. However, if you were to agree with me now... I no longer have any pull :P