We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Here is a nice collection of quotes before the round and as the round started, I have set it out so you can hopefully see the two sides of the argument. Enjoy.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Nice collection, but didn't 1up claim they (1up) weren't gonna win aswell? Can't remember what round it was, r12 or something?

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Probably. Misdirection is a powerful tool at times.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Yes! I didn't make a stupid prediction because all predictions are daft unless they involve stupid accumulators on football results!

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

predict the Chicago Cubs will win the 2007 World Series \o/

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

well in true ND style they suck and will ofc loose :)

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

The round isn't over, my little puppies!

Let the games commence!

But if eX do win, then all other top5 alliance HCs are rather retarded for letting it happen. I really didn't take that into account when I predicted that eX won't win.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

I like this one

Originally Posted by JBG 22 Sep 2006, 17:45
Predictions are a funny old thing. Personally I didn't predict exilition to win because I presume everyone will **** them over anyways.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Took long to gather all those quates? Geez, even I couldn't imagine ever being that bored :)

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Pig this is awesome. It just sort of sums up all the eXi threads. You had it right all along showing that you were neither stupid or paranoid.

Great thread.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

lol.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Seeing as that's me can I ask what you mean by "like"?

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

how did i disagree :confused: i just said you were indeed like a stuck record as mek posted apparently! (that was of course ignored, like expected)

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

I like the fact that you thought Exil would be ****ed over when there is not one competent leader left in the game (outisde exil) and when there is a serious lack of spine, it can only go one way.

May I ask who you expected to organise this **** Over?

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

It's not that difficult to do. Even forest went around trying to organise it!

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

I heard he succeeded

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BWTMC
bet you a night out for us and three other uk pa forum'ers that you're wrong.

Loser pays for the first three rounds, either London or Birmingham sound okay? How does that sound \o/

Too bad Relig didn't want to take up the bet...

I think he means that it is dramatic irony at its best, you believe that all the alliances will team up and **** eXi from the start seeing as you have some misplaced faith in the incompetent HC of the top 5 alliances, but they do the opposite...

Edit: Pig didn't include me, I've been saying that eXi would win from the start too :(

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Obviously nobody has, to this point in time, succeeded. However it is not an outrageously difficult thing to do. The fact that something has not happened does not mean it was by necessity impossible from day one.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

He can do anything he can, there's still time!

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

We did indeed, and we meant it. Winning took us by surprise as much as it did anyone else.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

When the incompetent leaders dont wanna hit exi, then yes its difficult.

the actual orgainsing isnt that difficult, its the planting the leaders in soil and hoping they grow balls that is the issue.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

I dont see how I end up the figure of fun again anyway.

Yes I tried.

Yes I failed.

But there is a shitload of threads on here of people whining that alliances didnt try.

And quite frankly, I believe its better to try and fail, than not to try at all.

Maybe if more people followed my thinking, and actually tried, we wouldnt be in this mess.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

1up didn't hide members out of tag?

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

It's a mixture of r12 1up and r17 1up. They're so uninventive eXilition :(

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

No, but they still won when they weren't supposed to (thought 1up probably were taken by a bigger surprise-win than eXi).

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Looking back on the round, people actually tried.

Infact Angels, block and Omen tried. Infact they agreed to hit - together. Only for Omen to end up going solo contrary to what was agreed, realise they'd been butt****ed by Angels and made them turn on them. But people have glossed over this too - only I realised this happened after i read through a few threads.

Once Angels realised they had a few angry alliances after them, Sjor made his thread on AD, which gives evidence of the above.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Stoom heart JBG

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

More than likely eX underestimated the combined stupidity of the rest of the PA alliance leadership. Back when I actually gave a shit, I partically begged both Mobrulz and Angryduck to put aside their differences and kill eX before they got big. These is no hope left for this excuse for a game. /game

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

It was exactly the opposite hehe. But don't worry, many others were 'fooled' by this strategy, including all HCs from all 2nd hand alliances playing this round. I call '2nd hand alliance' every alliance that at one point in the round dreamed at the end of round speech.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

hmm...i dont even remember posting that tbh. will go look it up :P

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

What do you mean fooled? I suggested merging late round as a good strategy in that very post :(


I'm quite offended now and will be leaving with my ball immediately.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

piglet I don't think you understand what most people were saying.

Noone said exilition didn't WANT to win.
Noone said exilition would be recruiting newbies.
Noone said exilition would suck.

Just that they wouldn't be putting as much effort into winning this round as previous rounds, as demonstrated by their lower membercount, supposedly less activity (I know that their technical stuff is just the same as last round, they haven't improved it or got techies working on anything, for example) and less in the way of organisation.

It isn't their fault that their competition sucks.

Just because a premiership footballer is hungover and not in the mood to play, doesn't mean a bunch of spastics could beat him, even if they all managed to somehow work together.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

i bet a team of spastics could beat teddy sherringham...hungover or not*


*the spastics...not teddy

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

And people think Jesus is a fantasy.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

I'm not sure to what extent you realise this but given context what you've just typed is severely offensive to mentally retarded people.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

I can prove you wrong, I added military scan parsing!! :(

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

In fairness 1up declared prior to tick start that we would not be going for the round win but would more exert whatever influence we had in Kingmaking another alliance. In this case it was ND. We also won because of gross stupidity.

eXilition: Having members out of tag isn't *quite* as stylish ( ;) ) - but well done all the same.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

In a round full of „dirty“ moves we of course have someone who is much better than any other alliance, who were the master of evil who did excellent politics work and so on.
What I can say is that there is still some kind of honour at most alliances where a word counts more than a win. It’s pretty clear that an ally that is not keeping their word will win because one ally kept its word
Let me bow in front of you exilition.
Let me clear first that this is not a whine post. I will definitely not play next round in a position higher than scanner but this round I HC-ed most of the time. This is more a “ I WERE A STUPID MORON THIS ROUND BUT I AINT ALONE!" post
This round was the shi***est round I have ever played
In a round where most alliances are as weak as ever it took even for the great exilition a lot of work and made them break all their statements and even drop their word

Ok so what happened?
After Angels got brought down by a lot of people we started looking for the big head in front of this organisation. We pretty fast found exil pulling the ropes
Also due to the fact we didn’t have roids anyway we decided to go after exilition. They claim we have sent 60 fleets at them + of course our “block”. After 2 or 3 nights where we could see ND grow and exil stagnate they approached us.
They said they will drop the nap with ND and not target Angels at all for the good of the round, to make it more interesting they said
LMAO if exil cares about anything but them.
They didn’t just talk to us but also to Omen, ToF and Vision.
To me this sounds like a break of a non aggression pact
At that point exilition had already a 15M lead to #1 ally, due to the stockpiled resources and planets out of tag.
After our merge with omen we asked exilition if the deal is still valid and we got a confirmation.
We knew pretty sure that there is no way that exilition is going to drop the nap as they now saw their victory threatened by the new ally.

I got told by an exilition HC how active their HC chan is, how much they talk, how active those 6+ brains are. As we tried to get an answer when the nap is going to be dropped we got answers like we need xxx he is not there, xxx sent us to yyy the old story
Finally I found some1 replying and got told that a they will not drop the nap cause we have tried to push ND hit them.
Only talks we had with ND at that time was between Lockhead and ND where exilition wasnt even mentioned.

Beside the steady tries to get our people to their side by offering them naps and trying to turn ToF and Vision against us by telling that we send them first so we get the roids and they drain the def. I would like to thank these two alliances for being real good partners and sticking with us.

So let me sum up
The great and glorious exilition ally that is so l33t and that doesn’t need anyone to win a round
Needed 5 alliances to play the round into their hands, needed to use most of the dirty tricks, needed to break an agreement

Exilition deserved to win this round most, as they very ready to give (do) most for it.
The guilty people for exil wins are pretty much all HCs of Angels (incl. me) , Omen, and ND and I think most will agree to it.
Seeing that next round exilition is back full force I really hope someone can be arsed to make a good ally to beat them as at the moment I don’t see any and the whole round they didn’t have any slightest pressure.
Also I hope Kaifux will be in charge again so maybe they keep words they give


If you need any proofs for all that let me know

Congrats exil however this round ends

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Sorry about this one Sjor, I do quite like you... but...

What the **** is that? What the hell was teh rest of your alliance doing? How the hell did you think 60 fleets was 'going after' eXilition? Seriously, I have no ****ing idea how Angels ever thought that was going to do a proper job.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

thats what exil said we for sure sent more than 60 fleets
anyway we did go after them

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Give them a break Gate mate, im sure you are well aware ND have sent far less at people during a war. Infact sometimes none at all. Its not easy to run a focused war, specially against someone like eXi.

Back to the topic. I think most people were aware of the fact eXi were the strongest alliance comming into the round but could not believe that the other alliances would do nothing about it. Its not easy have such a low view of people but the HCs of Angels/Omen/NewDawn have made it a lot easier this round. In the end to win games you need quite a ruthless/confident/fighter attitude and there are very few people like that, seemingly none HCing any other alliance than eXi.

I think the best thing that can come from this is for people to learn a lesson this round and realise sometimes you need to work with people you dislike to achieve your own goals. I dont think rubbing it in peoples faces is constructive though.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Pig, I know i've been wrong at tickstart, and have been suspecting that for some weeks, despite not playing a lot anymore. What surprises me is that people can't get over their hostilities now to give it a last try. But it seems that everyone's got the will to fight blown out of them. Shame really as it could still be done if only some people weren't so preudiced against each others.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Actually kudo's to FO today! I seriously hope you guys can/will keep this up.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

Sjor i would very much like to hear which "promises" we have broken.. and who made em.. we havent broken any agreements... nor made much agreements..

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

You were in the channel... I don't know why I would even EXPECT ANYTHING from people who don't keep what they promise, but lies still disappoint me...

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

I'm sorry, but your credibility is damaged, so I'm having trouble believing you.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

"Originally Posted by Cartman
Sjor i would very much like to hear which "promises" we have broken.. and who made em.. we havent broken any agreements... nor made much agreements.."

Go far back enough and find something I've said that's misleading/wrong and win a prize.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

im not asking u.. and its not a pr stunt.. i simply want to know why he implies such

and refering to a merger.. i ment we did not merge with any other alliance( imo not like 2 diff alliances that have no bonds or coops or close relations)

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

if it's a different tag, it's a different alliance because that's how the game defines it.

Re: We told you so! (some disagreed)
 

ye well atleast we didnt kick a shitload of loyal members to merge for #1