Declaration of War

[lokken]

The issue is clearly whether 1up actively targeted Angels or not, I'd wager they didn't, and that 1up simply hit Angels members because they were buddy packed with a load of Exilition players as has been claimed. Think it's pretty obvious EX were going to be hostile with 1up and its allies.

This is of interest to me, as Angels claim they wished to play solo. Didn't they realise that if you are in galaxies with one side more than the other you are inevitably drawn into someone else's war? This to me is just simply shoddy preparation - if you really wanted to be independent you should have simply said buddy with who you like, and attacked any galaxies without Angels in them.

Instead you forced yourself onto one side of a war you didn't really want to be in, and instead of being in a nice position like WP or HR you've gone and ****ed yourself by not only poor member positioning, slipping up by choosing sides hence ****ing up any strategy you had, getting Sid's attention to beat the living shit out of you early on to end your round and then make an even more terrible political error by cutting yourself from any help that you could get and making some disastrous PR in the hope that war would be suspended so you could take it one to one which is stupid when you expect them to do the opposite.

You claimed you aren't politicians; that's evident, and you've paid the price for it. I have no agenda here, I'm merely giving my assessment on what's presented here. Angels HC have made a litany of errors, hence why they are in such a grave position.

[Synthetic_Sid]

Originally Posted by Fyodor

How can you say we did not get an "Abnormal" amount of incoming then turn around and say that we cannot define normal what normal is at the beginning of the round? Seems a bit contradictive to me. Yes Last night was abnormal, but in the beginning of the round we all were wondering if the amounts of ince we were getting was normal. Fact of the matter still remains, the incs we were getting were mostly from your block

The point about "normal" vs "abnormal" is purely one of logic/semantics. Until you have a large enough sample to define what is normal it is logically impossible to claim that something is abnormal. If you were getting a similar level of inbound from us every night (whatever that level was) then surely that level would be "normal"?

If your inbound was mostly from our "block" then I'll have to downgrade my opinion of Angel's ability. At no stage prior to last night have we attempted to target Angels - so if you were getting more inbound from us than from anyone else that would mean that compared to us and many others you've led a very sheltered life this round.

Of course a cynic's reply to "the incs we were getting were mostly from your block" would be "well there'd be something badly wrong if it was mainly from your own block". But luckily i'm not so cynical.

Originally Posted by Fyodor

Id assume its the same type of thing youve got going on with vgn and nos. They are not part of your "block" but they help out by taking strategic targets that they may want to hit anyway.

Your intel is somehow flawed. Any definition of a "Block" that includes 1up would definitely include Nos and equally definitely exclude VGN.

Let me make this as clear and unequivocal as I can. We have, and have never this round had, any agreements or cooperation with VGN of any kind - even of the "temporary" kind that Angelsclaim to favour. I have not knowingly spoken to any VGN Officer or HC - and couldn't even name one off the top of my head.

So if the "abnormal" levels of inbound you received came from VGN and your attack on 1up was a retaliation for it I imagine a lot of VGN HCs (if they have a lot of HCs - which I have no idea about) will be laughing till they cry right now.

Originally Posted by Fyodor

This makes no sense as to any of my posts. I said we want a 1on1 war with you now .

So you cancelled your "temporary nap" ear;lier today then immediately afterwards decided that you were going to just attack 1up for the rest of the round? It all makes sense now ...

[Holyboy]

going back a bit first Sid before i read through the other posts since i got home, Mac knows about my family from my time in dragons, not from any talk in that channel, most friendly ties i had with dragons were severed when they got deleted en mass in "insert name of other tick based game here"

[Synthetic_Sid]

Originally Posted by Holyboy

you nearly weren't even targetted at all that night Sid, although 1up ego's might not be able to cope with this we nearly passed you over entirely in favour of others, :|

I'm sure we'd have lived with it.

Originally Posted by Holyboy

I fail to see where i say i wanted a one on one war, i wanted Angels involved in the war

So having got firmly involved in the war why does one of your HC then come onto AD and claim that:

1) You aren't involved in the war - you want a 1 v 1 fight
2) You're now going to leave the war and sever all ties with the allies that you just the day before joined because (as you just said) you wanted to join IN the war.

Can't you see how this appears perplexing to everyone else? Maybe your HC should get together and agree on what it is you wanted - and why you wanted to join the war (after you've agreed that yes, you did join it) then one of you actually make a post about your intentions that you can all agree upon?

Originally Posted by Holyboy

I can't say i'm happy about losing my roids, or any of angels roids, but it's a game and i dont see how people can be more happy sitting on the sidelines watching the game go on as being involved in some way.

Yeah, it would be shame to sit on the side-lines - for example by deciding that for the remainder of the round you'll not ever attack any of the top 4 alliances.

Originally Posted by Holyboy

To all those angels involved in this war now, you joined to play a war game, so stop moaning when you get incs, to all 1up involved in this war now, just fight us, and lets stop flaming each other on boards,

No offence but we're not going to just fight you - that would leave us sitting on the sidelines. You don't have the roids to warrant it.

Originally Posted by Holyboy

it's a war game and big battles are going on, OH NO, SHIT, SOMETHING MUST BE WRONG, BAIL OUT BAIL OUT

If only there were big battles going on - this round's far more about roiding than it is about fighting.

[Synthetic_Sid]

Originally Posted by Holyboy

going back a bit first Sid before i read through the other posts since i got home, Mac knows about my family from my time in dragons, not from any talk in that channel, most friendly ties i had with dragons were severed when they got deleted en mass in "insert name of other tick based game here"

Heh, well you more than held you own in that conversation with him

[Holyboy]

This is of interest to me, as Angels claim they wished to play solo. Didn't they realise that if you are in galaxies with one side more than the other you are inevitably drawn into someone else's war? This to me is just simply shoddy preparation - if you really wanted to be independent you should have simply said buddy with who you like, and attacked any galaxies without Angels in them.

erm, we did

im buddied with 2 1up's, i was told there wasn't a problem with this as Angels has no plans either way at the start of the round.

and btw, we DID target anyone, i had BC access in game so all i could see was gals which did / didnt have Angels in them, we attacked any gal we wanted without Angels in

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Fyodor

This may be due to the fact that we shared buddy packs with exi

Either way, we napped with exi.

Oh, I'm sorry, it's just that activity like this suggests you are in some kind of minority.

[Holyboy]

Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid

Heh, well you more than held you own in that conversation with him

he started it daddy

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by Holyboy

and btw, we DID target anyone, i had BC access in game so all i could see was gals which did / didnt have Angels in them, we attacked any gal we wanted without Angels in

Just out of interest. Can your BC`s choose freely from any none-angels gals?

[Holyboy]

So having got firmly involved in the war why does one of your HC then come onto AD and claim that:

1) You aren't involved in the war - you want a 1 v 1 fight
2) You're now going to leave the war and sever all ties with the allies that you just the day before joined because (as you just said) you wanted to join IN the war.

-------------------------

You told me the war was over Sid and hostilities between EX and 1up had ceased, so surely Angels then started the war?

you cant have your cake and eat it

and i don't make political decisions for the ally, and in all seriousness have no idea what is going on atm but am about to pm HC asking about it about... NOW

although i dont really care, i can happily and without any guilt say that i would just as much like to kill dragons players as i would 1up players if not more, :P

option 1.) NAP 1up block -

most of members against it and previous history suggests it simply wont happen even if 1up wanted it to.

option 2.) Sit on Sidelines -

also referred to as "putting the alliance into a nice position" as lokken puts it. Known to most as fencesitting and a surefire way to lose any and all respect other allies had for the alliance as well as being a damn boring way to play a war game.

option 3.) NAP EX Block -

Yes i'll call it a block, i don't bloody care, there was joint attacks going on on both sides. This option seemed the best at the time partly because of some ( not a majority afaik ) buddy groups being shared with EX as well as early incs coming from 1up block. In addition Angels members in many cases having a dislike of 1up.

A number of things did go on before that decision had been made,

1.) the only restriction we had before the night we hit 1up was not hitting our own gals.
2.) the night before we hit 1up, my own planet was the target of an ill prepared ToF attack in which 14 of the planets who were to be involved blew the operation by prelaunching.

So if we're talking about who started what, it seems ToF more than anyone can claim credit, no major waved attacks had gone on at all until that point.

so to put that in order:

1.) Angels hits any gal without Angels in
2.) ToF (1up block) hits Angels (No block)
3.) Angels (now temp napped to EX) hits 1up while others hit ND and ToF as a retaliation
4.) Entirity of 1up block now hit Angels (undecided) in retaliation for the previous nights attack
5.) i dont bloody know til HC stop idling i left the joint chan after spitting my dummy out with Mac

[Holyboy]

Trev, before 2 nights ago, yes we could

[Kjeldoran]

I promised to myself not to post in such a thread. I figured, it doesn't matter what I say because half the pple on AD are waiting for me to post and then rip every word I said out of context and give false meanings and assumptions to everything I said.

But hey, let's be stupid and post nway.

there's been posted too much crap, lies and plain idiocy in this thread to bother giving a reply on (yes Sid, you are also capable of posting utter shit and half truths, though you're normally a very respected poster). And I mean from both sides (yes, that also means the Angels side).

The reason why this war started and how it all happened is not important as both sides have different opinions and neither side is correct or wrong.

This thread is just another useless thread that shouldn't have been made in the first place (mind you not only the thread starter is responsible for it). I've asked Lokken to close this thread. He said no for various reasons he told me, reasons I find nonsence but let's agree to disagree there, Lokken.

We'll see you on the battlefield, Sid. Little point to fight it out here on AD.

I hope this is the first and last post I made on this thread. Don't expect a reply from me if you're quote this out of content or use it for sheer trolling.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by Treveler

Just out of interest. Can your BC`s choose freely from any none-angels gals?

simple answer: yes

[Game']

Originally Posted by Holyboy

1.) Angels hits any gal without Angels in
2.) ToF (1up block) hits Angels (No block)
3.) Angels (now temp napped to EX) hits 1up while others hit ND and ToF as a retaliation

Im confused, you get hit by ToF yet target 1up in retal, and let the others get the "softer" target, Holyboy you got SCREWED, ****ed up the ass by EXil and then by 1up (( How wide are you ?((

[Game']

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

*Few things*.

So will Angels only be attacking 1up for the rest of the round or not? Just wondering if that annoucement still holds any water seens as you said the entire thread shoudnt of been made?

[Holyboy]

so you told me after i claimed them Kev, :P

EX and LCH dived straight on the ND targets, the ToF lists were both 15 members each, do we take a 15 member list and look like idiots, meaning that the "allies" in the chan dont take us seriously and turn on us, or do we take the 1up list and show we have some balls?

balls, stupidity, i don't know, i don't do politics, never claimed to be able to.

[Cooling]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

~words~

We'll see you on the battlefield, Sid. Little point to fight it out here on AD.

~words~

Aside from calling Sid and members of your own alliance idiots you really could have shortened the whole post into this one line.

[Game']

Originally Posted by Holyboy

so you told me after i claimed them Kev, :P

EX and LCH dived straight on the ND targets, the ToF lists were both 15 members each, do we take a 15 member list and look like idiots, meaning that the "allies" in the chan dont take us seriously and turn on us, or do we take the 1up list and show we have some balls?

balls, stupidity, i don't know, i don't do politics, never claimed to be able to.

Errr NoS anyone?

[The_Fish]

Lets be fair:

Angels, LCH, Exilition and ToT are all proven good pa players who can go for a good fight.

ND and 1up are the same as above (to different standards of course) however, none of the other in our 'block' are proven or of the same quality.

[Holyboy]

Kev, NoS wasn't targetted that night at all

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by Holyboy

Trev, before 2 nights ago, yes we could

So if you have a rotten apple in officer level he can be used to pick targets for another block/ally and your HC would probably never find out? (as long as it was a none-angels gal) Seems a bit risky to me, all it takes in one BC with a disslike towards one ally and the ball could start rolling!

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by Holyboy

so you told me after i claimed them Kev, :P

EX and LCH dived straight on the ND targets, the ToF lists were both 15 members each, do we take a 15 member list and look like idiots, meaning that the "allies" in the chan dont take us seriously and turn on us, or do we take the 1up list and show we have some balls?

balls, stupidity, i don't know, i don't do politics, never claimed to be able to.

Do Angels HC still claim that this was "just" a nap?

[Synthetic_Sid]

Originally Posted by Treveler

Do Angels HC still claim that this was "just" a nap?

Get it right Trev, a "temporary" nap. A non-temporary nap in Angels lingo probably involves exchanging written contracts and/or bodily fluids. And for it to be a block rather than a nap the HC of all involved alliances probably have to all be huddled in front of one computer.

You're so naive on the terms used in PA sometimes.

[Holyboy]

to Trev : only me and Irvine picked targets for raids afaik

to Sid & Trev : we attacked one night with that group of allies to the best of my knowledge, so for us it was very temporary yes

[aNgRyDuCk]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

I promised to myself not to post in such a thread. I figured, it doesn't matter what I say because half the pple on AD are waiting for me to post and then rip every word I said out of context and give false meanings and assumptions to everything I said.

But hey, let's be stupid and post nway.

there's been posted too much crap, lies and plain idiocy in this thread to bother giving a reply on (yes Sid, you are also capable of posting utter shit and half truths, though you're normally a very respected poster). And I mean from both sides (yes, that also means the Angels side).

The reason why this war started and how it all happened is not important as both sides have different opinions and neither side is correct or wrong.

This thread is just another useless thread that shouldn't have been made in the first place (mind you not only the thread starter is responsible for it). I've asked Lokken to close this thread. He said no for various reasons he told me, reasons I find nonsence but let's agree to disagree there, Lokken.

We'll see you on the battlefield, Sid. Little point to fight it out here on AD.

I hope this is the first and last post I made on this thread. Don't expect a reply from me if you're quote this out of content or use it for sheer trolling.

interesting post, you typed all that and said absolutely nothing

[Jonas]

To the planet that roided me early in the round, two waves I belive. Ill check my history and keep attacking you till I die. This is how I like to spend my time online, in a GAME. a WAR GAME.

[Synthetic_Sid]

Originally Posted by Holyboy

to Sid & Trev : we attacked one night with that group of allies to the best of my knowledge, so for us it was very temporary yes

I don't think anyone's disputing that it ended up being temporary. The confusion lies over Angel's intent when they joined that block. Was the intention:

1. To join for 1 night, start a fight with 1up then go back to being solo? WHy join the block if so? Seems irrational at best, suicidal at worst.
2. To join until a specific goal was met then leave? Only seems to make sense if the goal was to lose 25% roids in 1 day - as that was your only noteworthy achievement yesterday.
3. To join for an indeterminate period of time? If so, then surely the only word "temporary" can be applied to the agreement retrospectively - as at the time of joining it had no meaningful limitation on it's duration.

I guess the alternative is that your HC changed their minds. That you joined a block and then the next day decided that you no longer wanted or needed to be in one - that you wanted to keep your newly acquired enemies but lose your allies. It just seems strange that having decided that you wanted to join in a block war (and from what you said about your target choosing your group were determined to restart it if, indeed, it was currently not ongoing), you successfully manage to doso, then promptly decide you want to pull out of it. AND then get one of your HC posting a thread on AD about how Angels aren't interested in being in a block war.

Ah well, I give up trying to figure out what you were trying to achieve. If you ever work it out be sure to let me know.

[noah02]

I beleive pilkara will be watched over the next few days to see how things are going.

This has been the most roid swapping round i have ever seen.

[Holyboy]

Sid in all seriousness i have no bloody idea, i was told it was a temporary arrangement and added to the chan, i did tp there, we attacked, i got into an argument, i left, no idea what since, :P

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid

Get it right Trev, a "temporary" nap. A non-temporary nap in Angels lingo probably involves exchanging written contracts and/or bodily fluids. And for it to be a block rather than a nap the HC of all involved alliances probably have to all be huddled in front of one computer.

You're so naive on the terms used in PA sometimes.

If not naive I am at least very confused. This seems to be a temporary nap that includes coordinated attacks against 1up after ToF attacked them, and it was done to prove that they had balls.

Somewhere down that line I just fall off!

[Holyboy]

read back.

ToF attacked Angels
we joined attacks to be able to hit the block, it was agreed to hit 60 ND targets (main target) 30 ToF targets (secondary) and 30 1up (keeping occupied basically)

these were further split into lists, list 1 = 30 1up list 2 = 30 ND list 3 = 30 ND list 4 = 15 ToF list 5 = 15 ToF

LCH and EX both dived on the ND lists in seconds, both were gone, the other two were obviously for smaller allies as they had only 15 targets, all of which were not highly ranked. This basically left us with no option other than to hit the 1up list.

[i]no irc logs, especially when they are as untidy as that - get them hosted.[i/]

Angels first and last night in the channel afaik

[Holyboy]

as you can see, it was a coordinated attack, but it's aim wasn't 1up, and the only reason Angels took 1up was because noone else either a.) had the guts to, or b.) deliberately wanted us to hit 1up so that we would get hit back.

either way it doesn't matter, let that be a lesson to all you fencesitters out there, stay on your fence, it's nice and safe up there, you might get ridiculed for fencesitting, but then you get ridiculed for doing anything else as well.

Would any one of the people saying Angels did everything wrong tell me what other option we had?

[Wishmaster]

nothing wrong with attacking

but seems weird to think 1up wouldnt respond.

and also - to think they would go 1on1.

[Synthetic_Sid]

Originally Posted by Holyboy

we joined attacks to be able to hit the block

Haven't quoted the rest as I've no major dispute with your account the target picking. Though you did say earlier you hit some ND as well as 1up - which by your own account would mean that LCH, exi and some angels ALL hit ND. Doesn't exactly give you the moral high ground when you then get attacked by multiple alliances yourself.

Why did you need to join their attacks to hit 1up/ND? Last I heard the launch button worked just fine vs our planets for everyone. If you were planning to stay in the block it would make sense - but all you gained by joining the block then leaving the next day (if you did) is to convince us that you were in it. I appreciate you don't personally know why - but that issue, I think, is the main thing the rest of the universe can't understand.

[Holyboy]

because otherwise we'd be piggying each other, and overall effectiveness would have been reduced. afaik i havent mentioned we hit ND, maybe another person from Angels has, but that night we targetted only 1up i know that for sure

[Synthetic_Sid]

Originally Posted by Holyboy

as you can see, it was a coordinated attack, but it's aim wasn't 1up, and the only reason Angels took 1up was because noone else either a.) had the guts to, or b.) deliberately wanted us to hit 1up so that we would get hit back.

either way it doesn't matter, let that be a lesson to all you fencesitters out there, stay on your fence, it's nice and safe up there, you might get ridiculed for fencesitting, but then you get ridiculed for doing anything else as well.

Would any one of the people saying Angels did everything wrong tell me what other option we had?

My last post for today then I'm off to bed. I'll try to answer your question at the end as honestly as I can and without any sarcasm.

The first thing I think you need to accept is that you weren't fence-sitting in the first place. Obviously LCH/Exi put a lot of effort into convincing you that you were but I just don't see it. Here's why. The only situation in which I can see the term fence-sitting really applying is when most of the top alliances are divided into two camps. Neither WP or HR (the top 2) alliances were on either side of our war, so I can't see that the top alliances can be divided into two camps to put a fence between in the first place. To take the situation to it's extreme, if the #19 and #20 alliance were fighing the #18 and the #21 would angels be fence-sitters if you didn't join in? Where does the boundary lie that makes all non-participants fence-sitters? You were fed propaganda convincing you that not joining in this particular fight was fence-sitting - and you swallowed it totally.

What could you have done? Well that depends very much on what Angels wanted to achieve.

If your goal was to get to the centre of the action immediately - without any concern over the likely effect on your rank - then you could have fully joined the LCH/Exi side without any reservations or pretentions about it being temporary (as in short term). This I would characterise as the stupid option.

If your goal was to maximise your rank in the short term plus increase your political leverage then your best bet would have been to stay solo and roid a bit of everyone while being careful to make it clear you weren't targetting any specific alliance in total. That would keep you growing fast, no way would either side in our war try to deliberately target you - as neither of us would want an extra enemy - and the stronger you grew the more political leverage you'd have when it came to negotiating with other alliances on who to side with later in the round. This I would characterise as the conservative option.

The third option - the one that would genuinely have required some balls - would have been to take on one of the two big alliances NOT in the war (WP/HR): either alone or with some small alliance to help you. This would offer the biggest rewards, but also the most risk (of the three optons I've descrbed). You could then genuinely try to have a 1v1 war - and would have every right to be indignant if your larger target went and got allies. This I'd characterise as the bold option.

Somehow you managed to find a 4th option which combined all the worst elements of the three I've presented while minimising the benefits.

[Synthetic_Sid]

Originally Posted by Holyboy

because otherwise we'd be piggying each other, and overall effectiveness would have been reduced. afaik i havent mentioned we hit ND, maybe another person from Angels has, but that night we targetted only 1up i know that for sure

It was fyodor who said you also hit ND - in the post where he refers refers to your participation in the joint attack channel as "during the NAP". You definitely did hit some NDs that night - whether they were just wrongly IDed as 1ups by your intel or not I don't know. Not that it's of major relevance either way.

[BlueDemon]

Seems to me, i heard a rumor, sometime back, that 1up would never block. Would someone be kind enough to clarify this for me.
And as for the declaration of war. Agreed, it prolly could have been put forth in a better way, but just the same, Sid (whom i have heard has an outstanding organization) you, sir, have been challenged on the field of battle, what say you?

[Cayl]

Originally Posted by BlueDemon

Seems to me, i heard a rumor, sometime back, that 1up would never block. Would someone be kind enough to clarify this for me.

We've been over this multiple times in multiple threads, but lucky for you, I'm bored.
r11, we challenged ourselves to win without blocking. We consider this point proved.
r12, we challenged ourselves to win at 2/3 strength. We consider ths point proved.
r13, our motives were not publically declared. We saw which way the wind was blowing and adjusted our plans accordingly. We're not denying or obscuring the fact that we're in a block.

And as for the declaration of war. Agreed, it prolly could have been put forth in a better way, but just the same, Sid (whom i have heard has an outstanding organization) you, sir, have been challenged on the field of battle, what say you?

I understand that you were moved by Fyodor's eloquent post, (heh), however, if you take the time to read through the rest of the thread, you'll discover something like 10 posts of "what say you" from Sid himself.

Good luck on the reading, it gets better with practice.

[Rinoa]

I like the fact that WP and HR have barely been mentioned here at all. Good to see the number 1 and 2 alliances are managing to stay out the limelight atm

[The_Fish]

'atm' being the key word, there is no chance at all HR or WP will win this round.

Especially HR

[Kree]

since when ppl give insight info about target picking and their military tactics ?

wonder why some ppl dare to reply to this, i mean its entertaining but Holyboy why you feel the urge to reply in such detailed way ? lol

[Gio2k]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

'atm' being the key word, there is no chance at all HR or WP will win this round.

Especially HR

Seems you like each other When's the wedding?

[Alki]

Originally Posted by lokken

The issue is clearly whether 1up actively targeted Angels or not, I'd wager they didn't, and that 1up simply hit Angels members because they were buddy packed with a load of Exilition players as has been claimed. Think it's pretty obvious EX were going to be hostile with 1up and its allies.

This is of interest to me, as Angels claim they wished to play solo. Didn't they realise that if you are in galaxies with one side more than the other you are inevitably drawn into someone else's war? This to me is just simply shoddy preparation - if you really wanted to be independent you should have simply said buddy with who you like, and attacked any galaxies without Angels in them.

Instead you forced yourself onto one side of a war you didn't really want to be in, and instead of being in a nice position like WP or HR you've gone and ****ed yourself by not only poor member positioning, slipping up by choosing sides hence ****ing up any strategy you had, getting Sid's attention to beat the living shit out of you early on to end your round and then make an even more terrible political error by cutting yourself from any help that you could get and making some disastrous PR in the hope that war would be suspended so you could take it one to one which is stupid when you expect them to do the opposite.

You claimed you aren't politicians; that's evident, and you've paid the price for it. I have no agenda here, I'm merely giving my assessment on what's presented here. Angels HC have made a litany of errors, hence why they are in such a grave position.

oh stfu no1 cares what u think, if care to ever get ur facts right Angels were allowed to pack with who they wanted SOME people chose to pack with exil players

[Alki]

Originally Posted by Treveler

If not naive I am at least very confused. This seems to be a temporary nap that includes coordinated attacks

smells alot like last round dont it

[LukeyLove]

Exciting stuff <3 Angels ! All this is slightly melodramatic but still.. entertaining

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Alki

oh stfu no1 cares what u think, if care to ever get ur facts right Angels were allowed to pack with who they wanted SOME people chose to pack with exil players

Even so, it doesn't move away from the fact that you've ****ed up on many other levels.

If there's anyone you should be chastising it's the Angels HC who got themselves into this mess.

[Karandras]

Originally Posted by Holyboy

read back.

ToF attacked Angels
we joined attacks to be able to hit the block, it was agreed to hit 60 ND targets (main target) 30 ToF targets (secondary) and 30 1up (keeping occupied basically)

these were further split into lists, list 1 = 30 1up list 2 = 30 ND list 3 = 30 ND list 4 = 15 ToF list 5 = 15 ToF

LCH and EX both dived on the ND lists in seconds, both were gone, the other two were obviously for smaller allies as they had only 15 targets, all of which were not highly ranked. This basically left us with no option other than to hit the 1up list.

Reading this, it seems to me that Angels got played like a fiddle. From what you say it sounds like they forced you into getting the attention of 1up, so meanwhile they could go after the easier roids in relative peace. Or to sum it all up into one word; flak.

[Goatsemaster]

Originally Posted by Alki

oh stfu no1 cares what u think, if care to ever get ur facts right Angels were allowed to pack with who they wanted SOME people chose to pack with exil players

I care what Lokken thinks.

[Holyboy]

Kree - because i hate the rumour mill that is AD with a passion,