Also have you seen the score? You might realized we have never trailed, and that you never closed the gap to single digits.
First off, I would like to thank you. Thank you for taking out the inactive and weaker players on the front lines in the beginning. That actually helped us determine who was simming and who was really there to fight. But once we figured that out, we did better (score was around 16 to 0 at that point I believe, so not discrediting you there). We actually made it so that you guys had to use the excuse that we are a larger alliance and you guys had players on VM (sorry I forgot you can fall back on those excuses any time, even though a little under half of our points are in O46, where we are dominating)
Umm yeah that's exactly the problem, a few hours. That needs to be way faster to get good results. A few hours in a 12 hour siege isn't tight. So yes makes a lot of sense.
We sent tight support in the
first few hours and stacked up the city with DLU. I'm pretty sure that's what you should do, but you're saying that is bad strategy. OK. But please enlighten me with your "strategy". Your "strategy" of sending tight support, do you mean keeping the support waves tight 12 hours straight until the siege ends? Because that purely depends on how much DLU we even have, and that doesn't make much sense to me at all :\
Almost all your support was already in and yet we still broke it?? Support from all 40 players of your alliance, against 4 of our active players (yes, only 4 of us were there to send flyers) and you lost that siege? Looks like you're making our case against you stronger.
As I repeat now, and as I have repeated
thousands of times before, you guys ALWAYS seem to forget where we are located. Look at a world map for christ sake. Do you not see the rest of us in 46, where our support takes 4+ hours to get to the front lines in 45? Sure we can't use that as an excuse for losing cities to you, but you
definitely can't use it to say we can't hold a siege. All the defense we had in there was mostly around the cities closer to the front lines, which is only a portion of our total numbers.
um, like you do know before they joined me the score between you 2 was 24:9 SAX?? That was without any of my help!! So like, are you delusional or have you been brain washed by your leaders insanity to post such statements??
Let's see....I'll repeat that they jumped to an early lead by taking out our weaker players, so good job on their part. Was around 16:0 at that point. When they took out our weaker players, what was left of us, those skilled enough to put up a good defense, all grouped together. I was 3 hours from the front lines and in 46, and I moved to the front lines to help out the fight. Since then we did better and came back. That would make the score 8:9 afterwards. So yes, they were indeed struggling in that fairly long stretch of time after the initial push.
All in all,
please keep using those two points in your argument. The total score and how much bigger we are. Since we are doing well now, you guys keep bringing up those numbers like we have short term memory loss. I will stop pointing out how irrelevant they are as of now...but still, keep using them if it makes you guys feel better about yourselves. 8)