View Poll Results: Will anyone else build a World Wonder? If so, who?

Voters
18. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, BTDT/KCCO will change their minds and build a World Wonder.

    3 16.67%
  • Someone in the NW will build a WW.

    0 0%
  • TMF, in the SE, will build a World Wonder.

    0 0%
  • TRA will still try to build a World Wonder.

    1 5.56%
  • No, no one else will build a World Wonder.

    6 33.33%
  • Betty White/Your Mom

    8 44.44%
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 172

Thread: The WW Race

  1. #41
    Senator Meherrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In a universe of my own design
    Posts
    4,095

    Default

    I know about the Trump transition team requesting resignations of all current US ambassadors, because I just read an article in a reliable news source that mentioned it. I don't know any more than that, I just know they are going to do it.

    See how that works?
    And now I'll tell you what's against us, an art that's lived for centuries. Go through the years and you will find what's blackened all of history. Against us is the law with its immensity of strength and power - against us is the law! Police know how to make a man a guilty or an innocent. Against us is the power of police! The shameless lies that men have told will ever more be paid in gold - against us is the power of the gold! Against us is racial hatred and the simple fact that we are poor.
    - The Ballad of Sacco and Vanzetti, Joan Baez

  2. #42
    Consul Luisss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    10,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Meherrin View Post
    I know about the Trump transition team requesting resignations of all current US ambassadors, because I just read an article in a reliable news source that mentioned it. I don't know any more than that, I just know they are going to do it.

    See how that works?
    Yes, I see how that particular scenario works. I do not see how it applies here. The actual equivalent would be if you said you knew about the trump team requesting resignations before the trump team had even decided what it was going to do. Then, you called the whole team liars for a few months.
    US1 - Redemption. US2 - Luisss.

    "Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."

  3. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luisss View Post
    I do not see how it applies here.
    Slick Willy at it again...


    "Contending that his statement that "there's nothing going on between us" had been truthful because he had no ongoing relationship with Lewinsky at the time he was questioned, Clinton said, "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

  4. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cisalpine View Post
    Basically. What's a win when you have no competition? It's like watching NASCAR that only has one car on the track. So if you think about it, we're just making the server more fun by encouraging the Natars to build, thereby actually giving GONE an opponent to race against. No need for thanks. We enjoy it.
    So if that's the case why continue? I wouldn't personally waste my time and energy in a server with an alliance that has zero desire to try to win. Since we're doing analogies, that would be like a football team showing up with zero desire to win a game.

    Further, the competition is going to be there whether BTDT is really building a wonder or not. Perhaps different strategies will be employed by BTDT and GONE if that's the case, but it's going to come down to whether BTDT is able to keep GONE from building the WW or not.

    I'm obviously out of the loop regarding leadership, but I still find it highly questionable that BTDT isn't going to build a WW.

  5. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    So if that's the case why continue?
    Because some people don't like Luisss. You haven't been around long enough for him to screw you yet. But he will.

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    I still find it highly questionable that BTDT isn't going to build a WW.
    Why? They've gone Natar before. It actually makes a lot of sense. Effectively the Natars are building and defending BTDT`s WW. This frees up resources and defense for fighting GONE.

  6. #46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Bane View Post
    Why? They've gone Natar before. It actually makes a lot of sense. Effectively the Natars are building and defending BTDT`s WW. This frees up resources and defense for fighting GONE.
    In other words, there is going to be an endgame competition between BTDT and GONE, meaning that the claims that a GONE win would be meaningless are nonsensical.

  7. #47

    Default

    I like you. Lying Luisss argues semantics for two months because he doesn't know what else to do. You hold your own. You should join us next round.

    Focusing on this round...

    I am not BTDT. If they are following my above scenario it's brilliant and a GONE win would be more meaningful. I don't know that they are and my current opinion is GONE`s effort is meaningless and nonsensical.

  8. #48
    Consul Lurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Midwest U.S.
    Posts
    5,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luisss View Post
    That when someone says "I know about your op" before the op has even been planned they are not telling the truth.
    However, a reasonable person would also accept the explanation that "know(ing) about your op" could also include simply knowing that an op will be planned in the near future. This would count as "knowing about" such an op, even if the details aren't there. You are, apparently, not such a person.

    A similar analogy could be...Let's say that I told my wife I'm going to make dinner. It's 7 AM. I don't have a single clue what I'm going to make or even what time it will be ready to serve. Hell, technically I didn't even say I was going to make it tonight, or anytime this month. Haven't even thought that out yet. If I get a text message from one of her friends saying, "Hey, I hear you're making dinner" a reasonable person would not freak out and say "ZOMGWTFLOL U LIAR I HAVENT EVEN LIEK PLANNED DAT **** YET YO **** YOU *****"
    Qui tacet consentire videtur, ubi loqui debuit ac potuit.

    [7:32 AM] Jason (Al Bundy raidslave): Who the **** loses an arti to 18 phalanx
    [7:32 AM] Old Timer US1: The same faction that loses one to 66 legos

  9. #49
    Senator Meherrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In a universe of my own design
    Posts
    4,095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    So if that's the case why continue? I wouldn't personally waste my time and energy in a server with an alliance that has zero desire to try to win. Since we're doing analogies, that would be like a football team showing up with zero desire to win a game.

    Further, the competition is going to be there whether BTDT is really building a wonder or not. Perhaps different strategies will be employed by BTDT and GONE if that's the case, but it's going to come down to whether BTDT is able to keep GONE from building the WW or not.

    I'm obviously out of the loop regarding leadership, but I still find it highly questionable that BTDT isn't going to build a WW.
    As leader emeritus, I can assure you, we are not planning on playing a traditional endgame. Oh, we might take a few WW villagrs and turn them into something useful (that half-wheat is a nice feature) but spending time and resources on the sandcastle race is not what we came here for.

    You ask why play if we don't want to "win." We play because we enjoy the things we get to do in the game - build accounts, engage in offensive and defensive strategies and operations, that sort of thing. And we like doing it with friends we know and trust. It's the journey, nit the destination.

    Have you looked up the meaning of BTDT? All of our core players have won conventional endgames, some of more times than we can remember. Many of us have held or sat WW villages. We have, as it says on the label, been there and done that. The thrill of having our names in the hall of fame isn't what it used to be. Oh, we play conventional endgames too, some of us, when we feel like it, but this time we decided just to blow stuff up.

    There's a (possibly perverse) thrill in trying to keep the opposition from doing what they want to do. As you pointed out when you said there would still be competition. That's what we came here for, the gameplay, not the sandcastle.
    And now I'll tell you what's against us, an art that's lived for centuries. Go through the years and you will find what's blackened all of history. Against us is the law with its immensity of strength and power - against us is the law! Police know how to make a man a guilty or an innocent. Against us is the power of police! The shameless lies that men have told will ever more be paid in gold - against us is the power of the gold! Against us is racial hatred and the simple fact that we are poor.
    - The Ballad of Sacco and Vanzetti, Joan Baez

  10. #50
    Senator Cisalpine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Sunshine state
    Posts
    3,506

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luisss View Post
    Cis, how many times do I have to pull out this quote?






    My question to you was with laughter in my head because as I explained in my very next post in the quoted thread, you said you knew about my op before I had even begun planning it. You did not say you knew I was going to plan my op, not that an op existed, you used specific language that you know you have to take back because it was not truthful.
    O....M....G....Luissssss. You can not POSSIBLY be that thick. DETAILS. I NEVER said I knew DETAILS. Go read it again. And you can whip it out as often as you'd like. It won't change a thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    In other words, there is going to be an endgame competition between BTDT and GONE, meaning that the claims that a GONE win would be meaningless are nonsensical.
    How long have you played Travian? Do you have ANY idea how HARD it is to get the Natars to start building? THAT is a much greater challenge than building an imaginary sandcastle. I know because I was there and played that year long (guesstimate....it was a looooong server) server. It was the most fun I've ever had playing Travian. We had to constantly hit the WW to keep it from getting to 100. After a long stalemate, the Natars finally started building. We had to keep hitting the WW to keep it from reaching 100 before the Natars. If you're a group of people who like hitting and killing things, what better team to be on than the Natars?

    Maybe after you've played long enough, and have won enough, you'll understand the draw. It's a much bigger, harder challenge than simply building the WW to 100. You just keep on trying to convince yourself it's meaningless and nonsensical. I'm sure it will make you feel better about yourself in the end. I mean, do you WANT us to build a WW? It would be highly foolish of you if you did because you'd lose FOR SURE then. At least going up against us and the Natars you have a fighting chance. And yes. Winning the server without any competition is meaningless. Remember that lone car? Only way it will mean anything is if you can beat the Natars. If the Natars don't start building, you have an empty win. A win you can't brag about. Well, I guess you could if you wanted, but it'd be kind of embarrassing in my opinion.
    Last edited by Cisalpine; 01-07-2017 at 06:51 AM.
    The ORIGINALCisalpine! Retired


    http://forum.travian.us/showthread.php?t=95436 for the Awesome Natar Win
    http://forum.travian.us/showthread.php?t=93085 For US S1 history

  11. #51
    Artisan Eric Rasputin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    765

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cisalpine View Post
    Basically. What's a win when you have no competition? It's like watching NASCAR that only has one car on the track. So if you think about it, we're just making the server more fun by encouraging the Natars to build, thereby actually giving GONE an opponent to race against. No need for thanks. We enjoy it.
    Outsider post: I don't think it's GONE's fault that no one is competing against them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ms. Evil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by The Blazin1 View Post
    Aw, you shouldn't have.
    Don't you have a hole to die in?

  12. #52
    Consul Luisss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    10,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lurk View Post
    However, a reasonable person would also accept the explanation that "know(ing) about your op" could also include simply knowing that an op will be planned in the near future. This would count as "knowing about" such an op, even if the details aren't there. You are, apparently, not such a person.

    A similar analogy could be...Let's say that I told my wife I'm going to make dinner. It's 7 AM. I don't have a single clue what I'm going to make or even what time it will be ready to serve. Hell, technically I didn't even say I was going to make it tonight, or anytime this month. Haven't even thought that out yet. If I get a text message from one of her friends saying, "Hey, I hear you're making dinner" a reasonable person would not freak out and say "ZOMGWTFLOL U LIAR I HAVENT EVEN LIEK PLANNED DAT **** YET YO **** YOU *****"
    Did Cis ever say "I know about the dinner you made"?

    If so, again, the analogy does not apply to the circumstances in question.

    Also, I'm not the one who freaked out. I simply said I had not planned an operation for them to know any details about as they claimed. Or am I supposed to let accusations of me lying go by and never say anything?

    Cis, you knew nothing about the op when you said you did. You knew not whether A) one actually existed, B) when I was going to plan it, or C) any details about it. You knew that I might be planning an op in the future based on a post in my general chat which I already knew had spying eyes inside. You said you knew about the operation because I "crow" nonstop. You were not being truthful. Simple as that.
    US1 - Redemption. US2 - Luisss.

    "Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."

  13. #53
    Consul Luisss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    10,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Rasputin View Post
    Outsider post: I don't think it's GONE's fault that no one is competing against them.
    Only on us1 can it be the frontrunners whose job it is to create their own competition. And when they do not, their win will be discounted
    US1 - Redemption. US2 - Luisss.

    "Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."

  14. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Bane View Post
    I like you. Lying Luisss argues semantics for two months because he doesn't know what else to do. You hold your own. You should join us next round.

    Focusing on this round...

    I am not BTDT. If they are following my above scenario it's brilliant and a GONE win would be more meaningful. I don't know that they are and my current opinion is GONE`s effort is meaningless and nonsensical.
    My only dog in this particular fight is the spin coming forth by certain posters that have basically said that GONE doesn't win no matter what. Not that you said that, of course.

  15. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Meherrin View Post
    There's a (possibly perverse) thrill in trying to keep the opposition from doing what they want to do. As you pointed out when you said there would still be competition. That's what we came here for, the gameplay, not the sandcastle.
    Completely understandable. Thank you for the clarity.

  16. #56
    Consul Lurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Midwest U.S.
    Posts
    5,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luisss View Post
    Did Cis ever say "I know about the dinner you made"?

    If so, again, the analogy does not apply to the circumstances in question.
    No analogy is perfect. That's why they're called analogies. The one that I used applies just fine, and you have yet to prove otherwise. In both the analogy and the reality, no-one claimed to have any details or timeframes.

    What makes your response to me all the more dumb is the fact that "I know about the dinner you made" is way stronger than what Cis claimed to know. She didn't even claim knowledge that you had planned anything (you hadn't, at that point, allegedly). All that she claimed was that she heard about an op. Heard about it. What that means is, for her to have not lied, all it takes is for someone to have told her that you were going to have an op. That's an extremely low bar given that people say all kinds of things far less believable than "Lulu is talking about an op" yet don't receive nearly the same level of **** that you're flinging right now. You've said way crazier things than that. So have I. It's the Internet for godssakes.

    Also. I wasn't saying you freaked out, necessarily. But, IMO, you did overreact very badly and the fact that you haven't let any of this **** go after 2 months have gone by just supports that opinion. Cis probably overreacted too, from my perspective. But if I remember correctly, you were the one that started that entire *****torm.

    Also. Reply to the first part of my post. Not just the analogy that you can semantic around all day.
    Last edited by Lurk; 01-07-2017 at 12:43 PM. Reason: Fixing English grammatical parameter things. I am ashamed to admit that Lulu and I share a same first language, and it shows.
    Qui tacet consentire videtur, ubi loqui debuit ac potuit.

    [7:32 AM] Jason (Al Bundy raidslave): Who the **** loses an arti to 18 phalanx
    [7:32 AM] Old Timer US1: The same faction that loses one to 66 legos

  17. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Meherrin View Post
    Not sure how that would have worked since the game was finished.

    The winners screen (which is automatically generated) defaulted to the runner-up because there was no provision for a Natar win. Now that the Natar win is coded into the game as a means of bringing games that run too long to an end, I would hope the code generating the winners screen would have been changed to accommodate that possibility. One would probably have to ask an MH to be sure.
    Yes if the Natars win it should be correctly recorded on the winners screen automatically from the coding. Failing that I get very busy with manually editing and re-posting the automated sysmsg....

  18. #58

    Default

    Oh snap!! Now what will Luis do? His default hope of a participation medal is gone.

  19. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    that have basically said that GONE doesn't win no matter what.
    Well if GONE wins a one man race is it really a win? No. Luisss might think so but he's part of that generation that got participation trophies and was wrapped in bubble wrap. Speaking of "Bubble Wrap"...

    Quote Originally Posted by Luisss View Post
    Also, I'm not the one who freaked out.
    Yes you are. That's why you're here arguing semantics from November.

    Let... it... go...

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    that have basically said that GONE doesn't win no matter what.
    Luisss is a special snowflake that is both entitled and was always told he was the smartest boy. That's why he can't let it go.... he can't bear to admit he might be wrong. That leads me to this...

    Personally I think you can lose even if you win. If there's a race as Cis described it then this server drags on for another 200 days. 200 more days of wasted gold, blown up caps and lost hammers. 200 more days of waking up in the middle of the night for end game duty. All so Lying Luisss aka "Bubble Wrap" can add his first big boy win to his sig.

    That sounds like a loss to me...

  20. #60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vicious_Machine View Post
    Oh snap!! Now what will Luis do? His default hope of a participation medal is gone.
    It apparently doesn't matter. The bases have already been covered by the spin-masters. For those following along, here's the spin-masters spinning based on possible outcomes:

    1) BTDT prevents GONE from winning is a win for BTDT.

    2) A GONE victory is meaningless because they're the only team building.

  21. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Bane View Post
    Well if GONE wins a one man race is it really a win? No. Luisss might think so but he's part of that generation that got participation trophies and was wrapped in bubble wrap. Speaking of "Bubble Wrap"...
    Maybe he is. I have no idea. All that I know is that there are players here from BTDT claiming that GONE doesn't win no matter what the outcome is. Is that not also a participation trophy? Sorry man, but that's spin. Either BTDT is able to prevent GONE from winning or they aren't. It's pretty cut and dry. They are successful, they can claim victory and I'll tip my cap to them. They are not, and I'm going to claim victory regardless of their nonsensical argument that they didn't try to build a WW.

  22. #62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    It apparently doesn't matter. The bases have already been covered by the spin-masters. For those following along, here's the spin-masters spinning based on possible outcomes:

    1) BTDT prevents GONE from winning is a win for BTDT.

    2) A GONE victory is meaningless because they're the only team building.

    Maybe I will add some nice top-spin to my shots later on. But for now, spot-on.......
    Usx: crybaby or S.I.M.P. when I play.
    US1: no_no
    US2: crybaby

  23. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    Either BTDT is able to prevent GONE from winning or they aren't. It's pretty cut and dry.
    It's not cut and dry. If GONE wins there will be logs showing them in league with botters, multi accounts and hackers. So a "win" will always have an asterisk next to it and it'll always be a point of shame for GONE`s members and a taint upon S1.

  24. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Bane View Post
    It's not cut and dry. If GONE wins there will be logs showing them in league with botters, multi accounts and hackers. So a "win" will always have an asterisk next to it and it'll always be a point of shame for GONE`s members and a taint upon S1.
    So botters, multi-accounts, and hackers = bad, but spies, deception, and the like are okay?

    Anyone that knows me or has read my posts know where I stand as far as dishonesty and cheating goes. If there are players in my alliance that are cheating, I'd prefer that they were caught and booted from the game, even if it means losing top accounts and giving an advantage to another alliance. That's just how I roll.

    What bothers me is the hypocrisy involved when spies and other things get called out and people defend it by saying "it's just a part of the game." Nonsense. Dishonesty is dishonesty.

    And it would only be a point in shame for those in the alliance that took part in it or enabled it.

    My account is my account. I don't have duals or use add-ons or tools that are out there that many players partake in because that's just not me. Certainly not the biggest player and by far am not the best player on Travian, but at the end of the day my account is what it is because of me and me alone. I develop friendships on every server that I play because I am a team player that will do what I can to help my alliance mates out, whether it be a resource push for someone holding an artifact or advice to newer players that are just looking for some guidance. People that know me trust me because they know that they can divulge information to me and that it will not leak out all over the place.

  25. #65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    So botters, multi-accounts, and hackers = bad, but spies, deception, and the like are okay?
    Yes! This first three are obvious no nos and I genuinely think you're too caught up on the "deception" thing. Is a fake deception? Yes. It's necessary but there are boundaries.

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    And it would only be a point in shame for those in the alliance that took part in it or enabled it.
    Ethics has a lot of gray to it. I didn't see you protest in Skype during the conversation of your now deleted top raiders tactics. In fact I don't think I've seen you protest anything that I would consider cheating. Is your silence enabling it?

  26. #66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Bane View Post
    Ethics has a lot of gray to it. I didn't see you protest in Skype during the conversation of your now deleted top raiders tactics. In fact I don't think I've seen you protest anything that I would consider cheating. Is your silence enabling it?
    Exactly what rules did they break? I must have missed it.

    And seriously, you're comparing sending a fake attack to someone having access to chatlogs, up to and including leadership chats?

  27. #67
    Consul Luisss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    10,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lurk View Post
    No analogy is perfect. That's why they're called analogies. The one that I used applies just fine, and you have yet to prove otherwise. In both the analogy and the reality, no-one claimed to have any details or timeframes.

    What makes your response to me all the more dumb is the fact that "I know about the dinner you made" is way stronger than what Cis claimed to know. She didn't even claim knowledge that you had planned anything (you hadn't, at that point, allegedly). All that she claimed was that she heard about an op. Heard about it. What that means is, for her to have not lied, all it takes is for someone to have told her that you were going to have an op. That's an extremely low bar given that people say all kinds of things far less believable than "Lulu is talking about an op" yet don't receive nearly the same level of **** that you're flinging right now. You've said way crazier things than that. So have I. It's the Internet for godssakes.

    Also. I wasn't saying you freaked out, necessarily. But, IMO, you did overreact very badly and the fact that you haven't let any of this **** go after 2 months have gone by just supports that opinion. Cis probably overreacted too, from my perspective. But if I remember correctly, you were the one that started that entire *****torm.

    Also. Reply to the first part of my post. Not just the analogy that you can semantic around all day.
    Lurk You did not even read what Cis said?

    She literally said "I know about your op."

    Good lord, get over yourself and actually read what you're arguing over. I laid it out to you weeks ago now, there is no need to try and "remember correctly". If people bothered to actually look at what they're arguing about before coming on here and accusing me of lying we would not be where we are now.

    To reply to the first part of your post, I not think that saying I know about your op can reasonably be construed to mean that she was claiming she knew that I might be planning an op in the future. I say that given that [i]I gave her the opportunity to correct herself in my very next post [i] when I asked her "Oh, you know about the op that I have not even planned yet?"

    Then, rather than say "Yeah, I saw you were going to plan an op sillyhead" she continues the facade.

    Also, you speak spanish?
    US1 - Redemption. US2 - Luisss.

    "Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."

  28. #68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    Exactly what rules did they break? I must have missed it.
    I'll message you. Also I think Luisss is your spy. It explains the Ops and so much more.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luisss View Post
    She literally said "I know about your op."
    Yo Bubble Wrap... semantics... let it go...

  29. #69
    Consul Luisss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    10,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Bane View Post
    I'll message you. Also I think Luisss is your spy. It explains the Ops and so much more.



    Yo Bubble Wrap... semantics... let it go...
    Watch out DevilAnse, he's going to try to convince you I'm a spy and ask you to spy for him like he did so many others.
    US1 - Redemption. US2 - Luisss.

    "Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."

  30. #70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Bane View Post
    I'll message you. Also I think Luisss is your spy. It explains the Ops and so much more.
    I have a pretty good idea who the spy is, and it's not him.

  31. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Bane View Post
    I didn't see you protest in Skype during the conversation of your now deleted top raiders tactics. In fact I don't think I've seen you protest anything that I would consider cheating. Is your silence enabling it?
    I assume you are talking about Guillionqt (or however his name was spelt, don't remember). As far as I know there was no valid basis for the accusations other than his constant presence as a top 1 raider, which is not really a valid reason. Feel free to fill me in if I'm wrong.

  32. #72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by banzai130 View Post
    I assume you are talking about Guillionqt (or however his name was spelt, don't remember). As far as I know there was no valid basis for the accusations other than his constant presence as a top 1 raider, which is not really a valid reason. Feel free to fill me in if I'm wrong.
    And if that's the case, that guy deleted right after I joined GONE. I joined the server late and wasn't in any of the precursor alliances.

  33. #73

    Default

    I just looked it up and I joined GONE on 10-30-16 and that Guilion guy deleted 11-2-16.

  34. #74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lurk View Post
    No analogy is perfect. In both the analogy and the reality, no-one claimed to have any details or timeframes.
    You have far too much common sense, for Luisss to understand you, and I have to spread some rep around.. Plus he changes his version of present/future tense every time he "quotes" Cis with his own words..

    Quote Originally Posted by Luisss View Post
    She literally said "I know about your op."
    No, she literally said "Everyone does.."

    Quote Originally Posted by Luisss View Post
    I not think
    Obviously..

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAnse View Post
    Either BTDT is able to prevent GONE from winning or they aren't. It's pretty cut and dry..
    I concur with this, I think GONE can claim it a victory if they can withstand our hits and still pull out a win over the Natar sand castle.. GONE will not have competition in building it, so that is a moot point, but they will have to defend it and that is where GONE can claim the victory..


    Quote Originally Posted by Meherrin View Post
    We play because we enjoy the things we get to do in the game - build accounts, engage in offensive and defensive strategies and operations, that sort of thing. And we like doing it with friends we know and trust. It's the journey, nit the destination.

    There's a (possibly perverse) thrill in trying to keep the opposition from doing what they want to do. As you pointed out when you said there would still be competition. That's what we came here for, the gameplay, not the sandcastle.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cisalpine View Post
    Maybe after you've played long enough, and have won enough, you'll understand the draw.
    ^^ Everything these two ladies have said, and let me add another reason.. For me personally, I spawn in on a server, and find friends whom I love to chat with in skype, and work with in game.. It is the friendships that bring me back server after server.. The fact that a WW will reach 100, and that server ends means so will this cycle of friends that I interact with.. The longer it takes for the server to end, the longer I get to have fun in game with this particular set of friends..
    s1 : Storeythor http://travian-reports.net/us/report/2674061c50d
    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow View Post
    Gotta be talented to look after 2 WW's simultaneously. Or crazy... Crazy seems more like it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gressor2 View Post
    The more I read of OdinLoki's posts, the more I want to play alongside him. Not for the results, as frequently good as they are, but for the sheer fun he seems to have at it. Would + rep if I could, man. Always enjoy reading your stuff... and mostly cringe at the results contained in 'em.
    Quote Originally Posted by Chas00 View Post
    Storeythor,most offensive/defensive account holder on the server.
    Quote Originally Posted by bugzy View Post
    He's a nut and the more the odds are stacked against him, the better he seems to come out of it.

  35. #75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by banzai130 View Post
    Feel free to fill me in if I'm wrong.
    Do you remember a Skype conversation breaking down raids to being sent every seven and a half minutes all day every day? And a general consensus that this player was botting?

  36. #76
    Consul Luisss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    10,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by odinloki View Post
    You have far too much common sense, for Luisss to understand you, and I have to spread some rep around.. Plus he changes his version of present/future tense every time he "quotes" Cis with his own words..



    No, she literally said "Everyone does.."



    Obviously..



    I concur with this, I think GONE can claim it a victory if they can withstand our hits and still pull out a win over the Natar sand castle.. GONE will not have competition in building it, so that is a moot point, but they will have to defend it and that is where GONE can claim the victory..





    ^^ Everything these two ladies have said, and let me add another reason.. For me personally, I spawn in on a server, and find friends whom I love to chat with in skype, and work with in game.. It is the friendships that bring me back server after server.. The fact that a WW will reach 100, and that server ends means so will this cycle of friends that I interact with.. The longer it takes for the server to end, the longer I get to have fun in game with this particular set of friends..
    Greg, please tell me how "Everyone knows about your op" and "I know about your op" changes what we're discussing in any way?

    I'll wait for you to show where I've changed my tense in my quoted post... but not with baited breath, as I know you've developed a habit of saying things without providing any substance to support your statements this round.
    US1 - Redemption. US2 - Luisss.

    "Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."

  37. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Bane View Post
    Do you remember a Skype conversation breaking down raids to being sent every seven and a half minutes all day every day? And a general consensus that this player was botting?
    Doesn't ring a bell. Now when I think of it, I haven't joined the skype group until after artifacts dropped, so all of the discussion regarding the botting I only had with my dual. Since we are not really the ones to enjoy filtering through countless reports, the only thing that even remotely screamed of botting was the amount of res he had farmed compared to #2 raider (android or the world I think it was like twice as much then them).

    I assumed his constant activity yielded him those results, but if those raids were really timed at those exact intervals as you said, then maybe it's possible he was botting. Though the way you described it seems too obvious not to be caught by the multihunter.

  38. #78

    Default

    Luisss can you post a screen shot of a time stamped pre artie conversation where you questioned and discouraged botting?

  39. #79
    Consul Luisss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    10,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Bane View Post
    Luisss can you post a screen shot of a time stamped pre artie conversation where you questioned and discouraged botting?
    Can you post a screenshot proving literally anything you have accused me of?
    US1 - Redemption. US2 - Luisss.

    "Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."

  40. #80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luisss View Post
    Can you post a screenshot proving literally anything you have accused me of?
    I didn't accuse you of anything. I'm asking if you ever had a conversation with the accused and told your members not bot.
    Last edited by Lord Bane; 01-07-2017 at 06:17 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •