| Author |
|
Ander 
Postmaster General
Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269 |
 Posted: 06 Dec 2012 at 16:10 |
 Darkwords wrote:
Deranzin wrote:
... |
There is an age old saying which goes.... "Practice what you preach".
Gotto say as a neutral party in this, your post hardly makes you or Consone appear as righteous or even trustworthy.
|
Deranzin a member of H, not consone. I do not read Derazin's posts, so I don't really know what he wrote. If whatever he wrote made consone look bad, I have to admit he did a good job.
|
 |
Aurordan
Postmaster
Player Council - Ambassador
Joined: 21 Sep 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 982 |
Posted: 06 Dec 2012 at 16:36 |
Llyorn Of Jaensch wrote:
Mr Damage wrote:
As I mentioned to Kumo in GC yesterday, there's a few more than that on Coal's team, pop. wise Coal is about 5mill ahead of us Soup folk. |
I'm sorry but this is blatantly false.
Please refrain from saying such or provide evidence to support your assertion.
Stating 'I'm not going to argue this' does not give you free reign to make unjustified claims implying they have any truth.
|
Actually, if you add up all alliances fighting on both sides, the H? coalition does end up with about 5 million more population. So not really blatantly false at all.
On another note, I'd like do go ahead and name this the Coal Soup war, because I'm going to be calling it that anyway.
|
|
The_Dude
Postmaster General
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396 |
Posted: 06 Dec 2012 at 16:41 |
|
This is the Consone War. Later, when there is another, this will then be the First Consone War.
|
|
Aurordan
Postmaster
Player Council - Ambassador
Joined: 21 Sep 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 982 |
Posted: 06 Dec 2012 at 18:01 |
|
We can't call every war Consone fights the Consone War, that's insane. If Consone breaks up as a result of this war, then maybe, but on principle I would prefer to avoid naming a war after just one side. I'm going with Coal Soup. Later, when there is a another, that will be Coal Soup 2: The Coalsoupening.
|
|
belargyle
Forum Warrior
Joined: 17 Jun 2010
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 401 |
Posted: 06 Dec 2012 at 19:54 |
|
It isn't naming the war after just one side though... It is naming the war after the very ones who initiated the war in question.
It was Consone who choose to come together as a total confederation and declare war, which begin the very war we are in. Thus it is only both logical and practical to call it "The Consone War".
Now I'm not personally saying I like the name but it does make sense to call it that.
Personally I like "The War of the coalitions" or even better - "The Great War" due to all the alliances involved.
|
|
geofrey
Postmaster General
Joined: 31 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1013 |
Posted: 06 Dec 2012 at 20:13 |
belargyle wrote:
It isn't naming the war after just one side though... It is naming the war after the very ones who initiated the war in question.
It was Consone who choose to come together as a total confederation and declare war, which begin the very war we are in. Thus it is only both logical and practical to call it "The Consone War".
Now I'm not personally saying I like the name but it does make sense to call it that.
Personally I like "The War of the coalitions" or even better - "The Great War" due to all the alliances involved.
|
I thought we had settled on the "War of 2 troves"
|
|
|
|
twilights
Postmaster
Joined: 21 May 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 915 |
Posted: 06 Dec 2012 at 20:14 |
|
with all the work the devs have done with the war functions and the way the game is becoming a territorial and v2 resource procession game, war strategy should be a constant...the nap and confederation structure just needs redoing for this to happen, you would think WE would have constant warfare and the rest of the players in the game have to reconsider how they are currently playing now, everyone needs to play a balance game
|
|
The_Dude
Postmaster General
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396 |
Posted: 06 Dec 2012 at 20:18 |
belargyle wrote:
***
Personally I like "The War of the coalitions" or even better - "The Great War" due to all the alliances involved.
|
I contemplated "The Great Patriotic War."
|
|
Thes Hunter
Wordsmith
Joined: 13 Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 129 |
Posted: 06 Dec 2012 at 20:44 |
|
As far as naming this shindig, how about "War: Soup to Nuts."
|
The image in my avatar is a chalk pastel drawing I did as part of the Imagine Yellowstone Art competition.
|
|
Aurordan
Postmaster
Player Council - Ambassador
Joined: 21 Sep 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 982 |
Posted: 06 Dec 2012 at 20:49 |
belargyle wrote:
It isn't naming the war after just one side though... It is naming the war after the very ones who initiated the war in question.
It was Consone who choose to come together as a total confederation and declare war, which begin the very war we are in. Thus it is only both logical and practical to call it "The Consone War".
Now I'm not personally saying I like the name but it does make sense to call it that.
|
I think the personal bias may be creeping in here. Which is fine, wars can have multiple names, but I'd like a neutral-ish one.
belargyle wrote:
Personally I like "The War of the coalitions" or even better - "The Great War" due to all the alliances involved.
|
Those work, as long as there aren't going to be any more wars that are large or involve coalitions. On the other hand, I thought I read somewhere that H? planned to kill the game, so maybe they would work.
|
|
Tweet
war declarations on WE
Topic Options