Kwannn, aponic is not a SoL recruitment officer. You can reach SoL recruitment officers via Colonel Chaos, Jon, Swampy, or LittleItaly

errr learn to read bro. I never said Rival were at war with lcn when they were hit, I said they were at war with LCN and co and not hitting you back. So thats means SoF would still be hitting more countries that were hitting them.

You are right, they did choose to ignore the fs, and our leaders have admited what the plan was, that does not mean I am incorrect in saying SoF fought an outnumbered war. For 90% of the time that sof was at war, they were fighting more countries than they had tagged, this is all I am saying, it is correct, I am not spinning anything. You guys try and argue pure facts, which are backed up by numbers by thoughts, like if so and so didnt do this, or so and so had of done this so its not our fault, same as when i was arguing pure war statistics on servants rankings.

I am basing everything I say, purely on facts, that simple, stop trying to argue against facts, it makes you look stupid. I dont even understand your second post there, so I wont bother with it.

No need for the personal insults Alin

SoF are well aware they were defeated last set & they only have a mediocre effort to blame for it

well then, by common SoF logic here it goes...


its not our fault your allies are retaRDs and got deleted so they didn't have your back :P Or that your guys plan to have yet another lopsided server war backfired in your face because you CHOSE to be dependent upon a clan whose leadership team was questionable at best at decision making and morality and already on thin ice from cheating the last time they got caught.

as the famous quote goes. "Show me your friends, and I'll tell you who you are."

If you are netting why did Jon say you were warring?

No its your not fault, i never said it was, I never said it was bad to win a war when you outnumber your enemy, I never said you did anything wrong last set. All i asked was when was the last time you won an outnumbered war, and you go off on this massive fluffing tangent.

This has nothing to do with right or wrong, or who was at war with who, I was simply asking when was the last time you won an outnumbered war?? Well when was it?

Oh i was also showing as I have in previous sets how sof is a better war alliance, purely by the numbers, which you guys then chuck in 'BUT IF LAF HAD NOT HIT OUR NUMBERS WOULD BE BETTER!!!!' bullfluff, but what ever makes you feel better about yourself (and before you get all cry baby on me, i am not saying you personally suck at war, just that on average, per member, sof has better quality war members. Yes half of them maybe arseholes, but that doesnt affect there war perfomance.)

I said war or net, i wasn't sure at the time what were doing, we're officially netting this set. Dont twist my words iscode.

And LAF hit more than 72hrs.

SoL>MD> sof.

i dont think sol has had the luxury of being in somewhat even but outnumbered war by themselves outside of rival/rd in a long time thanks to SoF and friends. we tried to set them up but as you guys know...it takes 2 to tango.

and we all know RD had a little more intel than everybody else..so on top of being outnumbered we were sadly out everything else'd

as for outnumbered, you guys werent actually outnumbered. you CHOSE to be to have the ability to claim vicitm to call in a def ally. that is different than actually being outnumbered.

soooo....because rival "wasn't in the war" does that mean that if somebody that you attack doesn't hit back you aren't actually at war and you didn't actually beat them? just so we are on the same page...

I choose nothing, I am a member, I run the occasional war chat, apart from that I call things how I see it. And the way I see it, Sof is the best war alliance there is.


I am educated in these matters, being something I have done for nigh on thirteen years, I provide facts to back it up, you provide nothing but your opinions and twisting of the truth.

And Jon, I twist nothing, I provided your direct quote. If you did not know what you were doing at the time why would you even mention it. If I was a random clan hopper (say like boltar) and joined your alliance on the promise of war, I would be might unhappy with you!

Your facts are as usually - not according with this game reality.

Sof avoided to fight Laf for ages now, which is a pure fact that blows up your theory. Is not because they had other enemies, is not because any other reason you might think - but because Sof would have had it`s ass fried and cooked, they knew that and everybody knows that.

While others took a shoot at that top dog and lost, Sof never had the guts to aim at that 1st spot and choose to stay in Lafs shadow as an eternal rank 2/3/4 alliance.

Instead, Sof always choose to fight uneven wars. Wars where the opponent was smaller in numbers, wars where Sof could always benefit of several advantages. FA wars, really unbalanced wars ( not 115 vs 93 + FS + a little Rival + a little Laf ), bullying smaller alliances and other fluff like that.

And you are telling us that Sof is the best warring alliance ? Sol outhit and out killed Sof 2 sets in row now. MD fsed and destroyed Sof in 48 hours a couple of resets ago. Your opinion is based on what facts? It is true, Sof had a good war effort when they fsed md in their celebration reset - but that is a rare flower, and you can cut all the flowers but you cannot keep spring from coming.

DANCE ALIN DANCE
SPIN SPIN SPIN


you are so cute when you make up bullfluff.

yea sure daggasheep.

Keep running out of arguments, so you can post only two rows in caps and some useless comment.

i am not out of arguments, i posted fact you post heresay, i just toy with you now because its pointless.


DANCE ALIN DANCE
SPIN SPIN SPIN

iscode facts : " I say so - therefore it is FACT"

Get the fluff out of Baghdad :)

13years of which most of them were spent running the juggernaught war department formerly known as iMag. Once they fell apart due to gettig beat over and over, he joined SoF leadership and how they have fallen, only for him to resign before the ground gave out.

Perhaps his vision of the best is different than the rest of us.

I agree mdevol, not quite what i would expect from the best war alliance..

You all misunderstand the way SoF works. In the past we've fought different kinds of wars. Some wars have been for the challenge and the thrill of testing our ability, others for getting revenge agaisnt alliances who opposed our interests and others have been to maintain our political power and that of our allies. In the latter cases we've had no problem using overwhelming numbers, especially during the periods where SoF's leadership has been less active. The truth is like most alliance's our strength varies from set to set and a lot of that is down to activity. However, when you are able to maintain a strong position in the game even during less active periods, it gives you the option to pick and choose oppenents and times etc. Just as the opposite is true when the other unforgiving side is in control...



You make it appear that everyone was lining up to fight LaF 1 vs 1. The only alliance which did this was MD. And the way they achieved it was to secretly FDP their allies' enemies, while keeping their current FDPs in the dark, and other manipulative actions. SoL on the other hand was targetted by LaF 3 years ago, when SoL decided to dissolve their FDP with SoF and go after us with RD. SoL tried to recruit an overwhelming coalition, but had pissed off most of the server including LaF, who they had beaten around a year prior while they were a pure netting alliance under Pang.

Nethertheless, why would we pick a fight with our FDP and our closest ally? I know it's a strange concept for alliances like MD and SoL, but we don't believe in undermining allies and chopping and changing pacts to advance our status. Our leaders became friends inside and outside the game. I do believe we offered an arranged war at some point two years ago, which never got off the ground, though I don't dsipute that throughout most of the sets during the last three years (especially during the Hanlong era) they would have most likely won convincingly.

If we were really serious about being number #1 at all costs, we could have accepted MD/SoL offer to turn on LaF, after the scandal, which would have been much easier that fighting SPERM. However, we chose to stick with our friends.




SoL did outhit us last set; big achievement. We had one of worst sets. We had many inactive vets, because it was a reunion set, our leadership wasn't very active due to rl reasons and our plans, backup plan and second backup plan went down the toilet. Once it became painfully clear how the war would turn out, we gave the choice for many members to take a break after two all set wars. And the set before... SoL outhit and outkilled SoF?

SOLidify RIVAL 17,294 27 641
SOLidify SoF 56,132 106 530

SoF EVOtella 19,939 40 498
SoF MONSTERS 7,507 18 417
SoF SOLidify 55,775 112 498

Ok SoL's HMP was like 50 more, but your claim that SoL outhit and outkilled SoF is a bit of a stretch... Furthemore, this was a war where SoL and allies surprise FSed oop and SoF choose to grow, instead of kill during the first week of the war.

You are also very selective about our war history...

We had an arranged war with SoL, where we even dropped members to be even. We didn't even have a selective tag either, we just let the first 60 or so who signed up fight, while the rest netted. We had also already fought a war that set. We also fought plenty of close coalition wars, fought more wars with MD, and had fights with PDM and NA when they were our size or even bigger. We've just about fought everyone we weren't good friends with.

We've had so many tough wars and just as many easy wars, but it remains the fact that we've lost like 3 times in 3 years and after each defeat we've been motivated to come back stronger the set after. But in the end I stand by point that SoF is the best 'war alliance' in the game, especially as we are the only true war alliance left :)

My opinion about the Sof ws Sol prearranged, ages ago is that somehow Sol was forced btw choosing that war or being gang-banged.

Sof selected 60 active player out of 80 or whatever - while Sol was somewhere around 55, stuck with more than 10 inactiveS.

Regarding Laf - that is pure propaganda you are feeding us. Laf was an umbrella for Sof, you choose to stay with the best and not aim to be the best. We saw some samples of your real intentions on RDs boards.

Otherwise, anyone is entitled to believe what they want. However in this age of EE netters are better warriors. There are a fluffload of even wars Sof will never handle ...

Actually Xyle and Dragon were working towards a FDP and it was mainly a bit of fun to keep two warprepped alliances occupied. And yes, those 60 members were active, because they signed up.

I don't get it, you claim we are the worst alliance ever, because we usually have more numbers and have reliable strong allies, but isn't that part of an alliance's war strength? The ability to recruit active players and the foresight and diplomacy to have true allies.

Yet even when we drop members and fight on even terms, there is always some excuse. SoL had more members that war and if you remove the less actives (not totally inactive) we had five more actives. And as I mentioned, we had already fought a war. Yet even if you claim we had an advantage, the war wasn't even close, we agreed to CF after two weeks, due to the gap. Then the set after we warred TIE/MD when they had a slight numbers advantage. Ofc MD wasn't warprepped, but thats another excuse where you claim our victory doesn't count.

The set after was last christmas; a celebration set. Many vets returned and half were planning to net, while the other half were going to have a late arranged war. We had made it clear that we'd call in allies if we got hit, we used our political advantage to ensure that our leaders could relax during christmas and our netters could grow off MD land, while our warriors could hit. But apparently... we're not allowed to use the 'we were not warprepped' excuse while MD the set before used the same excuse.

I really can't comment about the RD boards. I never read them, despite your delusions that I'm a colour and that Helmet is some dual leader of SoF/RD, despire him posting in Earth once every two months or so. I had member access there one set. But, really, you are off your rocker if you think we are some kind of LaF vassal, leaching off their strength. I personally developed a strong bond with LaFs leaders and later Xyle did the same. We fought together in many tough wars and SoF has made many sacrafices while LaF has been in trouble over the years, while they've helped us out of tough spots. You ignore everything that is inconvinient to your argument. Also, to become number #1, there are other ways than dropping your pact and beating your rival down. There is no reason why you cannot work on improving yourself too. Also, SoF and LaF are two very different alliances, we like doing different things.

Finally, wargaining is a huge part of the game, especially with the changes. It's been a while since we've done it due to early wars; it used to be a strength of ours. It's something we need to work on in the future. This set we have 70 active players and are all motivated; I personally think we could fight anyone 1vs1 this set... But I guess because we recruited well it means none of those wars would be even; hence we are fluff........

Never said you are not a good waring alliance - but not that good as you think you are.

Sure this set you look strong because you got some incorporated RDs in there, which i can give them the "benefit of doubt" to be clean this reset, however in this game , once a Rder always a Rder.

Regarding Helmut, sure, everyone quits/become less active at a point in this game. We all grow up (somehow) and have different priorities, families etc. But he stands for a lot of Sof history which is completely and irrevocably corrupted.

Regarding the RD mess - no one ever tried to proof otherwise than what that guy revealed ( whomever he is ). Therefore i have no reason whatsoever to believe you and not him. Denial without any evidence is a thin shield.

And a bottom line : if you are that good than prearrange a war this set with someone as solid as you are. You have all the tools to do that, and Sof is composed of it`s core + a bunch of active Rders. I am sure you can find some takers who will tag up as many as you are and "party". You will notice that an even war is not that easy to win... as you saw last reset.

P.S: please keep in mind i speak for no alliance in this game - nor i have a leading position in any therefore don`t take that as an offer.

Wait, I don't even remember the guy accusing me of being a colour in that thread; as far as I know its only been you that has called me that on AT. Also the same Helmet who spent years fighting RD and moved SoF away from the game because of it... its just ludricous. Also even though we were prepared to offer RD to outpost in SoF, there are three or four ex-RDers max in SoF, there are probably more in other alliances.

Last set was nowhere near an even war. You can use the numbers to manipulate it anyway you want. We had never planned to fight on even terms and in the end it was us fighting uneven numbers; its the way the cookie crumbled. We've already had offers of arranged wars rebuked, so it's not happening.

Enough is enough. We will always agree to disagree.

However you are calling "uneven numbers" a war that was pretty much close to even. For my side uneven is 160 ws 80 - for yours is 115 ws 93+FS+a little Rival+a little Laf. But whatever - at least you admitted you never planed to fight even so it is clear for me, you made a point there.

Also, Sof always proofs to be the closest ally of the outlaws in this game - so that is another thing that is in contradiction with "being best" at something. But that`s just me ...

Good luck to you Flame-y.