Oct 16th 2010, 12:47:05
True, true.
AxA brings up a good point that iMag was the primary focus, but I'm not sure how that takes away from the argument that they went troop heavy. I saw the ops and the targets too by the way -- I was at the FS. There were *many* targets that we could have easily broke down with BR, but because no one in iMag had any jets (seriously, like when we would call turns / troops / jets, it would always be XX turns / XXXk troops / 0 jets), they kept insisting on doing GS. If we had BRed from the start, there are three things that would have happened:
1) More dead PDM/iMag countries (due to having less troops as defense -- this is the typical "GS is better argument")
2) More dead Collab countries
3) Maimed Collab countries that walled (which would have helped immensely in the long run)
I'm not saying that iMag is *bad* at warring. I am merely saying I expected more from an alliance that does nothing but war.
For instance, when I was playing in 1a in Revolution and we were helping MET war, I was genuinely impressed with MET -- here was an alliance with not that many members that was mopping the floor with other alliances. I was expecting the same thing going into this war with iMag and was slightly disappointed.
PDM had piss-poor stonewalling, me among them. I was actually online the ENTIRE time they were killing me but IRC was off, and there was a fluffing period of 10 minutes where I wasn't checking Boxcar.
Yes, Collab -- you killed me while I was online and wasn't looking -- and no one else was looking at the newsbot either. I logged on literally seconds after I died. Was the most frustrating thing ever.
SoF I did notice was more amicable to BRing and Murf & Co (I think there were some Malaysian players who I can't remember the names of) did a really good job with what they had.
As I said, I could have been misinterpreting events and many of you brought up variables I hadn't really considered, so take my criticism with a grain of salt.