(TOC) vs (TIE)

Kenzu wrote:

stars wrote:Minutes later from the massing. Kenzu would love to make me believe he is the good guy in all this when obviously he only seems to care about his own sake. I told him about all the pain and suffering that was caused to me when ADW first started and this is what he had to say! I guess he doesnt even keep track off his alliance mates, and thinks all is well as long as he is not attacked?

It's hilarious how the some arrogant TIE members think that I'm arrogant.

@stars
No, you didn't say anything about your pain. When I asked for the whereabouts you didn't have the words for a proper answer. You made it sound like I was coresponsible for your suffering and this "suffering" of yours was the reason you stated you joined TIE.

Everything that happened after you joined TIE is irrelevant, because I only wanted to know why you joined them.

It's foolish to believe that a leader doesn't know the situation of his alliance members only because the leader hasn't been massed yet.
You can live in your world of illusions and dreams, but just because you think it's true, it doesn't mean it really is.


@ian
Why do you say we didn't accept peace? It was out suggestion to end the war in July. Did you forget that I stated 7th of July, to have the war last exactly 1 month, and Ishurue mentioned 4th of July, Day of Independence.

If you want peace earlier, I suggest you start talking in a more polite manner.
It would also be a good idea to stop boasting with nonimportant stats. If TIE masses, it's obvious that you have less losses, just like when TOC masses, we have less losses. Unless there is high technology gap, attackers loose less than defenders. But TIE kills 10 or 20% more TOC units, that's no victory. In fact it's a defeat of TIE, because TOC is growing much faster than TIE.

Do you need me to remind you all the time that it was TIE who started the war. The only ones who brought war upon themselves are you and your TIE friends. Who knows what future Aderan Wars would have, if TOC alliances didn't unite against the invaders.

I think i just died from laughter at the bold-bit. I ll let you work out why... at least one person who posted on this thread will get what i m referring to LMAO. I actually have conclusive proof and evidence you don't have a clue whats going on with World Republic or give a crap about your members other than their ability to milk your ego.... but i won't reveal it unless the person in question wishes it made known

As for wanting peace.. honestly i no longer care. I can keep the whole "farm, rebuild strike, mass down defence, farm, rebuild strike, mass down defence" up all year if necessary. I m greatly enjoying it to be honest.

As for the whole "TOC is growing much faster than TIE"... so you keep saying. Why don't you ask your members just how much faster they are growing than TIE when their nice defences keep getting knocked down?

As for stating the war... yes TIE officially declared war first. I could point out however TOC's numerous sabbing & assassinations on TIE in the proceeding weeks coupled with your & other TOC leaderships threats of war against a innocent TIE (we REALLY weren't responsible for the attacks on any of you) started the war though.... We were merely reacting to the use of force against us and the threat issued that that force would be escalated.

I won't bother pointing out that though... because clearly when TOC gets sabbed/ assassinated it has to be by evil TIE, yet when TOC sabbs/ assassinates TIE its fine and not hostile at all... just like when TIE goes hidden clearly its a threat and virtually a act of war, yet when TOC's own leaders expressly threaten TIE with war its not a threat and its not a act of war.

Peace isn't going to happen anytime soon untill T.O.C takes responsibility for its own part in starting this war. TIE & Myself have accepted our own acts - when will TOC accept theirs?

Untill that point - don't even bother trying to get peace. You won't have any.

Nimras wrote:

Sandwalker wrote:Nimras, you assume people care enough about a missing umlaut. They don't. I sure don't.

Lol maybe not but i care as well as Doxakk cared enough to correct IAN do i care enough to correct Ragnaök.

If you wanna do something then do it right not wrong not half not strange which is what you go into.

Thats against my code and rules and who i am as a Viking we are proud of what we do never forget that.

You're not a viking. Well, if you insist on being one, then you're a declawed viking. Do you carry arms at all times? Do you follow a policy of aggressive expansion with no real maritime opposition? Do you pillage and plunder your neighboring lands? I didn't think so. Say "meow".

And of COURSE Denmark lost to Japan. I mean Samurai+Ninja=WIN.

Funny, I'd think that someone would have corrected Ian by now. It's The Order of Chaos, not coalition. It's a nice paradoxical name.

Wow I have to admit a lot of bloted egos here You did this, you did that, he did this, he did that. A loss of words is all I have

He started it. No wait maybe the other guy started it. Wait did you start it?

I love the 6 year old drama. Used to argue with my sister before I learned how to walk.

Summary

ian wrote:I've been talking to a couple of people in TOC and there seems to be *some* desire for peace - so i ll propose the below just for everyone's consideration as to how to bring this war to an end (since large chunks of TOC no longer have any decent strikes and its costing everyone lots to fight this war)

Sea wrote:I would like everyone to notice that TIE made first hits.
We also made the first public and private peace offering.

Phyurie wrote:Sounds like this war won't end till one side is dead cuz we can't trust the other...

WhatsASniper1 wrote:I don't know, I honestly doubt that they would violate a peace treaty of their own creation.

Phyurie wrote:I'll stop fighting if Lord Ishurue commands it. However, I'm not done yet if TOC leadership isn't

ian wrote:Personally i m up for peace. I don't want to see more T.O.C or T.I.E accounts fall for no reason other than revenge or whatever reason there is for prolonging the war.

ian wrote:The Imperium's patience with T.O.C has ran out. On June the 14th we offerred them peace. They were not interested. It is now June the 18th - 4 days since then.

Kenzu wrote:I am afraid you will have to mass us more to get a better hostility award, but you seem to be running out of resources, so I don't know how you want to manage doing that, especially if you let others do the job for you.

Very ironic coming from Kenzu...

Sea wrote:He isn't running out of resources. He knows all he has to do is ask and I would happily send over 1m UU and the Kuwal needed to retrain. But instead he is doing what leaders should be doing and that is putting the needs of the alliance over the needs of himself. I can honestly say I have not met a single person in my alliance that has said, 'No, I won't I don't want this war or is it my fight' most of the items I got where 'I wish I could help but I don't have SS, give me a target and I will surly add to the damage being done.' Can you really say that all members of your alliance are willing to help with anything that is needed?

Vesper wrote:So when is the war ending?

Sea wrote:Once both sides agree that it is over.
I know personally I not at ending it till the last few items are done on my list.

Ian wrote:I think The Coalition of Chaos wants to continue the war untill all of The Imperium's accounts have been massed.

Jiro wrote:Ian, my summary of the "peace" talks is that we couldn't even get you to agree that you started this war, nor arrive on a common understanding of aggression, let alone move on towards finding a peaceful solution.

Ian wrote:1.) Noone's denying The Imperium Empire started this war.... we DID start this war via the opening shots being fired by US against Castravate.

Ian wrote:I am NOT saying or commenting on who started the aggression first. I have no wish to comment on that either. I am merely pointing out aggression was on BOTH sides - not just 1 or the other.

Ian wrote:I ll say it another time (i think i ve said it a couple of times now btw). The Imperium WAS aggressive before and leading up to this war. I honestly don't know how else i can say it simply enough. Just like T.O.C was also aggressive leading up to this war. Thats not to put the blame on T.O.C - nor is it to put the blame entirely on T.I.E. BOTH sides are responsible.

Kenzu wrote:First of all I think the numbers you state here are greatly exaggerated.

Secondly, even if you have slightly more kills than TOC, then this is not only because of tech difference, but also because some of your massers use mobile artillery against tanks and IFV, and tanks against IFV, which obviously means we will have more UU losses, but not much more losses in terms of kuwal value.

Thirdly, I am sure you neglected the millions of UU TIE has lost in order to finance their technological advance. This is something that you shouldn't neglect.

Ian wrote:Actually Kenzu i factored in SA47's & Seaborgium's Mobile Artillery - and i can assure you those figures are NOT exaggerated. By all means run through your own members logs and add them up in excel if you like.... As for "all the UU lost to fund their technological advance" - how the hell does that equate to casualties in this war?

Ian wrote:Remember guys... according to Kenzu The Imperium is loosing this war.... much like we apparently have ran out of Supply Turns since about 9 or 10 days ago when we first proposed peace.... much like we ve also apparently run out of funds.

Kenzu wrote:My predictions were right.
You wage the war as predicted.

It doesn't matter if you didn't understand with what I meant with running out of ST.
I didnt say that you wont be able to make any attacks at all. But it doesn't matter what you think.

I am glad this whole thing turns the way I expected.

OMG he knew about the war before everyone else...

Kenzu wrote:You are the one who wants war, and you made it clear many times.

Beldar wrote:I think Kenzu will be named as "Kenzu the Prophet" once war does finish sometime...

Ian wrote:All you ve done is reject The Imperium's attempts to end this war, while not making a single attempt of any form to end the war since. That to me is a clear indication of your wish for war.

Kenzu wrote:How come you massed me?

Ian wrote:Oh well, Kenzu should have accepted peace when it was offerred repeatedly...The Imperium will NOT be interested in peace for at least another week. Minimum...We won't be accepting peace the moment poor old Kenzu gets hurt - since poor old kenzu & his chums haven't had any problems at all watching their alliance members get butchered

Kenzu wrote:It's foolish to believe that a leader doesn't know the situation of his alliance members only because the leader hasn't been massed yet...

This one will come back to bite you later. Trust me! [/quote]

Kenzu wrote:But TIE kills 10 or 20% more TOC units, that's no victory. In fact it's a defeat of TIE

Kenzu wrote:Do you need me to remind you all the time that it was TIE who started the war.

Go read all Olive colored writing before you think to reply please.

Ian wrote:I think i just died from laughter at the bold-bit. I ll let you work out why... at least one person who posted on this thread will get what i m referring to LMAO

Yeah Kenzu you should hope he doesnt share the evidence. I sorta stumbled upon it myself that shows you are CLUELESS.

Ian wrote:As for stating the war... yes TIE officially declared war first.

And what do you want to say with your huge post?

lol.. i'm a declawed viking too! and i really don't care whether you spell Ragnarök, ragnarok or ragnarøk.. as much as I care that Sverige is called Sweden in english..

Just consider Ragnarok the english way of spelling Ragnarök.. besides weren't the vikings using runes when writing a word such as Ragnarök? so if you wanted to be correct you'd have to start writing it with rune symbols

Nimras wrote:

Sandwalker wrote:Nimras, you assume people care enough about a missing umlaut. They don't. I sure don't.

Lol maybe not but i care as well as Doxakk cared enough to correct IAN do i care enough to correct Ragnaök.

If you wanna do something then do it right not wrong not half not strange which is what you go into.

Thats against my code and rules and who i am as a Viking we are proud of what we do never forget that.

whats my name being spelled incorrectly got to do with anything nimrod? if your so particular take a look at your own grammar.....

Sandwalker wrote:

Nimras wrote:

Sandwalker wrote:Nimras, you assume people care enough about a missing umlaut. They don't. I sure don't.

Lol maybe not but i care as well as Doxakk cared enough to correct IAN do i care enough to correct Ragnaök.

If you wanna do something then do it right not wrong not half not strange which is what you go into.

Thats against my code and rules and who i am as a Viking we are proud of what we do never forget that.

You're not a viking. Well, if you insist on being one, then you're a declawed viking. Do you carry arms at all times? Do you follow a policy of aggressive expansion with no real maritime opposition? Do you pillage and plunder your neighboring lands? I didn't think so. Say "meow".

And of COURSE Denmark lost to Japan. I mean Samurai+Ninja=WIN.

Lol Ahh now your claiming that Vikings was all that?

You forget when the Vikings was home in Denmark they where people like everyone else they traded, they worked in the land they worked to breathfeed their famely and village.

The Vikings villiage chefe and King of Denmark would even join in when we went to war or when we went out to steal that says alot they where even in the front line and if they died the Vikings didn't run or got scared they fought on and won .

The fact is the Viking only carriede Weapons when going to war, going to plunder or defending their country else they didn't i am sorry you thouhgt that.

Lol Samurai + Ninja = WIN not really since Denmark is NOt Vikings anymore sadly only a few of us is . Hence it was Christians vs Samurai = win to Samurai.

pxn wrote:lol.. i'm a declawed viking too! and i really don't care whether you spell Ragnarök, ragnarok or ragnarøk.. as much as I care that Sverige is called Sweden in english..

Just consider Ragnarok the english way of spelling Ragnarök.. besides weren't the vikings using runes when writing a word such as Ragnarök? so if you wanted to be correct you'd have to start writing it with rune symbols

No offense but the Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish Viking was getting their ass kicked by the Danish hence why there was so many wars because the Swedish didn't like that and later you started to beat us that was after we stopped being Vikings and became Christians lol sadly that was the wrong move by the danish King ohh well.

Ragnarok is not the English way they actually use the ö the reason you don't see it is because most links can't handle ö just as well they can't handle åøæ therefore the o is made normal and because of that many thinks its the English way. And your correct they used Runes but before the Vikings stopped being here anymore because they turned christian had they in the last roughly 100 years used the first version of the Danish lang when they wrote and spoke and since i don't know the Finnish, Swedish and Norwegian Vikings at that age because they where not anywhere near the Danish in any way can i not say you stopped using runes also and started using what became your lang at that time. But actually is Ragnarökr the way we spelled it since day one when we stopped using runes but if you want i can write the Runes version for you?

Ragnarok wrote:

Nimras wrote:

Sandwalker wrote:Nimras, you assume people care enough about a missing umlaut. They don't. I sure don't.

Lol maybe not but i care as well as Doxakk cared enough to correct IAN do i care enough to correct Ragnaök.

If you wanna do something then do it right not wrong not half not strange which is what you go into.

Thats against my code and rules and who i am as a Viking we are proud of what we do never forget that.

whats my name being spelled incorrectly got to do with anything nimrod? if your so particular take a look at your own grammar.....

Lol everyone can misstype m8 and lol i did it thats life thank you for seeing it now get your name right will ya .

If i would be a mod, i would say to cut the crap with the spelling spam... it's becoming annoying already... thanks

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:If i would be a mod, i would say to cut the crap with the spelling spam... it's becoming annoying already... thanks

Lol what ya mean with the spelling spam?

I mean the debate about ragnariook, or ragnarook is spelled ragnarok or wahtever... doesn't biloong in this threadth.


made plenty of spelling errors just for you

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:I mean the debate about ragnariook, or ragnarook is spelled ragnarok or wahtever... doesn't biloong in this threadth.


made plenty of spelling errors just for you

I second that notion.

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:I mean the debate about ragnariook, or ragnarook is spelled ragnarok or wahtever... doesn't biloong in this threadth.


made plenty of spelling errors just for you

True hehe but since its part of the long talks as well as the 300 is it kinda ended up belonging anyway.

Beside crash and his laughing post hehe.

Plus werent you selling your account and leaving the game as far i recall from ingame?

People please spam a different topic . This is a war thread

Kenzu wrote:And what do you want to say with your huge post?

Its a SUMMARY Kenzu. It is quotes form only this thread. Seems you skip to the end of the posts. I made that post for you Kenzu so that you can actually have some idea of what your talking about next time you speak instead of making the dumbest remarks possible. Remarks like "let me remind you that TIE started the war" even though throughout this entire thread they said they started the war or asking why you were massed when your in a war. Things of that nature. I figured I would help you out this once.

well it seems that ToC has decided that there is no winning the war.
It has to come to a draw, I remember another game that did this, and both sides swore there would be no end until someone called uncle. Now the way it was presented and worded there was no 'winner' but I am sure that there were terms to the ending of the war, so that means that there was a winner.

admin best of luck to trying to find a way for a 'winner' I am sure that the other game lost a fair bit of players due to that type of thoughts on war.

seaborgium wrote:well it seems that ToC has decided that there is no winning the war.
It has to come to a draw, I remember another game that did this, and both sides swore there would be no end until someone called uncle. Now the way it was presented and worded there was no 'winner' but I am sure that there were terms to the ending of the war, so that means that there was a winner.

" admin best of luck to trying to find a way for a 'winner' I am sure that the other game lost a fair bit of players due to that type of thoughts on war.

"

seaborgium, if it's not to much trouble can you please explain your comment above.
the reason I don't understand it is because, as far as I know, the Admin doesn't get involved in game politics, so why would he have to find the winner of a war that does not involve him? shouldn't that be up to Tie leaders and ToC leaders?

@ seaborgium and Angel Slayer
The doesn't need to bother announcing any winners. Why should he get involved at all? It's up to the alliances if they want to announce winnders, loosers, or a draw.

In real world history there were a couple wars, where both sides claimed victory. I find it interesting, and it depends on the perspective. Some people say in a war there are no winners, but this is Aderan Wars, a game, and I believe that even though a lot of resources have been wasted in this war, this is why they exist, and this is why we play Aderan Wars. Fighting a war is more stressful than peace but definitely much more exciting than peace as well.

I personally think TOC gained a lot from this war, especially war experience. And I don't mean the numbers, I mean real experience which helps them being more efficient at waging war. Afterall we got many people who were fighting their first war here in TOC. It's great to see a new generation of skilled veterans building up.

Vesper wrote:

Kenzu wrote:And what do you want to say with your huge post?

Its a SUMMARY Kenzu. It is quotes form only this thread. Seems you skip to the end of the posts. I made that post for you Kenzu so that you can actually have some idea of what your talking about next time you speak instead of making the dumbest remarks possible. Remarks like "let me remind you that TIE started the war" even though throughout this entire thread they said they started the war or asking why you were massed when your in a war. Things of that nature. I figured I would help you out this once.

You think it's a dumb remark, because you didn't understand the question.

I didn't ask why I was massed.
I asked why stars was the one massing me.
I didn't expect that stars would take part in this war, in fact I wondered why he joined TIE at all.
TIE is known for going to many wars, so since he emphasises so much that he doesnt want anyone to touch his account, joinining TIE (and any other alliance which was ever involved in a major war) was a big mistake, because it's obvious the accounts will be massed. There is no need for hard feelings. If you join any alliance that was in a war, you must expect that sooner or later your account will get massed in a future war.

(In fact he didn't even defeat my defense, still had over 2 billion defense after he was done.
So it was more of an attempted mass, but let's put the terminology aside on this one.)

seaborgium wrote:
admin best of luck to trying to find a way for a 'winner' I am sure that the other game lost a fair bit of players due to that type of thoughts on war.

I have an ideea.

When a normal alliance does destruction attacks on another normal alliance members, alliance war is automatically declared. Then the war is fought in rounds. 1st round, 2nd round, etc... If you find a way to caculate the number of rounds for each war, factoring in it the alliance average power, alliance average numbers, alliance average techs, etc, etc... an alliance can fight and win a war like this:

1st round:
- the first alliance proposes surrender terms (the surrender terms could be: disbanding, military embargo, like disarming attacks, economic embargo - alliance will lose trading ability for X turns);
---- if 2nd alliance accepts, war ends and the first alliance is declared winner and the 2nd alliance suffers the penalty accepted in the surrender terms [wars won becomes a column in alliance ranks page]
---- if 2nd alliance rejects the terms, war continues to round 2.
---- if 2nd alliance does not respont to the terms in [12 turns? - 6 hours], the terms are automaticaly rejected and war continues to round 3
---- if 2nd alliance masses members of the first alliance, the war continues to round 2

2nd round:
- the 2nd alliance proposes surrender terms (the surrender terms could be: disbanding, military embargo, like disarming attacks, economic embargo - alliance will lose trading ability for X turns);
---- if 1st alliance accepts, war ends and the 2nd alliance is declared winner. The 1st alliance suffers the penalty accepted in the surrender terms [wars won becomes a column in alliance ranks page]
---- if 1st alliance rejects the terms, war continues to round 3.
---- if 1st alliance does not respond to the terms in [12 turns? - 6 hours], the terms are automaticaly rejected and war continues to round 3
---- if 1st alliance masses members of the 2nd alliance, the war continues to round 3

3rd round: (similar)
...
4th round: (similar)
...
etc
War ends when the number of rounds calculated by the game is reached.

On each round, the war points for each alliance will be calculated. At the end of each round, the war points are displayed in alliance news and an alliance is declared the winner of that round. The alliance with the most rounds won, wins the war and gets the WAR points added in the Total War Experience column [which contain from now on, only the war experience from alliance wars and not from farming innactives and other players outside of the war].


- If both alliances won equal number of rounds, the war ends in a draw.
- If it is a draw, then the Intergalactic Nations, those who offer The Temporary Council Protection, offer to both alliances the ceasefire terms: the alliances who fought cannot assault each other with destruction/sabb/assassination missions for a number of days equal with the number of rounds that the war had - it applyes only to the alliance members - if someone leaves an alliance, he/she can be assaulted/assassinated, etc
---- If both alliances accept the ceasefire terms, those restrictions apply
---- If at least one alliance does not accept the ceasefire terms proposed by the Intergalactic Nations, then the war continues to WAR OF ATTRITION (The rule of this war, is that no member involved in this war will benefit from the Temporary Council Protection, war is fought again in rounds until an alliance is declared a winner)
-------- If the alliance who refused the ceasefire terms loses the war, they lose the ability to trade and will not be protected by the Temporary Council Protection for X days equal with 2 times the number of the rounds fought [ignoring the Intergalactic Nations and seeking to wage wars that cannot be won against peaceful nations comes with Intergalatic Embargo]
-------- If the alliance who refused the ceasefire terms wins the war, they only lose the Temporary Council Protection for X days equal with 3 times the number of the rounds fought [again, ignoring the Intergalactic Nations and seeking to wage wars against peaceful much weaker nations comes with Intergalatic Embargo]

Rules:
* an alliance can fight multiple wars with multiple alliances, but the penalties will be cumulative
* if the winning alliance chooses military embargo, they are not allowed to wage destruction against the losing alliance, without losing the Intergalatic Nations protection... so... if they wage war against an alliance to which they won an military embargo, they will not be able to use protection!!!

You should post this in suggestions

Thanks Nigatsu_Aka,
you just answered my question to seaborgium's comment.

i like nig's suggestion here, it would certainly make a war thread a damn sight easier to understand with all the claims and couter claims on war losses.... at first i was concerned about round crossovers, so if you were install a generic number of turns in which no action could be taken inbetween rounds, it would help to clearly define which round was which, overall an excellent idea, and shoudl it turn up in suggestions i would back this update....

Ishurue wrote:
We ... Must .... TIE

Very good play on words Lord Ishurue, well said. I personally don't feel a TIE is possible, simply because I happen to agree with Kenzu in his post quoted below, and that scares the hell out of me. We can walk away with no one saying "We Lost". That makes it a tie, but Both sides will walk away from this war saying "We Won", because in many ways we both did. Both sides have gained an infinite amount of experience in game mechanics and battle tactics usable in AW. Both sides now know who will fight, who will cower, who they can trust, who will give all, and who will not. To me that is more important then anything else that can be obtained by War.

Either side can quote they won due to many factors, such as total power, activity, damage inflicted, damage sustained, damage avoided, total kills, War Records, etc, etc, etc. But to me you win when you get that which you seek. I personally seek but 1 thing and will continue the fight until I get it, or it is proven beyond any doubt that it will elude me for eternity. All these claims, stats, numbers and the like mean little to nothing. They are not the prize I seek, and any who seek those things are fighting a war for a fools dream.

Kenzu wrote:@ seaborgium and Angel Slayer
The doesn't need to bother announcing any winners. Why should he get involved at all? It's up to the alliances if they want to announce winnders, loosers, or a draw.

I agree, but you miss the point Sea and AS were refering to the suggested "War System"

Kenzu wrote:In real world history there were a couple wars, where both sides claimed victory. I find it interesting, and it depends on the perspective. Some people say in a war there are no winners, but this is Aderan Wars, a game, and I believe that even though a lot of resources have been wasted in this war, this is why they exist, and this is why we play Aderan Wars. Fighting a war is more stressful than peace but definitely much more exciting than peace as well.

I am glad you are finally understanding this Kenzu. Maybe now more will understand this isn't "The Sims".

Kenzu wrote:I personally think TOC gained a lot from this war, especially war experience. And I don't mean the numbers, I mean real experience which helps them being more efficient at waging war. Afterall we got many people who were fighting their first war here in TOC. It's great to see a new generation of skilled veterans building up.

Same for your opposition. Also discovering what battle tactics work, and which do not has been a great win for both sides.

Kenzu wrote:

Vesper wrote:

Kenzu wrote:And what do you want to say with your huge post?

Its a SUMMARY Kenzu. It is quotes form only this thread. Seems you skip to the end of the posts. I made that post for you Kenzu so that you can actually have some idea of what your talking about next time you speak instead of making the dumbest remarks possible. Remarks like "let me remind you that TIE started the war" even though throughout this entire thread they said they started the war or asking why you were massed when your in a war. Things of that nature. I figured I would help you out this once.

You think it's a dumb remark, because you didn't understand the question.

I didn't ask why I was massed.
I asked why stars was the one massing me.
I didn't expect that stars would take part in this war, in fact I wondered why he joined TIE at all.
TIE is known for going to many wars, so since he emphasises so much that he doesnt want anyone to touch his account, joinining TIE (and any other alliance which was ever involved in a major war) was a big mistake, because it's obvious the accounts will be massed. There is no need for hard feelings. If you join any alliance that was in a war, you must expect that sooner or later your account will get massed in a future war.

(In fact he didn't even defeat my defense, still had over 2 billion defense after he was done.
So it was more of an attempted mass, but let's put the terminology aside on this one.)

Kenzu its things like this that I truly feel is your worst problem, and what makes it so hard for you to communicate effectively with a large percentage of the AW playerbase. If you look at the question by itself it is a foolish question. You ask why a member of an opposing alliance whom you are war with, and a member who has been on the front lines during the entire campaign, has massed you. That appears to be a stupid question to anyone looking upon it mate. Now your explanation does help the outsider to understand a bit more, tho to those of us who know Stars and seen him in action, it still makes no sense as he has been a front line fighter and played a Vital role in many series of attacks. Pulling off some of the best morale boosting attacks for all of TIE. He has been a real trooper and deserves much praise as many in TIE do. Heck as many in the entire war do, and I mean both sides. Point being, just because you know what your talking about doesn't mean those reading your post do, so think about how you write them a bit more. Maybe we can avoid more errors in communication in the future. I'll include myself to that as well.

You also need to keep in mind that having "victory" appear in the log doesn't always mean you lost. Many times one sacrifices many "losses" so that others can move in. Also even if you "lose", if your kill more then you lose did you really lose at all? If you play for "victory" or "loses" then your missing so much more depth to this game.

For your last point, again you are correct. If you are here to actually play then war and being massed are inevitable. If your here to play "The Sims" then you shouldn't join any alliances at all, but you miss out on so much of what this game is all about.




Now all that said, I'd like to echo the question asked by one of my opponents who to me has been a true challenge.

What do you want to achieve by fighting this war?