[zenith]

While I don't agree 100% with the following, I agree with a lot of it. The following post was by Pullo (Mighke) in a topic overrun by a lot of noise. So here's the post in it's entirety without having to read through 90+ posts. I commend Pullo for his calmness and well-thought-out reasoning in response to comments about tactics in gang wars.

Original Post :

Mighke Wrote:I don't usually read the forums, but I decided to read this one. I think I may be misunderstanding something. In this game, you can start gangs, right?

What do gangs usually do? Correct me if I'm wrong, but i think they sell drugs, do drive-bys, kill people, bully people and many times when their targets aren't killed they land in the hospital, right?

If one strong gang fights another strong gang, do the gangs just leave it at that? Again, correct me if I'm wrong but I think gangs engage in the act of retaliation.

If 2 gangs are fighting, would their FRIENDS pitch in and help them? I think this is a normal occurrence.

If one large gang were fighting a bunch of other gangs repeatedly, is it so crazy to think that those gangs may tire of that tedium and band together to beat the larger gang?

SV had the money to expand their gang larger than anyone else's (and there is absolutely nothing wrong with strategizing in that manner). Because of the new code, how strong a player is mattered little in a gang war. Numbers are what wins gang wars here. However, if a couple gangs coordinate to take them down, isn't that a form of strategizing as well?. I don't understand what's wrong with that.

To sum up, the Villains used their money to create an edge for themselves by adding many slots to their gang. (Absolutely nothing wrong with that). Pest and SSM allied and coordinated their efforts in order to win a battle successfully with the SV's.

Both teams used the strategies available to them. What's wrong with that?

The other point I want to address is why the hospitalizations began. Pestilence and the SV's had agreed to a truce, to end at a specific time. They were supposed to open negotiations during that time. I refuse to point fingers so all I will say is very little if any negotiations occurred.

The morning the truce was over, I was the only member of Pestilence online. The SV's decided to attack us then. I have no problem with that. They saw a good opportunity and took it. I happen to have a little strength and I fought them w/1 on 1 combat hospitalizations. I don't think there's anything wrong with that either. To use an analogy, if one puts his/her hand in a tiger's cage and slaps it around, the tiger will bite back. I bit back.

The gang war escalated. That's realistic. Gang wars escalate. Gangs use strategies that are suited to the size and ability of their members.

I think both gangs exploited their strengths to battle one another. That's what one has to do in war. Accentuating your strengths is not an invalid strategy. In fact if one does not call upon that strategy, he/she will almost certainly lose.

I will not mention names, but during the war, some of the members attempted to taunt me. I wasn't going to sit down and have a chat with them at that point. One player who shall be nameless communicated to me that he/she had "loads of stims" and didn't care if he/she was hospitalized because of this fact. C'mon now. Do you really think I wasn't going to use all means necessary at that point?

I guess what I'm saying is this is a game of war and combat. To try and sanatize war and combat in AL, is to lose the essence of the game. For those of you who have played RISK, did it piss you off when your best friend allied with someone else in order to take you down? Of course it did. Did your friend do what he/she had to in order to tilt the odds in his/her favor? Yes. That's war.

I apologize for the length of this post, but there were some points I wanted to make and I made it as brief as I could.

~Pullo

[Guest]

A good pick zen...and congrat to pullo. You sum up everything. Not bad for someone who don't usually read the forums.

[Druchii]

Yep, nice post

[Guest]

Well put Pullo.

[Guest]

I agree totally

[Guest]

War does not determine who wins, but who is left.

[Guest]

Dragon Wrote:War does not determine who wins, but who is left.

Good job reading this quote off someones signature.

[Guest]

Now you all know why I miss talking to "Deathlok" on MSN...

Edit:
Oh and what the hell...
I also agree with a good part of what he said and yes, fighting back when alone is normal, especially if you can take all of them but to keep doing it when 5-6 members are online instead of trying to win the war may not be the best way to go. I don't want this thread to become an argument about what happened so I'm not gonna go further on the subject but I think we both (gangs) had our rights and wrong. Now it's over (I think) and I doubt it will happen again unless "provoked" intentionally.

[Ushanewnewba]

I agree with a lot, and commend the way pullo said everything, true gentlemen.

However, if a gang attacks another gangs hideout, and only one of their members are online (obviously they are not planning to war anyone), and the fact the ONLY thing the other gang loses is the health of their hideout, Is hospitalizing really necessary? I mean gang wars escalate slowly not full out to the wall right away. I think it was a little much to jump to hospitalizing when all the gang hospitalizing had to do is grab their faithful allies and strike back against the attacking gangs hideout.

I think it was overkill in the worst way.

Anyway, I just wish for peace right now and no more drama. The entire incident was blown way out of proportion on both ends, and I hope both sides learned a lesson or two.

As this message was not written to agitate anyone, only to express my views, I wish for peace.

And as far as taunting mails go, I don't think I sent any, but if I did, my apologies. There is no place for this, and anyone doing so will feel very foolish sending them to you, haha.

PEACE!

[Conrad1103]

Risk is awesome!