Pang, you've been asserting on these forums for several weeks now that war alliances do nothing but hit netters without cause. So far this hasn't been challenged, but does history really bear it out? It certainly wasn't a constant phenomenon on 2025... and I don't think the history here on EE supports that point of view either.

I can't speak knowledgeably about every war alliance since the move to EE. I haven't been involved enough in politics to pay a lot of attention. But what alliances do we have to address here. SoF, iMagNum, SoL... who else?

I don't even know how SoL's war last reset started... let alone what they've done over the last year. However, I know that SoF didn't blind side anybody last reset. They tried to get through peacefully absorbed an FS. In the resets before that, I don't know who they fought... but I know that in April they wanted a peaceful reset too. Could someone more familiar with their recent resets post a summary of their wars including who FSed who?

Of course, iMagNum I can speak knowledgeably about. And I don't think that our history of EE is in line with your claims. Anyway, reset by reset:

EE Reset 1: iMagNum FSed LaF. I forget if we had any serious reasons or not. But I'm willing to mark this war with being in line with what you're complaining about. 1 point for Pang's theory.

EE Reset 2: TIE FSed Collab. iMagNum dec'd TIE. RAGE, Rogue and Elysium all dec'd iMagNum. None of those wars are "war alliances beating up on netters" and there's no doubt that there's war clans righting eachother here. Obviously war clans do fight eachother. 1 point against Pang's theory (at least).

EE Reset 3: iMagNum FS'd Fist of Odin and LCN Dec'd on iMagNum as a result. The war with Odin was prompted by their mass FA to TIE while we were fighting them the reset before. I have no idea if Fist wanted to net this reset or not, but if you intentionally interject yourself in wars you should expect consequences. LCN choosing to hit iMagNum is also, obviously, not a war alliance picking on innocent netters. That's 2 points against Pang's theory now.

EE Reset 4: LCN FSed iMagNum. Nothing complicated here, I don't think I need to explain any further. We're up to 3 points against Pang's theory.

EE Reset 5: ICN attacked SoF, iMagNum came in to protect their FDP. After a CF, Collab attacked SoF, EEVIL and iMagNum... after some funny politics the war became Collab & ICN v. iMagNum, Paradigm, SoF & EEVIL. I don't see any blind siding of netters here either. That's 4 points against Pang's theory.

Like I said, I can't speak about other alliances. If someone else wants to break down other war alliances' records to show how they have picked on netters, I will happily listen. But iMagNum, the poster-boy for the "game destroying war alliance" has only twice in the last 5 resets declared war on an alliance that can make the argument that it was "netting". And only one of those two occasions was a blindside without provocation. In those five resets, we've certainly fought other war alliances too.

I'm sorry that the one netter blind side we've conducted in the last *year* was against your alliance Pang. But, at least as far as iMagNum is concerned, your claims that war alliances never fight each other and only blind side those who want to netgain in peace is nothing but hot air.

If you think the record of another alliance supports your claims better, fine. But I want you to post the record so I can see the evidence. Without that, you've got nothing but deflated hyperbole.

-Fooglmog
Guy with no clue.