[CC2] Semi Finals KoRT vs EMPIRE [37-23][Final] KORT WINS !

[comic boy]

A decisive and well earned victory for KORT and then along comes the arrogant clown to sour the victory , will he ever learn.....

[malevolous]

From a previous post of yours, the bonuses account for a net gain of 38 troops by KoRT, so that does not logically account for how a 74 troop advantage could turn into such a huge deficit. I restate that if you evidence doesn't account for all the troops lost, there must be another factor determining the lopsidedness. In the case of CC, only one other factor besides deploy will cause an imbalance in the troop count. So, just to be even with Empire, or in other words, to overcome the remaining 36 troop deficit, the only factor remaining is dice. The fact that the deficit is even more in your favor now implies an even greater disparity in the dice. In other words, my logic is sound and valid. If you want to attack the validity of my argument, you will be hard pressed unless you turn to claiming an extreme such as Empire suicided massive stacks of their troops into their own troops, or some such rubbish, and to attack the soundness, you would have to provide another explanation for at least 36 troops, as I am here attacking the soundness of your argument that an advantage in deploy accounts for the discrepancy.

ok, another fact, I hope it will prove who had better dice. in moment of writing this post, KORT deployed 25 more troops in whole game than Empire did. troop count is 201 (kort) vs 102+90 unknown region empire. let s say empire has al 1's in fog which means they have 192 troops. so, until now KORT had +25 drop and right now have only +9 troops total. how is this possible by your logic, if dice were in KORT favor? wouldn't our troops advantage be more than +25 (due to more drop+attacker advantage gotten by that drop) if dice really were in KORT favor in the game, like Empire guys stated?

if one team deployed 25 more, and have only 9 more troops, who was luckier?

Lol, Josko, you keep misdirecting here. The argument is that the turn around was allowed by dice. The turn around started at round 4, so please focus on the scope of the argument if you are going to participate. From round 4, you started down 74+ troops, and picked up +33 troops. this leaves 41 troops unaccounted for by your argument. I, and my clan mates, are merely stating the obvious: dice are the only explanation for the remainder of the comeback. Further, if the dice had been rounded, the bonuses you gained would have been broken by the larger armies which instead fizzled. If they hadn't fizzled, your bonuses would be gone and your argument as well. Thus your argument indirectly relied on dice to preserve those bonuses. Everyone here, except you, understands that dice are a huge part of the game. Why you refuse to see such a logically apparent fact both frustrates and amuses me. If you want to respond to the argument at hand, and not divert it to random asides, go ahead. If you try to go on a tangent, it will only make you appear the fool, so please don't.

if youir point was prove that KORT was lucky after round 4, then yes you are right, we rolled better than Empire. but game is made both by first 3 rounds and 4+ rounds.
facts are:

empire luckier rounds 1-3
kort luckier rounds 4+

whole game , Empire luckier (because +25 drop for KORT lead to only +9 troop advantage)

because of underlined statement I was especially offended by dice complaining. if anyone needed to complain about luck, that was my team when we had -74. but we showed class and did not make it to dice bitching fest, even when there existed reason for it in opening rounds.
if someone from world 21 or ww2 europe triples team for example complained about dice/luck that would be much more correct because there my team really got great dice, but complaining about dice in game where you had better total luck is really not needed.

Josko, I just asked you to not go on tangents. The statement has always been about the comeback, which is round 4+. Your constant need to wander off topic when you're wrong is disturbingly arrogant. If you had just admitted at the beginning that the statement: the comback was feuled by dice, was correct, as you finally did here, we could have avoided this whole thing. The need to deny an obvious statement and pursue a tangent of randomness=unnecessary discord.

Everyone else: thank you for the quality war! Good luck in the future to KoRT, and I look forward to future opportunities to measure myself against your clan. You've certainly left me with several things to consider moving forward.

[josko.ri]

From a previous post of yours, the bonuses account for a net gain of 38 troops by KoRT, so that does not logically account for how a 74 troop advantage could turn into such a huge deficit. I restate that if you evidence doesn't account for all the troops lost, there must be another factor determining the lopsidedness. In the case of CC, only one other factor besides deploy will cause an imbalance in the troop count. So, just to be even with Empire, or in other words, to overcome the remaining 36 troop deficit, the only factor remaining is dice.

Josko, I just asked you to not go on tangents. The statement has always been about the comeback, which is round 4+. Your constant need to wander off topic when you're wrong is disturbingly arrogant. If you had just admitted at the beginning that the statement: the comback was feuled by dice, was correct, as you finally did here, we could have avoided this whole thing. The need to deny an obvious statement and pursue a tangent of randomness=unnecessary discord.

your conclusion and logic is again wrong. if we had -74, and good dice "gifted" us +38, that means we would still be on -36, if we consider ONLY dice, true?

That means some other fact which is not dice achieved that we were on plus 9 instead of -36. and the other fact is strategy. so dice+strategy played role in our comeback (not only dice like you want to say). with dice we got like +36, and remaining troops are gotten by strategy (strategy = managing to have more drop with less total troops)

so what you said: "the comback was feuled by dice, was correct, as you finally did here, we could have avoided this whole thing." is again lie and trying to write my words in different way. what I admitted is "kort was luckier after round 4". what I did not admit is "the comeback was feuled by dice" because my statement means the comeback was feuled by dice (20%) and by strategy (80%), and statement "kort was luckier after round 4" goes to those 20%. if with good dice we now have +10 drop per turn and secured win, with mediocre/bad dice we would have like +4-6 drop per turn, so comeback would again be there, with good or with bad dice, it would just last longer.

[Bruceswar]

What Josko is trying to say is while dice got better for us after round 4, we still had to have some strategy to come back. Nobody is going to win a game on dice alone. The game was hard fought on both sides and both teams deserve credit. Nobody is trying to say one team or the other had a better way of doing things. Everybody is pretty much saying the same thing, just lost in translation a bit.

[lord voldemort]

Fun fact. Every game is based on dice results

Scumbag Josko, takes compliment then turns it around. Just makes him look foolish. It's a wonder that everyone likes kort.......oh wait???

[comic boy]

What Josko is trying to say is while dice got better for us after round 4, we still had to have some strategy to come back. Nobody is going to win a game on dice alone. The game was hard fought on both sides and both teams deserve credit. Nobody is trying to say one team or the other had a better way of doing things. Everybody is pretty much saying the same thing, just lost in translation a bit.

Nice try Bruce

[Denise]

What's pretty ironic and imo makes you look foolish, Josko, is that you have decided to take offense at something JJ, of all people, has said. I hesitate to stir the pot, but it's so ridiculous I can't help myself. Anyone who knows JJ at all will tell you he is the most amiable person on this site. He wasn't even trying to complain about dice, but even if he was, what's so hard about, as the winner, tolerating a little of that? I think players who win as consistently as you do should know how to be a better sportsman about it. Winning is important, but knowing how to win is also important, if you care at all for your clan's reputation. You like drama, huh?

[TheSpaceCowboy]

What's pretty ironic and imo makes you look foolish, Josko, is that you have decided to take offense at something JJ, of all people, has said. I hesitate to stir the pot, but it's so ridiculous I can't help myself. Anyone who knows JJ at all will tell you he is the most amiable person on this site. He wasn't even trying to complain about dice, but even if he was, what's so hard about, as the winner, tolerating a little of that? I think players who win as consistently as you do should know how to be a better sportsman about it. Winning is important, but knowing how to win is also important, if you care at all for your clan's reputation. You like drama, huh?

i am wounded

lol

but, yes, Denise. . .true dat.

[Denise]

What's pretty ironic and imo makes you look foolish, Josko, is that you have decided to take offense at something JJ, of all people, has said. I hesitate to stir the pot, but it's so ridiculous I can't help myself. Anyone who knows JJ at all will tell you he is the most amiable person on this site. He wasn't even trying to complain about dice, but even if he was, what's so hard about, as the winner, tolerating a little of that? I think players who win as consistently as you do should know how to be a better sportsman about it. Winning is important, but knowing how to win is also important, if you care at all for your clan's reputation. You like drama, huh?

i am wounded

lol

but, yes, Denise. . .true dat.

Don't be jealous, Moe. You get "B" for benevolent and "C" for comical. That's two adjectives!

[jj3044]

This thing keeps getting more ridiculous. Josko and Bruce both just validated what I said in my initial post (which Josko vehemently disagreed with). That is, that while dice played a role in the comeback, Kort's strategy during that time allowed them to take advantage (again, COMPLIMENTING Kort).

I'll quote all three posts for comparison. NOW will this finally end?

Yeah, very frustrating game. Deploy 14 and only take 4 singles every rd. ::sigh::

To your credit you guys put yourself in a position to take advantage if our dice turned as cold as they did. To think we were up like 70 terts at one point and you come back...

your conclusion and logic is again wrong. if we had -74, and good dice "gifted" us +38, that means we would still be on -36, if we consider ONLY dice, true?

That means some other fact which is not dice achieved that we were on plus 9 instead of -36. and the other fact is strategy. so dice+strategy played role in our comeback (not only dice like you want to say). with dice we got like +36, and remaining troops are gotten by strategy (strategy = managing to have more drop with less total troops)

so what you said: "the comback was feuled by dice, was correct, as you finally did here, we could have avoided this whole thing." is again lie and trying to write my words in different way. what I admitted is "kort was luckier after round 4". what I did not admit is "the comeback was feuled by dice" because my statement means the comeback was feuled by dice (20%) and by strategy (80%), and statement "kort was luckier after round 4" goes to those 20%. if with good dice we now have +10 drop per turn and secured win, with mediocre/bad dice we would have like +4-6 drop per turn, so comeback would again be there, with good or with bad dice, it would just last longer.

What Josko is trying to say is while dice got better for us after round 4, we still had to have some strategy to come back. Nobody is going to win a game on dice alone. The game was hard fought on both sides and both teams deserve credit. Nobody is trying to say one team or the other had a better way of doing things. Everybody is pretty much saying the same thing, just lost in translation a bit.

I was going to say before reading these posts that we should all just agree to disagree then, but now it appears that we should agree to.... agree!

Three different ways of saying the exact same thing.

Move on people.

[malevolous]

I know, and they're trying to say that we're claiming that only dice did it, when all we've ever said was they contributed to the comeback, in addition to other things.

So you know what to attack, this is the logical "formula" I'm using:
For A, either B or C
A
Not B
Therefore C
A is a shift in relative troop count, B is deploy advantage equal to A, C is dice contributing.

That was why I posted this, so they would know all i'm arguing for is dice contributing. Apparently when arguing they just prefer to ignore facts and put words in other people's mouths. I also like how josko is still calling my cacts wrong, then goes on to restate exactly what my argument stated. Is it some inherent need of his to be the one who gives truth? If I say the truth first, does it somehow hurt him to the point he has to falsely say my logic fails/conclusion's wrong just so he can restate what I'm saying and feel like he is the one initially saying it? Smacks of incredible arrogance, or maybe just that he should not try and interpret English on his own. That might be the most generous assumption I can have for him at this time.

[malevolous]

What Josko is trying to say is while dice got better for us after round 4, we still had to have some strategy to come back. Nobody is going to win a game on dice alone. The game was hard fought on both sides and both teams deserve credit. Nobody is trying to say one team or the other had a better way of doing things. Everybody is pretty much saying the same thing, just lost in translation a bit.

This would be true, but he categorically rejected jj saying that dice contributed. JJ never said it was ALL that determined it, but josko had to go and act like a. JJ did say that and b. that dice hadn't played ANY role in it. Now hes admitting they did, but trying not to say that we were right in saying it. Its just infuriating how arrogant that sounds, and how belittling he is. I'm especially upset because I'm the only one here who has provided a logical proof, but he says MY logic has failed, but meanwhile he refuses to format his argument in a logical way. Seriously? Logic is the same in all languages, so no croatian excuse, only explanation is educational failure. Even when my argument is boiled down to a simple logical proof, he doesn't dispute the proof, but puts words in our mouths(that we claim all was due to dice) and fights that argument without addressing the actual argument: he initially claimed no dice favoritism, but there logically had to be to account for the swing. Its like arguing with a three year old....

[jackal31]

What Josko is trying to say is while dice got better for us after round 4, we still had to have some strategy to come back. Nobody is going to win a game on dice alone. The game was hard fought on both sides and both teams deserve credit. Nobody is trying to say one team or the other had a better way of doing things. Everybody is pretty much saying the same thing, just lost in translation a bit.

This would be true, but he categorically rejected jj saying that dice contributed. JJ never said it was ALL that determined it, but josko had to go and act like a. JJ did say that and b. that dice hadn't played ANY role in it. Now hes admitting they did, but trying not to say that we were right in saying it. Its just infuriating how arrogant that sounds, and how belittling he is. I'm especially upset because I'm the only one here who has provided a logical proof, but he says MY logic has failed, but meanwhile he refuses to format his argument in a logical way. Seriously? Logic is the same in all languages, so no croatian excuse, only explanation is educational failure. Even when my argument is boiled down to a simple logical proof, he doesn't dispute the proof, but puts words in our mouths(that we claim all was due to dice) and fights that argument without addressing the actual argument: he initially claimed no dice favoritism, but there logically had to be to account for the swing. Its like arguing with a three year old....

If there were post ratings....this would get 5/5 stars.

[drunkmonkey]

Its like arguing with a three year old....

I was thinking the same thing, considering the last 7-8 posts in this thread have been a "josko's such a fool" circlejerk. Both sides are arguing the same thing right now, yet both sides have to get the last word to prove they're right (and no, stating "we're saying the same thing, you fool" isn't any better". How about both sides just shut up, and we don't turn a pleasant, well-fought challenge into a cat fight over one goddamn game?

[TheSpaceCowboy]

Word
(last)

End Thread now. . .eat more chicken.

[niMic]

Personally, I welcome our new dice overlords.

[malevolous]

I was thinking the same thing, considering the last 7-8 posts in this thread have been a "josko's such a fool" circlejerk. Both sides are arguing the same thing right now, yet both sides have to get the last word to prove they're right (and no, stating "we're saying the same thing, you fool" isn't any better". How about both sides just shut up, and we don't turn a pleasant, well-fought challenge into a cat fight over one goddamn game?

Well, saying that we were riled up because we were saying the same thing, or that that was the sum of our complaint is not going to help as it is far from what is going on, but as long as no one insults my intelligence or ability to use logic, I was fine, and still am fine, with leaving things as stated over a day ago.

Thank you for the quality war! Good luck in the future to KoRT, and I look forward to future opportunities to measure myself against your clan. You've certainly left me with several things to consider moving forward.

[comic boy]

Its like arguing with a three year old....

I was thinking the same thing, considering the last 7-8 posts in this thread have been a "josko's such a fool" circlejerk. Both sides are arguing the same thing right now, yet both sides have to get the last word to prove they're right (and no, stating "we're saying the same thing, you fool" isn't any better". How about both sides just shut up, and we don't turn a pleasant, well-fought challenge into a cat fight over one goddamn game?

Rather than constantly running around trying to clean up the baby's mess , wouldn't it be easier just to put a nappy on him

[Foxglove]

this is looking more and more like a b***** slapping fight. I guess it doesnt matter how well either clan did, what matters is who is going to get slapped last.

I would just like to go on the record and state that I do not enjoy being bitch slapped (assuming that the 5 asterisks following the b in your statement stand for "itch", of course).

[Denise]

Its like arguing with a three year old....

I was thinking the same thing, considering the last 7-8 posts in this thread have been a "josko's such a fool" circlejerk. Both sides are arguing the same thing right now, yet both sides have to get the last word to prove they're right (and no, stating "we're saying the same thing, you fool" isn't any better". How about both sides just shut up, and we don't turn a pleasant, well-fought challenge into a cat fight over one goddamn game?

Okay, I apologize for "foolish". I think what I said was fair, if I hadn't included that word. I hope we can move on, and there will be no more insults from either side, or from the sidelines. Let's get back to that group hug Foxy mentioned earlier.

[merch313]

Its like arguing with a three year old....

I was thinking the same thing, considering the last 7-8 posts in this thread have been a "josko's such a fool" circlejerk. Both sides are arguing the same thing right now, yet both sides have to get the last word to prove they're right (and no, stating "we're saying the same thing, you fool" isn't any better". How about both sides just shut up, and we don't turn a pleasant, well-fought challenge into a cat fight over one goddamn game?

Okay, I apologize for "foolish". I think what I said was fair, if I hadn't included that word. I hope we can move on, and there will be no more insults from either side, or from the sidelines. Let's get back to that group hug Foxy mentioned earlier.

♥

[Bruceswar]

And since we had a sig bet going... time to show the sig....




Enjoy All!

[Denise]

[jj3044]

[malevolous]

Aww, I'm not in it :'(