|
if both clans have common sense it is simple
clan 1 raids clan 2
clan 2 raids clan 1
till 1 clan give up
it is not a foreign concept I mean you cant say "will never surrender" clans have and will always break apart after suffering multiple loses so their clans can live on it happened before can happen again |
|
|
because clans only think about how to buck the system and bypass things rather than just fighting |
|
HateHouseJoin Date: 2013-08-27
Post Count: 8815 |
Because CSP could be ahead of VAK by 500 wins, and VAK will never surrender. There is no winner. |
|
|
|
"clan 1 raids clan 2
clan 2 raids clan 1
till 1 clan give up"
Right because that has totally happened in every past endurance war |
|
|
|
An endurance war could literally be VAK defends one server a day but as long as they don't surrender they can't lose.
We will not let them dance around us with these blatantly stupid terms.
|
|
|
|
"lol"
This dude has no argument |
|
|
|
son its common sense wym no argument its happened before 😂 |
|
|
Give me one example of an endurance war that actually went well and didn't end up with either both clans calling an autowin, one of the clans dying and going completely inactive and the other clan calls an autowin, or that didn't lead to high toxicity to the point where both sides decided to call off the war |
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQFxmAdyKcg |
|
zman250Join Date: 2011-01-20
Post Count: 18410 |
vak made it an endurance war bc csp would win one to x amount of wins /shrug xd question mark
|
|
|
just because theres no example doesn't mean people cant use common sense |
|
|
|
"son its common sense wym no argument its happened before 😂"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsIh6Sj_kmI
"just because theres no example doesn't mean people cant use common sense"
I guarantee you this war will not work out the way you think it will |
|
Altair551Join Date: 2008-11-23
Post Count: 1168 |
Nobody agrees to an endurance war with any expectation of their side losing. The ultimate result of a true endurance war is at least one clan dying. TGI vs VAK killed TGI. It doesn't even have to be because one side is so defeated. TGI vs VAK was a close war and the result is still in debate today by some who think TGI won, but the reality is that TGI completely collapsed as a result of it. You can quote me on this -- VAK has absolutely no intention of warring CSP. They know that CSP won't agree to an endurance war. VAK's tactic here is to make the ###### that they're willing to fight CSP, but will absolutely refuse realistic war terms. I personally support VAK, but it's what they always do. They know that most clans will cave to their demands, and their goal is always to win before the war starts. |
|
|
Nobody agrees to an endurance war with any expectation of their side losing. The ultimate result of a true endurance war is at least one clan dying. TGI vs VAK killed TGI. It doesn't even have to be because one side is so defeated. TGI vs VAK was a close war and the result is still in debate today by some who think TGI won, but the reality is that TGI completely collapsed as a result of it. You can quote me on this -- VAK has absolutely no intention of warring CSP. They know that CSP won't agree to an endurance war. VAK's tactic here is to make the ###### that they're willing to fight CSP, but will absolutely refuse realistic war terms. I personally support VAK, but it's what they always do. They know that most clans will cave to their demands, and their goal is always to win before the war starts. |
|
Altair551Join Date: 2008-11-23
Post Count: 1168 |
Hello Stan |
|
|
|
it would not work without terms.
there will always be terms made. |
|