Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
Where as a good top war record might consist of:
Rage
Sanctuary
Beastblood
I dont disagree and if every kd got reset to fight at 40k acres after each war with either any acre distributions they want or everyone at 1k acres those 3 kds would probably be the top 3 "war" kds in the game. But i personally think a few kds i've played against would/could beat them.

And what it boils down to is
Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
Are you honestly going to sit there and argue that beating Cataclysm (#100 on the warring charts) is just as worthy as beating Rage? If you are I'm honestly done arguing with you.
im not gonna argue that.
What i'd argue is alot of people would rather meet new kds, spam the war forums, and try lure a kd like Cataclysm onto IRC to have funny times during wars 1-2-3 while they wait for war kds to tag up. Ie have fun and relax instead of power play and land whore oop. A kd like Wehurt, Vic N Virture or a kd that arrises with 4/4 war wins like "wSk Xmas Party" to is still valid competition. While not maybe as good as sanc a war can be equally challenging if u give those kds enough of an advantage. I remember waring The Legendary Gods, we weren't taged when they waved us and they had a 10 % size advantage. However as they were mostly undeads on 60% draft rate and lowish def we grew something like 40-50% in min time and were able to chain 5 of them from 2000-300 in the opening war wave. was that an "worthy win?" eh, but would i war i war them again, sure, if they thought they could beat us why not let them try again. The last time we asked for war hoping they would try we got turned down because their activity was low Why is making them pay for that a good thing, or letting them war a kd as active as claimed to be a bad thing.