I noticed when logging on from the phone, on non-mobile site yesterday it captcha'ed me. Then a bit later I went on again but this time went to the mobile site and it captcha'ed again. Same device, just swapped between mobile and non-mobile.

6k hit from LaF -> Evo. Rival has barely done twice that in the entire war. If Rival had focused on Evo even with just 4k hits that would have been 4k less on SOL. Less killed SOL countries, more breaking power, more dead SoF breakers, much different numbers.

They're not assumptions, they're variables. Variables that could have affected numbers in either direction.

SoF outhit SOL by 700. Say LaF never killed Evo's countries. That would mean less SOL'ers dead early on, since more of SoF's hits would have been on Evo. When a country is killed the first 100 turns can't be used for attacks, not to mention losing any turns when killed. The 700 hits could have easily been made from that if LaF did not take out Evo.
Not to mention Evo would have had more breaking power to take out more SoF completely built countries. Which would have meant lost turns from more SoF restarts.
If LaF had stayed in, this would have been over weeks ago.
I highly doubt the numbers would be the same given either of those two things happened.

If Evo didn't lose most it's original countrie to LaF, would the current state of the war be the same? If LaF didn't cease it's attack and kept on vs SOL and Monsters, would the current state of the war be the same? If either of those were true, would those numbers be different? Would they still hold as much weight? That's my only point, I'm not bashing SoF or glorifying SOL, just don't think it can boil down to pure numbers.

Sov - It's never been a war of fairness, people on both sides will cry foul no matter what, it's the nature of this game.

But you're comparing TWO alliances in a war where there are more than TWO alliances.

If it was pure SoF vs SOL then those numbers would hold more weight.

Or are you saying the rest of the clans in the war have not had any influence on those numbers?

If you base this on a pure numbers basis, then sure. But where did Servant say this is based purely on numbers?

Personally, I think comparing 2 alliances' performances in a war where there are other involved parties without looking at anything but numbers is a bit unrealistic.

Somehow I figure hitting with one alliance at a fraction of the size of the other would show more desperation.

Love it when the slippery slope arguments come out :)

If it's a "civil union" and not a "marriage" by law (not any religion) then all couples should be labeled civil union only. Straight or gay.