I just have to make more of these entries. Reflecting on a particular combat which was originally entitled, "4v3comp"… where do they get such interesting names? As we were beginning, of course the organizer of this combat forgot to close out the last position and someone leapt in and took the spot, so it became, "5v3 comp." Knowing this would already be a ridiculous experience, I began by raising the usual Terran structures so I could send forth a horde of marines and tanks. The commander who had become the fifth on our side was poor enough to have his forces destroyed by the enemy we outnumbered. Back to "4v3comp."
Upon the massing of a squad of twelve marines, I noticed that another of my allies had begun his attack. I was instructed by another of my allies, who did nothing, to assist and so I did. As our two forces fought, no assistance came. The commander who originally attacked suddenly blurted, "I dont have time for Sim-City players," and then dropped from the engagement wiht his forces still on the battlefield. "3v3comp," went on with my conducting most of the combat using conventional forces, my ever so instructive ally firing nuclear missiles at our enemies, and our last ally acting completely on his own and helping us only after he went, "1v1comp," versus an enemy commander.
I still can’t decide who was the worst ally to have. I’m leaning towards the fellow who hates "Sim City players" because comments of this nature typically come from ignoraimus commanders who can’t command units for more than 5 minutes or lose. I’m leaning towards the best ally being the fellow who was destroyed early and spared me the ensuing stupidity of his strategy if he would have survived. As I mentioned, it’s a close contest.