Jump to content

The Protectorate Reaches Two Million NS


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Alonso Quixano said:

 

These are not the old days where nations are sentenced to PZI. I'm not admonishing the raider as a big deal; we are trying to normalize the situation with reparations to their originally affected nations. You can continue to use the word civilized, but to us you are not using the world correctly.

 

We are understanding to other alliances, and we offered reps to their originally affected nations. The civilized response, as you so continue to use, would be to accept the repayment to their nations. Your use of of civilized is uncivilized, as you advise the use of force when you are not meet with the response you want, or expect to see. 

 

I disagree with your use of force, but agree with the fact the there needs to be a civilized response. We are dealing with the raider, not the rogue, in paying of reparations. If alpha wolves don't want to accept my offer of reps to their originally affected nations, that's their right, but it is our right to consider an attack against our alliance affiliation as an attack against our alliance affiliation. 

 

You can spin the act as civil or not, but we think your definition of civil is wrong. We have offered alpha wolves reparations to their original nations. Is that not civil enough?


Stoli is a rogue, not a raider. You're a rogue when you declare 3 wars on an alliance.

Also I don't see where Junka advised the use of force. And I assume by use of force you mean violence against the rogue nation to punish them?

The only one I see threaten to use force against another when not meet with the response they want is you, really. Stoli was a rogue on none, an AW matter to be dealt with and now you're stepping in trying to tell them how to handle it and if they don't handle it how you want, you'll attack them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

9 hours ago, Alonso Quixano said:

 

I don't see a problem with accepting a nation that conducted a tech raid, and was then attack on none after leaving their alliance. I see no qualms with the wars continuing until they end. 

 

Are you suggesting that AW is an acceptable target for "raiding"? Generally attacks by a nation on a large alliance with treaties as that nation is leaving their alliance are called roguery.

 

Pretty clearly this isn't a raid, he didn't offer peace until after they retaliated, he didn't launch GAs on all of them, kind of the point of raiding, and he stated his motivation in the war declaration reasons; his trade partner was sanctioned on red by LoD after AW requested it when he attacked AGWO.

 

Accept whichever nations you want, so long as you do not try to defend him it makes no difference, but to agree with Junka any decent alliance would have kicked him ASAP. Had he attacked NPO for placing the sanction instead of AW for requesting it I doubt you would come up with the same line.

 

Quote

 

(12/30/2016 2:16:51 PM)Alonso Quixano approved Stoli in their request to join the alliance Protectorate of Sovereign Socialist Ententes.

(12/30/2016 2:15:54 PM)Stoli requested to join the alliance Protectorate of Sovereign Socialist Ententes.

I also find it hilarious that you take less than 60 second to approve a nation that is at war.

 

4 hours ago, Canik said:

Okay so it's this nation apparently: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=558953

Next time it would be nice if someone said the name or posted a link to avoid the unnecessary confusing or going through every nation individually to find out.

Anyway, yeah. From the looks of it dude went full retard on Alpha Wolves and by the traditional unwritten but well-known international laws of Bob - Alpha Wolves gets to beat the crap out of him if they want. To teach him a lesson, deter future rogues, etc.

 

Sorry Canik, I sometimes assume everyone checks war screens as excessively as I do! :P

Edited by Blackatron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats to our good friends and bloc mates PoSSe in this great feat. 

 

As far as the issue between them and AW, I hope both parties can find a diplomatic solution to this incident. Ive been down this same path before and it never ends pretty... for either side. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Immortan Junka said:

There is nothing more annoying for an alliance that has recently ended a major conflict to deal with than a random rogue punking their membership.

 

 

Yes yes, the pheonix federation should be ashamed of themselves,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats to PoSSE on reaching 2mil NS. Hope to see u guys continuing growing.

Best of luck in dealing with ur current issue with the wolves. Don't compromise on ur principles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Canik said:


Stoli is a rogue, not a raider. You're a rogue when you declare 3 wars on an alliance.

Also I don't see where Junka advised the use of force. And I assume by use of force you mean violence against the rogue nation to punish them?

The only one I see threaten to use force against another when not meet with the response they want is you, really. Stoli was a rogue on none, an AW matter to be dealt with and now you're stepping in trying to tell them how to handle it and if they don't handle it how you want, you'll attack them.

 

Since we're so fond of using history as our barometer in this thread, one big action taken by Athens to raid Ni, was alliance wide. Were they considered rogues? History is littered with alliances mass raiding alliances, some of your allies have done it. DBDC did it to one of our leaders last alliance, CPAC. So let me ask you. Are your allies an alliance of rogues? Or are they just raiding? 

 

What makes this situation different? Because you get to define the actions of this one person in this instance for then "attack" against your ally? 

 

I find it funny that people use history of decorum, acceptableness, guidelines, to suit their needs, but this world is anything but a unified set of rules to follow on alliance to alliance interactions. 

 

 

You will not see me advocating for force, I am advocating peace, for reps to the originally affected nations. I'm not denying they had the right to deal with him on none. Now he is a member of our alliance, and we are advocating peace. They are a sovereign entity, and can continue to attack if they so choose. Not every attack needs to be meet with military force. It can be meet with continuation of our ideals, and the mass funding of tech to our nation. 

 

6 hours ago, Blackatron said:

 

Are you suggesting that AW is an acceptable target for "raiding"? Generally attacks by a nation on a large alliance with treaties as that nation is leaving their alliance are called roguery.

 

Pretty clearly this isn't a raid, he didn't offer peace until after they retaliated, he didn't launch GAs on all of them, kind of the point of raiding, and he stated his motivation in the war declaration reasons; his trade partner was sanctioned on red by LoD after AW requested it when he attacked AGWO.

 

Accept whichever nations you want, so long as you do not try to defend him it makes no difference, but to agree with Junka any decent alliance would have kicked him ASAP. Had he attacked NPO for placing the sanction instead of AW for requesting it I doubt you would come up with the same line.

 

I also find it hilarious that you take less than 60 second to approve a nation that is at war.

 

 

Sorry Canik, I sometimes assume everyone checks war screens as excessively as I do! :P

 

 

Any nation in any alliance is a acceptable target for raiding, if they don't wish to be so, there is a mode called peace for the nation to be in. You can refer to my above post to Canik about what constitutes as roguery. 

 

According to him, he did offer peace before they attacked, some had accepted before, and accepted it minutes after the declarations. As seen by time stamps on their activity page. So clearly it was a raid, done by a nation with 269,894 Casualties, in his first few wars. 

 

So with this new information are you still going to call him a rogue, when clearly nations accepted peace, when he sent it after he raided? He tested out the war functions that every nation has the right to, and offered peace. I'm not saying get retribution for those in your alliance, but deciding to continue to attack for one mistake is unfit of a decent, civilized alliance. 

 

We would come up with the same line as we actually have values we hold dear. That might be hard for people to understand when most alliances have the same structure, and have never really stood for something (not commenting on any alliance or person in particular), few do, I can think of ISX, the Orders (sans NSO), and GPA.

 

Not everyone deserves to be pounded into the ground, everyone deserves a chance in this world, big or small, if they make a mistake. We want to make restitution to the affected nations. There are plenty of ways of defending your alliance from rouge, having one round with "reps", ZI'ing the nation, sanctioning them, etcetc. 

 

I've reached out to Alpha Wolves privately saying, you're more than welcome to continue the wars, and we'll pay for the damages. I'm positive that, that is the best out come for a nation who made a mistake, and for the offended alliance to show that they can defend their members. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is addressing not simply BMTH but certain other replies in this thread.

 

What separates a rogue from a civilized entity is that civilization is focused on economic and cultural growth. It is true that alliances like DBDC have blurred the lines in the past; however the situation with DBDC was a result of an aberration in super-tier mechanics: much larger nations being able to declare on much smaller nations in the top 250 nations range. The objective in that case was to augment the raiders strength by seizing land from weaker nations. 

 

The rogue entity, however, does not have that luxury. As we see with the foolish Emperor Khan attacking the Imperium, the rogue gains nothing from attacking properly-fortified civilized alliance. He has lost untold billions of dollars in warchest as well as more than 15,000 tech. He will serve as an example to those who would be so foolish in the future.

 

The entire purpose of an alliance is to lift the membership out of the state of nature, rogues are the primary threat to this purpose. For a third party to intervene in a rogue dispute and threaten the use of military force on behalf of the rogue is an act of war.

 

Accepting a rogue as a member does not wipe clean the state of war that exists between the rogue and the victim alliance. We have seen these types of antics in the case of micro alliances, but a 2,000,000 NS alliance is a much bigger target and should know better.

 

However, if you are willing to play brinksmanship to disrupt the established order of things, by all means go ahead. I have lead seven major wars in the Imperium alone and it can take hours each day to properly organize a military effort. If your principles lead you to a major war, and you lead your troops well, I think we will all have a new respect for your leadership even if I disagree on your principles.

Edited by Immortan Junka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Immortan Junka said:

This is addressing not simply BMTH but certain other replies in this thread.

 

What separates a rogue from a civilized entity is that civilization is focused on economic and cultural growth. It is true that alliances like DBDC have blurred the lines in the past; however the situation with DBDC was a result of an aberration in super-tier mechanics: much larger nations being able to declare on much smaller nations in the top 250 nations range. The objective in that case was to augment the raiders strength by seizing land from weaker nations. 

 

The rogue entity, however, does not have that luxury. As we see with the foolish Emperor Khan attacking the Imperium, the rogue gains nothing from attacking properly-fortified civilized alliance. He has lost untold billions of dollars in warchest as well as more than 15,000 tech. He will serve as an example to those who would be so foolish in the future.

 

The entire purpose of an alliance is to lift the membership out of the state of nature, rogues are the primary threat to this purpose. For a third party to intervene in a rogue dispute and threaten the use of military force on behalf of the rogue is an act of war.

 

Accepting a rogue as a member does not wipe clean the state of war that exists between the rogue and the victim alliance. We have seen these types of antics in the case of micro alliances, but a 2,000,000 NS alliance is a much bigger target and should know better.

 

However, if you are willing to play brinksmanship to disrupt the established order of things, by all means go ahead. I have lead seven major wars in the Imperium alone and it can take hours each day to properly organize a military effort. If your principles lead you to a major war, and you lead your troops well, I think we will all have a new respect for your leadership even if I disagree on your principles.

 

Just because they are super-tier shouldn't negate the fact that if you apply the label rogue to a singular nation, you must there for label the alliance a rogue alliance if they do it on alliance level, in the same mechanics. The objective in a tech raid is to gain tech, land, and money. So be it if the nations fight back, and that singular nation losses more then he gained. So it is disingenuous to label a single offender a rogue, but not the alliance who does the same thing. 

 

Do I think they are/were an alliance of rogues? No. I just think you can't label one person one thing, and an alliance the other. When does an alliance stop becoming rogue? When they offered peace to the alliance affected? Or they ally someone? To use you as an example, because I am genuinely curious. I've heard you cal LPCN rogue before, what now makes them not rogue entities? Is it because you are bringing them out of a state of nature? Where do you draw the line? If they ever raid again, will they then be considered rogues, or raiders?

 

If we look at the individual nation, we can see this is a tech raid, and not an act of roguery. As peace was sent before Alpha Wolves was able to respond in force, while he was on none. I can't fathom how people can call him a rogue, but he acted, and did everything a tech raider does. Especially when those calling him a rogue are allied to tech raiders, and have tech raided themselves. 

 

Where have I publicly stated we would use, or threaten to use military force to stop them if they attacked Stoli again? Just because we consider him a part of the protectorate, and consider attacks against the protectorate's members as attacks against the whole alliance does not mean we said we would respond with force. There must be a time, and place for force to be used, but we did not say it would be this time. Actually throughout this entire thread I have advocated peace for a one time mistake, who offered peace before retribution even started, as seen by time stamps on the original offended nations. I have offered reps privately, and publicly to Alpha Wolves, and those affected, you should see one batch go out soon, as a sign of good faith. 

 

Our friends in Varangian Guard, are soon to be codified partners to an ally of Alpha Wolves, so I would like to resolve this peacefully. We don't see peacefully as throwing a member out to the wolves, though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Alonso Quixano said:

Since we're so fond of using history as our barometer in this thread, one big action taken by Athens to raid Ni, was alliance wide. Were they considered rogues? History is littered with alliances mass raiding alliances, some of your allies have done it. DBDC did it to one of our leaders last alliance, CPAC. So let me ask you. Are your allies an alliance of rogues? Or are they just raiding? 

 

What makes this situation different?


The mass raid by Athens should probably really be called a war. I think calling it a mass raid is almost a joke, it is generally classified that way when the alliance being raided is isolated. If I recall correctly, Ni kept itself pretty isolated for a long time.. still is rather isolated I think. I don't know all the circumstances around that example so can't really comment farther.

As for DBDC, they actually were widely considered rogues at first. It wasn't until they started to settle down and sign treaties that they started to become accepted as a fully legitimate alliance. So yeah, maybe they were at the time. Although if it was just CPAC no one probably would've cared, never heard of CPAC until now. It was because they raided larger alliances connected to the web.

Anyway, I don't know all the reasons for why everything is the way it is.. but a single nation acting out on it's own attacking a decent sized and decently connected alliance has pretty universally always been considered rogue.

 

1 hour ago, Alonso Quixano said:

I find it funny that people use history of , acceptableness, guidelines, to suit their needs, but this world is anything but a unified set of rules to follow on alliance to alliance interactions.


Seems pretty unified to me.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Canik said:


The mass raid by Athens should probably really be called a war. I think calling it a mass raid is almost a joke, it is generally classified that way when the alliance being raided is isolated. If I recall correctly, Ni kept itself pretty isolated for a long time.. still is rather isolated I think. I don't know all the circumstances around that example so can't really comment farther.

As for DBDC, they actually were widely considered rogues at first. It wasn't until they started to settle down and sign treaties that they started to become accepted as a fully legitimate alliance. So yeah, maybe they were at the time. Although if it was just CPAC no one probably would've cared, never heard of CPAC until now. It was because they raided larger alliances connected to the web.

Anyway, I don't know all the reasons for why everything is the way it is.. but a single nation acting out on it's own attacking a decent sized and decently connected alliance has pretty universally always been considered rogue.

 


Seems pretty unified to me.
 

 

 

I must say, despite us being on different sides of most of the issues we've discussed the last few weeks, you've been generally one of the better people to engage on topics, your posts seem to be especially removed from vitriolic response, on these forums. Thank you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that this has been resolved (congratulations by the way!) so this will be my last post on the topic.

 

2 hours ago, Alonso Quixano said:

 

Since we're so fond of using history as our barometer in this thread, one big action taken by Athens to raid Ni, was alliance wide. Were they considered rogues? History is littered with alliances mass raiding alliances, some of your allies have done it. DBDC did it to one of our leaders last alliance, CPAC. So let me ask you. Are your allies an alliance of rogues? Or are they just raiding? 

 

 

I don't disagree that there is a large blurry area here, I don't think anyone does, however I don't think the existence of blurry areas (for example Berbers and Addaff and Co. attacking Valhalla) make the designation of very clear cut cases as rogues less valid.

 

Also as pointed out by Junka (damn I always agree with him too much on these topics) raiding is done for profit, either in the form of tech, land, cash or xp, this is clearly not done for profit so cannot be classed as a raid.

 

As for DBDC, when the started there was very little separating them from rogues TBH and they were often viewed as such. However since then they have made treaties and have their own internal procedure on what constitutes a valid target, just far more open than most alliance's raiding protocols due to the lower fear of retaliation. So whilst I don't like how they raid I wouldn't call them rogues.

 

 

Happy New Year everyone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Alonso Quixano said:

 

 

I must say, despite us being on different sides of most of the issues we've discussed the last few weeks, you've been generally one of the better people to engage on topics, your posts seem to be especially removed from vitriolic response, on these forums. Thank you. 


Thanks, glad you appreciate it. :)

I've enjoyed our discussions too, you have some interesting views. (albeit impractical ones, in my opinion )

Edit: And glad to hear a peace arrangement has been agreed upon. All of our aid slot usages are great right now, would be a shame to disrupt all that trade. :D

Edited by Canik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alonso Quixano said:

A peace has been achieved between Alpha Wolves, and the protectorate. I thank everyone for their well wishes on us reaching 2 million nation strength. 

Seems your rogues don't agree....I do love threats....

 

To: Al Bundy    From: New Lucinda    Date: 12/31/2016 12:03:50 PM

Subject: Enough

 

Message: Send Stoli peace now or you will regret it. 1st and only warning.
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

To: Al Bundy    From: malakarlian    Date: 12/31/2016 2:22:03 PM

Subject: my reply

 

Message: To: New Lucinda    From: malakarlian    Date: 12/31/2016 1:43:53 PM

Subject: RE: Enough

Message: One....he attacked my alliance. Two....don't threaten me when he was in the wrong. Three who the $%&* are you? I dont see a star by your name.Any diplomatic talks should go through AL bundy my foreign relations diplomat. Four....I am not sorry very often
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: FW: RE: Enough

 

Message:   To: malakarlian    From: New Lucinda
 
Sorry, you mistake me. It wasn't a threat, it was a promise.

Your talking to new MoD for POSSE, its new top military commander.

Your also talking to a bitter old vet with 4 years under my belt from 08-12 in this game, including leading an alliance of 150 members for almost 2 years.

So you might want to check your tone there "pal". He attacked you, because you demanded NPO trade sanction me, 4 weeks after my war with 1 of your guys ended.

Your alliance started this "mate", and now POSSE will finish it unless all 3 of you back the f*ck off and do it right now before next DT.

Wasn't a threat, it was a promise. Call my bluff if you think thats wise and you will find out what happens, because I keep my promises and I'm a man of my word.

Your alliance was spitting in my face by demanding that sanction on red and you know it. That's why Stoli attacked you. My NS might be low atm, but I now represent the entire military force of POSSE. So blink if you dare, i'll be waiting.

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AL Bundy said:

messages

 

 

To: malakarlian    From: Alonso Quixano    Date: 12/31/2016 2:10:12 PM

Subject: Hello

 

Message: Please excuse our fiend that messaged you. 

Peace was achieved with Al Bundy this morning. 

Sorry for any confusion.
 
 

To: Alonso Quixano    From: malakarlian    Date: 12/31/2016 2:25:01 PM

Subject: RE: Hello

 

Message: No worries we have a few over zealous characters in our alliance as well lol. Enjoy your new year!
 
 
 
 
There should not be any confusion with who is negotiating, I still believe that the payment of 18 million and 300 tech spread across those three nations is still intact?  
 
 
We apologize for any confusion. I've responded to your messages in-game as well. 
Edited by Alonso Quixano
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AL Bundy said:

Seems your rogues don't agree....I do love threats....

 

To: Al Bundy    From: New Lucinda    Date: 12/31/2016 12:03:50 PM

Subject: Enough

 

Message: Send Stoli peace now or you will regret it. 1st and only warning.
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

To: Al Bundy    From: malakarlian    Date: 12/31/2016 2:22:03 PM

Subject: my reply

 

Message: To: New Lucinda    From: malakarlian    Date: 12/31/2016 1:43:53 PM

Subject: RE: Enough

Message: One....he attacked my alliance. Two....don't threaten me when he was in the wrong. Three who the $%&* are you? I dont see a star by your name.Any diplomatic talks should go through AL bundy my foreign relations diplomat. Four....I am not sorry very often
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: FW: RE: Enough

 

Message:   To: malakarlian    From: New Lucinda
 
Sorry, you mistake me. It wasn't a threat, it was a promise.

Your talking to new MoD for POSSE, its new top military commander.

Your also talking to a bitter old vet with 4 years under my belt from 08-12 in this game, including leading an alliance of 150 members for almost 2 years.

So you might want to check your tone there "pal". He attacked you, because you demanded NPO trade sanction me, 4 weeks after my war with 1 of your guys ended.

Your alliance started this "mate", and now POSSE will finish it unless all 3 of you back the f*ck off and do it right now before next DT.

Wasn't a threat, it was a promise. Call my bluff if you think thats wise and you will find out what happens, because I keep my promises and I'm a man of my word.

Your alliance was spitting in my face by demanding that sanction on red and you know it. That's why Stoli attacked you. My NS might be low atm, but I now represent the entire military force of POSSE. So blink if you dare, i'll be waiting.

 

 

Over and under on this guy going rogue again in the future?

 

Very classy PoSSE. Glad you cancelled that treaty for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Alonso Quixano said:

 

 

To: malakarlian    From: Alonso Quixano    Date: 12/31/2016 2:10:12 PM

Subject: Hello

 

Message: Please excuse our fiend that messaged you. 

Peace was achieved with Al Bundy this morning. 

Sorry for any confusion.
 
 

To: Alonso Quixano    From: malakarlian    Date: 12/31/2016 2:25:01 PM

Subject: RE: Hello

 

Message: No worries we have a few over zealous characters in our alliance as well lol. Enjoy your new year!
 
 
 
 
There should not be any confusion with who is negotiating, I still believe that the payment of 18 million and 300 tech spread across those three nations is still intact?  
 
 
We apologize for any confusion. I've responded to your messages in-game as well. 

They just keep coming!

 

To: Al Bundy    From: New Lucinda    Date: 12/31/2016 2:57:51 PM

Subject: You have until DT

 

Message: This is a carbon copy msg sent to all 3 Alpha Wolves nations currently engaged in hostilities with the Nation Stoli of the alliance POSSE.

You have until downtime to send peace to Stoli. You will not be attacked again until DT, but failure to comply with this will result in a direct threat to your entire alliance.

This message is sent by the new acting Head Military Commander / MoD of the POSSE alliance and carries the full weight of the POSSE government behind it.

Failure to heed this message will result in escalations of hostilities, up to and including your entire alliance if required, until you all back down.

You will not get another warning, you have until DT to comply. Message Ends.
 
 
9 minutes ago, YOLO SWAG said:

Are you sure you are looking for peace Al?

  Don't see how we are, seems they do? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're all allowed to partake in the holidays, not that we should partake, and then post or send messages about defending their long time alliance mate.. I will take your bet on 1000 tech Junka. 

 

I want it to be clear that I am the only sponsored person doing talks for peace, which has been achieved. Any other messages should be disregarded. As I've already talked to Malaklarian, and he said he understood about the over zealousness of the member. 

Edited by Alonso Quixano
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alonso Quixano said:

We're all allowed to partake in the holidays, not that we should partake, and then post or send messages about defending their long time alliance mate.. I will take your bet on 1000 tech Junka. 

 

I want it to be clear that I am the only sponsored person doing talks for peace, which has been achieved. Any other messages should be disregarded. As I've already talked to Malaklarian, and he said he understood about the over zealousness of the member. 

1 message disregarded yes, 2 why not, more and additional messages to my members not acceptable. Control your rogues.

 

Al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AL Bundy said:

1 message disregarded yes, 2 why not, more and additional messages to my members not acceptable. Control your rogues.

 

Al

 

 

http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?search=568542&Extended=1

 

There's one war from Alpha Wolves on our newest member around a month ago? Maybe he is upset that you guys raided him? From the available information I don't see how he is a rogue, unless you have more information to share with me via private channels. All I see is a person raided by Alpha Wolves who joined us, and is still upset about being raided. 

Edited by Alonso Quixano
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Alonso Quixano said:

 

 

http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?search=568542&Extended=1

 

There's one war from Alpha Wolves on our newest member around a month ago? Maybe he is upset that you guys raided him? From the available information I don't see how he is a rogue, unless you have more information to share with me via private channels. All I see is a person raided by Alpha Wolves who joined us, and is still upset about being raided. 

It was not a raid, he rogue attack AGW overlords and avalanche. We attacked to defend our allie. Like I said you just accepted 2 rogue nation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Alonso Quixano said:

We're all allowed to partake in the holidays, not that we should partake, and then post or send messages about defending their long time alliance mate.. I will take your bet on 1000 tech Junka. 

 

I want it to be clear that I am the only sponsored person doing talks for peace, which has been achieved. Any other messages should be disregarded. As I've already talked to Malaklarian, and he said he understood about the over zealousness of the member. 

 

I think most alliance governments would consider the outbursts by your membership rather embarassing. Obviously I have no stake in any of this, but being that you moved onto the brown team after the last mess we had to clean up... it would be nice for the team's reputation to improve for a change.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...