Jump to content

The A Team DoE and Protectorate


Stonewall14

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Banned said:

I see a lot of wars there that were peaced out very early, so would seem quite a jump to make such a universal claim that these guys all defended themselves.  Some did, sure.  And I expect that we'll see these same raiders, now that they're on the other end, do some fighting back of their own. 

I find it interesting how you presume them all as raiders when only 1 out of the 4 wars declared was on a nation that took part in raiding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

13 minutes ago, Supreme Emperor Daeg said:

So you're saying it's just a case of bad lighting? Oh well then, A-team better turn up the lights...

Wilco Green Flares will light up asap...I say again green flares and smoke, fire and brimstone...:ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

To: stonewall14    From: Diadochi    Date: 2/11/2017 7:23:23 PM

Subject: Spy Operation Attack

Message: A spy operation has been launched against your nation. The attacking spies were given the following order: Target Weapons of Mass Destruction. In the attack your counter intelligence systems prevailed and managed to thwart the attack. Your counter spies managed to kill 20 enemy spies.

To: stonewall14    From: Diadochi    Date: 2/11/2017 7:23:44 PM

Subject: Spy Operation Attack

Message: A spy operation has been launched against your nation. The attacking spies were given the following order: Target Weapons of Mass Destruction. In the attack your counter intelligence systems prevailed and managed to thwart the attack. Your counter spies managed to kill 20 enemy spies.

Well now brochacho that is provocative indeed looks like I need to break out the Apple Pie Moonshine to go with my Mexico's finest smoke tonight...Alpha Mike Foxtrot...:laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Banned said:

And yet you dislike this while you love that Alonso attacks alliances at will. 

 

Right.

Let's not pretend you or Stonewall are doing this because you are anti-raiding. Alonso is clearly not even close to being in range of anyone in The A Team, so using his actions as an excuse seems petty.

 

I would wish Stonewall luck with the alliance, but he's not off to a good start attacking my friends for no reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good sir, while I may not speak on behalf of A-team I can assure you that we here at SLAP have a policy on raiding, If we raid you that is good and proper if you raid us... we kick your teeth down your neck, as is good and proper. I would think that A-teams actions also would indicate a pro-raiding leaning, as they seem to be raiding as we speak. I wouldn't wish for there to be any confusion as to our stance on a matter of such import.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Supreme Emperor Daeg said:

Good sir, while I may not speak on behalf of A-team I can assure you that we here at SLAP have a policy on raiding, If we raid you that is good and proper if you raid us... we kick your teeth down your neck, as is good and proper. 

 

This is hilarious 'tough talk' from a guy who sat in a former alliance who disbanded rather than defended

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Immortan Junka said:

Why does range matter?

Why wouldn't it matter? They're not in range to fight the person who they use as an excuse. It just makes it clear what Alonso was doing had nothing to do with this, if anything it was a calculated move to form an alliance where he wouldn't be in range to fight anyone in "The A Team"

 

They should be upfront they attacked because they thought they had the raid advantage in their NS tier, rather than make up other excuses.

Edited by Noctis Lucis Caelum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Lord Hitchcock said:

 

This is hilarious 'tough talk' from a guy who sat in a former alliance who disbanded rather than defended

Learn your history grasshopper, Daeg, Caliph, me etc got extra terms from that very war so to question our honor that way is highly frowned upon in this thread brochacho...I appreciate the comraderie earlier but that don't mean we will be taking warm showers to wee hours of the morning...:p

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Diadochi Von Seleucids said:

Well if you are condemning for the actions of raiding and then not hitting the one who is raiding.... well now that appears of a bit of hypocrisy as you are "raiding" innocent nations...

 

In most of CN's history collective culpability has applied to alliances. This means that an entire alliance becomes a legitimate target for the actions of govt. I'm not saying that this is the reason for A-Team's raids... I don't speak for them. However I am saying that their raids are arguably legitimized by the fact that Alonso himself, as the apparent alliance sovereign, has been raiding other alliances. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." This is something members should be aware of.

 

If PoSSE is trying to split the alliance between two AAs to limit backlash, all I can say there is that it doesn't really work looking at what happened with SPATR/Mongols.

Edited by Immortan Junka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Noctis Lucis Caelum said:

Let's not pretend you or Stonewall are doing this because you are anti-raiding. Alonso is clearly not even close to being in range of anyone in The A Team, so using his actions as an excuse seems petty.

 

I would wish Stonewall luck with the alliance, but he's not off to a good start attacking my friends for no reason.

It was not I that first suggested these things were linked.  Nor do I care if they are.  I simply pointed out the irony of defending one action while attacking another.

 

41 minutes ago, Lord Hitchcock said:

 

This is hilarious 'tough talk' from a guy who sat in a former alliance who disbanded rather than defended

I would point out that when DK disbaned, Daeg joined Last Call and got in the fight anyway.  So, I guess I'm short to see quite what you're implying about him.

 

19 minutes ago, Noctis Lucis Caelum said:

Why wouldn't it matter? They're not in range to fight the person who they use as an excuse. It just makes it clear what Alonso was doing had nothing to do with this, if anything it was a calculated move to form an alliance where he wouldn't be in range to fight anyone in "The A Team"

 

They should be upfront they attacked because they thought they had the raid advantage in their NS tier, rather than make up other excuses.

Stonewall has never struck me as the person to care whether or not he has an advantage.  And for all the good and bad moments alike, I've known him for a while.  If he doesn't like you, don't worry, you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Banned said:

I would point out that when DK disbaned, Daeg joined Last Call and got in the fight anyway.  So, I guess I'm short to see quite what you're implying about him.

 

Sure, we all know that. I am implying exactly what happened,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Stonewall14 said:

Learn your history grasshopper, Daeg, Caliph, me etc got extra terms from that very war

 

 

Youre impact sucked. You spent months aknowleging your yearn for goading a war between BONEs and OC... I fail to see why you shearing a few pixels makes you special when your 'comrades'... 'friends'.... lost much more, but what-evs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lord Hitchcock said:

 

Sure, we all know that. I am implying exactly what happened,

You profess to know a lot about DK's disbandment.  Still, I don't recall seeing you there, nor you being the one to make that decision, and as somebody who was both there, and in government at the time, I profess that you are very much missing the mark on your reasoning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Banned said:

rrrrriiiiiiiggggggggggghhhhhhhttttttt. 

 

I'm just gonna back away slowly from the crazy guy in the room.

 

1 minute ago, Immortan Junka said:

Lord Hitchcock randomly not making sense, this is new.

 

Please be more specific and I will address your 'shock' accordingly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lord Hitchcock said:

 

 

Please be more specific and I will address your 'shock' accordingly

Sure, claiming you know more about DK's disbandment than I do is equivalent to me claiming I know more about Lord Hitchcock's last retirement than you do.  You're delusional.

 

But hey, you got one thing on me.  You do obsess about it a lot more.

Edited by Banned
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Banned said:

Sure, claiming you know more about DK's disbandment than I do is equivalent to me claiming I know more about Lord Hitchcock's last retirement than you do.  You're delusional.

 

Lord Hitchcock retired because he knew he went too far in his actions against the Imperium, back during the Plutocratic War. ;)

Edited by Immortan Junka
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...