Xavii

[quote name='Swanfield' timestamp='1283873840' post='2445370'] Reading comprehension is your friend. GOONS didn't have any credibility in the first place before this war took place. [/quote] You try to hard man.

[quote name='Barron von Hammer' timestamp='1283872671' post='2445343'] Princess, I did lock horns with three Umbrella nations in the last war. I certainly didnt cry and !@#$%* about it. The point is that Goons had the capability to deal with this without help. [/quote] I know we did, and I don't see any GOONS members crying. Sure they could have handled these guys alone, but why should they? If their allies can better cover their bigger nations not asking for help would be retarded, why force more damage on your own alliance then you need to?

[quote name='thekirbyfake' timestamp='1283872252' post='2445330'] I know where you got a lot of it. CTF Brotherhood (our original but long since dead alliance) used to tech trade with Umbrella. You might remember I was in a 3x3 with you for months. I'm not in any way suggesting that this means you should show lenience, far from it. I just thought it was a delicious irony given the current events. [/quote] Yea I remember, I also know that Grog ran a tight ship, very little complications. Which is why I'm surprised to see one of the earlier members buying 1800 tech in game.

[quote name='Barron von Hammer' timestamp='1283871811' post='2445321'] And the fact that your alliance could not handle eight nations. Sweet mother of pearl that is pathetic. [/quote] What if Umbrella take 8 of our top tier nations and attack TFD, I'm sure you guys can handle that just fine right? Go back to your corner.

[quote name='the rebel' timestamp='1283870259' post='2445286'] Everyone knows with the consumption of beer and a bad curry (curbstomp) that the toilets will get very messy for the cleaners (GOONS) [/quote] Wow your analogy's stink. No pun intended. Re: BSR, Sending out 3m for a tech deals very time consuming I know. Having a busy life myself I bought my 15580 tech in game as well.

[quote name='Whyohwhy' timestamp='1283869345' post='2445273'] Remarkable post from a senator, what relevance is it how he got his tech. Finding reliable tech sellers is diffcult at best as I am sure most experienced players will agree. [/quote] It will help the morale of the GOONS who read this, knowing their enemy completely lack insight on game mechanics and how to build a nation effectively. Not that GOONS need help in that area, but it will be a good laugh if anything.

My sources say that blindswellrat has never had a buying tech deal, meaning he bought ~1800 tech in game. Seems your facing true masters of CN here GOONS.

[quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1283780075' post='2443735'] My mistake, i mixed things up after you mentioned 12 as the size limit used by Umbrella to define an alliance. Nevertheless, i am debating this as a matter of principle. During an alliance war sanctions should not be used in the first place and to request sanctions when the numbers are clearly stacked in GOONS favour is downright ridiculous. Edit: Note that i still define this as an alliance war and not a bunch of rogues. [/quote] A mistake is a mistake, that's fine. However, you already said you a 1-man alliance is basically just a rogue, where do you draw the line though? If I brought a buddy, would we still be rogues or a 2-man alliance fighting an alliance war?

[quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1283778466' post='2443714'] 1-man alliances are generally regarded as rogues, 12 man alliances are recognized by most alliances as being an alliance ( I think most use the 10 man limit, not entirely sure). Overall i believe this 12 man group is an alliance and sanctioning them because they would be "rogues" is not correct in my opinion. [/quote] They are 8 nations, not 12. That's why I labeled them as rogues.

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1283777061' post='2443698'] You've been [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=84327"]abusing your senate seat[/url] for a while now, which has ruined the black team for a while now for those who don't get along with all your allies. This is a classic case of a senator abusing their senate seat to benefit their allies with no regards for the negative effects it has on the rest of the team. You have enough allies on black you can maintain it despite your blatant abuse of the power. [/quote] I was waiting for your reply Meth, from what I can remember you didn't get a whole lot of support for your cause in that thread. I sanction rogues, the black team thanks me for it by voting for me. I also offer advice to the many new black nations who come to me for help. Scream as much as you want, but you have blown your credibility a long time ago.

[quote name='KingMinornut' timestamp='1283776523' post='2443683'] [b]Poorly worded OP perhaps, when we formed we did not have a specific stated target[/b], GOONS by attacking me put themselves at the top of the list. The quisling responsible for that happening knows who they are [/quote] But you had a target. You just proved to everyone that your goal was to go rogue on someone. [quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1283776651' post='2443687'] So were down to semantics on what is an alliance and what isn't ? Pretty sad. [/quote] I bet you would think it was just as sad if I made my own 1 man alliance and attacked your alliance. You would support me not getting sanctioned then right?

[quote name='thekirbyfake' timestamp='1283775329' post='2443664'] Then why help them with cowardly sanctions? This is an alliance having an open fight with another alliance. Shame you need to sink to such measures. Goons raided and nuked us. We hit back. And we're rogues? >slowhandclap< [/quote] Umbrella does not recognize alliance who has less then 12 members, therefore you are rogues. Quite simply really, and you can say what you want about sanctions being cowardly, its a means for me to limit the damage on my allies. Before anyone screams "Umbrella abusing senator spot", had these rouges been 12 members or more in their "alliance", I would not have sanctioned them. But what about if Umbrella decided that alliances below 30 is not an alliance? Slippery slope etc.. All I can say that I have a clean history of not abusing my seat and Umbrella have never used sanctions as a weapon in it's wars. This is a classic case of a bunch of rogues who thinks if they make a DoE they can escape sanctions. Methrage tried the same in his first crusade versus GOONS.

[quote name='Kindom of Goon' timestamp='1283775033' post='2443658'] I'm jealous. I don't like the precedence than any rogue senetor can declare an entire alliance rogue and decide to sanction them. [/quote] Be careful, I might just declare GATO a rogue alliance.

[quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1283774589' post='2443656'] These 8 nations have an alliance, posted a DoE and DoW. That's an alliance, not rogues. I know GOONS may struggle against 8 nuclear armed nations in the 25k-45k range, but perhaps they need that baptism of fire. [/quote] If you want to recognize these rogues as an alliance that's your choice. I don't support setting the precedence that any rouge can post a DoE and be immune to sanctions. I also doubt GOONS will struggle with these rogues, seeing they somehow managed to hit half a dozen SDI nation midrange, way to maximize damage there.

[quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1283773446' post='2443647'] Poor show (as expected i might say) to request sanctions GOONS. http://www.cybernations.net/all_sanctions_view.asp What is it can't you keep up with an 8-man alliance? [/quote] You say 8-man alliance, I say 8 rogues. Rogues get sanctioned, end of story.

My pleasure. One of the perks of the job.

I see 8 rouges that will be handled accordingly. Have fun GOONS.

I support this treaty. That is all!

Flatten these nobody's.

You went from respected member then King in FCC to a CN joke. How you fallen Meth.

[quote name='Shodemofi' timestamp='1283481715' post='2439791'] I thought the poll was going to be "Which alliance that has yet to be created will be the most successful?" I'm disappointed I was wrong, would have been an interesting poll. [/quote] Yet to be created you say? I can answer that right now. Umb/MK/Goons merger.

Not just the cool kids, everyone knows more the Legion.

[quote name='Fernando12' timestamp='1283475306' post='2439671'] *50 members *20k Average NS *1 million total strength *Perhaps within a certain amount of time otherwise the creators are kidding themselves. Is that too much to ask? I hate seeing top heavy alliances that get over 1 million strength because they have 7-10 80k+ nations and the rest are pretty tiny nations. If you're over 1 mil ns and have 20 members, you're really only disgruntled or power hungry and think you will shape the world or just don't want to follow anyone's orders but your own and want to "lead" your alliance to war but it's really your larger ally saying its time to go to war. [/quote] Even if you don't recognize them as an alliance or not, would you want to take the chance to raid a top heavy alliance like Creole or OBR? They don't need protectorates. There is some truth in what you say, but small top heavy alliances can ruin a bigger alliances top tier with ease.

Don't really think the topic title fits the poll here. When I saw "Best future alliance" I thought it was going to be something like "Who do you think will success the most in the future? Who has the best outlook given what information we have right now. Anyways, voted MK. edit: See your asking who will be best next year, but the poll don't really reflect that.

0.02 We need to do better.