Jump to content

Mayzie

Members
  • Posts

    1,821
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mayzie

  1. I think there must have been quite a few deletions because I've just noticed I'm at #49 and I've not even broke the 15m mark yet.

     

    Number of Soldiers Lost: 4,120,524 Attacking + 10,770,065 Defending = 14,890,589 Casualties
    Casualty Rank:
     
    Ranked #49 of 4,346 Nations (Top 1.13%)
  2. 51 minutes ago, Blackatron said:

    Wait, SKW is the one talking crap?

     

    To be fair, I shouldn't have read this on my phone in tiny font as obviously he was biting to those baiting him.  Either way, these "no-one is filling my defensive slots, my defensive wars haven't even been by GLOF, no-one even fights back, half of their members in my range are in peacemode" posts get a bit irritating.

     

    No-one is filling your defensive slots, because no-one cares.  Plus with limited numbers in certain ranges, you don't unnecessarily throw three people onto a nuclear nation & put them out of action (into anarchy).

    SUN found themself at war with a bunch of our allies (& other coalition members) for interrupting our wars with TTK.  Obviously all of our offensive wars aren't going to be against SUN & your defensive slots wont be filled by us.

    Like any other alliance, not all of our members are active every single day.  Sorry you've not been satisfied with your engagement so far.

    Yes, half of our members in your range during that time were in peacemode.  Half of your alliance are in peacemode now, what's your point?

  3. 2 hours ago, Subtleknifewielder said:

    Admittedly I believe some of them probably are in PM restocking nukes and navies and warchests, but I was pointing out the error, in fact the hypocrisy, in mocking nations who go to PM to recoup losses when their much larger foes are doing the exact same thing.

     

    And I really am disappointed that so far GLoF's allies are putting up more of a fight so far, than GLoF itself, from what I have seen. I have to date, been countered by: 2 SLAP nations (Devialance of Hellish and TsarZiedonis of American Directorate), 1 GLoF nation (Mayzie of He-She Ises), 1 Dark Templar (D.A.D.1of IGP Warriors), and 1 IRON (Dodoei123 of Dodob00ts).

     

    So I was wrong about the majority of them being SLAP, but I have been hit by more SLAP than anyone else :P

     

    I'm hardly active, don't know what goes off within Oculus or amongst any of our allies but I'm pretty certain that SUN doesn't even register on anyone's list of priorities for this war.  The only reason I hit you and not someone from TTK was because you're a gob-!@#$e and you were running your mouth on here.  I figured it might shut you up for a bit and it did, but now you're not in range and back talking crap.

     

  4.  

     

    Important distinction you just made there. Since I proved that these aren't just first-day-on-the-job newbies, you just made my point perfectly.

     

    If being in the NPO for hundreds of days (if not a few years) does not teach you to be developed and equipped for war, what on Earth DOES?

     

    Maybe they don't deserve their reputation as one of the 'greatest' alliances on Bob.

     

    Being a great alliance is not about pixel hugging and having more numbers, it's about working together, building a community and above all standing together as one when $£%& hits the fan and you have nothing left to lose but each other.

     

    Something the NPO (and many other alliances too, mind) seem to be rather lacking in these days.

     

     

     

    Edit:

     

    Blackatron seems to understand this quite well. It's not 'god-like clicking skills', unless you count being able to log in each day and launch a successful full round of attacks in the correct order/form to do most damage as being such. The building of the nation is to ensure that when the day comes the luck is as in your favour as possible. When you look at the across the board and see the large positive damage ratio we are inflicting on the NPO, then think that we are a group of maybe ~35 nations doing it to a group of 435 nations, yes it is utterly disproportionate and speaks volumes about the state of the NPO (and possibly Bob as a whole if you take NPO as an analogy for the re-established hegemony)

     

    I never said they were a day old.  Either way, feel free to highlight all of the words since they all ring true.  Younger, less advanced, less developed & less prepared.  Generally, hitting nations at an NS level where the people running them haven't been bothered to do anything other than maybe sell tech will give you a high damage ratio.  Well done you.  I guess that's what you were looking for?

  5.  

    Tell you more? My pleasure.


    I could go on, but I'll stop for now.

     

    Yeah, I'd stop too.  All you're doing is reinforcing my point that you're fighting a bunch of nations that are less developed & less equipped for war than your own, so it's hardly suprising that you're outdamaging them.  Unless I'm missing something and you've got some God-like button clicking skills that are boast worthy.

  6. SPTR -> TAO -> DK. I know the oculus bloc likes hitting AA's close to their allies, (See TPF -> STA -> ODN) but it really revolves around if doom can contain their allies or not. As is, chances are sengoku will call for help with staggers, Oculus' AAs will oA in (which majority of oculus AA's are hitting PM, especially if they are in range), try to expand things, and pull on every non-oculus treaty the bloc has.

     

    That's great logic.  With such a convoluted treaty web, if no-one went to war with alliances that are two treaties away from another ally of theirs then things would be even less interesting around here.

  7. RIA has always stood for their allies over coalitions, it's unfortunate that others do not value their allies.

     

     

    I guess everyone treats their allies differently.  Normally alliances respect the difficult decisions made when it comes to which side you're going to fall and the reasons behind it - it's usually a case of "We've got X amount of allies on this side of the war, I can't justify ignoring X treaties to defend you when you jump in to defend your other allies".

     

    It seems to me that you expect opsec to be broken, rage incessantly all over the OWF about how shit your allies are and demand the impossible - to fight every war unopposed because you're tied to most of the treaty web in one way or another and you expect every ally you have to stick their neck out to prevent any semblance of a counter on you above the needs of their coalition & their other allies.

     

    If that's how much you value your allies then I'm thankful we don't hold a treaty.

  8. We most certainly are and yes, the terms presented for individual surrender are most certainly not without precedent and alliance-wide surrender terms would indeed be of a different nature.

     

    I will save my explanation of why such terms exist for private discussion, but I will clarify one thing. You were excluded form individual surrender terms as provided thus far, on the basis that you are the sole leader of CIN and hold sole responsibility for the declaration of war against NPO and the string of poor decisions made under your tenure (supporting buckaroo13 being one example). CIN members seeking to surrender have led us to believe this is the case.

    Needless to say, we would rather not agree to a lenient peace agreement unless we were sure that we would not see a repeat of past behaviour. That doesn't mean we'd force you to disband or otherwise attempt to takeover your AA ((Viceroys aren't allowed anyhow)), but it does mean that we'd want to have a nice long discussion about your future, your alliance and what we can do to help you understand  and adapt to the politics of this game which you've already butted heads with a few times (to your own detriment as well as those around you). If you need affirmation of our intentions and integrity, I can certainly nominate a few individuals that might be able to moderate such discussions.

     

    I wouldn't offer them lenient peace terms either, in fact I'd just keep them at war forever.  That's no less than a tiny alliance that doesn't know any better deserves.  Fuck em all I say.  Or you could stop coming across as such a pretentious prick and just peace out.

     

    Pounding on their nations while attempting to teach them the ways of the world & after the aggrieved party in all of this have given them white peace makes no sense.

     

    Does anyone really give enough of a crap about this to moderate discussions between a tiny alliance no-one has ever heard of before and another tiny alliance that just decided to stomp on them for no good reason?

×
×
  • Create New...