Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AuiNur

  1. I am aware. Its a throwback to that "Wonderful" history and is poking fun at all those who actually use that phrase seriously. Especially when their own alliance is in pixel ruins.
  2. Maybe I'm misreading it, but I am actually having a hard time parsing exactly what you are trying to imply (also sarcasm on the internet and all that). I also have been removed from the community for quite some time now so I don't quite understand the reference... MasterRace????.... So I'll take it as another generic my "side" vs your side post. But no, I was not limiting or suggesting anyone else from participating in discussion. As I've stated earlier in this thread, this is a place for only discussion so I never really understood why people get so amped up about other people expressing their own viewpoint and opinions. Yes, the one thing that engages the community is basically the drama of politics, so why limit it. People should express whatever they want, however much they want. Don't like what they are saying? Do something about it.
  3. yes. we are the parasites of the world. go be a producer hunter.
  4. They need to be absolutely sure they "win" this argument. Otherwise they have nothing to show for. "Oh, we will never have a top tier, but we can limit their tech deals" is literally their argument.
  5. but how else are my citizens supposed to get their cheap foreign manufactured iphone 6's and imacs and apple tvs?
  6. tech deals. neutral parties. no military ties. no signed pacts.
  7. Woah now. I was just asked to "sell down" and "do something about it" to which I responded that I could not because a) i am out of range and b) even with 0 infra I would have no one in my range who is not in peace mode. See my own quote here. Yes I agreed with you: Sorry. When you go out of your way to point out "Our 150k nations were being hit by 600k nations" I thought you were referring to the NS gap. I get it, you're a little on edge maybe because of some posts in this thread, but I am not personally attacking you. I am attempting to hold a discussion why tech deals are not considered acts of war. And again yes, the free tech to enemy nations seems pretty sketch, but I have not been recording these deals on either side so I cannot comment on it.
  8. Isn't that what we've been discussing this entire time? A little discourse so you can understand my perspective and so that I can see yours? I can't. Ya'll are in peace mode and I still would be out of range if I sold down (i already did).
  9. The above dt probes sending free tech: sure -- and i would agree that it can be considered as military aid. Run of the mill tech deals? No. Those are still economic deals meant for growth for both nations and I would never consider those acts of war.
  10. I'm sorry you dont have an upper tier.. or ever I've been in wars before. I've even fought DBDC before. I've never had DT target my opponent's tech sellers or tell them to stop selling. I'm sorry there is a huge gap in NS. They're just better. ?? free tech??
  11. The discrepancy here is with the various degrees of meaning for the term financial assistance. Yes, I understand the point you guys are making and would agree to some extent IF we were sending full aid packages to said nations (similar to the scenario that someone proposed in order to raid <30k or something). But these are tech deals. Growing our nations; sending something of value for something in return of equal value (or more/less depending on your capitalistic goals). I, myself, me, do not view buying some groceries at a store as "financially assisting" the store in the sense that I want to see that store succeed or to see that store beat their competition. I understand that some people do view it this way (boycott Wal-Mart so your local mom/pop store can succeed), but I do not. I want some cheerios and do not care if walmart ends up owning the entire world. With the term "no financial assistance" in surrender threads, I honestly would assume that it would mean that tech deals are still allowed.
  12. Not too sure what those surrender terms have to do with this current topic. Why did we agree on that? Do I represent that coalition? Did someone surrender to me? Did I come up with those terms? I do not care who is doing tech deals with who. It just means more tech to blow up, and hopefully more casualties. In all my battles, I have never considered tech deals an act of war against me or my alliance.
  13. Go ahead. I'll make my way down there eventually and we can play. We still wouldn't be hitting your tech sellers.
  14. thats because we take our orders from DBDC.
  15. I don't believe DT has ever left an ally hung out to dry. But, if you can provide me with an example then I'll change my tune. My memory is truthfully pretty shoddy.
  16. Gonna have to call bullshit on this. The core is still here, and we haven't changed. I don't think someone outside the alliance has more authority over that than the actual alliance members. Pixel hugging or not: Number of Soldiers Lost: 7,667,769 Attacking + 9,767,403 Defending = 17,435,172 Casualties :ehm: Everyone else is silly and I just wasted my time reading all these replys.
  • Create New...