Kaiser

Congrats. This treaty is based on a true friendship, and when true friends get together, it is always a good thing to see.

If only we could have held off the Karma war until today. That would have been a good time to start the war.

I'm really confused by all this. NPO hasn't even lost a million NS in a month, and their score is staying pretty steady. How can you blame all your loses on them when they are outnumbered 18:1, and aren't even losing as much strength as you? That can't be the only reason.

This could cause some confusing if you call yourselves "The Citadel"

I don't understand the second bracket on Gopher's updates. Could someone explain those to me?

Black: GOONs, Umbrellla Blue: NpO, NAAC Aqua: Fark, Rok, Mk Orange: TOP, IRON White: Atlantis, TPF Green: VE, GPA, GGA Purple: Legion, Valhalla Maroon: RIA, GOD, USN, CSN Red: NPO Brown: GATO Yellow: FAN, GOLD Pink: LUE, Sparta Multi-Colored/No official Color: MCXA

I'd go with top 100. Top 250 seems really big.

I have those resources and I quite like it. Wheat and Fish would be good too.

So you are admitting that what you did was an attack on their sovereignty, and they had ever right to defend themselves through war? I thought you guys didn't think what you did was that bad?

No, I can't know that. However, would you agree that neutral alliances, that have never gone to war, and that are constitutionally forbidden from it are least likely to go to war, thus minimising the chances of this whole stunt backfiring?

Ivan Moldavi himself has said "Any PR is good PR" Perhaps they would have, but probably not. However, you still picked the ones that would never, under any circumstances go to war about it. You went after the weakest link.

Good point. I suppose I should have said "never gone to war about it" that would have been more accurate. I'll edit.

Oh OK then. I guess it was just massively convenient that you happened to send these messages to the alliances that would never go to war over it.

They are not defenseless, but they are certainly not powerful. Let's be honest, if NSO went to war they would bring in FB, and against any of the main blocs the neutral alliances would be crushed in a war. NSO picked the weakest, though not defenseless, alliances to send these messages to. When the bigger party insults a weaker party, simply because that party is weaker, then that is bullying. If you had sent these messages to Citadel or SF or C&G, then people would see it differently. However, you didn't. You sent messages to the weakest alliances as you knew that you would get away with it, and would get your name out there. You spawned a 60 page thread bearing your name, so congratualtions, you did what you intended. You got your PR.

This topic is great. First NSO blatantly insults neutrals, then they say "We're kind of sorry," then when a Citadel person comes along and says something not even close to as insulting as the original message they come in yelling about how Citadel is so insulting to neutrals. And people say Citadel is the one posturing.

TOP is going to have a bad day today. Damn deletions.

Not often you see an alliance get created and disband all in two pages. Epic failure.

I never liked Crohl, but I did kind of like Bikecat. Oh well, spying fails.

I love you.

Good day for TOP coming up.

I like the gaps thing. You should apply it to sanctioned alliances as well.

You're going to be waiting a very long time.

Thanks for taking the time to update this. It's a very interesting read.

Oh ok that's completly understandable. However, in the future please do not claim lies to be facts without proof, or a source. Deathangel fought his first 12ish wars with TOP, and we knocked out nearly half his NS. I may be mis-recalling his numbers, but it was something like that.

If it is a fact that our targets barely dropped in NS, I would like to see your proof. I'm sure you wouldn't claim a fact without a source or proof. Also, can you give us a nation list of the nations that we messed the stagger up on? Thanks for your time.