Dcrews

I think Europa has a copyright on that phoenix.

Comic hoarding is a valid Cb

Its pretty cool to see Shoving gaining new members. I wonder if any are former Shoving GOONS. Some cool history there.

IRON sure pick their battle in EQ, those guys didn't lose anything. Sure as hell didn't do anything in Grudge either. I swear some people don't even try to back up their rhetoric with facts.

I have no moral objection to terms being demanded or enforce. Its up to the alliance to determine whether the hinderence/gain is worth the potential political fallout. Choosing not to give terms, was a calculated. It puts NPO in a position to capitalize on the good will they've shown if they so choose. For a forward thinking alliance, I expected nothing different. Congratz on the peace. Good luck on the rebuild.

AW were formiddible opponents. Good luck on the rebuild.

Damage ratio jokes are the new peace mode jokes.

Well, I wear glasses irl so maybe I need a new prescription. You call it indefensible, I call it a challange. Thanks for the gift Rush :)

He sent peace requests and a rep without consulting/contacting a single government member of FTW before hand. That doesn't fly at all, I really don't know how any government member or someone of even mild intelligence could assume it would. Quoted response to jalap Shut up Rey.

So one strike and you're out. Valhalla oAed into NPO for you burning bridges that remain to this day. They chose to help you and your cause but now that they are considering allies other than you it is time to kick them out and slam the door in their face. Spare me any incredibly childish, biased banter on your part. Pretty wide spread, so you're not sure whether they knew and are choosing to assume they did. Convient that suits your narrative right? Sounds like an excuse to flame an ally in public. Who's fault is it that there were alliances that needed to be covered over a month into the war? How about you blame that on Valhalla too while you're at it. If you or your government had done their due diligence there would be nothing to cry about, but you didn't. Poor decisions, following a poor stragetgy, yielded poor results. Perhaps I would be heated if I was in your position, then again, I'd have taken steps to make sure I wouldn't be.

So clarifying that an alliance or ruler cannot one sidedly dictate peace terms is posturing now? You're criticisms have no substance as if your opinion of FEAR or FTW if the posts of one member suddenly changes 6+ years of history. This attempted character a assassination is comical as the source for the criticisms are entirely asinine. A routine jab is being made out as some sort of character defining crime. Get off your high horse Rey.

If you have something to say, spit it out. This is war, I had no control on the policy my ally had and the strategy the enemy used. I think the idea of high gov not doing due diligence before he declars war on an alliance is very funny, but that wasn't even the content of my original post. I the post I made reflected the confidence I had in my ally against an enemy alliance. If that equals posturing or a mad poster and causes you to think less of me, I really could life with that.

Making a fool of myself? You publically stated you will try to get your Valhalla treaty cancelled and accused them of conspiring against you with abolutely no proof. How about you live up to your status as an og player and hash out these problems somewhere like a damn professional.

Lets not make this topic about my posting habits. If you really are concerned you have a shiny new embassy at our forums that you can use anytime you want. But while I'm here, I might as well address it. Not sure how "Yeah, NEW has nothing to worry about" equals I'm an angry poster, condescending I give you, but not angry/hostile which was the point of your original reply. At this point, I feel as if we're going to end up arguing semantics which I really don't care to do. Words are useful, but they are limiting without the subtle communication that accompanies them. And even if I was angry, there is no problem with that. I'd rather have some sort of distinctive emotion in my replies that sets me apart from some of the monotone, recorder like responses we see or the all important one-liner. [ooc] No, I have to disagree with you there. First off, blind support would suggest NEW is doing something that I wouldn't particularly agree with if they were not my allies, this isn't the case, they are being attacked and I stated they have nothing to worry about. This would be true whether or not I was allied to them. Second, facebooknization of CN occures when everyone alliance and their mother are friends with everyone else. It zaps some of the conflict out of the game and takes away some of the depth to the grudges. It also leads to this monstrosity of a treaty web. I'm up for a healthy debate on it amoung other things. Maybe we can address my angry posting then too :P[ooc]

Levi has already stated he had no idea of MHA's plan so unless you have evidence to the contrary seems like it was a coincidence. Your coalition had weeks to get counters on whoever they wanted before it was posted but it didn't happen. You took your sweet time and, when one of the key borderline alliances publically declares their policy with respect to this war, you cry that it is conspiracy. The allaince who has thought of such a conservarive strategy when they should be aggressive deserves to have more damage done to them. How about you look inward and reflect on your alliance's poor strategy instead of publically throwing allies under the bus.

Do I have to be a defender in order to wish ill will upon someone who attacks my ally? You could argue that my side being the aggessors chose to fire the first shot, and thus are in the "wrong" but I would retort with this. This war was bound to happen in one form or another. Had a few moves gone through and a few not, my nation and allies could have been the defending coalition. Considering this, the attacking/defending argument is a moot point. At the end of the day an alliance attacked an ally of mine, I'm not going to wish them luck, I hope they burn.

Pretty much this, just because there isn't a stated cb doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Top tier raids, this war, all have their reasons and there has been just as much build up and context to them as any other war. While I will agree that the tradition of slapping you in the face with the reason may take away some of the enjoyment from your average CNer, maybe you have to consider not doing so was also something calculated.

That often happens when an alliance hits one of my allies. I don't pretend to be happy about it, or feign some mutual respect or admiration. MHA hit an ally of mine, I want them to burn as much as possible. I have no problems stating that. ooc- the facebooknization of cn is one of the problems this place has, too much happiness for the enemy-ooc

I'm sorry, but you don't get to unilaterally decide peace terms

Why not both? Someone got lost on the way to war.

Yeah, NEW has nothing to worry about.

Polar has been getting destroyed for a while now. Took you long enough. Drink all of their alcohol ODN, leave no beer untouched!

[Sat-12-2014 21:02:39] <&Dcrews|FTW> Fuck is up with these two Npotards trolling my chan. [Sat-12-2014 21:02:52] <Terminator> to be fair [Sat-12-2014 21:02:59] <Terminator> I proved your member wrong [Sat-12-2014 21:03:15] <Terminator> its not really trolling when I stated a fact your guy said I was wrong [Sat-12-2014 21:03:20] <Terminator> and I proved I was right [Sat-12-2014 21:03:37] <&Dcrews|FTW> We've delt more damage to them, we have a higher damage per war than most of the alliances involved, and we are 21st in damaged caused [Sat-12-2014 21:03:44] <&Dcrews|FTW> How does that equal we cannot fight [Sat-12-2014 21:03:46] <&Dcrews|FTW> it doesn't [Sat-12-2014 21:04:08] <%TheDon125> Dcrews|FTW: Terminator is clinging to the tiny victory where I didn't believe Sima started the war with only 200 tech. [Sat-12-2014 21:04:09] <&Dcrews|FTW> It was a baseless attempt to attempt to get an emotional response [Sat-12-2014 21:04:18] <%TheDon125> He was terribly incorrect on everything else he said. [Sat-12-2014 21:04:44] <Terminator> oh that too [Sat-12-2014 21:04:47] <&Dcrews|FTW> Seems to me [Sat-12-2014 21:04:49] <Terminator> but in the wars [Sat-12-2014 21:04:56] <Terminator> polars have dealt more damage to FTW [Sat-12-2014 21:05:00] <Terminator> than you have to us [Sat-12-2014 21:05:02] <Terminator> NS wise Vs Polar 321384.56 damaged caused 307713.73 damage taken. And these are from last night, about two cycles after we decided you weren't worth our time and decided to play with your friend Sparta. Whatever you're smoking Terminator, stalp. You're embarrassing yourself.

If we're going to do this, lets do it right. Can't leave us to make up categories for ourselves, it would be like herding cats.

Just making the way for some elite warriors for now; we'll get there so sit tight.