WarriorConcept
-
Posts
5,803 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by WarriorConcept
-
-
Didn't want to do this, but que sera sera.
-
Get 'em GoNos.
-
Get 'em 'ella
-
Good stuff, congrats y'all.
-
Pandora's Box united one last time on the battlefields of Grata
I almost regret not being in gov back then. Almost.
-
Been checking this often :)
-
Rush, I have to admit I don't give a rat's ass about most/all the alliances you're engaged with. $%&@ one up for me.
-Craig
edit: also, in-game messaging is a desperation tactic. Considering the sheer amount of NS leveled against you guys, the fact that they're sinking to such a level (and so soon) is a tremendous compliment to TLR.Or Ronny did it to amuse himself. But sure.
-
There is such a thing as going overboard with things. Like, the images of this kid. If possibly, you could cut it off a bit.
#rollMogar
But really, there is a reason he's on my ignore list here.
-
Why the "".
STA is literally just defending an ally with no ulterior motives unlike majority of the attacking coalition and their creative treaty chaining.
Because when you just "defend an ally" you're still joining the larger coalition conflict and you should expect to be rammed as hard as the other side can muster and cry about "i don't care about coalition warfare" because we used some extra chains to bring in more pain.
-
Now you are being deliberately obtuse. pointless, over the top and convoluted was in reference to the multiple oA chanins used to get IRON onto the STA. Not that we were countered. We were countered by TTK, Echelon and GOD before RIA, Fark and IRON were all oA'd onto us. Hence my descriptions above. Again, I know you are fully aware of this and are being deliberately obtuse because its a requirement of the legendary "coalition warfare".
Speaking as someone who cares nothing for "coalition warfare" you just look like an idiot.
So you're basically complaining about us using chains to continue to counter you. Got it.
-
We aren't whining, least of all about being countered. I'm sure you know that, well, I hope you do.
"Our membership merely stated that the response to STA honouring their treaty with TPF seems over the top and pointless with respect to the convoluted means to achieve the dogpile and the dogpile itself." - Tyga
Or is it that Polar didn't try to undermine its own coalition for an alliance they have no treaty with?
-
I guess we're old school but nobody in the STA gives a crap about the coalition. We are a small yet very proud alliance and we will not be used by alliances in a coalition most of whom have little or no regard for the STA except for what assets we bring to the table. Call us stupid or whatever, but we are not pawns to be moved around on a chessboard.
But you're an alliance that needs to be countered and that happened. So, I still don't see where all the whining is coming from.
-
How dare you pile on the other side!!!
-
I don't see any meaningful difference to be honest. We have no path or position other than defending TPF. Quite how that warrants multiple oA chains to counter our threat to you winning the war remains a mystery. Seeing as it is immense overkill I can only conclude that as the STA did not do as you wished we are now being punished for it.
I'd also be interested to hear your views on the NpO line being thrown about about the STA cancelling on you to avoid another beat down leaving you in your darkest hour. Is going overboard in trashing us on the battlefield not enough?
You're not that dense Tyga. For Polar to win its own war every front of the coalition has to be winning its own. STA happens to need more coverage and we happen to have the reserves for it, why hold back at all? There's no mystery, you're just on a whine fest.
-
This is a first in a really long time, but I have to agree with Schattenmann here.
STA may be joining a coalition to defend their ally, but at the end of the day they are still joining the coalition. Their contribution of nations and NS to the coalition TPF is in is far more useful to TPF than any pressure relieved directly to TPF because of STA entering against someone attacking them.
This is why you were one of my favorite MKers, usually you cut through all the bs.
-
UPN gets in the way.
You've learned coalition warfare, congrats.
-
The only difference is we didnt oA chain in to do it. I really dont care I figure I'd just save someone the trouble of trying to continue the stupid debate. This war will end when TPF peaces out. (prolly when NPO does) As long as we dont get declared on by TPF or UPN it is fair game. I even told Caustic to get NG to declare on us to save IRON the trouble of oAing 4 chains.
Getting off that cross anytime soon?
-
Then y'all should stop whining and just throw down. It's a war, Bob knows we don't get enough of them.
-
Rest assured that I have no fantasy that Polaris could unilaterally veto it, but it was my understanding that they did not even try very hard to stop it. Whether they could stop it or not being my issue. But again, I've already admitted that it's my fault for viewing them in such a way. To that end, consider it a moot point.
Why attempt to try and stop coverage for a member of its coalition? Not only would it naturally not work, but it would undermine the people helping them in this war. I mean don't get me wrong, you're entitled to your opinion of course but trying to harm its own coalition via the action you suggest would be even lower than trying to put up some resistance into countering y'all.
-
I don't "blame" Polaris. I blame myself for ascribing a certain viewpoint to an alliance that clearly was not their view.
As I said before, there is nothing wrong with viewing things through a coalition lens where everything is done for the benefit or detriment of the coalition, allies and friends be damned. That is not how STA works, but if that's how you guys roll with pragmatism overruling everything else then so be it. You're free to live by your own ideals, or lack thereof.
You seem to imply that this entry was solely on Polaris, or rather that Polaris could have stopped it themselves. You're trying to create a fantasy world where you're being wronged by an ex-ally, but that's simply not the case.
-
I don't think we believe that Polaris was plotting against STA actively. I think our disappointment is more along the lines that Polaris didn't do anything to stop the oA chain from happening. As I stated before, Polaris has absolutely no technical obligation to STA and thus what you're doing is superficially fine.
But there's a deeper history between our alliances. When Polaris was the pariah of the world, we stuck by you. When you were getting beaten in the noCB war, we declared on every alliance at war with you. Through multiple times in our history we risked total destruction to stand by you. We bleed with you, we fought for you, we suffer alongside you. We cancelled our treaty with you after that due to communication issues, but never once did we regret fighting for you. It was a privilege and honor to fight in the defense of an ally when the whole world hates you. As an aside, that's a commitment your new friend TOP will never give you.
After that kind of commitment, I would hope that your honor would bind you to perhaps not actively defend us but to at least prevent ridiculous oA chains from being formed against your old blood brother. I again hesitate to call it a debt or that you owe us, but more akin to a feeling of profound honor.
You have no literal obligation to us. And for that you can wash your hands clean of what has transpired. The fact that you are able to do so though saddens me deeply because it means that I completely misunderstood the psyche of your alliance. And for that I have no one to blame but myself.
You really need to get off your cross Jyrinx. This is coalition warfare and alliances will be moved around on fronts where it's more advantageous for the whole side. Really don't see how you can take this personally and assign blame on Polaris when these decisions are reached by an overall consensus from a group of alliances, in which Polaris is but a single voice.
-
So to recap for everyone, IRON ignored their treaty with NG, then declared war on an alliance protecting their ally. Then, instead of having one of NADC's actual allies declare on us, IRON declares on STA using not 1, but 4 treaties to get to an oA to enter against us, a much, MUCH smaller alliance attacking an alliance IRON is not allied to and with whom we are pretty evenly matched. It serves no strategic value whatsoever, and no matter how hard I try, I can't figure out why you'd choose to do this rather than do something that actually HELPS your coalition.
Shame on IRON. We now know why it took you so long to enter the war... you had to stop to search for your dignity. It looks like you weren't able to find it. Shame on FARK. We thought a lot of you before this nonsense and have had several discussions with TPF about getting closer to you. You were one of the few alliances we truly respected. And to NpO: Our illusions have been shattered. We know. Yeah. Oops.It's almost like this is coalition warfare.
-
Yeh, it's almost as if this is a ghost dow.
Almost!
-
If it makes you feel any better I'd have love to declared on you guys and stated so on our forums because VE gets down on it's knees to win so often it's disgusting. IRON followed suit as well so whatever lets do this.
Yes that's exactly what VE does, just look at the last few wars for instance.
Declaration of War from the Viridian Entente
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
You mad?