Jump to content

KingSuck

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    674

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by KingSuck

  1. Imperial Decree - New Polar Order

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    Are you some kind of expert when comes to spying on allies?

    pfff, sparta don't spy on their allies. they pay other people to spy on their allies for them :v:

    Also I've seen an argument bandied about a lot recently that goes along the lines of "Karma is not bad for giving NPO harsh terms because we gave light terms to other alliances" and it's just !@#$%^&*. Karma is just a loose bunch of alliances only connected by their side (forgive me if that's wrong, the definition seems to change a lot). I think it's pretty obvious that the alliances inside Karma have very different views on peace terms (just read any peace mode topic). Just because someone on your side, who you're probably not even connected to, gave light peace terms, does not make your alliance any better.

  7. Imperial Decree - New Polar Order

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    Im seeing the constant redundancy here, After what NPO has done to several past alliances the terms we are offering are everything lenient. We aren't asking for them to disband, we aren't asking them to decom their wonders or military, the only thing we are seeking here is the justice where in which they have brought upon themselves.

    You call the terms severe and harsh, But look at NPOs history and what they have done. We are not draconic as they are. Its fair and reasonable.

    I say to NPO that you should take the terms as they are, Do the right thing.

    You do realise you were allied to the NPO when they committed most of these 'crimes' right?

  9. Cry E-lawyer.

    in Open World RP

    Posted

    I take being called a e-lawyer as a point of pride. It usually means people are unable to come up with a good rebuttal or are tired of arguing an issue and just want it to go away.

    If you don't want me to point out the logical inconsistencies in your actions, don't make it obvious. Otherwise, it's a great time killer and entertaining to see how people like to squirm when they get called out on things.

    Pretty much this, you know you're on to something when the best your opponent can come up with is to call you an e-lawyer

  10. What was he thinking?

    in Open World RP

    Posted

    I read TWiP and Sponge's publication eagerly every week and attained information pertaining to secrets of various Continuum and non-

    Continuum alliances alike.

    Therefore, by your unquestionable logic since I admit to doing so it has been found out and I deserve to be ZI'd. Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? Coming from Moo-Cows himself: "everybody accepts information". SethB did not approach this fellow and ask for any information he was offered it and accepted it.

    If you can't see the hypocrisy there then I can not help you.

    personally, i think the first line indicates that this was a lot more than just a random drop, but maybe that's just me sherlock.gif

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> I got that screenie for you

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> Cheesy

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> about NPO increasing warchest

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> BUT

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> here's the deal

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> ?

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> NPO has an anti-spy feature

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> it's embedded in the image

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> we don't know where

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> so if that screen shot leaks, we lose a spy

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> ok

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> okay

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> just so you know

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> It will remain in OV

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> http://i730.photobucket.com/albums/w...rchestleak.jpg

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> http://i730.photobucket.com/albums/w...chest2leak.jpg

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> guard that with your life

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> I will

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> promise

    [17:28] <sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> <Demeanor[blackstone]> bbl

  11. Old Man Chron

    in Open World RP

    Posted

    There isn't a group in charge right now and the forums are more interesting than for a long time.

    Not really. The forums were great in the lead up and in some respect during the war but they suck atm.

    I find all of Chron's points to be pretty valid, and though it would have done better to have used quotes from other players instead of just Bob so people wouldn't be constantly saying that this is some type of grudge post it is easier to research one player then many.

    This, I agree with a lot of what you said Chron.

  13. Address from Commanding General

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    Wow, your posts have sure deteriorated as of late. I see you have resorted to putting words in my mouth, nice. Please tell me where I said better tactical decisions meant picking the bigger side (I'll address that abomination of an argument here in a second).
    I wonder if you would still whine had you won because the only thing you really have to say about us is that we found ourselves on the winning side. You should actually made better tactical decisions than whine that you never stood a chance.

    I interpreted the tactical decisions you were referring to there as 'side-picking' because in reality all CN tactics really come down to is who has the bigger side.

    Let's look at the facts.

    Initial pre-war projections had about even sides, with the Hegemony with a slight advantage. Well damn, I guess we picked the bigger side huh? If Sparta, MHA, and TOP wanted to choose the bigger side and keep a position of pure political dominance, we would have joined NPO and quite possibly turn the tide of the war.

    heh, those sure are some convenient 'facts' for your argument. Our predictions (and most predictions I've heard of) had you guys on top, so I'm not really sure where you're getting that from.

    Also seeing how the war turned out, I'm thinking our predictions are slightly more reliable than yours.

    What about the fact that you entered a war in support of an aggressive proxy attack on SF? ;)

    We both know we entered the war due to defensive agreements. :P The CB doesn't change the fact that our ally was attacked.

  14. Address from Commanding General

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted · Edited by KingSuck

    It was abundantly clear we wouldn't endorse an aggressive war with SF. Your actions severed the ties, not ours. The fact you try and blame us for not backing your agenda is laughable at best. I wonder if you would still whine had you won because the only thing you really have to say about us is that we found ourselves on the winning side. You should actually made better tactical decisions than whine that you never stood a chance.

    It would be amusing if we could compare the war chatter before the war, because I know many of us were talking about going to ZI in the impending conflict.

    Valhalla had (suspended at the moment due to peace terms) MDoAPs with both Ragnarok and MA; two SF alliances. Your accusation that we had an agressive agenda towards SF is just plain stupid. Do you have any evidence to support that claim, or are you just spouting more of your rubbish?

    And yeah in the future Valhalla should just pick the bigger side. :rolleyes:

  15. Address from Commanding General

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    You are missing the point that you would have won, or been in an even sided battle of wills grinder, if your allies didn't cut and run at the start. The CoC doomed the hegemony, not Karma.

    Firstly we'd already lost by then, without a shadow of a doubt. The cancellations probably didn't help but to pretend they were what lost the war is ludicrous.

    Secondly our allies didn't cut and run. The CoC is a term used by those who don't have a !@#$@#$ clue what actually happened. Seriously.

  16. Address from Commanding General

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    You had a "side" weeks before the war? Weren't you still allied to them "weeks before" the war?

    They were. You're not really doing yourself any favours in this thread Sparta, to say the least.

    May I ask how you got those indications? Because by my assessment, there was a pretty good chance of us losing. That would in fact be the contents of a post made months ago in our forums, for general members, that we needed to gear up for a possible war on the horizon in which we stood a very good chance of losing. (which anyone who was a member of Valhalla at the time of post can attest to) There was simply no way this was ever even or in our favor. At best we were only a slight underdog. At worst, well, you can see how that worked out. To be honest, this was pretty much my nightmare scenario. I really didn't think it would be *this* bad. Just bad ;)

    I suspect a lot of people had similar ideas about what was coming. It's not like people exactly hid their feelings or intentions you know :P For evidence that was accessible to anyone, I would refer you to either the Hoo logs, or perhaps Sparta and the alliance names they dropped during their 'Valhalla spy' accusation. Or perhaps even just the general demeanor of folks in owf.

    If your numbers were so even, I figure your number-maker most likely erred on the side of caution. Which imo is wise. Better to count someone out and maybe be pleasantly surprised, would you not say?

    This. I was doing some number crunching for our side and only the most optimistic predictions put us even, we were pretty sure we'd lose this one.

  18. Address from Commanding General

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    I think this is the only time in the history of PB that people have actually put any stock into an NAP, or an NAP being broken, and it was only ever done to make Poison Clan look bad.

    The countless times it was done in the past didn't matter, but this time? This is the one time that an NAP was worth more than an MADP, judging by all the comments after it was broken, and even now.

    Don't sit there and pretend like any NAP signed is worth a damn to you.

    I'm not. I'm sitting here amused that a PCer claims they tried to avoid warfare with TPF.

    oh and personally If I signed a NAP I'd stand by it, but you're kind of missing the point here.

  19. Address from Commanding General

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    You also realise that the same NAP we signed with mhawk written BY mhawk had intended loopholes for TPF to use right? If you'd like, you can even ask TPF for a copy.

    Firstly I'd bet pretty much anything that was just a poorly written treaty, not an intentional 'loophole'. Secondly, and more importantly, the 'loophole' was utter bs.

    If either party breaks the pact, it is considered null and void.

    Of course if you break a pact it's considered null and void; it's the same scenerio with pretty much every treaty out there. The only difference was that it was stated in the actual treaty. Something tells me if you attacked a MADP partner they'd consider that treaty null and void; is that a loophole? Secondly look at the word I bolded, you still broke a NAP to attack them, which indicates you guys didn't exactly try to "avoid warfare" with TPF.

    Thirdly, you seem to have avoided answering my question :)

  20. Will NPO's membership revolt?

    in World Affairs (IC)

    Posted · Edited by KingSuck

    I'm not entirely sure you're taking changing conditions into account. "Bank" nations may be obsolete in an alliance with an average NS of 25k and an average infra of almost 5k (Hi, Polaris!) but in an alliance with an average infra of just over 1k, and where 536 nations have LESS THAN 1k infra, bank nations are important. People continually bring up about our billion dollar war chests. There is one critical flaw in this argument: we've just fought two months of nuclear war. Not everyone started with a billion dollar warchest in the first place, and two months of nuclear war, especially when you're fighting 3:1 or 4:1 and eating a nuke every day, can easily burn through even a billion dollar war chest even without extravagant spending. I did.

    The rest of you may be enjoying the massively inflated nation strengths of 2009 with your billion dollar warchests. We are not. We're somewhere back in 2007, where $3M is a crapton of money and can keep you out of bill lock for weeks.

    I'm also not seeing how the NPO is going to bounce back in a year, much less suddenly. YEARS of NS have been destroyed. I lost two years of growth. Therefore, it seems reasonable that it will take me somewhere around two years to recover. During that time everyone else will have had two MORE years to grow.

    (OOC)It is illuminating of a reason so few new nations stay around, though. There is pretty much zero chance of growing enough to compete with the top nations. Really, there's little chance of competing with the middle nations if you start fresh now. The game needs to (like so many other online games that have gotten top-heavy) make the game much easier/faster for new nations. This might also encourage some people who played and left to return. Either way, more players is better. (/OOC)

    This. If someone had asked me before this war I would have said banking was obsolete. However after the damage NPO have taken, and the length of the war in question; my opinion on that has changed completely.

  22. Address from Commanding General

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    Despite this, we tried constantly to avoid warfare but with the hostile aggression you have showed us, we had no choice.

    You do realise you guys attacked them whilst you held a Non-Agression Pact with them right? Doesn't really sound like trying to avoid warfare if you ask me..

    They wont recieve peace, they wont get no grand celebration, rather, they will die a quiet death should they choose to keep this up, that much I promise you.

    and how pray tell would you enforce such a promise?

×
×
  • Create New...