Jump to content

Hunterman1043

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    804

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Hunterman1043

  9. The FARKLAND war

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    You misunderstand why I am here. My own beloved Kashmir is out of the war (we were never in the main conflict to start with). I'm cognizant of the fact that my presence here has no material effect on your defeat.

    That being said, I'm mainly here to enjoy the sight of you and yours repeatedly getting your teeth kicked in. You see, there's no statue of limitations on schadenfreude. Watching the spiritual heirs of Electron Sponge get introduced to the business end of a jack boot is the best game in town right now.

    By all means, please, drag this fight out beyond all reason. Continue to get smashed in the face whenever you get back up again. Pull out all the stops.

    I and the unquiet dead of \m/ will be watching, and laughing.


    Lol I had to quote that line. Hilarious.

  15. The FARKLAND war

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted · Edited by Hunterman1043

    Didn't you declare all out war against DBDC tech sellers? Because to me that is pretty damn close to eternal war. Why you may ask. Simple the tech sellers aren't going to stop selling to DBDC. They are loyal. You can hit them all they want but they won't stop. So essentially in essence you will be in eternal war.


    Loyal to the bone. Blood in, blood out baby.

  18. The FARKLAND war

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted · Edited by Hunterman1043

    It's an even split actually, though that does depend on how you decide to count disbanded and merged alliances. Not that it's a particularly relevant point.

    I don't think Fark is generating any particular "precedent" here in what is a pretty minor sideshow to a sideshow. They have a "right" to such action, and whilst their choice of target can be questioned form a perspective of fairness and effectiveness, they don't really have any obligation to be fair to anyone and they are accountable only to themselves in terms of whether it produces results or not. If I was on a losing side of a war, I might very well consider the possibility of getting more lower tier targets just to piss in the other side's soup. Of course, whether it'll have any positive effect in the end in terms of intimidating other micros without big sponsors (you might need a bit more effort than making an "example" out of just one micro) or whether it's just creating drama (and bad relations) for nothing is something we'll all have to wait and see.

    I just want to be put on the record that during Karma, while I was for the war based on past transgressions to my alliances from NPO, I was heavily outspoken against rediculous terms towards them.

  20. The FARKLAND war

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    The point that people are missing (or intentionally ignoring) is this: the issue isn't that Fark considers a tech deal during a war an act of war, it's who they chose to make an example of. WFF is a tiny, tiny alliance with absolutely no real military capacity. Fark had literally 25 alliances to choose from, and this is who they chose to attack.
     
    Now, a couple of Fark folks have argued that the reason they picked WFF was attitude: "WFF didn't roll over, they insisted on continuing to do tech deals with whoever they want, including our opponents." Let's break this down into two parts:
     
    - WFF's side: WFF is, again, an absolutely tiny alliance with no large members. For an alliance like that to grow, it must do external tech deals. It doesn't have the resources for an internal aid program or internal tech deals. Therefore, economic freedom is a key principle for WFF and it's not really one that they can afford to budge on if they hope to last.
     
    - Fark's side: They're at war, they don't like the people they're at war with getting aid. Fair enough. However, was WFF really causing that much of a problem, given that they only had tech deals with five DT nations, just two of whom are actually in range of Fark nations? Is the military impact here such an important motivator that it's worth it to kick around a new micro just to get your point across? Obviously not.
     
    So, what was Fark's motivation for hitting WFF instead of the other 24 alliances dealing tech to their opponents? Basically, they didn't like WFF's attitude, knew that they couldn't fight back and decided to teach them a lesson. It's both petty and pathetic.


    Hear hear!

  23. The FARKLAND war

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    OOC: I like the fact that I get to choose whether or not I want to read what they say or not. It's like closing a duck's mouth with your hands and letting go on your terms. Lol

    Anyway, yea I don't see people backing off on the aid. I mean really tho, Fark is barely mid-range so any aid to our God sphere or upper tier nations out of range should be discounted entirely.

×
×
  • Create New...