Penguin Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 (edited) [quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1303246895' post='2693895'] No. Please re-read what Dave said or come chat with one of the fine people of Thriller [/quote] I assumed it was a clear no when I first read it, but then I sifted through the comments and decided a clarification was prudent. Thanks for providing one. Additional clarification from Thriller or Dave is not necessary. Edited April 19, 2011 by Penguin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 Attacking alliances because you don't like them is not something that should be supported, even if the alliance you are hitting is terrible. (After all, you wouldn't like [i]your[/i] alliance hit just for being terrible, right?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro Nakara Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 I kind of find this pretty funny, good work guys. Although I have a question for WickedJ, if he wouldn't mind indulging me for a minute. On the Doomhouse DoW against NPO you posted within the first 5 pages and yelled "cowards" for our pre empt for disliking NPO. And here you are a couple of months later pre empting someone because you dislike them? Is that about right? Just curious is all. I mean it looks like hypocrisy and smells like hypocrisy. Ohh wait, it is hypocrisy. Not that I have anything against what you guys are doing, I find it quite amusing, it's just an observation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Penguin' timestamp='1303247036' post='2693897'] I assumed it was a clear no when I first read it, but then I sifted through the comments and decided a clarification was prudent. Thanks for providing one. Additional clarification from Thriller or Dave is not necessary. [/quote] Go for it. I'll look the other way while you get your moral on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Rahl Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1303249386' post='2693934'] I kind of find this pretty funny, good work guys. Although I have a question for WickedJ, if he wouldn't mind indulging me for a minute. On the Doomhouse DoW against NPO you posted within the first 5 pages and yelled "cowards" for our pre empt for disliking NPO. And here you are a couple of months later pre empting someone because you dislike them? Is that about right? Just curious is all. I mean it looks like hypocrisy and smells like hypocrisy. Ohh wait, it is hypocrisy. Not that I have anything against what you guys are doing, I find it quite amusing, it's just an observation. [/quote] Don't challenge the man in the mirror. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro Nakara Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Richard Rahl' timestamp='1303249706' post='2693938'] Don't challenge the man in the mirror. [/quote] Ohh not challenging the man in the mirror, I just Wanna Be Startin Somethin I was just curious that he banged on using such a word as coward and wondering if he attached it to himself as well? Edited April 19, 2011 by Hiro Nakara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Pansy Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1303249980' post='2693942'] Ohh not challenging the man in the mirror, I just Wanna Be Startin Somethin [/quote] Oh, You Bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1303249386' post='2693934'] I kind of find this pretty funny, good work guys. Although I have a question for WickedJ, if he wouldn't mind indulging me for a minute. On the Doomhouse DoW against NPO you posted within the first 5 pages and yelled "cowards" for our pre empt for disliking NPO. And here you are a couple of months later pre empting someone because you dislike them? Is that about right? Just curious is all. I mean it looks like hypocrisy and smells like hypocrisy. Ohh wait, it is hypocrisy. Not that I have anything against what you guys are doing, I find it quite amusing, it's just an observation. [/quote] You had to haul in half a dozen alliances to attack NPO, we're half the NS of AcTi. AcTi will also have peace within two weeks meanwhile we enter how many weeks of war with NPO? edit: for the record i supported Ejay's DoW on GOONS [quote]Attacking alliances because you don't like them is not something that should be supported, even if the alliance you are hitting is terrible. (After all, you wouldn't like your alliance hit just for being terrible, right?)[/quote] Right. When will VE be cancelling on all the alliance at war with NPO? Edited April 19, 2011 by wickedj Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro Nakara Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='The Pansy' timestamp='1303250022' post='2693945'] Oh, You Bad [/quote] If he doesn't want to answer, I guess I will just Beat It. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro Nakara Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1303250131' post='2693948'] [b]You had to haul in half a dozen alliances to attack NPO, we're half the NS of AcTi. AcTi will also have peace within two weeks meanwhile we enter how many weeks of war with NPO? [/b] Right. When will VE be cancelling on all the alliance at war with NPO? [/quote] But your pre empting someone for disliking them. To quote your original post. [quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1295928210' post='2597904'] Cant sleep. Pacifica will roll me cowards [/quote] Kind of hypocritical though aye to bang on about pre empting and then do it yourself ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1303207301' post='2693489'] So... you switch AA and immediately declare war? That's pretty much the textbook definition of a nuke rogue. Now let's see if the teams that Thriller's nations are on have the nerve to issue sanctions. [/quote] I believe you are mistaken good sir. The textbook definition of a nuke rogue is as follows: 1) Fire nukes 2) There is no 2 3) ??? 4) Profit See... Without step one, you are no nuke rogue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Londo Mollari' timestamp='1303214177' post='2693508'] This is not the case here, and we have a nobler purpose in mind here, as will be revealed in the coming days. [/quote] Really? Why wait to enlighten us? Haven't come up with a good enough story yet, I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wu Tang Clan Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1303250271' post='2693951'] Kind of hypocritical though aye to bang on about pre empting and then do it yourself ? [/quote] I think you're missing the point... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro Nakara Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Wu Tang Clan' timestamp='1303252634' post='2693961'] I think you're missing the point... [/quote] Maybe your clearly missing mine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wu Tang Clan Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1303252799' post='2693962'] Maybe your clearly missing mine [/quote] No no, I understand your point "you're just as much a coward for preempting as we were" am I right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1303244019' post='2693848'] We did it now just to spite you To address some quick points, Prior to declaring we all agreed on the length of this war. Battalion is welcome to drop by #thriller and discuss it [b]Carlos Accords has nothing to do with Impero [/b] And finally its 900k 17 nations v 1.6m(?) and 45 or so members. Had Batt not run to peace mode he could be out defending his alliance [/quote] Bolded is incredibly factual and true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote]Right. When will VE be cancelling on all the alliance at war with NPO? [/quote] It has been explained many times that that war is not just about 'we don't like you' – unlike yours. I don't agree with that one either, personally, as I've made clear in many places. And this is not a thread about DH-NPO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KahlanRahl Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [center][img]http://i482.photobucket.com/albums/rr189/michaelvonprussia/tioprop/deptbanners/ICExtl.png[/img][/center] Given the amount of misunderstanding and lack of reading comprehension going on related to Dave's declaration of tech raiding protection, we're going to make this crystal clear and official for you folks. This is simply a tech raiding protection statement. It is nothing more than that. We are not committing any resources to defend Thriller in the event of a declaration of war, official or unofficial. In the unlikely chance they get tech raided, we will discuss our options with them and possibly send those willing to defend them out to counter the raiders. [quote][17:22] <Teddyyo> make it more clear that it is protection from tech raiders [17:22] <CaoPai[TIO]> It says it... [b][17:22] <Teddyyo> and not from those willing to interdict [17:22] <Teddyyo> as that is how it is perceived at the moment[/b] [17:23] <CaoPai[TIO]> TIO will be protecting the Thriller AA from Tech Raiders until further notice. [17:23] <CaoPai[TIO]> signed, [17:23] <CaoPai[TIO]> Dave93 - Imperial High Commander [17:23] <CaoPai[TIO]> It can't be any more cut and dry than that [b][17:23] <Teddyyo> perception is what matters, Cao[/b] [17:24] <CaoPai[TIO]> A perception is up to the individual....if someone doesn't perceive it for the dictionary definition by which our IHC gave, that is not my fault. [17:24] <Teddyyo> when many perceive it incorrectly [17:24] <Teddyyo> perhaps it is best to clarify [b][17:24] <CaoPai[TIO]> It has been stated SEVERAL times on the OWF that this is just for tech raiders, from what I understand[/b] [17:25] <Teddyyo> just officialize it [17:25] <CaoPai[TIO]> ok. [17:25] <Teddyyo> thanks [17:25] <Teddyyo> <3 [17:25] <CaoPai[TIO]> No problem. [17:28] <CaoPai[TIO]> One question, however. [17:28] <Teddyyo> shoot [17:28] <CaoPai[TIO]> How exactly do you wish us to officialize it? [17:29] <Teddyyo> an announcement, or an large official-looking post in the two main threads [17:29] <CaoPai[TIO]> just making sure. [17:30] <Teddyyo> happy to clarify :3[/quote] So. There's no big hand in Thriller's actions on the part of The Imperial Order. Sorry tinfoil hats. If you have any questions as to the clarity of this statement, you may take it up with us. [img]http://b.imagehost.org/0297/highcom2.png[/img] Dave93 Super Kame Guru -- [img]http://b.imagehost.org/0651/comtio2.png[/img] Executive Imperial Commander: Imperial Internal Commander: Scorponok Imperial External Commander: Scipio Africanus -- [img]http://b.imagehost.org/0642/impoff.png[/img] Imperial Officer of Foreign Affairs: KahlanRahl Imperial Officer of Internal Affairs: CaoPai Imperial Officer of Defence: Stagger_Lee Imperial Officer of Finance: Blackrose Imperial Officer of Membership Affairs: Dark_Temptation Imperial Officer of Media Affairs: Bobogoobo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the rebel Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1303250131' post='2693948'] You had to haul in half a dozen alliances to attack NPO, [b]we're half the NS of AcTi.[/b] AcTi will also have peace within two weeks meanwhile we enter how many weeks of war with NPO?[/quote] Its more than half, plus you have 15k avg. nation strength advantage, so technically you arent fighting a larger alliance, weighing it all up it would be a pretty evenly matched fight if they had good warchests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Duncan King' timestamp='1303229665' post='2693627'] Wow, when I looked at the alliance display, it looked like Skippy was but one of 17 people on the AA. Was I hallucinating when I saw that Londo (formerly of Athens), Pansy (formerly of Olympus), Mogar, WickedJ (formerly of CSN and Fark, among others), Stelios (formerly of FAR), and 11 others were on the AA as well. Because to me, it looked like a hell of a lot more than one alliance's alumni were represented there. But what would I know? I was just going off what the alliance display information ingame told me about the members of Thriller. I didn't have access to your great intellect, which, I suspect, is derived in no small part from what you pull out of your ass. You see, I try to base what I say on evidence and not on what comes out of my rear end. Now TIO and Olympus aren't a part of your little PB-DH-CnG-SF clique but CSN, Fark, and Athens definitely are. Plus, many of the denizens in Thriller were also involved in the Carlos Accords, that lovely little attack on a leader of VE that also received rave reviews from parts of the PB-DH-CnG-SF clique. You can put lipstick on a pig but it's still a pig. [/quote] The Carlos accords were not now, nor ever, an attack on a leader of VE, nor anyone else. I was there when it was made, and throughout its entire existence. Get that through your head. That said, this situation is Thriller attacking Acti because "they don't like them". What sells this for me is that Acti has them in nations and stats, has a 3-1 member advantage, and should be able to rock Thriller, but instead Acti's leaders are hiding in peace mode whining about the injustice of it all rather than organising a defense of their alliance. Their members are taking damage while they sit in peace not taking any. That is something I do not agree with. Peace mode can be a good tactic if you use it to cycle in and out of war mode to gain a tactical edge on your opponent. But using it to the extent NPO's coalition is wrong, and using it because you are too afraid to fight and unwilling to put your infra on the line for your alliance is even worse. I expect to see Acti's gov out of peace mode in 5 days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MitchellBade Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='KahlanRahl' timestamp='1303246311' post='2693886'] Since when does having a grudge and a legitimate reason go hand in hand? Oh wait, we're living in the New Hypo-gemonic Age. That's standard practice these days isn't it... Sorry, we'll try harder next time. [/quote] Only proving my point. I have lost a lot of respect for TIO and gang for condoning behavior that falls within Doomhouse's standards. I hold/held you guys to higher standards than that and you disappointed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarmatian Empire Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1303250131' post='2693948'] You had to haul in half a dozen alliances to attack NPO, we're half the NS of AcTi. AcTi will also have peace within two weeks meanwhile we enter how many weeks of war with NPO? [/quote] I'd love to know why being half the NS of AcTi means anything. Quality beats Quantity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Sarmatian Empire' timestamp='1303255146' post='2693989'] I'd love to know why being half the NS of AcTi means anything. Quality beats Quantity. [/quote] A larger alliance should have the members and warchests sufficient to beat down a smaller alliance, even one which has one third of the members as the larger one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeroofTime55 Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Caliph' timestamp='1303254677' post='2693982'] The Carlos accords were not now, nor ever, an attack on a leader of VE, nor anyone else. I was there when it was made, and throughout its entire existence. Get that through your head. That said, this situation is Thriller attacking Acti because "they don't like them". What sells this for me is that Acti has them in nations and stats, has a 3-1 member advantage, and should be able to rock Thriller, but instead Acti's leaders are hiding in peace mode whining about the injustice of it all rather than organising a defense of their alliance. Their members are taking damage while they sit in peace not taking any. That is something I do not agree with. Peace mode can be a good tactic if you use it to cycle in and out of war mode to gain a tactical edge on your opponent. But using it to the extent NPO's coalition is wrong, and using it because you are too afraid to fight and unwilling to put your infra on the line for your alliance is even worse. I expect to see Acti's gov out of peace mode in 5 days. [/quote] The leadership of Pacifica does not hide in peace mode, they are always the first to the front line. Please kindly refrain from telling outright lies, and comparing Pacifica to these cowards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarmatian Empire Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 [quote name='Caliph' timestamp='1303255225' post='2693990'] A larger alliance should have the members and warchests sufficient to beat down a smaller alliance, even one which has one third of the members as the larger one. [/quote] Oh I know, but I've just seen that being used to justify attacking. "You got more numbers! Come on fight back!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.