WorldConqueror Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1317881702' post='2818149'] If Invicta's scared, just have Polar declare first, RoK will ignore their higher level treaties and defend them. [i][size="1"]Edited for clarity.[/size][/i] [/quote] Should have edited for the fact that they no longer have a treaty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1317882096' post='2818159'] I like you, so I will ignore you . [/quote] you better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kzoppistan Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 (edited) [quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1317881186' post='2818137'] Calm down there. You seem to be delusional. [/quote] *waves fan* Whoo, pardon me, I had bit of the ol' war fever there for a minute. 'Course, the impression that I've ever had any sanity at all has been a surprisingly enduring illusion. As for IAA, well, you declared, so let's fight. That's that. Good luck with your internal dissolution or what ever is happening here. [quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1317881487' post='2818143'] You are a bit of an egomaniac, but I like your style. [/quote] Edited October 6, 2011 by Kzoppistan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Zeke+ Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 Lulz, JW's making his move. He just said he had screenshots of me plotting a coup. He took it from my own boards. Seems that spies flock together here. He also has a bad spy. The spy forgot to notice that the date was before JW took over and a latter post shows me saying a month ago that I chose to back JW instead. Ah well, serves me right, I guess. Then he has one of his cabal message me that I was suspended for posting screenshots here. Look back at my posts and note no screenshots and no edit marks. Really they are making this up as they go along. JW can do what he wants, I guess. But he's in this war without membership treaty approval and knows he just forgot to post it up. So that's his leadership style. His ego is more important than his alliance...and likely the allies he hopes will jump in to save his bacon. A true pillar of the community and a fine example of masterful CN leadership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 Where was the protectorate cancellation post Zeke? If by your logic everything needs to be posted here to be official....doesn't that make the protectorate still valid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cager Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 IAA you are literally the envy of the world getting to attack Legion. Please don't screw up this most important task of defeating them. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdaddychacha Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 (edited) To put the IAA's update blitz in proper perspective, let's break it down a bit: 8 offensive wars were declared on 7 Legion nations. Out of those 7 Legion nations, 2 are currently in Anarchy...[i]BUT:[/i] Each of those Legion nations had pre-existing wars with either Tetris or NsO nations, so it's possible that they were Anarchied before the IAA attacks (maybe someone in IAA can help clear this up for us. I'm sure they'd be proud to claim even 1 or 2 anarchies doled out in their update blitz at this point...) Another big BUT: In their small update blitz (I'm saying small, even when accounting for the fact that their alliance has a mere 51 members. I don't know, maybe 50 now, it sounds like they're kicking +Zeke+ out), 1 IAA nation was anarchied by the Legionnaire he chose to attack. Yet another big BUT: In a small counterblitz by 3 Legion nations who were paying attention at update, 2 out of 3 IAA nations targeted were anarchied immediately. tl;dr - 8 IAA declared on 7 Legionnaires. 3 Legionnaires declared on 3 IAA. IAA [i][b]may[/b][/i] be able to claim at least partial responsibility for anarchying 2 Legion nations who were already at war. Legion can definitely claim full responsibility for wrecking 3 IAA nations into anarchy since this attack began. Those are just the facts, people. Edited October 6, 2011 by bigdaddychacha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='bigdaddychacha' timestamp='1317887448' post='2818248'] To put the IAA's update blitz in proper perspective, let's break it down a bit: 8 offensive wars were declared on 7 Legion nations. Out of those 7 Legion nations, 2 are currently in Anarchy...[i]BUT:[/i] Each of those Legion nations had pre-existing wars with either Tetris or NsO nations, so it's possible that they were Anarchied before the IAA attacks (maybe someone in IAA can help clear this up for us. I'm sure they'd be proud to claim even 1 or 2 anarchies doled out in their update blitz at this point...) Another big BUT: In their small update blitz (I'm saying small, even when accounting for the fact that their alliance has a mere 51 members. I don't know, maybe 50 now, it sounds like they're kicking +Zeke+ out), 1 IAA nation was anarchied by the Legionnaire he chose to attack. Yet another big BUT: In a small counterblitz by 3 Legion nations who were paying attention at update, 2 out of 3 IAA nations targeted were anarchied immediately. tl;dr - 8 IAA declared on 7 Legionnaires. 3 Legionnaires declared on 3 IAA. IAA [i][b]may[/b][/i] be able to claim at least partial responsibility for anarchying 2 Legion nations who were already at war. Legion can definitely claim full responsibility for wrecking 3 IAA nations into anarchy since this attack began. Those are just the facts, people. [/quote] None of that is anything to be proud of for either side. Why don't we wait a few days til some usable damage stats come in before we start arguing who's doing a better job? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='James Wilson' timestamp='1317875470' post='2817800'] Hey, Invicta: [url]http://d3uwin5q170wpc.cloudfront.net/photo/122511_700b.jpg[/url] [/quote] I can remember when you were better than this, James. I think you've caught something, and I think I know where you caught it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the rebel Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 So NsO went running for assitance less than 24hrs after declaring war on Legion, BTA/IAA comes running in and gets aid assitance from TLR/GATO... So we at 5 alliances now, you know you're doing it wrong when people start saying "wtf more needed for lolegion". But go ahead call in more help its making those helping look pathectic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 This is becoming the most pathetic war of all time. Its fricking Legion people and for all the tough talk people keep calling in help? And it appears outside of NSO the rest of this coalition makes Legion look like they know what they are doing. And IAA? What the hell happened to you? That you are involved in this at all like this is just sad. That your attack was this poor is even more sad. Every single alliance involved in this war should hang its head in shame. Its fricking Legion people and they making the rest of you look bad. Legion sucks stop making them look good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeonidasRexII Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='Cager' timestamp='1317886553' post='2818236'] IAA you are literally the envy of the world getting to attack Legion. [b]Please don't screw up[/b] this most important task of defeating them. Thanks. [/quote] Whoops too late... [img]http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/579/8087372684.png[/img] Do you think the number of offensive wars in the IAA blitz is directly proportional to their love of NsO? Hmmm, out of the 8 offensive wars IAA has two are from it's exalted (except for Zeke) leader. Between that and the very flimsy, CB via treaty, way they got into this war; do you think Jimmy has a thing for NsO? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrwuss Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 How is a treaty being used a flimsy CB? Also IAA is and always will be garbage. Why are people so concerned what micros are doing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeonidasRexII Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='mrwuss' timestamp='1317892138' post='2818270'] How is a treaty being used a flimsy CB? Also IAA is and always will be garbage. Why are people so concerned what micros are doing? [/quote] Flimsy because the treaty itself has been called into question. The questions around the treaty link seem to bear some weight due to IAA members seemingly not adhering to their AA's DoW. [quote name='+Zeke+' timestamp='1317878800' post='2818069'] Meh, already the 5th page and likely to be lost in all the noise, but here goes..... There is no IAA/NsO Protectorate. Over a month ago a full member vote changed the treaty to an MDP. Ergo, unless NsO was attacked then IAA was not going to roll. Furthermore the vote approved a non-chain treaty as well. But it seems that James Wilson somehow forgot to announce a properly approved treaty he is now saying the Protectorate is in force still. If anything, with the vote and lack of announcement it seems more like no valid treaty exists at all. The Protectorate treaty was struck down by valid IAA member vote and the new one wasn't declared here. Does any treaty exist at all even? Many will note that IAA basically didn't roll out tonight. They weren't interested in war and voted accordingly a month ago. A few devout JW followers, or more likely just bored members, will roll. I'd be very surprised if even a dozen declare if you give them a week. This isn't an alliance at war. This is a leader practicing a bit of CYA because he's too embarrassed to come here and tell you he completely screwed up and didn't post the new treaty. A true leader owns up to his mistakes, no matter how embarrassing. He doesn't declare a non-approved war to save personal face. Me? I'll be in hippy. Actually, I was looking forward to the winter war season to finally break some things. But I've played long enough not to be party to an illegally declared war. So when this circus ends be sure to address the fact that JW trotted out a war declaration with no basis or authority by treaty to do so. It has been said that an alliance that approves of a leader's actions are responsible for his actions. But this is clearly a case where we did not give him treaty authority to declare this war. He has taken this burden upon himself without our permission. For the record the vote was held and passed on August 3. [/quote] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the rebel Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='LeonidasRexII' timestamp='1317892796' post='2818273'] Flimsy because the treaty itself has been called into question. The questions around the treaty link seem to bear some weight due to IAA members seemingly not adhering to their AA's DoW.[/quote] I suppose that is the reason why there has been little input to the war from IAA membership... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrwuss Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='LeonidasRexII' timestamp='1317892796' post='2818273'] Flimsy because the treaty itself has been called into question. The questions around the treaty link seem to bear some weight due to IAA members seemingly not adhering to their AA's DoW. [/quote] But even if the first part is answered the second remains open. Why do people care so much about a handful of terrible alliances doing an awful job at war? Has the world gotten so boring that double A league ball is more exciting than trying to convince someone they are wrong about tech raiding, what makes an alliance and not a micro.... I see. Will someone in one of the bigger blocs just activate one arm of the web already? Someone start the dominos and let's ends this awful and useless planet once and for all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beau Vine Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='mrwuss' timestamp='1317892138' post='2818270']Why are people so concerned what micros are doing?[/quote] [quote name='mrwuss' timestamp='1317893233' post='2818281'] But even if the first part is answered the second remains open. Why do people care so much about a handful of terrible alliances doing an awful job at war? Has the world gotten so boring that double A league ball is more exciting than trying to convince someone they are wrong about tech raiding, what makes an alliance and not a micro...[/quote] I'd think GOONS would be happy about this chance to be noticed and cared about :V What makes IAA involvement important is that this changes significantly how people expected this conflict to continue, and what possibilities of it expanding were taken into consideration. At least by most. Sabcat made 200 tech on going against the current. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='Beau Vine' timestamp='1317895434' post='2818309'] I'd think GOONS would be happy about this chance to be noticed and cared about :V What makes IAA involvement important is that this changes significantly how people expected this conflict to continue, and what possibilities of it expanding were taken into consideration. At least by most. Sabcat made 200 tech on going against the current. [/quote] No he didn't. NSO and IAA are not allied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beau Vine Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 (edited) [quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1317895516' post='2818310'] No he didn't. NSO and IAA are not allied.[/quote] Whether takers of his bet will weasel out on this (absolutely valid) semantic argument is another matter. Allies, side of coalition in a war, allies, signatories of an official pact. Poteytoh potatoh in reverse. [size="1"]edit: grammarz[/size] edit2: My bad, the latter definition was intended [quote name='Sabcat' timestamp='1317895197' post='2818304'] No, I've won no tech. The bet was that NSO would call in allies. I don't believe that anyone allied to NSO has declared (or am I wrong?) [/quote] Edited October 6, 2011 by Beau Vine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='Beau Vine' timestamp='1317896106' post='2818315'] Whether takers of his bet will weasel out on this (absolutely valid) semantic argument is another matter. Allies, side of coalition in a war, allies, signatories of an official pact. Poteytoh potatoh in reverse. [size="1"]edit: grammarz[/size] [/quote] Huh? The bet was whether NSO would call in allies before Legion did. Since neither alliance has called in allies, the bet is ongoing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 Should I be declaring war on Legion or something? Seems to be the new thing to do these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac MatthewII Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 *Glares at said bet* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaiar Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1317896517' post='2818321'] Should I be declaring war on Legion or something? Seems to be the new thing to do these days. [/quote] Are you in range of World Conqueror? Declare on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='Jaiar' timestamp='1317898862' post='2818336'] Are you in range of World Conqueror? Declare on him. [/quote] Aw did I hurt your feelings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EViL0nE Posted October 6, 2011 Report Share Posted October 6, 2011 [quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1317882406' post='2818162'] Should have edited for the fact that they no longer have a treaty. [/quote] You say that like it was relevant to my post. 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.