IYIyTh Posted June 1, 2012 Report Share Posted June 1, 2012 [quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1338540371' post='2975623'] Fixed that for you. [/quote] ThIs was amazing btw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Buscemi Posted June 2, 2012 Report Share Posted June 2, 2012 [quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1338250074' post='2973755'] ITT: Non Slota makes excuses for having 40% Aid Slot Efficiency. I read all of this and I dont get it, Umbrella and GOD lowered their aid slot efficiency... this is supposed to mean NG isnt lazy and high aid slot usage isnt a good thing? So to wrap this thread up, NG makes excuses for their laziness and incompentant alliance. Those dont win wars, but we have those too. [/quote] Non slota, I love it! The only excuse I know for how lazy and incompetent we are is that my dog ate my homework. In reality everyone knows what an awful alliance we are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty Posted June 2, 2012 Report Share Posted June 2, 2012 (edited) Recently ive left this thread, but the issue came up in #Sovrana so I thought id leave this here to wrap up the WHOLE thread. [quote][18:37] <BloodFury> He is the face and voice of the alliance, that is what it boils down to. [18:40] <BloodFury> I've had conversations with Stewie in the past, KX is the defacto decision maker. [18:42] <BloodFury> If I want something from NG, I will talk to KX.[/quote] Edited June 2, 2012 by Rotavele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velocity111 Posted June 2, 2012 Report Share Posted June 2, 2012 [quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1338680335' post='2976273'] Recently ive left this thread, but the issue came up in #Sovrana so I thought id leave this here to wrap up the WHOLE thread. [/quote] Gee I wonder why you've left the thread Sovrana: 10 / 49 (20.41%) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty Posted June 2, 2012 Report Share Posted June 2, 2012 [quote name='Velocity111' timestamp='1338680582' post='2976276'] Gee I wonder why you've left the thread Sovrana: 10 / 49 (20.41%) [/quote] Check the aid that just came in, sweets. That hasn't updated yet. Unfortunately that % is still near NG's level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velocity111 Posted June 2, 2012 Report Share Posted June 2, 2012 [quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1338680648' post='2976277'] Check the aid that just came in, sweets. That hasn't updated yet. Unfortunately that % is still near NG's level. [/quote] If you couldn't do better than a 200+ member alliance with your micro I'd be shocked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty Posted June 2, 2012 Report Share Posted June 2, 2012 [quote][18:48] <Unkajo[NG]> what is the goal of war [18:48] <~Rotavele[Sovrana]> TO make a point [18:48] <Unkajo[NG]> no [18:48] <Unkajo[NG]> to have fun [18:48] <~Rotavele[Sovrana]> I do it to have a point [18:48] <lenin> Unkajo[NG] you are about to get into the most retarded argument [18:49] <lenin> over the internet [18:49] <lenin> about spreadsheets [18:49] <Unkajo[NG]> no [18:49] <lenin> turn back [18:49] <Unkajo[NG]> i just won [18:49] <lenin> you didn't [18:49] <lenin> you're horrible [18:49] <Unkajo[NG]> the goal of war is to have fun [18:49] <~Rotavele[Sovrana]> No its not [18:49] <Unkajo[NG]> lenin ill roll you [18:49] <Unkajo[NG]> you !@#$@#$ !@#$%* [18:49] <lenin> wow [18:49] <lenin> racist [18:49] <~Rotavele[Sovrana]> This is how NG's FA is... [18:49] <BloodFury> lenin: Arguing on the internet is retarded period. [18:49] <lenin> that is very racist [18:49] <~Rotavele[Sovrana]> Im putting this on a plaque[/quote] IMO, This is how NG's FA always go down from my PoV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted June 3, 2012 Report Share Posted June 3, 2012 The irc convo seems pretty boring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ilyani Posted June 3, 2012 Report Share Posted June 3, 2012 [quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1338538078' post='2975615'] Nonetheless, I've never been fond of that spin. We "defended" RoK in so far as we made sure we wouldn't have to actually lift a finger for them, so we could spend our time and resources fighting PB's war. [/quote] If this was true (and I'm fairly certain that it's not, seems more like a figment of your RoK-hating imagination), then how come RIA did end up hitting SLCB for us in the first place? Wouldn't just hitting Polar's allies in defense of VE be a better way to "spend your time and resources fighting PB's war"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted June 3, 2012 Report Share Posted June 3, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1338684790' post='2976296'] If this was true (and I'm fairly certain that it's not, seems more like a figment of your RoK-hating imagination), then how come RIA did end up hitting SLCB for us in the first place? Wouldn't just hitting Polar's allies in defense of VE be a better way to "spend your time and resources fighting PB's war"? [/quote] The idea was to allow for some sort of counter on RoK for morale purposes and to take at least some off the heat off PC. In retrospect, SLCB would have been better on a different front since the gains were minimal in terms of hitting rok, especially since it was supposed to be only some of RIA against SLCB and no one else. Of course, RIA had no control over what \m/ and the Sirius alliances would do, but that should have been taken into consideration. In addition, the SOS-SLCB thing was an issue for RIA, at least that's how Delta made it seem at the time and they saw it as resolving that. Edited June 3, 2012 by Roquentin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ilyani Posted June 3, 2012 Report Share Posted June 3, 2012 [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1338685365' post='2976298'] The idea was to allow for some sort of counter on RoK for morale purposes and to take at least some off the heat off PC. In retrospect, SLCB would have been better on a different front since the gains were minimal in terms of hitting rok, especially since it was supposed to be only some of RIA against SLCB and no one else. Of course, RIA had no control over what \m/ and the Sirius alliances would do, but that should have been taken into consideration. In addition, the SOS-SLCB thing was an issue for RIA, at least that's how Delta made it seem at the time and they saw it as resolving that. [/quote] Well, yeah, but I'm talking about RIA, not SLCB. I can understand why SLCB hit RoK, but RIA's counter on them in RoK's defense just doesn't make sense if what XIph said is true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted June 3, 2012 Report Share Posted June 3, 2012 [quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1338685982' post='2976300'] Well, yeah, but I'm talking about RIA, not SLCB. I can understand why SLCB hit RoK, but RIA's counter on them in RoK's defense just doesn't make sense if what XIph said is true. [/quote] "The idea was to allow for some sort of counter on RoK for morale purposes and to take at least some off the heat off PC" I assume that at least partially answers it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted June 3, 2012 Report Share Posted June 3, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1338685982' post='2976300'] Well, yeah, but I'm talking about RIA, not SLCB. I can understand why SLCB hit RoK, but RIA's counter on them in RoK's defense just doesn't make sense if what XIph said is true. [/quote] Because RIA was going to hit anyone who hit RoK, so moderate commitment from RIA on SLCB was going to make it so the SF treaty was honored. Like Xiph said, the "spirit of the treaty" was something they didn't violate entirely despite what RoK did. SLCB hitting RoK was only on the condition of RIA hitting SLCB in retaliation. It was all preplanned. edit: So SLCB hits previously uncountered RoK nations giving maybe some minimal breathing space and a morale boost to PC since Derwood said his membership was very upset about the idea no one defending against them RoK, and was supposed to take moderate hit from RIA in retaliation. It goes wrong because the ghost DoW for Hydra ends up making all the Sirius alliances hit SLCB in addition to RIA and \m/ coming out from ROK. Edited June 3, 2012 by Roquentin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted June 3, 2012 Report Share Posted June 3, 2012 [quote]SLCB hitting RoK was only on the condition of RIA hitting SLCB in retaliation. It was all preplanned.[/quote] Roq's got it. We [SF-PB] planned around you guys going full schitzo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted June 4, 2012 Report Share Posted June 4, 2012 [quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1338370952' post='2974481'] You want in on our war plans, you be part of our coalition. I have ALWAYS thought that. I have ALWAYS thought this nonsense about honor in war was a magnificently stupid attempt to make people warm and fuzzy about the act of killing people and breaking things (which is what a war is intended to do). When a leadership of an alliance that is caught between both sides in a war, is too weak to make a decision to to definitively pick one side, then you should not expect to be privvy to the conversations and plans of any alliances that you might be allied to, that are on the opposite side. I had no requirement whatsoever to tell you anything about anyone we were going to hit. [/quote] Are you sure you didnt have a treaty at the time that said otherwise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted June 4, 2012 Report Share Posted June 4, 2012 [quote name='Sigrun Vapneir' timestamp='1338818023' post='2976873'] Are you sure you didnt have a treaty at the time that said otherwise? [/quote] The treaty said that we would share intel essential to the security of their alliance. GATO and IAA were already engaged, and we had told them from day (because GATO offered to fight both sides), that we would not ask them to defend us, we had plenty of other allies to handle that. Couple that with the fact that we were on a clear winning side, there was zero threat to the security of GATO or IAA In anything we planned, planned to do , or did. We honored our intel clauses to the letter, and history proved me right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omniscient1 Posted June 4, 2012 Report Share Posted June 4, 2012 [quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1338831428' post='2976935'] history proved me right. [/quote] What does that mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted June 4, 2012 Report Share Posted June 4, 2012 [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1338686457' post='2976304'] Because RIA was going to hit anyone who hit RoK, so moderate commitment from RIA on SLCB was going to make it so the SF treaty was honored. Like Xiph said, the "spirit of the treaty" was something they didn't violate entirely despite what RoK did. SLCB hitting RoK was only on the condition of RIA hitting SLCB in retaliation. It was all preplanned. edit: So SLCB hits previously uncountered RoK nations giving maybe some minimal breathing space and a morale boost to PC since Derwood said his membership was very upset about the idea no one defending against them RoK, and was supposed to take moderate hit from RIA in retaliation. It goes wrong because the ghost DoW for Hydra ends up making all the Sirius alliances hit SLCB in addition to RIA and \m/ coming out from ROK. [/quote] If we had not defended RoK there would have been a member revolt. It may seem strange now, but at the time RoK was the blood of our blood and we would be damned if they were left to burn. Future events would end up tarnishing this feeling and leave us regretting our decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodFury Posted June 4, 2012 Report Share Posted June 4, 2012 [quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1338680335' post='2976273'] Recently ive left this thread, but the issue came up in #Sovrana so I thought id leave this here to wrap up the WHOLE thread. [/quote] I like how you have to use others to make an argument for yourself. Congratulations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercoolyellow Posted June 4, 2012 Report Share Posted June 4, 2012 Rota, you should have just stayed a one person alliance for a few more days and made every retort to some one "My alliance has 100% aid slot usage, what's yours?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micheal Malone Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 [quote name='BloodFury' timestamp='1338848968' post='2977075'] I like how you have to use others to make an argument for yourself. Congratulations. [/quote] My thoughts on her post were exactly that... 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.