An Umbrella Treaty Announcement

[MCRABT]

[img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_s5nTdkk0u7E/TD0rig9-QeI/AAAAAAAAAtQ/yHMGm5XMU0Y/s1600/Copy+(5)+of+stephen-fry-cheshire-cat-2010--large-msg-126291729369.jpg[/img]

This picture represents the expression on my face as I read this thread.

Edit: How rude of me, congrats on the treaty!

Edited June 5, 2012 by MCRABT

[Zoomzoomzoom]

This really was a good topic, aside from the fact that I had to catch up on 10 pages.

[JoshuaR]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338863667' post='2977207']
Yes there was trolling. But just clarification, arexes is correct, we didn't have a problem with MHA/Sparta. The reason we wanted those treaties canceled is because you guys were using those ties as a scapegoat to not pull your weight again.
[/quote]
Pulling our weight in someone else's war, where the opponents face enormous odds and those targeted already have 10x the NS on them, Umbrella should drop allies that have done nothing wrong while allies of their allies plan to destroy those alliances? I think the truth is that we weren't going to be prodded into doing other people's work for them.

[Sunny Side King]

[quote name='JoshuaR' timestamp='1338934749' post='2977865']
Pulling our weight in someone else's war, where the opponents face enormous odds and those targeted already have 10x the NS on them, Umbrella should drop allies that have done nothing wrong while allies of their allies plan to destroy those alliances? I think the truth is that we weren't going to be prodded into doing other people's work for them.
[/quote]

[s]You could argue that this last war was Umb's war since IRON is your ally and was started by TOP/IRON.[/s] Ignoring that, Umbrella has historically always found ways to avoid being part of any tough wars. See Vlad's post. My personal favorite is "Let's declare on paper but in actuality don't declare and wait for them to fall out of range."

[Monster]

When exactly has that happened? I mean, because it hasn't and you can ask alliances we actually were in range of fighting that we fought. The benefits to actual avoidance of wars are minimal due to the reputation hits and the stats of Umbrella nations would be better if they had actually done it, might as well earn the reputation you're going to get anyway. Well not really, but the fact that it's not really well-documented says a lot.

You're going to have to back it up, dude.

Edited June 6, 2012 by Roquentin

[kwell]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338939917' post='2977915']
[s]You could argue that this last war was Umb's war since IRON is your ally and was started by TOP/IRON.[/s] Ignoring that, Umbrella has historically always found ways to avoid being part of any tough wars. See Vlad's post. My personal favorite is "Let's declare on paper but in actuality don't declare and wait for them to fall out of range."
[/quote]

Maybe if you didn't ask us to target allies then maybe would have had people to hit. Despite that fact, I fought 4 wars when I was 120,000 ns. Cry my a river. You choose to pick a fight with someone and now want to cry about getting your nose broke in in the process. If you want to challenge Umbrellas war ability, go ahead. Here is my nation link http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=135378. Otherwise, quit whining, at least you were able to fight a war.

Edited June 6, 2012 by kwell

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338939917' post='2977915']
[s]You could argue that this last war was Umb's war since IRON is your ally and was started by TOP/IRON.[/s] Ignoring that, Umbrella has historically always found ways to avoid being part of any tough wars. See Vlad's post. My personal favorite is "Let's declare on paper but in actuality don't declare and wait for them to fall out of range."
[/quote]

you used to be cool ssk what happened

[kwell]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1338941113' post='2977938']
you used to be cool ssk what happened
[/quote]

If you ask me, ng was never cool. They just know who to go to when they need help.

[Monster]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1338941113' post='2977938']
you used to be cool ssk what happened
[/quote]

Meh, it's a common belief in his AA. Keep in mind the people launching these criticisms have also nestled themselves in huge treaty web configurations so they can avoid real opposition for as long as possible!

[Sunny Side King]

Kaskus off most recent memory. Kaskus had 6 nations over 30k NS when Umb declared, in the first week there was just 3 DoW's all on the one 100k guy. Yes I know you weren't going to hit the Kaskus guys who weren't attacking GOONS or however it was phrased. You guys DoW'd on the alliance Kaskus and found a way to avoid obliterating GOONS enemy, Kaskus.

[Garion]

That's not a good example, I'd say... Like, all of PB was on Kaskus...

Edited June 6, 2012 by Garion

[Monster]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338942085' post='2977952']
Kaskus off most recent memory. Kaskus had 6 nations over 30k NS when Umb declared, in the first week there was just 3 DoW's all on the one 100k guy. Yes I know you weren't going to hit the Kaskus guys who weren't attacking GOONS or however it was phrased. You guys DoW'd on the alliance Kaskus and found a way to avoid obliterating GOONS enemy, Kaskus.
[/quote]

Oh. I saw that as a pretty pointless declaration too, but they don't have a lot of people in the 30k range anyway, so kind of hard to pull it off. There was just one 100k NS guy that they could deal with. It didn't warrant a DoW. That was ridiculous, but when the Ninjas declared on GOONS and there were more Umbrella did fight more of them. I don't really see a lot of nations on the umbrella AA that could fight someone below 60-70k NS.

[Lusitan]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338942085' post='2977952']
Kaskus off most recent memory. Kaskus had 6 nations over 30k NS when Umb declared, in the first week there was just 3 DoW's all on the one 100k guy. Yes I know you weren't going to hit the Kaskus guys who weren't attacking GOONS or however it was phrased. You guys DoW'd on the alliance Kaskus and found a way to avoid obliterating GOONS enemy, Kaskus.
[/quote]

That was just as dumb as expected. I'm disappointed.

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338939917' post='2977915']
[s]You could argue that this last war was Umb's war since IRON is your ally and was started by TOP/IRON.[/s] Ignoring that, Umbrella has historically always found ways to avoid being part of any tough wars. See Vlad's post. My personal favorite is "Let's declare on paper but in actuality don't declare and wait for them to fall out of range."
[/quote]

Yeah umbrella should have declared on NpO considering all the open slots

[Neo Uruk]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338942085' post='2977952']
Kaskus off most recent memory. Kaskus had 6 nations over 30k NS when Umb declared, in the first week there was just 3 DoW's all on the one 100k guy. Yes I know you weren't going to hit the Kaskus guys who weren't attacking GOONS or however it was phrased. You guys DoW'd on the alliance Kaskus and found a way to avoid obliterating GOONS enemy, Kaskus.
[/quote]
30k isn't Umbrella tier. I mean, really.

[Sunny Side King]

[quote name='Neo Uruk' timestamp='1338943747' post='2977973']
30k isn't Umbrella tier. I mean, really.
[/quote]

Umbrella has a middle tier believe it or not and they didn't cover it sufficiently.

[Sunny Side King]

[quote name='Garion' timestamp='1338942337' post='2977956']
That's not a good example, I'd say... Like, all of PB was on Kaskus...
[/quote]

After a while yes, Umbrella declared as of all the rest of PB did about a week to 10 tens later.

[kwell]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338948331' post='2978019']
Umbrella has a middle tier believe it or not and they didn't cover it sufficiently.
[/quote]

hahahaha You do realize Umbrella only has 1 30k nation

[Neo Uruk]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338948331' post='2978019']
Umbrella has a middle tier believe it or not and they didn't cover it sufficiently.
[/quote]
They have like 5 guys under 60k iirc

Unless NoR's guys brought them down that hard.

[Lusitan]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338948471' post='2978022']
After a while yes, Umbrella declared as of all the rest of PB did about a week to 10 tens later.
[/quote]

People tell you you said something dumb and you insist on it?

[Sardonic]

[quote name='Sunny Side King' timestamp='1338942085' post='2977952']
Kaskus off most recent memory. Kaskus had 6 nations over 30k NS when Umb declared, in the first week there was just 3 DoW's all on the one 100k guy. Yes I know you weren't going to hit the Kaskus guys who weren't attacking GOONS or however it was phrased. You guys DoW'd on the alliance Kaskus and found a way to avoid obliterating GOONS enemy, Kaskus.
[/quote]
Seriously?

Seriously?

Please don't make that argument, it's too silly. Umbrella did all they could in that conflict.

[MCRABT]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1338941552' post='2977942']
Meh, it's a common belief in his AA. Keep in mind the people launching these criticisms have also nestled themselves in huge treaty web configurations so they can avoid real opposition for as long as possible!
[/quote]

Welcome to CN, this isn't an allegation you should be targeting at any specific group of people especially given your track record at Umbrella. Securing the interests of yours and your own is the name of the game, don't hate the player hate the game.

[Neo Uruk]

[quote name='MCRABT' timestamp='1338989935' post='2978209']
Welcome to CN, this isn't an allegation you should be targeting at any specific group of people especially given your track record at Umbrella. Securing the interests of yours and your own is the name of the game, don't hate the player hate the game.
[/quote]
His record for... siding with his bloc until TOP hit MK? Huh.

[Monster]

[quote name='MCRABT' timestamp='1338989935' post='2978209']
Welcome to CN, this isn't an allegation you should be targeting at any specific group of people especially given your track record at Umbrella. Securing the interests of yours and your own is the name of the game, don't hate the player hate the game.
[/quote]

The difference is, that the people I am targetting the allegations to are the ones who talk about wanting to fight all the time and wanting wars that are good for entertainment value and challenging. It's one thing to play politics in the sense you're suggesting, but when your(not your as in MCRABT) rhetoric consists of "let's shake things up" and the actions don't line up with the rhetoric, it's another thing altogether.

edit: If only my track record was taken into consideration more of the time. D:

Edited June 6, 2012 by Roquentin

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1338941552' post='2977942']
Meh, it's a common belief in his AA. Keep in mind the people launching these criticisms have also nestled themselves in huge treaty web configurations so they can avoid real opposition for as long as possible!
[/quote]

You mean you nestled us in huge treaty web configurations to avoid real opposition as long as possible. Most of the treaties we hold are ones which you signed.