Omniscient1 Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) Good luck I guess. Edited June 21, 2012 by Omniscient1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brehon Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 I am not jumping on a bandwagon but I want all of you to see the truth in Bansky's post (damn you all for having me agree with him even if its just one point ) He is wrong on the 6 months as we calculated it would take approximately a year at current levels to proper harm and interrupt cash flow. Very exceptional few are willing, let alone able to conduct such an operation. Pragmatic. That is the word of the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol Navy Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1340311138' post='2992079'] I am not jumping on a bandwagon but I want all of you to see the truth in Bansky's post (damn you all for having me agree with him even if its just one point ) He is wrong on the 6 months as we calculated it would take approximately a year at current levels to proper harm and interrupt cash flow. Very exceptional few are willing, let alone able to conduct such an operation. Pragmatic. That is the word of the day. [/quote] Despite protestation from them, you can't discount the attention span factor in MK. They did indeed lose interest in DH/NPO to the point that many didn't bother fighting back despite having 1bn+ war chests. There isn't a way to take down their top tier due to UMB/TOP/NG having the balance of non-neutral ns at the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o ya baby Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1340311541' post='2992084'] Despite protestation from them, you can't discount the attention span factor in MK. They did indeed lose interest in DH/NPO to the point that many didn't bother fighting back despite having 1bn+ war chests. There isn't a way to take down their top tier due to UMB/TOP/NG having the balance of non-neutral ns at the top. [/quote] there isn't a way to take down any of MK sorry to be the bearer of good news Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enamel32 Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1340311541' post='2992084'] Despite protestation from them, you can't discount the attention span factor in MK. They did indeed lose interest in DH/NPO to the point that many didn't bother fighting back despite having 1bn+ war chests. There isn't a way to take down their top tier due to UMB/TOP/NG having the balance of non-neutral ns at the top. [/quote] VN has a good point. Least not forget, there was a reason Umbrella put all their nations in PM that were in range of FARK hits. I recon MK will be bawwing up a storm in no time. They're trying to be smug now, but a few weeks from now? I'm not sure. if MK has to keep aiding their lower tier, that's going to impact tech flow to their upper nations. I'm not sure how much negative impact that will really have on their coalition, but I'm certain it will be enough to result in plenty of bawwing to go round for everyone. At the end of the day, it may come down to which coalition wants to kill the other coalition more. I'm going to guess SF may be the winner there. At this point, it seems MK/Umb/NG has much more to lose than SF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o ya baby Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Enamel32' timestamp='1340312293' post='2992090'] VN has a good point. Least not forget, there was a reason Umbrella put all their nations in PM that were in range of FARK hits. I recon MK will be bawwing up a storm in no time. They're trying to be smug now, but a few weeks from now? I'm not sure. if MK has to keep aiding their lower tier, that's going to impact tech flow to their upper nations. I'm not sure how much negative impact that will really have on their coalition, but I'm certain it will be enough to result in plenty of bawwing to go round for everyone. At the end of the day, it may come down to which coalition wants to kill the other coalition more. I'm going to guess SF may be the winner there. At this point, it seems MK/Umb/NG has much more to lose than SF. [/quote] lol at you actually thinking MK cares enough about tech over destroying you guys' terrible aliances to ever stop aiding our own nations to import tech i guess this just goes to show you how much worse your alliances are than ours for that thought to even cross your mind and in a few weeks, your alliances will be either disbanded or piles of ash so... we'll probably be laughing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enamel32 Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) [quote name='o ya baby' timestamp='1340312557' post='2992091'] lol at you actually thinking MK cares enough about tech over destroying you guys' terrible aliances to ever stop aiding our own nations to import tech i guess this just goes to show you how much worse your alliances are than ours for that thought to even cross your mind and in a few weeks, your alliances will be either disbanded or piles of ash so... we'll probably be laughing [/quote] What? So in the event of a VietSF incident, you'd wreck your own alliance over pride? I'm sure SF and the rest of the world will make a note of that Edited June 21, 2012 by Enamel32 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o ya baby Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Enamel32' timestamp='1340312858' post='2992093'] What? So in the event of a VietSF incident, you'd wreck your own alliance over pride? I'm sure SF and the rest of the world will make a note of that [/quote] you might need to learn how to comprehend the things you read before you start responding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enamel32 Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) [quote name='o ya baby' timestamp='1340312923' post='2992095'] you might need to learn how to comprehend the things you read before you start responding [/quote] Ah....I read it again, and I'm pretty sure you said what I think you said. EDIT: either that or you have a terribly constructed sentence. Edited June 21, 2012 by Enamel32 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlogYou Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Jaiar' timestamp='1340300116' post='2991957'] blah blah blah [/quote] you were in NPL, right? lol, nice dodge of the war just like HELLAS, and just like SPARTA, and MHA. And let me guess this was coming for months, right? You leaving to spread your wings, BAWWWWW, lol!!! BURN BABY BURN! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leet Guy Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Enamel32' timestamp='1340312293' post='2992090'] VN has a good point. Least not forget, there was a reason Umbrella put all their nations in PM that were in range of FARK hits. I recon MK will be bawwing up a storm in no time. They're trying to be smug now, but a few weeks from now? I'm not sure. if MK has to keep aiding their lower tier, that's going to impact tech flow to their upper nations. I'm not sure how much negative impact that will really have on their coalition, but I'm certain it will be enough to result in plenty of bawwing to go round for everyone. At the end of the day, it may come down to which coalition wants to kill the other coalition more. I'm going to guess SF may be the winner there. At this point, it seems MK/Umb/NG has much more to lose than SF. [/quote] And who will they need to compete with in tech importation? It's not like your upper-tier will be able to import tech, they'll be slowly decaying away in peace mode. You're also forgetting the fundamental difference about DH-NPO and what seems to be the strategy of this war. NPO had to sacrifice much of their upper-tier to create the damage you seem to envision being wrecked upon our lower-tier. As it stands, those nations you need to have shed off infra are instead hippying out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o ya baby Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Enamel32' timestamp='1340313092' post='2992097'] Ah....I read it again, and I'm pretty sure you said what I think you said. EDIT: either that or you have a terribly constructed sentence. [/quote] no, i'm pretty sure you're just seeing things that you want to see so you can try to make terrible points fact of the matter is, all of your alliances are going to go into trash can.. well, they're already in the trash can... we're just going to step on you guys with our feet and make you go deeper into the trash can. i hope you guys enjoy paying reps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacingOutMan Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='o ya baby' timestamp='1340312134' post='2992088'] there isn't a way to take down any of MK sorry to be the bearer of good news [/quote] Well I mean, you are more then welcome to join our side. The side with o ya baby is generally the side of victory. Jus' sayin'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravnica Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 I'm giving as much as I'm getting in damages, mostly. The only real difference is that they have two to three times my tech. The day after the war, I'll be sure to send the tech I owe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o ya baby Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Ravnica' timestamp='1340313558' post='2992106'] I'm giving as much as I'm getting in damages, mostly. The only real difference is that they have two to three times my tech. The day after the war, I'll be sure to send the tech I owe. [/quote] you don't have to even bother with that i'm sure all of these alliances we're about to smear would LOVE to send the tech you owe people, and then some! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) You can be pragmatic for different ends. Not everyone's wanting to cling on to each and everyone for the hope that they will some day be able to abuse their position in the treaty web or so they can post declarations of support for allies that they openly wish to never have to follow through on. Some people seem to forget that. I know, crazy. Also, this is probably the most effective strategy used in any war on a coalition scale in some time. I'm enjoying the laughable idea that it won't work -- because it will -- and it's not some half-committed effort but a resolute stand by people who are tired of you and yours' !@#$%^&*. You keep speaking like one has to move on from something. I don't know why everyone is assuming that we're going to play ball. Edited June 21, 2012 by IYIyTh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDRocks Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1340311541' post='2992084'] Despite protestation from them, you can't discount the attention span factor in MK. They did indeed lose interest in DH/NPO to the point that many didn't bother fighting back despite having 1bn+ war chests. There isn't a way to take down their top tier due to UMB/TOP/NG having the balance of non-neutral ns at the top. [/quote] Great thing about that was is that those nations you speak of are neither with us or have gone into T3 mode. So good luck finding more than a couple nations who are going lose interest especially when our most [i]favorite[/i] alliances are delivered to us on platters. SF could have learned from how NPO/TPF conducted that war but are too cowardly to pull it off themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banksy Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1340311541' post='2992084'] Despite protestation from them, you can't discount the attention span factor in MK. They did indeed lose interest in DH/NPO to the point that many didn't bother fighting back despite having 1bn+ war chests. There isn't a way to take down their top tier due to UMB/TOP/NG having the balance of non-neutral ns at the top. [/quote] our enemies weren't fighting back either so there wasn't much point. the same thing would happen here, the war would scale down and we'd still be on top. @brehon, i'm always correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Ravnica' timestamp='1340313558' post='2992106'] I'm giving as much as I'm getting in damages, mostly. The only real difference is that they have two to three times my tech. The day after the war, I'll be sure to send the tech I owe. [/quote] MK Yesterday: "lol we're going to crush you" MK Today: "lol we're doing as much damage as you are" MK Tomorrow? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tamerlane Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='SpacingOutMan' timestamp='1340313520' post='2992105'] Well I mean, you are more then welcome to join our side. The side with o ya baby is generally the side of victory. Jus' sayin'. [/quote] This man understands... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o ya baby Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='James Dahl' timestamp='1340313815' post='2992112'] MK Yesterday: "lol we're going to crush you" MK Today: "lol we're doing as much damage as you are" MK Tomorrow? [/quote] thank you for your selective reading, mr dahl but the fact that he has less than 33% of the tech of his opponents and is keeping up with them in daily damages is quite pathetic for your front and makes us look amazing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tamerlane Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) [quote name='James Dahl' timestamp='1340313815' post='2992112'] MK Yesterday: "lol we're going to crush you" MK Today: "lol we're doing as much damage as you are" MK Tomorrow? [/quote] MK Tomorrow: Edited June 21, 2012 by tamerlane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o ya baby Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) [quote name='tamerlane' timestamp='1340314005' post='2992118'] MK Tomorrow: [/quote] superfriends tomorr--- wait, there isn't going to be a tomorrow Edited June 21, 2012 by o ya baby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='tamerlane' timestamp='1340314005' post='2992118'] MK Tomorrow: [img]http://www.probz.com/style_emoticons/default/Baby%20Crying.gif[/img] [/quote] I was thinking more like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enamel32 Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 [quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1340313361' post='2992103'] And who will they need to compete with in tech importation? It's not like your upper-tier will be able to import tech, they'll be slowly decaying away in peace mode. You're also forgetting the fundamental difference about DH-NPO and what seems to be the strategy of this war. NPO had to sacrifice much of their upper-tier to create the damage you seem to envision being wrecked upon our lower-tier. As it stands, those nations you need to have shed off infra are instead hippying out. [/quote] Yeah, that's entirely possible. I never said it wasn't. That doesn't mean you're coalition won't still bawwwwww, though. And I think you are just considering pixel loss, not political loss. MK and friends have a substantial amount of political capital to lose, that SF really....doesnt. That's more what I was really factoring, I guess. But now that I think about it, SF does have less pixels to lose as well. I could have sworn there was some adage about if you don't have much, you can't lose much. If there is one, I think it fits here. That scenario would certainly be interesting in a not fun kind of way. Why are we talking about this lol? Back on topic: Woo Sparta! 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.