Taget Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 I'm dissapointed you're not standing by GATO. Not that I still don't love you guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pd73bassman Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 So you guys couldn't get your alliance in gear fast enough to join the big blanket DOW from the beginning? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 I am seriously cracking up at all the outrage from all these people who happily supported b.s like "For DAVE!!" and the Pre-Empts of the past when we'd have to fight people from alliances who never declared war on us, but it was okay because you were in a coalition together. What makes anything this coalition is doing any less legit than Umbrella declaring they were just going to attack the upper tiers of every alliance for the coalition? You people supported that, you supported Dave, you've supported GOONS here taking reps every time someone fires a shot at them, you support Umbrella starting this with AI. You've pissed off and screwed over nearly all of Bob the past 4 years. And all you've spoken of during those 4 years to any who complained was gems like 'Cry more" "we love tears" "bring it" "do something about it" etc. Now something is being done. Live with the world you created and the hatred you seemed to relish when you had the might of arms to stomp people out. You all said you looked forward to the day when people came to try and topple you. Well it's here, you should be happy. I don't care what tactics and strategies you want to use. Be honest about what you are doing. That's all I would expect. "In defense of TIO." is not honest. oA via AI>NPO>TIO>LoSS is honest. It's simple. We called our pre-empt of MHA a pre-empt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 EvU was a direct treaty partner man. Don't think AI is a direct treaty partner of LoSS.... It's an excuse to bandwagon without a treaty. Some alliances fall for that bullshit as evidenced here. Some actually follow their treaties like a decent alliance should. See NG. Never thought I'd see the day I'd think higher of NG than LoSS but hey if it's what LoSS wants I can dig it. Remember when you bandwagoned on other side instead of coming to help NSO. Another alliance that only honors its treaties on the "winning side". Read up the rich history of your own alliance. You all keep saying LoSS isnt being straight up, but you havent been either. This has nothing to do with bandwagoning, you're only pissed they arent on your side. In the past you've accepted 'bandwagoners' with open arms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deth2munkies Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 So you guys couldn't get your alliance in gear fast enough to join the big blanket DOW from the beginning? More likely a second wave sort of thing. I find it funny that the people are basically bitching about a technicality. From what I can tell of the treaty web, they're coming in on the same side as they would have normally on a valid target in the grand scheme of things. All you're doing is bitching about the technicalities. Have fun old buddies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 (edited) Remember when you bandwagoned on other side instead of coming to help NSO. Read up the rich history of your own alliance. You all keep saying LoSS isnt being straight up, but you havent been either. This has nothing to do with bandwagoning, you're only pissed they arent on your side. In the past you've accepted 'bandwagoners' with open arms. No. No we always pretty much called what we did for what it was. We didn't have to hide a 3 ties out oA as "in defense" of anyone. Again LoSS told us they weren't going to help us on this side. I was fine with that. To see them act in this fashion is sad to me. Edited January 27, 2013 by magicninja Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol Navy Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 This is funny coming from a hegemony alliance. Seriously? You really trotted out that gem? Welcome to 2008....you're about 5 years late. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverlordShinnra Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 (edited) Remember when you bandwagoned on other side instead of coming to help NSO. Read up the rich history of your own alliance. You all keep saying LoSS isnt being straight up, but you havent been either. This has nothing to do with bandwagoning, you're only pissed they arent on your side. In the past you've accepted 'bandwagoners' with open arms. This has everything to do with bandwagoning. They chose to oA on an oA on an oA meaning neither their ally nor their allies ally was being attacked. Then they waited until Equilibrium had overwhelming numbers to attack. How big does the advantage have to be and how far away must the treaty chain be until you can call it bandwagoning? Edited January 27, 2013 by OverlordShinnra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 That is what I liked about you. I also thought you had the decency to not bandwagon in like this. I figured you would actually wait for a direct ally to ACTUALLY be hit and not be taken with the ridiculous bullshit policy of hit one hit all. Even if you had just cited the treaty chains you used to oA in on GOONS I would have been fine with that. We oA via AI>NPO>TIO>LoSS could have been your DoW and I would have been completely fine with it. To bastardize your treaty ties to the effect you have by claiming "defense" of TIO is ugly, dishonorable, and not something I thought would come out of you. I feel dirty for agreeing with Magicninja, cuz we literally never agree on anything. But seriously? Defense of TIO? They literally have 2 defensive wars.. against the one alliance they actually declared on. It is great that you all wanna buy into these blanket defenses. I look forward to using it in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 No. No we always pretty much called what we did for what it was. We didn't have to hide a 3 ties out oA as "in defense" of anyone. Again LoSS told us they weren't going to help us on this side. I was fine with that. To see them act in this fashion is sad to me. They arent helping you, doing what they said they would. And you've been sad for the past few days anyway :P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amossio Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 Seriously? You really trotted out that gem? Welcome to 2008....you're about 5 years late. still the same old shits piled together with the same intentions, same shit different colour, welcome back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverlordShinnra Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 Seriously? You really trotted out that gem? Welcome to 2008....you're about 5 years late. TPF have short memories apparently. Not surprising since they also forgot that an MDoaP usually trumps an ODoaP. Forgetful alliance apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 (edited) This has everything to do with bandwagoning. They chose to oA on an oA on an oA meaning neither their ally nor their allies ally was being attacked. Then they waited until Q had overwhelming numbers to attack. How big does the advantage have to be and how far away must the treaty chain be until you can call it bandwagoning? Q died years ago, not sure what you're referring to. Its funny you whine about people creating web of semantics when you're doing that yourself, Magicninja, I don't see you criticizing him. os, the laws of bandwagoning state that if your alliance has been famous for bandwagoning, you cant call others out. Hope that answers your questions about bandwagoning. Edited January 27, 2013 by shahenshah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverlordShinnra Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 Q died years ago, not sure what you're referring to. Meant Equilibrium obv. Same alliances regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Co God Ben Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 (edited) At any rate I've lost my respect for LoSS. At least we did one thing right. Literally bitching about the wording of our DoW. I somehow feel that there's something else bothering you. Also lol'd at hegemony references, given the other side's recent history. Edited January 27, 2013 by Co God Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 They arent helping you, doing what they said they would. And you've been sad for the past few days anyway :P. Actually, I've been pretty happy. Yes I was fine with the not helping part...disgusted with calling this declaration "in defense" of TIO when its oA via AI>NPO>TIO>LoSS is what I am. What is the point of trying to mask it as defense when everyone knows what it really is? I'd like to know what benefit you guys or they thought they would get out of it.....I don't see one spot of trouble with the truth. I've always considered LoSS an honorable and respectable ally and never thought they would do such a thing so I guess that compounds my disgust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 Q died years ago, not sure what you're referring to. Its funny you whine about people creating web of semantics when you're doing that yourself, Magicninja, I don't see you criticizing him. os, the laws of bandwagoning state that if your alliance has been famous for bandwagoning, you cant call others out. Hope that answers your questions about bandwagoning. New Q same as the old Q. If it makes you feel better I'll call this one...E-Q. I don't remember bandwagoning while in GATO. I'm pretty sure we have to have a treaty, by our charter, to do anything except defend ourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 (edited) Actually, I've been pretty happy. Yes I was fine with the not helping part...disgusted with calling this declaration "in defense" of TIO when its oA via AI>NPO>TIO>LoSS is what I am. What is the point of trying to mask it as defense when everyone knows what it really is? I'd like to know what benefit you guys or they thought they would get out of it.....I don't see one spot of trouble with the truth. I've always considered LoSS an honorable and respectable ally and never thought they would do such a thing so I guess that compounds my disgust. They'll get the same benefits ODN got when MK hit CoJ without a DoW and when CoJ hit back, ODN jumped in calling it 'defense'. You didnt seem to mind back then, so I'm just totally shocked and horrified that it saddens you now. Also, we dont have TOP, so it isnt a Q and we dont have all the same set of enablers like ODN, Umbrella etc either :/. I'll take EQ. Edited January 27, 2013 by shahenshah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 They'll get the same benefits ODN got when MK hit CoJ without a DoW and when CoJ hit back, ODN jumped in calling it 'defense'. You didnt seem to mind back then, so I'm just totally shocked and horrified that it saddens you now. I seriously don't know what you are talking about. So, that's probably the reason I didn't mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 I seriously don't know what you are talking about. So, that's probably the reason I didn't mind. Well the point was we didnt see you criticizing your blockmates when they were going around playing word games. If you're not aware of the above episode, then well, you could find out more about it from somewhere. Also, I'm glad you are happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverlordShinnra Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 Well the point was we didnt see you criticizing your blockmates when they were going around playing word games. If you're not aware of the above episode, then well, you could find out more about it from somewhere. Also, I'm glad you are happy. I'm sure you were there crying about it though. :smug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol Navy Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 I seriously don't know what you are talking about. So, that's probably the reason I didn't mind. See DH/NPO when MK attacked CoJ without any kind of DoW, then when CoJ fought back, ODN DoW'd CoJ "in defense" of MK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 Well the point was we didnt see you criticizing your blockmates when they were going around playing word games. If you're not aware of the above episode, then well, you could find out more about it from somewhere. Also, I'm glad you are happy. Don't have to find out. If they did then poo on them too. My opinions never have been exclusive to one side and quite obviously not even my allies are immune. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 They'll get the same benefits ODN got when MK hit CoJ without a DoW and when CoJ hit back, ODN jumped in calling it 'defense'. You didnt seem to mind back then, so I'm just totally shocked and horrified that it saddens you now. Also, we dont have TOP, so it isnt a Q and we dont have all the same set of enablers like ODN, Umbrella etc either :/. I'll take EQ. You do have Grämlins though ... Also ODN had treaties to jump in on that conflict. Just ... be honest with that your doing. Treaty chain it. Being destroyed is just part of the cycle. Heres to war :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 See DH/NPO when MK attacked CoJ without any kind of DoW, then when CoJ fought back, ODN DoW'd CoJ "in defense" of MK. I guess. I don't remember. What side was GATO on in that war anyway? Were we tied to ODN then...I think so.........guess I'd have to see the DoW if I posted and what I posted. 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.