flak attack Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 You don't actually believe this do you? o_O I think he legitimately believes that they have a chance against us in a war. Honestly, I think I'm offended that our reputation has fallen this far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cager Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 With the rogues only having a 47 member strong alliance this war is all but over. Together with TDO we will be able to strike down their lower and mid tiers. It is the high tiers that will be the actual challenge. TDO can barely coordinate among themselves so what hope do you have?. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevolutionaryRebel Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 When TE/TDO declares at least one war per nation, I'll believe that they can 'win'. Just one war. Please. Okay, maybe 1 declaration between two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeb the Wise Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 I thought they were neutral, but if they don't care then that certainly doesn't help them with responding. Yeah! wtf WTF? wtf aren't you doing something?! :v: I like the idea of neutrals defending neutrality beyound just their alliance, to all nuetrals in general. Ya can't be "non-neutral" defending neutrality right? What do you think Vulkland? Let's get started on that secret Nuetral MD Bloc huh? Have your people call my people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partymaster Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 Yeah! wtf WTF? wtf aren't you doing something?! :v: I like the idea of neutrals defending neutrality beyound just their alliance, to all nuetrals in general. Ya can't be "non-neutral" defending neutrality right? What do you think Vulkland? Let's get started on that secret Nuetral MD Bloc huh? Have your people call my people. That would be interesting to see. It was Neutrality, with the MDP, in the war room! :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louis XVI Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 This is pretty pathetic. You have twice as many wars as nations, 2/3 of your nations are in anarchy, and you think you have a chance? lmao Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorSoul Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 (edited) I find it remarkable that people are criticizing TDO for showing some pride. Their options are either: a) Fight back with confidence, and get mocked by the pathetic peanut gallery here to watch their demise or, b) Roll over and take it, and get mocked by the pathetic peanut gallery here to watch their demise. The sheer stupidity of those posting that criticize TDO for standing up for their own is beyond me. Here's to TDO at least fighting, and a resounding "go to hell" to everyone who mocks them for it. Edited September 20, 2013 by WarriorSoul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunzzz Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 Nobody is criticizing TDO for showing some kind of action against MQ. it is just the fact that they think they have a chance fighting MQ. MQ has agressive origins, they know how to war, TDO, not so much. I mean TDO saying stuff like, "It sure would be sad to be known as the alliance that got outlasted and beaten by a newly blooded neutral. Then again rogue nations deserve no better," thats borderline cocky for an alliance that hardly knows war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcrews Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 This is so ominous. I love it. I don't think GPA would consider TDO "their own". I don't even know if the two alliances have any correspondence. It's just a common philosophy of sorts. TOP and GATO are both democratic but you don't see them constantly rushing to each other's aid whenever a threat looms. That isn't an adequate comparison and you know it. Pls try again, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 I find it remarkable that people are criticizing TDO for showing some pride. Their options are either: a) Fight back with confidence, and get mocked by the pathetic peanut gallery here to watch their demise or, b) Roll over and take it, and get mocked by the pathetic peanut gallery here to watch their demise. The sheer stupidity of those posting that criticize TDO for standing up for their own is beyond me. Here's to TDO at least fighting, and a resounding "go to hell" to everyone who mocks them for it.The problem with that is, TDO aren't just fighting. They're coming off as arrogant while getting their asses kicked. Isn't that what you were mocking Competence about a few months ago? (Maybe not you personally, apologies if not) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 (edited) I find it remarkable that people are criticizing TDO for showing some pride. Their options are either: a) Fight back with confidence, and get mocked by the pathetic peanut gallery here to watch their demise or, b) Roll over and take it, and get mocked by the pathetic peanut gallery here to watch their demise. The sheer stupidity of those posting that criticize TDO for standing up for their own is beyond me. Here's to TDO at least fighting, and a resounding "go to hell" to everyone who mocks them for it. It's not about that at all. Had TDO put up a decent counterblitz, or had any kind of FA/economic/etc. presence over the last half decade, no one would be calling them out. Where the issue lies is in all this chest-thumping backed by what doesn't look like much of a military performance. That isn't an adequate comparison and you know it. Pls try again, No comparison then. Just straight shit. GPA's foreign affairs strategy consists of not getting entangled in the treaty web. So does TDO's. As far as I know, and I say this barely having an idea of who TDO are, that's just about where the similarities end. I'm not sure that's enough to draw a parallel between those two alliances. Beyond the fact that there are different approaches to neutrality, there are different ways to run IA, economics and the whole gamut. jerdge knows a lot more so I'll defer to him but I imagine there are almost* as many ways to run a neutral as a non-neutral. *I say "almost" because I imagine it's the same except for not being able to decide which kinds of treaties to sign. Edited September 20, 2013 by Max Power Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcrews Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 It's not about that at all. Had TDO put up a decent counterblitz, or had any kind of FA/economic/etc. presence over the last half decade, no one would be calling them out. Where the issue lies is in all this chest-thumping backed by what doesn't look like much of a military performance. No comparison then. Just straight shit. GPA's foreign affairs strategy consists of not getting entangled in the treaty web. So does TDO's. As far as I know, and I say this barely having an idea of who TDO are, that's just about where the similarities end. I'm not sure that's enough to draw a parallel between those two alliances. Beyond the fact that there are different approaches to neutrality, there are different ways to run IA, economics and the whole gamut. jerdge knows a lot more so I'll defer to him but I imagine there are almost* as many ways to run a neutral as a non-neutral. *I say "almost" because I imagine it's the same except for not being able to decide which kinds of treaties to sign. If you can't see why, as a neutral, standing by and letting your fellow neutral be destroyed for existing is a raw deal then there really is no point in replying to you any further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacific Fleet Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 I am grateful for your tolerance, hopefully you don't mind if I try to address your points. The main problem with your approach is that your way to defend neutrality requires that neutrality gets abandoned in the first place. Secondarily, neutrals don't need to spread their "beliefs". As far as I know no neutral actively tries to "convert" any other alliance to neutrality, and I can't imagine why any neutral would want to do so. At the GPA we're interested in the rest of this world, and we're very happy to see that others can live as they please. It's called "respect". If that means that we are not safe, so be it. We don't want to trade our values for our safety. I get it and you have every right to do as you please. I just personally feel that neutrality is a very faulty philosophy, especially in a game where alliances are always warring and a lot of people seem to want to take a swing at you guys (neutrals) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacific Fleet Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 Also, hello Rey. How is your PR department doing? I wish I was a popular as you :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 (edited) Also, hello Rey. How is your PR department doing? I wish I was a popular as you :PI'm holding my own, I suppose. You can point the finger at me if you must, but think about which group is usually at the center of issues such as the one happening. Edited September 20, 2013 by Neo Uruk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeroofTime55 Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 If you can't see why, as a neutral, standing by and letting your fellow neutral be destroyed for existing is a raw deal then there really is no point in replying to you any further. The whole point of being neutral is that you aren't "fellows" with anyone. No neutral should defend TDO, per se. But neutrals do have a concurrent interest in defending their own borders from the potential of a future assault from MQ, given that MQ has now established that such assaults are probable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omniscient1 Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 One thing I do find interesting is that TDO was hit and not GPA. Of course we all know why, but I thought MQ might have a little more fun going there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 GPA are actually interesting people, though. I've liked nearly every interaction I've had with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vellocet Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 Fight for your lives. Fight as if it were your last... Might as well be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchboy00 Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 With the rogues only having a 47 member strong alliance this war is all but over. Together with TDO we will be able to strike down their lower and mid tiers. It is the high tiers that will be the actual challenge. Thus why they attacked you and not WTF,. WTF could handle their high tiers, TDO cannot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurnipCruncher Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 Surely when TDO use the multi-multi-billions they have hoarded to buy tech this is all but over right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londo Mollari Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 Surely when TDO use the multi-multi-billions they have hoarded to buy tech this is all but over right? TDO is broke, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurnipCruncher Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 TDO is broke, lol. Delicious isn't it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londo Mollari Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 Delicious isn't it. The only drink sweeter than the tears of the infidel is the blood of the infidel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 I get it and you have every right to do as you please. I just personally feel that neutrality is a very faulty philosophy, especially in a game where alliances are always warring and a lot of people seem to want to take a swing at you guys (neutrals)Not wanting to give up our values and policies for safety would already be enough for me, but there's also the fact that aligned alliances aren't immune from being targeted either.As far as safety is involved, TBH, I think that neutrals and aligned that take risks (like NpO or NG, just to mention the first two off the top of my head) aren't that far away. The same goes for the need/opportunity to be diplomatically aware and active.Of course, the differences in other aspects are tremendous. 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.