Jump to content

NG-Val


Recommended Posts

The posts in this thread don't help Val's reputation or make them look to be political geniuses.

Claiming DT 'owes' Val something because of assistance years ago - which was repaid in eQ - makes Val look like worse opportunists than they are.

Will be interesting to see who they treaty next and what backstabbing they pull on them as well.

Edited by Holy Ruler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Says a member an alliance that took the entirety of the last major war off.   :popcorn:

 

 

I'm not aware that NpO actually asked for our help, TOP surely did not (no treaty).  There were also very serious concerns that we would be countered at some point. It would be interesting after the war to find out why a counter never materialized against either Valhalla or GOONS on the NPO front.

 

[spoiler]That said...I'll just say if it were my call I would have perhaps been more aggressive in another sector, and leave it at that.[/spoiler]

If only you would have defended MI6. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not aware that NpO actually asked for our help, TOP surely did not (no treaty).  There were also very serious concerns that we would be countered at some point. It would be interesting after the war to find out why a counter never materialized against either Valhalla or GOONS on the NPO front.

 

MI6 asked for your help. You refused. There was also the point early on in the war when chefjoe disrupted the battle plan by putting Valhalla's top tier into peace mode on the emptiest of pretexts and then refusing to bring them out against NPO; mind you, this was neither the first nor the last time he refused to abide by the plan. And while many other alliances in the coalition have declared war on numerous organizations from the opposition, up to and including wars entered via ghost DoWs, Valhalla has limited itself to that days-late strike against NPO.

 

You needn't bother with these rebuttals. People know more.

Edited by Crymson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, pretending that AI wasn't a successor state to Valhalla at the time and that what DT did wasn't in consideration for their relationship with Valhalla is pretty ridiculous. I seem to remember a lot of rhetoric from Valhalla leadership when they reformed about them subsequently owing a debt, actually. It was taken about as seriously as it was likely meant, fortunately.

 

A nonnuclear policy in 2009 is a completely different animal from a nonnuclear policy in 2013, and acting as if there weren't plenty of upper tier targets yall could have supported your allies on or that yall even intended to use yall's upper tier to support your allies in the first place is pretty funny at this point. Good show.

 

Keep digging though. I'm sure there's buried treasure somewhere in that pile of shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Valhalla merged to make AI then left to become Valhalla.

Valhalla = AI = Valhalla.

Good to know you see us as the true successor state of AI. and those that continue to fly the AI banner are fakes. I don't agree but hey, you might be right.

 

As for top tier crap, the whole top tier on Bob are a ****ing joke, not sure how you lot keep yourself entertained when nothing really happens with you. Be it Valhalla or not, just as bad as each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last two actually. Amusing how Valhalla has tried to do so this time around.

 

Edit: At the current rate we could fight in one major war for every five you do and still have the same damage output per nation. Should we sit the next two as well to make it fair?

 

That would make such statements only confirms how clueless you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That would make such statements only confirms how clueless you are.

 

You know you've been owned when Hal busts out the clueless card.  Best. comeback. ever. 

Edited by TBRaiders
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You and more so, your alliance, set the bar in those categories for many years, I guess you would know eh? I mean hell we had to go nuclear 30hrs after a lame mistake was made....TOP made it thru an entire war doing the same. Were far worse at such things then you. *tips hat at your achievement*

Excuse you, we went through several other wars with a non-first strike nuke policy. I'll list them: GW2, GW3, Dove War, and WoTC. You were apart of the last two and didnt make a peep about it, strange.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You know you've been owned when Hal busts out the clueless card.  Best. comeback. ever. 

I may have a spreadsheet worth of data, but Hal called me clueless.    :facepalm:

 

It's evident I'm out of my league here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

too lazy to quote everyone.

The reason we compare it to what you(TOP) did 5 years ago is because that's what everyone else compares it to.

Are we talking about the same plans were you(TOP) were slotted 90 nations on the NPO front? Then you PM half of those assigned. Keep hiding behind your strategy of your AA being at a disadvantage in the mid-lower tiers when the coalition out numbered all tiers at least 3:1.

Steve, love the double left hook. I wish you and NG the best of luck moving forward.

DT doesn't owe Val sh*t and if anything, yes, we owe DT one.

Feanor, the two wars we were apart of, which ones did we actually fight you? If we weren't fighting each other directly I could give two sh*ts of your policies.

Edited by rileyaddaff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...