Master Holton Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Since you're so emphatically upset about this situation of alliances using any kind of treaty to declare war, I thought for sure if we go back to the origin of this practice I would find you railing against it and the slippery slope it was bound to take us down. So, I went to ODN's DoW against 64Digits, Cult of Justitia, etc because we had "gone to war with [ODN's] allies in MK." where "gone to war with" means MK attacked all of us without declaring war on us and when we retaliated ODN ~defended~ MK. So, that's where I went, and you know what Well, it was a busy war. Maybe ol' Moral Steve just missed that one. So, I went to the other thread that established this practice that you loathe with such bile in your throat and heart, where MK and Umbrella announced that they had been attacking TPF without a DoW but it was "small scale" but that ML had retaliated and that !@#$ would not stand. And I figured that was a bigger one, you would definitely be there, but you know what Steve could not be found. And I'd bet dollars to dimes that if anyone with the time goes and looks for you railing against the concept of "coalition warfare" which "requires no treaties" in allocating resources, that they're not going to find you anywhere. Because back then it was you benefiting from the practice's invention. So tell me, Steve, what changed? The simple answer is "Steve's place in the world." But I'm a fair guy, so you tell us what changed. It is honestly disheartening to see you defending the same people that I admired you for exposing and attacking over the past four years. I suppose selectively choosing your battles on the OWF now still allows you to maintain some self-justification though. This post amused me greatly. Take a look at the charts and you will see Polaris is doing nothing to preserve NS! Oh right. Thanks for correcting me. I've been drinking tonight and thought for a moment that Polaris might be a puppetmaster in the oA coalition. It's actually just TOP who are preserving themselves while the rest of you and your allies burn for a grudge match against an Order.... Which Order would depend on which propaganda you buy into I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ilyani Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 It is honestly disheartening to see you defending the same people that I admired you for exposing and attacking over the past four years. I suppose selectively choosing your battles on the OWF now still allows you to maintain some self-justification though. Oh right. Thanks for correcting me. I've been drinking tonight and thought for a moment that Polaris might be a puppetmaster in the oA coalition. It's actually just TOP who are preserving themselves while the rest of you and your allies burn for a grudge match against an Order.... Which Order would depend on which propaganda you buy into I suppose. Are you going to rally against Pacifica when they inevitably get tired of your teenage bullshit and you leave? I mean, it's not as if your track record speaks to the contrary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse End Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Frustration when you find out that you are trying to fight a war against an Alliance that hides in Peace Mode? That's what has been coming to anyone fighting Pacifica. Besides from Sir Paul's terrible voice :blink: :wacko: :gag: :facepalm: 645 wars declared by Pacifica on Polar since Nov 3 337 wars declared by Polar on Pacifica since Nov 3 That's an increase of 33 Pacifican offensive wars and only an increase of 7 Polar offensive wars since my last post about it a day and a half ago. We've almost declared twice as many wars on you as what you've declared on us :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Thanks for coming in CCC. I almost bothered to read the comments, but I imagine it is the same as every other thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elorian Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 So... it's like a ping pong? One side unleashes GOD, the other side lets CCC at the enemy. What's next? GPA enrages and kills us all? Actually that would be kind of cool... Hmm. Okay, I digressed. Have a good fight and such. o/ NPO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 So... it's like a ping pong? One side unleashes GOD, the other side lets CCC at the enemy. What's next? GPA enrages and kills us all? Actually that would be kind of cool... Hmm. Okay, I digressed. Have a good fight and such. o/ NPO Hey now, don't start inviting the neutral menace. They will gather Pax Corvus, and WTF and roll through all of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeology Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 645 wars declared by Pacifica on Polar since Nov 3 337 wars declared by Polar on Pacifica since Nov 3 That's an increase of 33 Pacifican offensive wars and only an increase of 7 Polar offensive wars since my last post about it a day and a half ago. We've almost declared twice as many wars on you as what you've declared on us :) If polar wasn't on a few other fronts then you have a point but seeing that polar has other fronts to help with not just NPO your point really isn't there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander shepard Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 If polar wasn't on a few other fronts then you have a point but seeing that polar has other fronts to help with not just NPO your point really isn't there You would have a better point if Pacifica was not fighting a bunch alliances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeology Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 You would have a better point if Pacifica was not fighting a bunch alliances. I will agree to a point. NPO can choose any AA that is on them to focus on. So they can focus on polar if they wish or anyone on them or spread on all of the AAs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
commanderragnar Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 This post amused me greatly. Take a look at the charts and you will see Polaris is doing nothing to preserve NS! I'd write a long argument or something to prove a point here, but I won't even bother. Your post is lol worthy though. Frustration when you find out that you are trying to fight a war against an Alliance that hides in Peace Mode? That's what has been coming to anyone fighting Pacifica. Besides from Sir Paul's terrible voice :blink: :wacko: :gag: :facepalm: You should speak to your allies, it's frustrating trying to find a good target who has money still, or who hasn't given up because their nation has burned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On3H34rT Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Frustration when you find out that you are trying to fight a war against an Alliance that hides in Peace Mode? That's what has been coming to anyone fighting Pacifica. Besides from Sir Paul's terrible voice :blink: :wacko: :gag: :facepalm: This is obviously not the case considering the drop in Polar's NS. The last time I checked, Pacifica was doing more damage than taking, much of that damage being done to your alliance. If you are going to criticize me, at least make sense bro. There are plenty of nations not in PM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 (edited) I'd write a long argument or something to prove a point here, but I won't even bother. Your post is lol worthy though. You should speak to your allies, it's frustrating trying to find a good target who has money still, or who hasn't given up because their nation has burned. I think this is true for a majority of alliances at this point. Certainly not something exclusive to one side or one alliance. You also have 2k NS...what do you expect? I myself have found some terrible Pacifican and TIO targets at that range, because often times you'll find nations that are newer, or just not involved in the game. Presenting that as an example of the war while at that range is completely ignorant of reality. The best nations at that range are always the ones dropped from above. 645 wars declared by Pacifica on Polar since Nov 3 337 wars declared by Polar on Pacifica since Nov 3 That's an increase of 33 Pacifican offensive wars and only an increase of 7 Polar offensive wars since my last post about it a day and a half ago. We've almost declared twice as many wars on you as what you've declared on us :) Certainly impressive stats. However, you are ignoring some facts about that. NPO is focusing quite a bit more on us than anyone else, and is also a larger alliance. When inspecting closer the last 70 wars (Not a stat head and don't care to look further), I only saw 2 nations above 12k NS declare on us. Your lower tier is certainly an impressive war machine (In particular joesta and Chuckistan have been personal headaches). However, that is indeed the lower tier, and admittedly not hard to replace. Credit is due though for your ability to continue declaring with so many alliances on you. We are certainly enjoying this war along with you guys! Frustration when you find out that you are trying to fight a war against an Alliance that hides in Peace Mode? That's what has been coming to anyone fighting Pacifica. Besides from Sir Paul's terrible voice :blink: :wacko: :gag: :facepalm: This is obviously not the case considering the drop in Polar's NS. The last time I checked, Pacifica was doing more damage than taking, much of that damage being done to your alliance. If you are going to criticize me, at least make sense bro. There are plenty of nations not in PM. Not sure how you managed to destroy that quote, but, anyway, you are aware Polar is more positive in damage given than received, as well? Not really an argument you can make towards us. Edited January 11, 2014 by Starfox101 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the rebel Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 You should speak to your allies, it's frustrating trying to find a good target who has money still, or who hasn't given up because their nation has burned. I will come visit you if the war carries on for some more rounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Ummm, I don't think this war is going to end any time soon bro. Also, Jesus was a pacifist. Blessed are the peacemakers for they will inherit Planet Bob's precious infra. o7 GPA Thanks, and my respect to NG and to you, as well. :) So... it's like a ping pong? One side unleashes GOD, the other side lets CCC at the enemy. What's next? GPA enrages and kills us all? Actually that would be kind of cool... Hmm. Okay, I digressed. Have a good fight and such. o/ NPO The path to the dark side, rage is. Light, we love, and never to the dark side we will turn. Hey now, don't start inviting the neutral menace. They will gather Pax Corvus, and WTF and roll through all of us. We're too busy charging against the GRL, anyway. :P Seriously: save an handful of us, the GPA doesn't really remember anymore that you all are still at war. We just care to not do any tech deal with any party at war and that's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 It is honestly disheartening to see you defending the same people that I admired you for exposing and attacking over the past four years.I suppose selectively choosing your battles on the OWF now still allows you to maintain some self-justification though.If you've spent the last 4 years under the illusion that I defend (or attack) people rather than ideas, then you've spent that time fooling yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 I think this is true for a majority of alliances at this point. Certainly not something exclusive to one side or one alliance. You also have 2k NS...what do you expect? I myself have found some terrible Pacifican and TIO targets at that range, because often times you'll find nations that are newer, or just not involved in the game. Presenting that as an example of the war while at that range is completely ignorant of reality. The best nations at that range are always the ones dropped from above. Certainly impressive stats. However, you are ignoring some facts about that. NPO is focusing quite a bit more on us than anyone else, and is also a larger alliance. When inspecting closer the last 70 wars (Not a stat head and don't care to look further), I only saw 2 nations above 12k NS declare on us. Your lower tier is certainly an impressive war machine (In particular joesta and Chuckistan have been personal headaches). However, that is indeed the lower tier, and admittedly not hard to replace. Credit is due though for your ability to continue declaring with so many alliances on you. We are certainly enjoying this war along with you guys! Not sure how you managed to destroy that quote, but, anyway, you are aware Polar is more positive in damage given than received, as well? Not really an argument you can make towards us. You've always an excuse, always a sidestep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On3H34rT Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 (edited) I think this is true for a majority of alliances at this point. Certainly not something exclusive to one side or one alliance. You also have 2k NS...what do you expect? I myself have found some terrible Pacifican and TIO targets at that range, because often times you'll find nations that are newer, or just not involved in the game. Presenting that as an example of the war while at that range is completely ignorant of reality. The best nations at that range are always the ones dropped from above. Certainly impressive stats. However, you are ignoring some facts about that. NPO is focusing quite a bit more on us than anyone else, and is also a larger alliance. When inspecting closer the last 70 wars (Not a stat head and don't care to look further), I only saw 2 nations above 12k NS declare on us. Your lower tier is certainly an impressive war machine (In particular joesta and Chuckistan have been personal headaches). However, that is indeed the lower tier, and admittedly not hard to replace. Credit is due though for your ability to continue declaring with so many alliances on you. We are certainly enjoying this war along with you guys! Not sure how you managed to destroy that quote, but, anyway, you are aware Polar is more positive in damage given than received, as well? Not really an argument you can make towards us. Oh darn, I typed in the quote box. Argument invalid. Seriously, was Polar jumped on as heavily as us? I hardly call that even. I still consider the argument valid. The fact is - by sheer numbers, we should NOT be doing more damage than taking. Your coalitions inability to work as a team, stagger, etc, is the real issue here. By sheer numbers, this war should have been over at the very beginning. That's obviously not the case. Otherwise, I do respect the rest of your statements and appreciate the compliments as someone now in the lower tier. Edited January 11, 2014 by On3H34rT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 (edited) You've always an excuse, always a sidestep. Excuse, for? I deal in reality. Nobody should be criticizing NPO or NpO's warfighting ability. You should be the last person to attempt to call me out for that given the position NSO sits under your leadership. Oh darn, I typed in the quote box. Argument invalid. Seriously, was Polar jumped on as heavily as us? I hardly call that even. I still consider the argument valid. Historically speaking, a large majority of competent alliances that have been jumped have generally dealt more damage than they have received. See: Kaskus. If you are making a case that Polar is performing poorly this war, then please speak to your comrades who have been trading blows with us, or again, consult one of the numerous stat pages. Edited January 11, 2014 by Starfox101 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On3H34rT Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 (edited) Excuse, for? I deal in reality. Nobody should be criticizing NPO or NpO's warfighting ability. You should be the last person to attempt to call me out for that given the position NSO sits under your leadership. Historically speaking, a large majority of competent alliances that have been jumped have generally dealt more damage than they have received. See: Kaskus. If you are making a case that Polar is performing poorly this war, then please speak to your comrades who have been trading blows with us, or again, consult one of the numerous stat pages. It's not a matter of performing "badly." It's all relative. It's more that Pacifica is performing better. I think that's the notion people are butthurt about. I don't feel as if Polar or any other alliance is necessarily performing badly. We are all dealt different hands. I do find it unfortunate though that this type of mutual respect and discussion should have been extended even before this war started. I think once both coalitions come to respect each other and for their respective performances in this war, we'll have a prompt resolution of this matter. Edited January 11, 2014 by On3H34rT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 It's not a matter of performing "badly."It's all relative. It's more that Pacifica is performing better. I think that's the notion people are butthurt about. I do find it unfortunate though. This type of mutual respect should have been extended even before this war started. I think once both coalitions come to respect each other and for their respective performances, we'll have a prompt resolution of this matter. I agree. Mutual respect among alliances on the opposite spectrum is generally hard to find though, which is unfortunate, but we are all guilty of it at some time or another. However, I can attest that we respect Pacifica's fighting capability and you are certainly giving us an enjoyable fight. As for who is performing better, I don't think that is entirely clear cut. Different situations, and all. However we have both handed out and taken the most damage in our respective coalitions, and that speaks volumes for the standing of each of the Orders in the world after so many years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letum Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Historically speaking, a large majority of competent alliances that have been jumped have generally dealt more damage than they have received. See: Kaskus. If you are making a case that Polar is performing poorly this war, then please speak to your comrades who have been trading blows with us, or again, consult one of the numerous stat pages. Whilst competence does play a role, a large part of that has been small, very active alliances high high avg NS nations and with high avg tech.NPO is neither small, nor very nigh avg NS, nor very high in avg tech. So yes, our damage output despite being the main target here and despite the numerical disparity is saying something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Whilst competence does play a role, a large part of that has been small, very active alliances high high avg NS nations and with high avg tech. NPO is neither small, nor very nigh avg NS, nor very high in avg tech. So yes, our damage output despite being the main target here and despite the numerical disparity is saying something. I have not debated that it is an accomplishment. In fact I have agreed with you. I have only debated the parts where NPO members have attempted to claim NpO is poor at war. Neither alliance can claim the other one is doing poorly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On3H34rT Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 I think both sides should take heed to this conversation in any future peace negotiations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse End Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 (edited) Certainly impressive stats. However, you are ignoring some facts about that. NPO is focusing quite a bit more on us than anyone else, and is also a larger alliance. When inspecting closer the last 70 wars (Not a stat head and don't care to look further), I only saw 2 nations above 12k NS declare on us. Your lower tier is certainly an impressive war machine (In particular joesta and Chuckistan have been personal headaches). However, that is indeed the lower tier, and admittedly not hard to replace. Credit is due though for your ability to continue declaring with so many alliances on you. We are certainly enjoying this war along with you guys! 65% of our alliance is now below 12k NS, so it makes sense that the majority of our wars would now be in that NS range. I have not debated that it is an accomplishment. In fact I have agreed with you. I have only debated the parts where NPO members have attempted to claim NpO is poor at war. Neither alliance can claim the other one is doing poorly. I'm not sure if you're talking about me, but I didn't claim that NpO is poor at war.I simply stated some facts about how many wars each of us has declared on the other in response to a post expressing frustration about incorrectly accusing us of hiding in peace mode. If we've declared twice as many wars on you than you've declared on us, then your lack of wars on us can't be from us hiding in peace mode. If we were hiding in peace mode, we wouldn't be able to declare on you either.I actually think NpO is putting out much more of an effort than other alliances in your coalition, like TOP for example.Wars declared against anybody since Nov 1, 2013NPO - 1330NpO - 875GOONS - 412Sparta - 390MI6 - 318Invicta - 316TOP - 304Valhalla - 227The Legion - 208Commonwealth of Independent Nations - 15Wars declared against NPO since Nov 1, 2013:GOONS - 360NpO - 338Valhalla - 215MI6 - 181Invicta - 145The Legion - 116Sparta - 106TOP - 54Commonwealth of Independent Nations - 13edit: added more stats Edited January 11, 2014 by Jesse End Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 Excuse, for? I deal in reality. Nobody should be criticizing NPO or NpO's warfighting ability. You should be the last person to attempt to call me out for that given the position NSO sits under your leadership. I should have reduced my quote of you down, it was the response to Jesse I was referring. Every word out of your mouth is some sort of excuse as to why your numbers are lower. As a couple others have recently said, I'm not saying anything negative about your alliance's performance - I'm talking about what you're saying.NSO sit's just fine under my leadership, I don't know what it is you're trying to get at. 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.