The Zigur Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 I think it is premature to judge the intent of Valhalla. They have faced aggression by the God King and I do not think they are so craven as to throw themselves under his service as IRON has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthey Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Hmmm. Valhalla used to be the type of alliance to fight on both sides if they didn't commit.... Maybe I'm just getting old.... The sort of move that doesn't help anyone, least of all your allies. Time and again this time around I'm left wondering why people seem to so abhor the matured politics of war. There is little honorable in stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 The sort of move that doesn't help anyone, least of all your allies. Time and again this time around I'm left wondering why people seem to so abhor the matured politics of war. There is little honorable in stupidity. Because there's nothing more honorable than not making a coherent stand and just bowing to pressure from everyone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Agreed. This would have been great before we all ate 12 counters, haha. Now this policy is actively preventing Polar allies from providing assistance to us. Not only did they ignore us being hit, they are protecting allies hitting other MD level allies. I have to say, the timing of this looks very suspicious, and smells alot like a stab in the back. Feel free to explain yourselves but it's going to fall on deaf ears. I expected better out of you, Hal. There is little doubt that this policy, designed to look and sound neutral, is in reality the direct opposite. One of Valhalla's allies in particular, only at war with other Valhalla allies (intentionally, no doubt, to keep Valhalla on the sidelines), now has no potential for any military support whatsoever. It's just disappointing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 (edited) Because there's nothing more honorable than not making a coherent stand and just bowing to pressure from everyone! The more I yell at my allies, the more I expect them to listen to my every word. Basic common sense. DT stands firmly behind bud in this time of crisis - where is he supposed to get his casualties from now? Edited December 20, 2014 by Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taliburn Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 I haven't liked the way Valhalla has supported its allies in good many of the wars I've seen since 2009, but this makes sense and is well done. This, but we will see... How the Hell r ya SCY? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 (edited) Would you expect anything else from me, Zog? No, I suppose not. And I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that we're among the few who have picked up on what a cowardly, cynical policy this is. Great song, though. Edited December 20, 2014 by kingzog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 (edited) Ladies and gentlemen, Valhalla demonstrates perfectly why most of you are doing it wrong. When you sign paper all over the place you're setting yourself up for such a treaty conflict. When you can't enter on either side because you have allies on both ultimately you're doing a disservice to them all. Obligatory best of luck of course to all parties involved. :) Edited December 20, 2014 by SirWilliam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Ladies and gentlemen, Valhalla demonstrates perfectly why most of you are doing it wrong. When you sign paper all over the place you're setting yourself up for such a treaty conflict. When you can't enter on either side because you have allies on both ultimately you're doing a disservice to them all. Obligatory best of luck of course to all parties involved. :)Actually, they've quite readily picked a side. They're just hoping nobody noticed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trigger Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 No, I suppose not. And I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that we're among the few who have picked up on what a cowardly, cynical policy this is. Great song, though. No. Many more than you realize picked up on this. Most just turn a blind eye. Nothing like waiting until everyone is pretty much engaged before stating you will now finally defend any further declarations against allies. LOL... typical Val..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devialance Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 (edited) Your reason for not joining this war and staying on the side lines is a move of a weak coward, Three of your so called allies who you have came here to support are fighting TOP or Sparta you could easy jump in to help them, but sure as things look they are on the winning side, so lets jump to the other side, where only two of your allies are fighting, Mi6 is pretty much being taken apart by people you have treaties with, yet poor NpO is facing 12 alliances that have no treaties with, yet you do nothing. The simple truth is, you're all cowards and waited a month before you make your stand, I HOPE someone finds a reason to attack NpO or Mi6 so your poor alliance can be ripped apart. After this war your allies should look at the treaties they have with you and cancel them the second they are done laughing, I am pretty sure every other alliance will think twice before signing a treaty with you, after this very poor display you have shown. Edited December 20, 2014 by Devialance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeology Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 This, but we will see... How the Hell r ya SCY? holy crap Taliburn havent seen you in a while. and well Valhalla being Valhalla dont color me surprised well outside that those in Valhalla thinking that NG relationship eneded on a positive note if you notice where the valhalla embassy is in NG anyone could figure out how that one ended Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devialance Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Please NG you could make this so much fun, you have a treaty with IRON ODoAP i believe, then simply talk to IRON hit Mi6 that will force Valhalla to join this war, you have enough allies who still have loads of room for war ready to slap the crap out of Val for being cowards :) and who does Val really have left in order to support them, i mean who would want to support an ally that does not come to your aid ?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoskia Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 You've had a year with each foot on tectonic plates at odds. The result has been clear from the first day. Enough said about it. :smug: If everything else fails, Bi-Polar is the way to go!!! [insert big facepalm here] :facepalm: o/ Valhalla o/ NpO o/ Schattenmann o/ Hailing everything! :psyduck: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 No, I suppose not. And I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that we're among the few who have picked up on what a cowardly, cynical policy this is. Great song, though. Cowardly indeed. Find a way to make NoR get involved and set off this powderkeg. Valhalla has outright conspired to keep MHA from hitting FTW, who aggressively attacked Polar. Instead of having bloc mates jumping in to help us slug it out in the mid tiers with a pretty solid alliance, we get shafted by MD level allies. This policy directly leads to more damage to an alliance already down over 6 million NS. I mean, what more is there to the story than that? I will do all I can to ensure this treaty isn't around much longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Cowardly indeed. Find a way to make NoR get involved and set off this powderkeg. Valhalla has outright conspired to keep MHA from hitting FTW, who aggressively attacked Polar. Instead of having bloc mates jumping in to help us slug it out in the mid tiers with a pretty solid alliance, we get shafted by MD level allies. This policy directly leads to more damage to an alliance already down over 6 million NS. I mean, what more is there to the story than that? I will do all I can to ensure this treaty isn't around much longer. One alliance from each side of the conflict declares on a Valhalla ally. Problem solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longshadow Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 One alliance from each side of the conflict declares on a Valhalla ally. Problem solved. The Moldavi Doctrine is always there for everyone :ehm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KainIIIC Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Valhalla has more our allies on our side and several alliances they don't have historically good relations with attacked their oldest treaty partner, IRON. I'm not sure why you or others would expect Valhalla to forsake 4 of its allies. It would be far easier for Valhalla to throw in on either side and not look back. This is a more difficult path to take presently. 4 Allies? As if that's anything for Valhalla, in their history they've never failed to impress. If you remembered BiPolar, they jilted 8 MDP+ treaties: BTA (MDP), Exodus (MDoAP), DT (MDoAP), NoR (MDoAP), MCXA (MDoAP), Olympus (MDoaP), Molon Labe (MDoAP + Duckroll) and 1 other (SNAFU I think? Someone with the knowledge can correct me). This is quite the historically tough and firm line for Valhalla here. I applaud. o7 "Viking Warriors" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conistonslim Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Agreed. This would have been great before we all ate 12 counters, haha. Now this policy is actively preventing Polar allies from providing assistance to us. Not only did they ignore us being hit, they are protecting allies hitting other MD level allies. I have to say, the timing of this looks very suspicious, and smells alot like a stab in the back. Feel free to explain yourselves but it's going to fall on deaf ears. I expected better out of you, Hal. I'm sorry you had to learn the hard way. Valhalla in keeping with thier tradition have proven once again they are snakes in the grass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Pansy Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 4 Allies? As if that's anything for Valhalla, in their history they've never failed to impress. If you remembered BiPolar, they jilted 8 MDP+ treaties: BTA (MDP), Exodus (MDoAP), DT (MDoAP), NoR (MDoAP), MCXA (MDoAP), Olympus (MDoaP), Molon Labe (MDoAP + Duckroll) and 1 other (SNAFU I think? Someone with the knowledge can correct me). This is quite the historically tough and firm line for Valhalla here. I applaud. o7 "Viking Warriors" As much as I do like the mud slinging, and am quite happy for it to continue, you can take Olympus off that list, as we were not actually countered. Yes it was something they pre-arranged to avoid joining that coalition, but it was done with our blessing at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcrews Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Cowardly indeed. Find a way to make NoR get involved and set off this powderkeg. Valhalla has outright conspired to keep MHA from hitting FTW, who aggressively attacked Polar. Instead of having bloc mates jumping in to help us slug it out in the mid tiers with a pretty solid alliance, we get shafted by MD level allies. This policy directly leads to more damage to an alliance already down over 6 million NS. I mean, what more is there to the story than that? I will do all I can to ensure this treaty isn't around much longer. Levi has already stated he had no idea of MHA's plan so unless you have evidence to the contrary seems like it was a coincidence. Your coalition had weeks to get counters on whoever they wanted before it was posted but it didn't happen. You took your sweet time and, when one of the key borderline alliances publically declares their policy with respect to this war, you cry that it is conspiracy. The allaince who has thought of such a conservarive strategy when they should be aggressive deserves to have more damage done to them. How about you look inward and reflect on your alliance's poor strategy instead of publically throwing allies under the bus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Wait, now Polar is throwing Valhalla under the bus? That's just a bad post. Please stop making a fool of yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcrews Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Wait, now Polar is throwing Valhalla under the bus? That's just a bad post. Please stop making a fool of yourself. Making a fool of myself? You publically stated you will try to get your Valhalla treaty cancelled and accused them of conspiring against you with abolutely no proof. How about you live up to your status as an og player and hash out these problems somewhere like a damn professional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 There is little doubt that this policy, designed to look and sound neutral, is in reality the direct opposite. One of Valhalla's allies in particular, only at war with other Valhalla allies (intentionally, no doubt, to keep Valhalla on the sidelines), now has no potential for any military support whatsoever. It's just disappointing. You also realize that Val is saving that ally from getting even more NS thrown on top of it, and turning a losing war into an absolute curbstomp of that alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 I know my opinion matters little but frankly yes this policy is fairly shitty towards MI6 and Polaris but lets face it, Polaris did have ample time to have their allies counter. MI6 well that is private matters between MI6 and Valhalla. Valhalla though has attempted to do the best for all their allies. Fark and MHA should have come in long before they did. There are many alliances still waiting on the sidelines that could have come in against Polaris and MI6 though that now may reconsider this. Who knows. I keep hearing people state that they hope someone hits MI6 or Polaris to test Valhalla and some of them are coming from alliances on the sideline. If y'all want that, then push your alliance to come at us or shut up. This may not have been what I truly wanted from Val but it is better than it could have been. Val has more allies on the opposing side than on my side and could easily have oA'ed into the winning side. That would have been worse for MI6 than this proclamation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts