Caustic Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 (edited) stay classy failhalla Cool story bro, and if you told the entire tale, it might have even been placed with the non-fiction section in the book store. But let's talk for a moment about the NG-Valhalla relationship, hmm? NG knew we were going to be on other side during the last war and also knew we were oAing in. At no point did you actually ever formally ask for our help. The alliance in question was LoSS. Were you actually hit by LoSS? No, you weren't. I wonder how that happened? Magic, clearly. <_< NG and Valhalla parted more or less on good terms, though it was obvious we weren't heading in the same direction FA-wise and hadn't been for a while, as in before the war. Clearly you are bitter. Can't help you there. holy fucking revisionist history... "good terms" AHHHHHHHHHHHAHAHAHAH AHAHAH oh lord thanks for the laugh you insipid backstabbing douche. Let me untwist your nonsense here. We CLEARLY requestested Vals help multiple times and were met with a total comms blackout. CJ just up and disappeared and refused to talk to any of us. All requests we then took to your embassy were left to rot where they stood. Take your good terms and shove it, you took your protector and MD ally and literally stabbed us in the back. Edited December 20, 2014 by Caustic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Take your good terms and shove it, you took your protector and MD ally and literally stabbed us in the back. Well if it makes you feel any better, they're doing the same thing to Polar this war! Guess Maroon is the only sphere where treaties matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caustic Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Well if it makes you feel any better, they're doing the same thing to Polar this war! Guess Maroon is the only sphere where treaties matter? Maroonity forever breh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spankthefrank Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 I know, I know, risking a scraped knee would be terrible for you guys, so the timing is perfect. Vague commitments really does suit you better. Keep that charm of yours going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 It would be more honest to say "we're not going to enter because of treaty ties to both sides". That's what this announcement means, and also what the one you already made earlier (when you said you would only enter against alliances not using a valid treaty chain to attack NpO) meant, but you're trying to sound as though you're protecting your allies and honouring your treaties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ying Yang Mafia Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Well if it makes you feel any better, they're doing the same thing to Polar this war! Guess Maroon is the only sphere where treaties matter? Not really, because the treaties that they have on the opposite side of the treaty web are the ones we want them to keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garion Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Where are the log dumps? People want to see them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 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. In the first week of the war I told anyone who would listen what I would have done in Polar's place. Fortunately nobody, including Polar, was paying attention. So I'll agree with the first part. A swift response early on would have changed the character of this war dramatically, and tilted the balance in Polar/SNX's favor. The ones who deserve to suffer, though, are the various alliance leaders. There have been some truly awful decisions made during this war. Reacting by doing nothing is just one of them. This pronouncement is another. (There have been others.) Hopefully the leaders will be held accountable when this war is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 In the first week of the war I told anyone who would listen what I would have done in Polar's place. Fortunately nobody, including Polar, was paying attention. So I'll agree with the first part. A swift response early on would have changed the character of this war dramatically, and tilted the balance in Polar/SNX's favor. The ones who deserve to suffer, though, are the various alliance leaders. There have been some truly awful decisions made during this war. Reacting by doing nothing is just one of them. This pronouncement is another. (There have been others.) Hopefully the leaders will be held accountable when this war is over. I know you are a skilled politician Zog, but there was never a situation that played out with a Polar victory here. We will give credit where credit is due. The writing was on the wall before the war even started, hence the tepid response which was designed to force alliances to target us 1 by 1 without CB's to draw in favorable chains. It was thrown into whack by the dogpile on SNX which drew us in because we were not going to let SNX be destroyed with no response. Unfortunately, the plan to wait failed, but hindsight is 20/20, and we are having fun, if nothing else. 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. Yes, I will ask for it to be canceled. In fact, I already have. What is there to hash out? I never understood why people in CN give people so many chances. If an ally fails you in your time of need, to me, there is nothing to save. Move on, and find new friends. Valhalla outright prevented MHA from hitting you guys, so please spare me any incredibly biased banter on your part. Whether or not Valhalla knew this was coming (How could they not? It was pretty widespread that MHA and Fark were entering a week ago), it still is directly hurting us, as our alliances are well covered and the chains are complete, while the alliances on your side were not. Do you see what I'm getting at here? Valhalla watched Polar get hit by 12 alliances, but did nothing. Now Valhalla wants to be a hero and defend their allies. It's just way too little, way too late, and the complete wrong direction to go here. A full declaration of neutrality was their best choice. With Valhalla's history, I'm inclined to believe what is on the surface presented to me. Would you be saying the same were you in our situation, or are you sitting here saying this because this policy protected you directly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 I know you are a skilled politician Zog, but there was never a situation that played out with a Polar victory here. We will give credit where credit is due. The writing was on the wall before the war even started, hence the tepid response which was designed to force alliances to target us 1 by 1 without CB's to draw in favorable chains. It was thrown into whack by the dogpile on SNX which drew us in because we were not going to let SNX be destroyed with no response. Unfortunately, the plan to wait failed, but hindsight is 20/20, and we are having fun, if nothing else. Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. What I suggested was that an overwhelming response would have raised the cost of war considerably, quite possibly shortening it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. What I suggested was that an overwhelming response would have raised the cost of war considerably, quite possibly shortening it. I agree, actually. I understand the coalition heads came up with their plans, but I would have preferred immediate activation, as well. Not sure if it would shorten anything though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Ive notice a common theme of trying to turn alliance members against alliance government. Good luck with that guys, everyone knows who the real bad guy is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Ive notice a common theme of trying to turn alliance members against alliance government. Good luck with that guys, everyone knows who the real bad guy is. Don't look too far into it. It's just dialogue and everyone has their own opinions. Nobody is infallible and it's easy to say what you would do when the decision wasn't yours, and the repercussions aren't yours. Run along now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renegade4box Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Let's see them keep this policy after DBDC hits MI6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Don't look too far into it. It's just dialogue and everyone has their own opinions. Nobody is infallible and it's easy to say what you would do when the decision wasn't yours, and the repercussions aren't yours. Run along now. If you think they do not have talking points you are mistaken, Starfox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 If you think they do not have talking points you are mistaken, Starfox. You are the bad guy. Your actions have cost many nations to lose infrastructure. If the world was crafted in your eyes, it would amount to 6 million for 300 tech deals, dbdc on a permanent ZI list, readings on owf that rival that of north Koreas and an unholy amount of communist, socialist and dictatorship rule. Karl Marx looks like a saint compared to you. Have you ever stopped and wondered had you not of insulted the free world with tyranny thoughts that maybe your friends would not be burning? Your revolutionary power grab has cost more pixels than what the world and free markets would ever dream of suffering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 You are the bad guy. Your actions have cost many nations to lose infrastructure. If the world was crafted in your eyes, it would amount to 6 million for 300 tech deals, dbdc on a permanent ZI list, readings on owf that rival that of north Koreas and an unholy amount of communist, socialist and dictatorship rule. Karl Marx looks like a saint compared to you. Have you ever stopped and wondered had you not of insulted the free world with tyranny thoughts that maybe your friends would not be burning? Your revolutionary power grab has cost more pixels than what the world and free markets would ever dream of suffering. Finally, someone cries out for the poor infras! But I have heard of no nation ruler named Karl Marx, nor did I find socialism or communism in Vladimirs old tomes. I am alas at a loss for these strange names you give me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 (edited) Also, it would be more like 9 million for 100 tech. More wealth should go to producer nations. Edited December 20, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercoolyellow Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Have you ever stopped and wondered had you not of insulted the free world with tyranny thoughts that maybe your friends would not be burning? Your revolutionary power grab has cost more pixels than what the world and free markets would ever dream of suffering. You really think this war is about Tywin? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 He certainly never endeared himself to anybody who may have taken pity on the alliances he joined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Warriors do not seek pity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longshadow Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Warriors do not seek pity. Yet you garner it in the droves because your mouth is filled with more crap than your butt. Maybe they are one and the same in your case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 You really think this war is about Tywin? lol of course its not, but it does serve as icing on the cake, and polar's stance of jeopardizing tech deals to dbdc shows that they do not care about free markets. after the conflict, I predict polar to go down the same road as non grata. A has-been who declares just for the face time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 You can't make Polar into a bad guy when DBDC has been raiding and attacking Polaris and many others for over a year. Restricting their access to the tech market is an appropriate and measured response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renegade4box Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 You can't make Polar into a bad guy when DBDC has been raiding and attacking Polaris and many others for over a year. Restricting their access to the tech market is an appropriate and measured response. What? These allegations are ridiculous. DBDC has been friendly and cordial with Polar in all of our interactions for the past year and more. We've merely engaged in a few tech and land deals with them, it's not really our fault that Polar suddenly backpedaled about the deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts