This Week in the Network

[gatorback05]

Praise CT

[Caliph]

I encourage all WTF members to ignore this caliph guy. He is a nobody, just a DBDC meat shield slave lap dog. Actually i will block him if that function exists.

 

Duderonomy, NG had no business attacking a legit WTF nation. Any nation from any AA who attacks WTF will be nuked indefinitely.

 

Personally i think some mistake has been made and would let Stewie/ NG pull out because i would like to concentrate on hitting DBDC no one else.

 

All hail CT, champion of all that is right and just in the world.  Now.  Please ignore his past, everything that he did in the past is to be ignored. 

[Unknown Smurf]

I've never seen a war where individual nations that wanted to surrender weren't allowed to.  Or at least not allowed to without wrecking and destroying themselves with crazy reps and terms.
 
I've never seen a war where people who mess up aren't given reasonable outs.  A couple of rounds of war say and then peace. A trip to ZI and then they move on.  A publicly posted surrender on the owf then they sit on a pow AA for the duraiton.  WTF seems to find these things not acceptable.  They need huge tech repreations and etenral war.  Again on individual nations, not the AA they have a beef with.

Do you forget Karma? High (tech) reps on individual high NS nations in NPO that were not allowed to surrender?

As far as im concerned, WTF are free to war with DBDC till they surrender, DBDC surrenders, or one of them disbands.  But I don't think they are poor victims.

If you believe this then you should not protect DBDC nations that are looking for a safe haven to rebuild. If you/noob cake actually mean what you have been saying then I suggest this:

1) Noob Cake fully demilitarizes and joins the WTF PoW AA.
2) If noob cake buys a single nuke/whatever then WTF is free to attack him.


Ohh and for the record im not threatening WTF DBDC/ODN.  They are free to ignore my feelings on them being asses.  I'll just sit on the sidelines and point out their hypocricy.

Since when is "need to remove their ability to fight/be competent" accepted as a justifcation for harsh reps?
 
Seriously ridiculous.  If I had suggested last war that Polar needed to do xyz to remove their ability to fight me in the future can you imagine the outrage?

Uhh since Karma. DH-NPO.

As for point two, there's been plenty of wars against polarsphere/xx/etc aimed at just keeping them in line.

If DBDC decided they needed to remove WTF's threat and demand they destroy THEIR nations... are you ok with that too?  Somehow I doubt it if you are being honest.

Well for 1 those terms weren't serious. Don't worry you don't have to bake cupcakes and 2 DBDC can refuse those terms and so can WTF. I don't see how it effects ODN.
 
 
 
What you are REALLY saying OsRavan, is "I don't like DBDC, so its OK [for them] to do to them what I would not be ok with any other alliance doing to me."

 
Nobody is 100% a dick.  But you do have 1 point, acting rude is entirely subjective.  As is the case of most politics, if someone wants to spin something they can.  Look at Mogar and the other anti DBDC squad, they eat up anything that can be used to justify their anti DBDC views even if it behavior they have spoken out against in the past, but it is all ok just because it is against DBDC.
 
Use your pixels in whatever way you deem fit, you are your own AA and can make those decisions for yourself.  But all decisions have consequences.  DBDC's raids have consequences, as does dragging out a war that is all but won by the other side.  There comes a point when a defiant act against an agressor becomes a pathetic excuse to continue a conflict that you have been soundly defeated in.  While you could continue the fight for months, is that really what you want to do?  Lay low for 7 years, never fight a war, then fight a long multi month war?  Multi month wars are boring.  If you really want to make up for missing every war by a marathon war now, go for it, but that decision could have consequences too.

DBDC should've known the consequences when they hit WTF and have to accept them.. Pax showed them neutrals will not just roll over and they said that is what they want.

If WTF is "soundly defeated" why do you demand they surrender? WTF must still be doing damage, therefore should still be allowed to fight if they so choose.

DBDC's still got a solid hold of the top 10, they are probably just mad that there isn't much land left in WTF and they want their allies to take a share of the nukes now that its no longer profitable.



Also beware WTF! 1000 nations of the Persian ODN empire swarm upon you.

[Rhizoctonia]

Its funny that some of you question whether i am a rogue or not when your pathetic meat shields from allied aa's come and go freely without any questions. Hypocrites. I suggest you drop the subject until DBDC stop begging allies for other nations to effectively become rogues themselves.

 

P.S i am shocked that stewie was hurt about the WTF declaration. Stewie i held you higher then that tbh. HMM whatever

 

 

Woah now, I think you out of most should watch calling people "hypocrites."  Let's not forget you for a long time did the very thing you're defending against now to other alliances without any care to their well being.  As I've pointed out before in another of these umpteen threads, you only gave two shits once DBDC raided an alliance you cared about, before that, you had no compassion or care about the other alliances you raided while wearing the DBDC.  So you might want to quit calling people hypocrites so loosely, you're one the biggest with you now suddenly condemning DBDC for raiding innocent alliances when you participated in such actions time and time before with them.  You didn't just have some change of heart because you realized what you use to participate is bad, you did because it affected an alliance you cared about, and had it not, you'd likely still be raiding someone else.  I've yet to see any repayments or reparations to the individuals you did this too, so maybe you should pipe down with your moral high ground stance.  

 

 

Other then that, everyone carry on, I enjoy reading the same things I've read in the other 10 topics.  

[ChairmanHal]

I don't believe that is the case. Depends on your definition of "same" I suppose.

I was alerted on the 22nd.

And he wasn't actually with us then.

This is all a matter of record in-game. (the last on our forum)

 

_______________________ EDIT ____________________________

 

I'll stop replying to this BS now. What I have to say would just get me banned.

 

Carnivore does many things, it doesn't lie.

[christian trojans]

Ohh and for the record im not threatening WTF DBDC/ODN.  They are free to ignore my feelings on them being asses.  I'll just sit on the sidelines and point out their hypocricy.
 

 

I LOL'd at this :)

[christian trojans]

Rhizoctonia, its rather sad that you have a picture of an Audi tt as your signature like its a dream car that you cant afford. My first car was a audi tt. Meh

[HeroofTime55]

 

Hardly a scoop, but some of us are simply too lazy to be searching high and low for such  blatant grandstanding by the ODN.  Schatt simply does the world a favour by bringing ODN's chest thumping to a more accessible arena where we can all delight in true diplomacy in action.

That, and it's cleaner than having to read it through RIA's goofball language filter.  

Thanks for reposting the hilarity that is the ODN, Schatt.

[christian trojans]

I think this is great.

 

The whole of CN can see how DBDC deflect wars, attention and diplomacy to other lap dog aa's. They seem to be unable to handle anything their selves. DBDC are basically happy to throw their allies under the bus.

 

The whole world can also see how DBDC allies act so immorally to please DBDC.

 

I think these are enormous warning signs. Everyone involved in this for DBDC has ruined their reputation. One of my missions is just to make things visible for everyone to see. DBDC and its slave aa's will be under very close scrutiny from now on. From its tech income to its slimy war tactics DBDC will be watched.

Edited March 10, 2015 by christian trojans

[Rhizoctonia]

Rhizoctonia, its rather sad that you have a picture of an Audi tt as your signature like its a dream car that you cant afford. My first car was a audi tt. Meh

 

 

Lol?  Man you're big man with that type of insult.  You have no actual rebuttal to the truth I delivered so you resort to OOC attacks.  Congrats Bro.  

 

[OOC]But to your remark, I have one, and I quite enjoy driving it.  I'm glad you could to, also glad you feel the need to attack someone on basis of wealth[/OOC]

[Caliph]

Do you forget Karma? High (tech) reps on individual high NS nations in NPO that were not allowed to surrender?


If you believe this then you should not protect DBDC nations that are looking for a safe haven to rebuild. If you/noob cake actually mean what you have been saying then I suggest this:

1) Noob Cake fully demilitarizes and joins the WTF PoW AA.
2) If noob cake buys a single nuke/whatever then WTF is free to attack him.


Ohh and for the record im not threatening WTF DBDC/ODN.  They are free to ignore my feelings on them being asses.  I'll just sit on the sidelines and point out their hypocricy.


Uhh since Karma. DH-NPO.

As for point two, there's been plenty of wars against polarsphere/xx/etc aimed at just keeping them in line.


Well for 1 those terms weren't serious. Don't worry you don't have to bake cupcakes and 2 DBDC can refuse those terms and so can WTF. I don't see how it effects ODN.
 
 
 
What you are REALLY saying OsRavan, is "I don't like DBDC, so its OK [for them] to do to them what I would not be ok with any other alliance doing to me."


DBDC should've known the consequences when they hit WTF and have to accept them.. Pax showed them neutrals will not just roll over and they said that is what they want.

If WTF is "soundly defeated" why do you demand they surrender? WTF must still be doing damage, therefore should still be allowed to fight if they so choose.

DBDC's still got a solid hold of the top 10, they are probably just mad that there isn't much land left in WTF and they want their allies to take a share of the nukes now that its no longer profitable.



Also beware WTF! 1000 nations of the Persian ODN empire swarm upon you.

 

What makes you think DBDC didn't take into account WTF's options?

 

WTF has taken significant damage and simply are not dishing out significant damage in return.  The damage totals are all the more lopsided.  By all means fight as long as you want but there comes a point when you just are not being effective.

 

[Stewie]

You have to realise. I don't care about my nation.

If WTF want to throw more nations at me, please feel free.


CASUALTIES FOR THE CASUALTY GOD!!!

[Caliph]

You have to realise. I don't care about my nation.

If WTF want to throw more nations at me, please feel free.


CASUALTIES FOR THE CASUALTY GOD!!!

 

Casaulties are the one stat that you never lose.

[Keelah]

OOC discussions such as the type of car someone might or might not have needs to stop or go to pm.

[christian trojans]

You have to realise. I don't care about my nation.

If WTF want to throw more nations at me, please feel free.


CASUALTIES FOR THE CASUALTY GOD!!!

 

Bro you are not even top 5 in casualties.

 

And no WTF would be very happy to fight just DBDC but you have yourself decided to slave yourself out to DBDC.

Edited March 10, 2015 by christian trojans

[christian trojans]

OOC discussions such as the type of car someone might or might not have needs to stop or go to pm.

 

Noted. Thanks

[HeroofTime55]

 

What makes you think DBDC didn't take into account WTF's options?

 

WTF has taken significant damage and simply are not dishing out significant damage in return.  The damage totals are all the more lopsided.  By all means fight as long as you want but there comes a point when you just are not being effective.

 

So why are you guys so desperate to end the war as soon as possible then?

[Caliph]

So why are you guys so desperate to end the war as soon as possible then?

 

Fighting multi month wars is boring, thats why.  We need wars that last a few weeks, then we'd have more wars more often instead of 1 huge war a year that lasts months.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Caliph

[Sigrun Vapneir]

You are free to see it however you like, as am I.  I see your nations being slaughtered in DBDC's ranges, with occasional people coming back from the Great Beyond and getting slaughtered too.  The damage isn't even nearing equal, DBDC has severely outdamaged your forces.  By all means fight if thats what you want to do, but looking at the stats it just is not going your way on the vast majority of your wars on DBDC.

 

 

Mostly this thread has devolved into petty personal arguments I have and want no part in, but in this particular case I think I might actually be able to contribute something worthwhile. You see this is part of the culture clash for lack of a better term which was just touched on in the parent forum. There are (at least) two entirely different ways that people have of judging winning and losing of wars, and this is often a cause for consternation when people from the different orientations interact violently. You (and many others) look at the stats and act like it's a ball game. We outdamaged you for a couple of weeks, we won, mark the points on the wiki and go home. Anything more or different is odd and unexpected to you.

 

That's something that I have come to understand from many years around y'all, but it was totally alien to me to begin with and still seems quite boring frankly.

 

The way that I naturally look at it, which seems to be the way most of WTF see it as well, sees war as being about politics. The stats are almost completely meaningless to this point of view - just a tool, not the end goal at all. And there is certainly no rule anywhere about them lasting 2 weeks, or 4 weeks, or any particular set amount of time. The aggressor gets to decide when it starts but they do not get to decide when it ends. It ends when *both sides* agree to end it, and not one moment before.

 

You're looking at the stats and saying 'they lost, why wont they admit it?'

 

They're looking at the things they consider important instead. Their morale is high, their warchests are fine. (Some of) your guys appear to be fleeing for cover already. (Some of) your allies are showing up trying to beg or threaten or really do anything at all to get you peace (and doing a side-splittingly bad job of it.) Clearly, in their world, you are the ones losing, and you should admit it. 

 

Thanks to both groups, btw. My investments in  :popcorn:  are really paying off!

Edited March 10, 2015 by Sigrun Vapneir

[Starfox101]

The thousand nation army of the ODN empire. I'm quite certain literally nobody was afraid. If ODN wants peace so bad, they can take on WTF's mid tier and get slaughtered. Instead, they will make thinly veiled threats on behalf of a foreign power, and then cower up and fall back on allies as usual. In the history of CN, there has never been an alliance sanctioned for so long that has done so little. The last time ODN led anything was when Prodigal Chieftain was inciting the Citrus Wars with NPO. Even Legion and GATO have had their time at the forefront of a coalition.

 

I am utterly amazed at how much DBDC has influenced their sphere. You've raised Cuba as a hero and submitted all of your willpower to an alliance that has conducted the most shady dealings since MK. No coincidence, ODN also rode the coattails of MK.

 

Please disband.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Starfox101

[kingzog]

 In the history of CN, there has never been an alliance sanctioned for so long that has done so little.

 

As apt a description of WTF as there has ever been.

[christian trojans]

So why are you guys so desperate to end the war as soon as possible then?

 

They have tiny war chests and hate to lose stats. Also WTF has their bottom 10 by the gonads. They cant sit in peace forever.

Edited March 10, 2015 by christian trojans

[Starfox101]

 

As apt a description of WTF as there has ever been.

While I am certainly no fan of neutrals/independent alliances, to even compare them to non-neutral alliances that have fought in 10+ wars is either blatantly ignorant, or incredibly stupid. Take your pick.

[Caliph]

 

Mostly this thread has devolved into petty personal arguments I have and want no part in, but in this particular case I think I might actually be able to contribute something worthwhile. You see this is part of the culture clash for lack of a better term which was just touched on in the parent forum. There are (at least) two entirely different ways that people have of judging winning and losing of wars, and this is often a cause for consternation when people from the different orientations interact violently. You (and many others) look at the stats and act like it's a ball game. We outdamaged you for a couple of weeks, we won, mark the points on the wiki and go home. Anything more or different is odd and unexpected to you.

 

That's something that I have come to understand from many years around y'all, but it was totally alien to me to begin with and still seems quite boring frankly.

 

The way that I naturally look at it, which seems to be the way most of WTF see it as well, sees war as being about politics. The stats are almost completely meaningless to this point of view - just a tool, not the end goal at all. And there is certainly no rule anywhere about them lasting 2 weeks, or 4 weeks, or any particular set amount of time. The aggressor gets to decide when it starts but they do not get to decide when it ends. It ends when *both sides* agree to end it, and not one moment before.

 

You're looking at the stats and saying 'they lost, why wont they admit it?'

 

They're looking at the things they consider important instead. Their morale is high, their warchests are fine. (Some of) your guys appear to be fleeing for cover already. (One of) your allies is showing up trying to beg or threaten or really do anything at all to get you peace. Clearly, in their world, you are the ones losing, and you should admit it. 

 

Thanks to both groups, btw. My investments in  :popcorn:  are really paying off!

 

It is indeed a culture clash.  I get looking at the long term, and if you are playing the game where you hope by dragging it out as long as possible that you might sway others into white knighting for your cause, go for it.  Nobody wants to see a war that goes on for "too" long.  But any parellels drawn to make it seem like DBDC is keeping WTF at war need to dismissed as false, it is WTF keeping DBDC at war.  They can do that if they chose, and they might be able to keep up the fight for a long time.  Many have the money to fight a long war, and perhaps they find they enjoy war now that they have had their first taste of it, and their strategy is geared to a long term engagement. 

 

As for fleeing for cover, you clearly haven't seen many wars here. 

[Caliph]

While I am certainly no fan of neutrals/independent alliances, to even compare them to non-neutral alliances that have fought in 10+ wars is either blatantly ignorant, or incredibly stupid. Take your pick.

 

DBDC has fought in many wars and has been the subject of a huge amount of activity.  They are the topics of many discussions, their actions are brought to the arbiters of our realm routinely, and their actions are spoken of at great length in public and private channels.  They have done more in their short time than WTF has in its entire existence.