Xanth Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Or imagine how much quicker the back pedal would've been if we weren't falling apart. I mean, of course we're not. I know we're a bunch of old men but none of us are useing walkers yet. Canes yes, walkers no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexio15 Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 OMG Halp!!! :frantic: Methrage's "brother" is threatening me!!! :facepalm: I see what you did there ;) Now as for this shit on who's fault it is by god are you seriously that bloody stupid. I mea seriously. Let me lay it out in bullet points for you. I am pretty close to this situation. 1 - Some tso gov talk to mi about a merge. 2 - Merge is found to be in violation of tso charter. (In the manner in which it is being conducted) 3 - MI or L_H pissed off or as some claimed emotionally conflicted about this. (Never a good trait as a leader) attacks TSO) 4 - TSO allies TSC/SNX/NADC all catch onto this fact and actually are planning to defend TSO. 5 - MI try and spin the victim card with the help of some friends. We all know who's in the wrong here. The people who started the attacks. 6 - MI want white peace after initially trying to extort tech from the victim alliance. I don't believe I have missed anything which is good. I mean someone will be sure to add it in for me. Now let's not all be oblivious to the fact this is at least the 5th time MI has been doing this. Although it's the second time they have been publicly caught. Now others would have learnt from the first offence. Maybe they will learn from this but you never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 It would be nice if their allies woke up to the fact that this is the second time in a little more than a month that Monsters Inc. has pulled a bonehead move and then complained about the response to it. The first time around, I suggested that a little bit of humility went a long way; in other words, an apology and an admission of wrongdoing (especially when one happens to be in the wrong) is the shortest route to conflict resolution. The same would have applied here. But instead, they attempt to be blasé about it. Then they greet it with open arms. Then they complain that people are out to get them. (They have some enablers with this part.) And, along the way, they toss out insults at anyone who happens to question their core competence as an alliance; a practice which they have declared as being CB-worthy. I could stock an alliance's government with schizophrenic children and get a similar result, except the kids would respond to medication. Can someone explain to me why these dolts still have allies? Do they have pictures of somebody's Mom? Is it because this is only their second (public) strike as an alliance? There was a time when new alliances made their way carefully in the world lest they piss off people with long memories. Do tell me about the "growing new alliances on planet bob". Half of the members we've picked up were on their way out the door. Why? Because planet bob has come to a halt. Let's face it, pre planned world wars are the only thing that get your jollies off. "New alliances" will spend their days posting their hundredth treaty announcement and gov positions. -and Monsters Inc will continue being active, and weeding out the weak will make us stronger down the road. Monsters inc dances to a different beat, sure some can say we are unethical boneheads dipshit loudmouths, and at the same time we've enjoyed the funny messages back-and-forth to our enemies- which, IMO is the best part of war. DS saw this as an opportunistic way to bait Kaskus- who they criticize smurf because he told his allies not to support the DBDC/blood pact during the WTF conflict. It's OWF politics after all, 10 people say one thing on one side and 2 people say one thing on another. Regardless of right/wrong, it's quantity over quality these days. I mean look at Sparta, spineless nations jumping sides because they don't like their pixels burning. @ Sigrun- we were never a part of TCA, they asked us to be, but we didn't want any more links to DS. Pixels don't matter. Picking on smurf for not bowing to your wishes and then attempting to make his work ridiculous goes to show the type of sheep out their, smurf actions in this world have driven much more activity on this planet than what some 100 nations on this planet will ever do. Stonewall has some type of thinking that because he's with a bigger crowd his true colors can come out, what he doesn't realize is that it's not about the infra, id much rather fight to the last pixel and bill lock with the closet friends I have on planet bob than exist in a world of conformity and boredom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 (edited) I see what you did there ;) Now as for this !@#$ on who's fault it is by god are you seriously that bloody stupid. I mea seriously. Let me lay it out in bullet points for you. I am pretty close to this situation. 1 - Some tso gov talk to mi about a merge. 2 - Merge is found to be in violation of tso charter. (In the manner in which it is being conducted) 3 - MI or L_H pissed off or as some claimed emotionally conflicted about this. (Never a good trait as a leader) attacks TSO) 4 - TSO allies TSC/SNX/NADC all catch onto this fact and actually are planning to defend TSO. 5 - MI try and spin the victim card with the help of some friends. We all know who's in the wrong here. The people who started the attacks. 6 - MI want white peace after initially trying to extort tech from the victim alliance. I don't believe I have missed anything which is good. I mean someone will be sure to add it in for me. Now let's not all be oblivious to the fact this is at least the 5th time MI has been doing this. Although it's the second time they have been publicly caught. Now others would have learnt from the first offence. Maybe they will learn from this but you never know. You missed how you tried to get involved in the war and your courageous members said "no" and then tried to find a rock to hide under Edited May 24, 2015 by Lord Hitchcock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexio15 Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 (edited) Nothing really there to follow on this really. We was asked and as you yourswlf should know Optional level treaties are voted on by the GA. None of us are hiding under rocks Fyi, especially me. Edited May 24, 2015 by Alexio15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walshington Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 TCA? I don't see a DoW justifying the attacks by Stonewall14 and others in DS on MI, just pure opportunism. Stonewall14 has no ties to alliances involved in the war, the war between DS and MI is separate from the war between TSO/TSC and MI. While TSC has justification I can agree with for their war, Stonewall did not. Perhaps DK/DS is not actually declaring war. Perhaps it's just a mass tech raid. Those things do happen by opportunists. Check with the Stoic Movement and SWF I think they've suffered from the same thing recently, you should ask them how they dealt with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexio15 Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Perhaps DK/DS is not actually declaring war. Perhaps it's just a mass tech raid. Those things do happen by opportunists. Check with the Stoic Movement and SWF I think they've suffered from the same thing recently, you should ask them how they dealt with it. Don't forget The Grey Council and The Perrussian Federation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Perhaps DK/DS is not actually declaring war. Perhaps it's just a mass tech raid. Those things do happen by opportunists. Check with the Stoic Movement and SWF I think they've suffered from the same thing recently, you should ask them how they dealt with it. SWF/DL dealt with it by having a war but it was weird because MI just raided and then posted a DoW but it wasn't a war it was a raid. Then there was some fighting and then there wasn't again. It was all very confusing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonewall14 Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Stonewall has some type of thinking that because he's with a bigger crowd his true colors can come out, what he doesn't realize is that it's not about the infra, id much rather fight to the last pixel and bill lock with the closet friends I have on planet bob than exist in a world of conformity and boredom. How dare you, I assure you being a part of Doomreich is never boring and I could go on for hours about how planet Bob seems to conform to Doom's agenda...I am but the Harbinger of Doom and not maker of Doom policy and as you can clearly see we will and do defend our allies and protectorates with ever available pixel against all enemies be they foreign or domestic... :war: I see what you did there ;) And here i thought I was being all subtle and stuff... :facepalm: No they are and were never apart of TCA. I normally do not get involved in these chats I just view them for my own amusement but that is one thing I will state MI posted on his alliance ranking being a member of TCA as a joke and mockery because that is their only weapon they have left. They are not and never will be TCA material. Thank you have a nice day Preach it my brother...I noticed the slur myself the other day when scanning the flock... :wacko: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Once again, every thread is about ReyRey.I often wonder how it ends up that way.Rey, kindly do us all a favor and crawl back into whichever commode you've seen fit to exit.Oh.SWF/DL dealt with it by having a war but it was weird because MI just raided and then posted a DoW but it wasn't a war it was a raid. Then there was some fighting and then there wasn't again. It was all very confusing.When an alliance doesn't have an inkling of their shit together, it tends to get confusing when they try to dictate what's happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Do tell me about the "growing new alliances on planet bob". That phrase does not appear once in my post, and the idea is not even intimated. In fact, the part (I think) you're referring to is entirely backward-looking; a kind of wistful longing. It is not possible for me to respond to you, since you are now referencing something that never happened except in some kind of imaginary dialogue between yourself and yourself. I think I now know the source of your problems, though. You honestly don't understand what people are saying to you, interpreting everything in a way that fits your internal narrative instead of responding to what is actually happening around you. I initially believed your problem to be one of simple comprehension. I was mistaken. If this is how you respond to people in your 'normal' interactions, then your alliance's tendency to repeat the same problem(s) over and over makes a great deal of sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Shocked. Disbelief. Say it ain't so. Meh, we knew it was coming- out damaging TSO, TCA, and TSC's coalition- it's always good to add another 2 alliances to the list. The Casualties God will be happy Of course you are causing more damage on the defensive it is nearly impossible not to be early in a conflict. I know this is always what the losing side of conflict drags out as a silver lining but, it gets old hearing it every single conflict like it means anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duderonomy Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Of course you are causing more damage on the defensive it is nearly impossible not to be early in a conflict. I know this is always what the losing side of conflict drags out as a silver lining but, it gets old hearing it every single conflict like it means anything. There were quite a number of AAs on the winning side of the Doom War that out damaged their opponents initially. Other AAs shouldn't even bother warring because they don't get ahead winning or losing. Some AAs are just bad at war. Time to accept this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blurrenza Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 O - I'm getting real tired of your 'thing'. O - Lift your right hand and bend your legs. Swing your right hand over your face, now take it take it take it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 There were quite a number of AAs on the winning side of the Doom War that out damaged their opponents initially. Other AAs shouldn't even bother warring because they don't get ahead winning or losing. Some AAs are just bad at war. Time to accept this. If you can not out damage your enemies on the defensive early in a war then you might as well disband because it means your alliance is far to inactive to even notice they are at war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duderonomy Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 If you can not out damage your enemies on the defensive early in a war then you might as well disband because it means your alliance is far to inactive to even notice they are at war. I'll acknowledge their right to exist, just like I recognize neutrals' right to exist. It takes many special snowflakes to make a community. Both groups should recognize their limitations, however. Or, even better, improve their capabilities, so they can contribute more to Bob. But they will be punching bags until that happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingNeptune Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 Since its gone so quiet in here, one has to assume TSO is dead and finished. Congratulations M'inc for winning yet another just war. :awesome: :war: :war: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elite Virgin Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 Since its gone so quiet in here, one has to assume TSO is dead and finished. Congratulations M'inc for winning yet another just war. :awesome: :war: :war: kjhuhy8gt67g7bhubhgybhj beat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurthwaite Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 Since its gone so quiet in here, one has to assume TSO is dead and finished. Congratulations M'inc for winning yet another just war. :awesome: :war: :war: Sarcasm doesn't come off well in communications such as this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathAdder Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) Take notice how I will not run into PM It's okay. One day you'll stop warmongering long enough to purchase an MP, and then can do tangible damage against the Alliances you roll for not letting you extort them. When that happens, you'll also cycle to peace to rearm, and then learn how ridiculous you really are for thinking the above quote was at all witty. :) My issue is with Stonewall14 alone, unless LH wants to absorb nukes for a traitor who will turn on him as well regardless of what they do for him. Stonewall14 seems to be developing a history of betraying everyone who has helped him eventually, I see no reason why it would turn out different for Doom Squad. Edit: Thought you meant Lord Hershey, lol. It would be silly to want my Ally's ally nuked, and I'm quite fond of Hershey. Don't let me interfere with your Stonewall14 rants, though. I'm sure he's all a flutter with the attention you're giving him... Or maybe he just doesn't care. I'll just go with the latter. Edited May 27, 2015 by DeathAdder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 It's okay. One day you'll stop warmongering long enough to purchase an MP, and then can do tangible damage against the Alliances you roll for not letting you extort them. When that happens, you'll also cycle to peace to rearm, and then learn how ridiculous you really are for thinking the above quote was at all witty. :) It would be silly to want my Ally's ally nuked, and I'm quite fond of Hershey. Don't let me interfere with your Stonewall14 rants, though. I'm sure he's all a flutter with the attention you're giving him... Or maybe he just doesn't care. I'll just go with the latter. Good thing you're not the leader of monsters inc, we'd jump over to the other side by now and bad mouth former allies. Stay classy DA, stay classy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hombre Sabio Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 LMAO press <button> Come on Bob..let's party! Fill my last D slot.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathAdder Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 Yeah. I'd totally leave the leadership of a sanctioned Alliance to lead a micro. :v: . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernkastel Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 Yeah. I'd totally leave the leadership of a sanctioned Alliance to lead a micro. :v: . Become king of the peasants, they will accept you and you shall have a cult following. You will be more powerful than ever. :v: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathAdder Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 That gave me a chuckle. +2. 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.