Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well MaxnMike Ive been here on this nation for 7 years prior I had two other nations. As I recall the peak of the games in terms of nations, interaction, plots, politics was during the period of draconian terms. Now you get "nice fight" white peace and an MDP 3 months later, and we have less people playing now then we did then.
 
Im just using a logical deduction here, when NPO fell at karma, the jig was up the villain was defeated. They played a critical role in the narrative of CN and played on peoples natural instincts of fairness and ethics. Which, I might add has a limited application here. I, and I assume others play CN anonymously to do things, within reason, that we wouldn't do IRL.
 
But all that aside, this is in the context of methrage and frankly I think its time for him to go. Lets allow him the self fulfilling prophesy he wanted, lets make him the martyr. Who knows, maybe someone will emerge as a legit "bad guy" I mean, electron sponge isn't walking through that door, Moldavi isn't relevant, Dilber's best moments are long gone.
 
Methrage, sadly, is the star of the show. Who better to make an example of to refresh the discourse?

Retaliating when me and my alliance are under attack makes me the "bad guy". The spin you are trying to put on this war is funny.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 282
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Still trying to pretend you are not the aggressors here eh?

 

He'll be out of peace mode and wrecking your nations again soon enough. Even the best need a pause to reload occasionally.

Edited by Sigrun Vapneir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not unless your coalition is COMPLETELY handing Kashmir and PPO their asses -- and you aren't:

 

METH COALITION vs. JUST SRA STATS

 

Posted 28 June 2015 - 11:33 PM

Methrage, on 28 Jun 2015 - 11:30 PM, said:snapback.png

 

Looks like you're down 37,356.78 at this point. 

 

"Hey Sigrun -- we've got another typo over here!"

 

Any bets on Meths reply?  Will he:

a) admit he completely miscalculated the damage his alliance is receiving

b) ignore these stats

c) bring up the fact that he has caused 39K damage to SRA, so his lie is irrelevant

d) simply not post anymore

 

 

If you want those stats to mean anything, take JUST LN STATS vs JUST SRA STATS. See what you come up with and what was true 2 days ago can change within that amount of time.

 

Also reposting a quote where I admitted I made a mistake doesn't make you look any smarter, or that you're posting almost the exact same thing in several places. Seems you're the one lying if we go by the post you're linking to, where you don't specify you're only talking about those on the SRA AA for your side.

 

Meth -- it must be disappointing to take part in an exercise where things are recorded for posterity.

 

Look at the damn link -- it is called "METH COALITION vs. JUST SRA STATS". Can it really be any more crystal clear that those stats are "only talking about those on the SRA AA for my side"?

 

Included in that link is a link for "Just LN stats vs. Just SRA stats".

 

Not sure I look any smarter for pointing out the obvious here, but how are you looking now?  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted 28 June 2015 - 11:33 PM

Methrage, on 28 Jun 2015 - 11:30 PM, said:snapback.png


Looks like you're down 37,356.78 at this point.

"Hey Sigrun -- we've got another typo over here!"

Any bets on Meths reply? Will he:
a) admit he completely miscalculated the damage his alliance is receiving
b) ignore these stats
c) bring up the fact that he has caused 39K damage to SRA, so his lie is irrelevant
d) simply not post anymore

I don't see a mention of "JUST SRA" in this post and the post you quoted from me was talking about coalition wide damage. However if I bend the stats the same way you do, Just LN Stats vs SRA Coalition, we're still ahead. So I'm not sure what you hope to prove by responding to a post with stats irrelevant to what you're quoting. Edited by Methrage
Link to comment
Share on other sites


But all that aside, this is in the context of methrage and frankly I think its time for him to go. Lets allow him the self fulfilling prophesy he wanted, lets make him the martyr. Who knows, maybe someone will emerge as a legit "bad guy" I mean, electron sponge isn't walking through that door, Moldavi isn't relevant, Dilber's best moments are long gone.

 

Methrage, sadly, is the star of the show. Who better to make an example of to refresh the discourse?

 

If you are so keen on it, you can always join forces with Lady Dakota (who already declared "eternal" war on Methrage).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure Thorgrum has always been a straight shooter, murtibing.  And if I'm not mistaken, I think I saw his name in an application thread at Kashmir (though in all honesty, I didn't read the thread because I wasn't applying and I didn't think it was my business).  I think that means he is at war with Meth by default, but I don't know Kashmir's exact stance on Methrage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have several nations on brown, but I have not used the Senate as a weapon despite the number odds. If you don't condone using sanctions as a weapon in this war, I think you guys should have her move to red if she's going to join.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already know your stance, but smurthwaite claims to be a man of civility. He might be of a different opinion if he really is.

It doesn't matter what his opinion is or even if he states it. You will spin it every way imaginable simply because you cannot handle truth. It is a term your fragile mind can't comprehend.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already know your stance, but smurthwaite claims to be a man of civility.

 

It's funny how your mind works.  I have all of the messages you and I exchanged.  Never once did I make such a claim.  The claim I made was that to come to the table of peace talks both sides need to be honest and civil and all the major leaders from both sides need to be in the same room at the same time.  Just because I choose to act, usually, in a civilized fashion, doesn't mean I claim to be be anything less than barbaric.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a rogue. Lets clear that straight up. Two, I made sure to go over my plans before joining.

Declaring eternal war on an alliance while on none isn't a rogue or unjustified sanctions?
But yes it is hard to be a proper rogue when you throw a paddy and always seem to be in peacemode when you have them.

In other news apples are oranges. Edited by the rebel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Declaring eternal war on an alliance while on none isn't a rogue or unjustified sanctions?
But yes it is hard to be a proper rogue when you throw a paddy and always seem to be in peacemode when you have them.

In other news apples are oranges.

To be clear, I'm pretty sure she just wants Meth.  I haven't seen anything here to indicate the rest of his alliance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear, I'm pretty sure she just wants Meth.  I haven't seen anything here to indicate the rest of his alliance.

 

And?

 

Actions that constitute someone as rogue, makes them a rogue regardless of biased opinions one may hold for said rogue to say otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear, I'm pretty sure she just wants Meth.  I haven't seen anything here to indicate the rest of his alliance.

 

She's handing out sanctions like flyers. She's gone rogue whichever way you look at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...