The Phoenix Federation, may you live forever Pacifica.

[Dochartaigh]

 
Both alliances broke with each other in many steps really. Mi6 was a big one, Umb was a big one - but it goes back further than that - there was the public NSO-TPF flaming war before that, and certain things within the Disorder war even further back - really it's because of the strength of the history that the treaty lasted in the face of a lot of accumulating splits.

 

Most coming from NPO treating TPF like !@#$... Y'all state that MI6 needs to own up to our mistakes and here most of NPO is trying to place most of the blame entirely on TPF. This has to be a rather huge irony experiment right?

Edited October 14, 2015 by Dochartaigh

[Dajobo]

Unlike TPF, GATO and ODN has a treaty with NPO. So, very unlikely. 

 

They also have one with STA. Treaties are just a silly inconvenience for some...

[Partisan]

 

You cut ties with us and allied our enemy.

 

You are free to choose your own course.. and in doing so.. your own consequences. Your group needs to step up and learn the value of personal responsibility for its actions. Sure, we had a great past together, but you remolded the present to counter-balance your past with us.

 

What exactly would you expect us to do? Set by while you lend MI6 your support? Did you envision this ending any other way? You who know us better than any other should have seen this coming. Are we supposed to be okay.. with you in the trenches.. opposed to us?

 

#TPFEmbraceYourFAChoices

 

Seriously, we have no obligations to you. You chose to break with us. We have other obligations now.

 

I had a great appreciation for the TPF of  8 years ago.. that stood by its TREATIES, and upheld its OBLIGATIONS.. just like we are now. You burnt for us, now you can burn for MI6.

 

It has been stated multiple times that you yourself are guilty of the exact same and worse, as what you portray TPF to be guilty of. You signed NG, despite TPF's rocky relations with them. You signed NSO, despite TPF's rocky relations with them. You signed Umbrella, despite TPF's rocky relations with them. And while you eventually cancelled NSO, you did so a year later, when damage to relations was likely already done.

 

You went your own way expecting TPF to follow you without complaint. Expecting them to reconcile with your FA choice of allying people they were not comfortable with. And they stuck with you, despite their weariness, because they felt their relations with you were worth it for them.

 

When TPF then decided to sign one alliance out of sentiment, which did not fit in with your intentions, you threw a fit about it, dropped them, and pre-empted them in a war of aggression.

 

Get off your high horse. Admit that you and only you are responsible for the fact that TPF is now burning, and for the deterioration of your relations, and quit your pathetic attempts at revising history and shoving the blame into the face of an alliance that has stood with you for years.

Edited October 14, 2015 by Partisan

[HalfEmpty]

It has been stated multiple times that you yourself are guilty of the exact same and worse, as what you portray TPF to be guilty of. You signed NG, despite TPF's rocky relations with them. You signed NSO, despite TPF's rocky relations with them. You signed Umbrella, despite TPF's rocky relations with them. And while you eventually cancelled NSO, you did so a year later, when damage to relations was likely already done.
 
You went your own way expecting TPF to follow you without complaint. Expecting them to reconcile with your FA choice of allying people they were not comfortable with. And they stuck with you, despite their weariness, because they felt their relations with you were worth it for them.
 
When TPF then decided to sign one alliance out of sentiment, which did not fit in with your intentions, you threw a fit about it, dropped them, and pre-empted them in a war of aggression.
 
Get off your high horse. Admit that you and only you are responsible for the fact that TPF is now burning, and for the deterioration of your relations, and quit your pathetic attempts at revising history and shoving the blame into the face of an alliance that has stood with you for years.

Exactly and thanks for that.

I will be here after the rocks are gone - throwing dirt.
May you live forever Pacifica.

Also: shout out to my Genmay war friends!.

[Geerland]

If we could not fight alliances we have been allies with in the past there would be very few alliances that we could fight. 

 

Ultimately, Pacifica and TPF grew apart gradually over a number of years. With hindsight, we could most likely have done more, earlier to rescue the treaty and relationship. However, by the time things started getting really rocky, many of our members only had sentimental memories of TPF, while our newer allies had put time and effort into engaging our membership. The FA leadership team put in a lot of effort into trying to salvage the relationship, however it did not work. There was no lack of effort put in by both sides, but the paths of the two alliances were always diverging. 

 

As a final note, I remember elements of TPF's leadership expressing a need to "get out from underneath NPO's shadow", and wanting TPF to  be more sovereign, more free. You wanted to pull MI6 towards STA and C&G, and carve out your own niche in the world there. Unfortunately this did not happen, but pursuing such an aggressive FA path when your own activity was not the best was always going to be risky; this war is the culmination of the risk not paying off.

 

At least you are out from under our shadow now HS, so run with it, and make yourself a future.

[LittleRena]

If we could not fight alliances we have been allies with in the past there would be very few alliances that we could fight. 

 

The point, I think you missed it.

 

Or were TPF [i]just[/i] allies to you and nothing more?

[Perez]

 

They also have one with STA. Treaties are just a silly inconvenience for some...

That doesn't change the fact that, NPO will not declare on ODN or GATO. 

[Neo Uruk]

The point, I think you missed it.
 
Or were TPF just allies to you and nothing more?

Oh, you think you should be special from their other allies?

[HeroofTime55]

If we could not fight alliances we have been allies with in the past there would be very few alliances that we could fight. 

 

Ultimately, Pacifica and TPF grew apart gradually over a number of years. With hindsight, we could most likely have done more, earlier to rescue the treaty and relationship. However, by the time things started getting really rocky, many of our members only had sentimental memories of TPF, while our newer allies had put time and effort into engaging our membership. The FA leadership team put in a lot of effort into trying to salvage the relationship, however it did not work. There was no lack of effort put in by both sides, but the paths of the two alliances were always diverging. 

 

As a final note, I remember elements of TPF's leadership expressing a need to "get out from underneath NPO's shadow", and wanting TPF to  be more sovereign, more free. You wanted to pull MI6 towards STA and C&G, and carve out your own niche in the world there. Unfortunately this did not happen, but pursuing such an aggressive FA path when your own activity was not the best was always going to be risky; this war is the culmination of the risk not paying off.

 

At least you are out from under our shadow now HS, so run with it, and make yourself a future.

"Make yourself a future," he says as he launches what is clearly going to be an eternal war.  Let's not kid ourselves about the intentions of Oculus.

That TPF sat so high on your list of who to take out first, THAT is what is stunning in all this.

TPF grew apart because you had total contempt for them in your own FA choices.  You expected the most loyal ally you ever had and ever will have, to just go along with you practically antagonizing them in your FA choices.  Relationships are give and take, and it is clear that Pacifica does not give, they only take.

[Neo Uruk]

That TPF sat so high on your list of who to take out first, THAT is what is stunning in all this.

Correction -- TPF penciled themselves in by being one of MI6's two treaties.

[Rhizoctonia]

Let's see, NPO treaties NG, who we had bad blood with for years. NPO treatied NSO right after we'd broken ties with them and had terrible relations with them at the time After keeping the treaty almost two years, drops NSO claiming they are idiots and a-holes, tries to play it off like they did it for us. Apparently gets upset that we only fought 35 or so days and lost 3.5 million NS out of the 5 or so we had defending them in the war they plotted to start with the two alliances we didn't like at all and asked them not to treaty.  NPO then treaties Umbrella, who generally attack us in most every war for years, professes hatred of us constantly, was in-game spying on us at the time of signing and after it....but we betrayed them by signing with someone they didn't like? Wow...

 

 

So what you just laid out is NPO on many occasions you say, obviously going different FA paths from you.  If your hatred was so intolerable for the likes of NG,NSO, Umbrella and so on, and you felt NPO was not looking out for the best thing for TPF, you guys could of, and obviously should of, canceled on them.  I don't see how you'll not reacting to an ally going in a different path and/or allying alliances you dislike NPO's fault because you didn't just make the call to look to go elsewhere and cancel on NPO.  

 

I would imagine, though do not know since I'm in neither of your alliances, that you signing a treaty with MI6 was brought up, and my guess is NPO showed dislike towards the idea.  TPF went ahead and signed a treaty with them anyway as it's in your right to do, and instead of doing what TPF was unwilling to do when NPO signed treaties with people you don't like, they canceled.  NPO obviously wanted no connection to MI6, you'll wanted to be, so NPO got rid of such a tie.  

 

You can sit here and lay out NPO signing treaties with alliances TPF sincerely didn't like, but NPO didn't force you to keep the treaty between you both, and you could of easily canceled on them.  The fact you'll were unwilling to act when it seemed obvious to you that either NPO was going a different path then you wanted, or didn't have TPF's interests in mind is no one fault but your own for just going along with it anyway.  The only difference in all this is, NPO acted when your tie with MI6 connected them to alliance they didn't want any part of, where you'll should of awhile before, and now are here complaining about it. 

 

You decided to take a path that NPO was not a fan of, thus I don't see why one could be upset or not surprised NPO decided to cancel it.  It's purely TPF's fault if they have felt this much betrayal from NPO to have kept the treaty as long as they did, and actually took NPO to sever the tie for them.

[Rhizoctonia]

"Make yourself a future," he says as he launches what is clearly going to be an eternal war.  Let's not kid ourselves about the intentions of Oculus.

That TPF sat so high on your list of who to take out first, THAT is what is stunning in all this.

TPF grew apart because you had total contempt for them in your own FA choices.  You expected the most loyal ally you ever had and ever will have, to just go along with you practically antagonizing them in your FA choices.  Relationships are give and take, and it is clear that Pacifica does not give, they only take.

 

 

And yet, TPF did just that, they just went along with NPO even after TPF posters have pointed out ways they feel NPO betrayed them.  It took NPO not happy with TPF's choice of ally to completely sever a tie.  That is NPO's fault?

[Partisan]

 

 

So what you just laid out is NPO on many occasions you say, obviously going different FA paths from you.  If your hatred was so intolerable for the likes of NG,NSO, Umbrella and so on, and you felt NPO was not looking out for the best thing for TPF, you guys could of, and obviously should of, canceled on them.  I don't see how you'll not reacting to an ally going in a different path and/or allying alliances you dislike NPO's fault because you didn't just make the call to look to go elsewhere and cancel on NPO.  

 

I would imagine, though do not know since I'm in neither of your alliances, that you signing a treaty with MI6 was brought up, and my guess is NPO showed dislike towards the idea.  TPF went ahead and signed a treaty with them anyway as it's in your right to do, and instead of doing what TPF was unwilling to do when NPO signed treaties with people you don't like, they canceled.  NPO obviously wanted no connection to MI6, you'll wanted to be, so NPO got rid of such a tie.  

 

You can sit here and lay out NPO signing treaties with alliances TPF sincerely didn't like, but NPO didn't force you to keep the treaty between you both, and you could of easily canceled on them.  The fact you'll were unwilling to act when it seemed obvious to you that either NPO was going a different path then you wanted, or didn't have TPF's interests in mind is no one fault but your own for just going along with it anyway.  The only difference in all this is, NPO acted when your tie with MI6 connected them to alliance they didn't want any part of, where you'll should of awhile before, and now are here complaining about it. 

 

You decided to take a path that NPO was not a fan of, thus I don't see why one could be upset or not surprised NPO decided to cancel it.  It's purely TPF's fault if they have felt this much betrayal from NPO to have kept the treaty as long as they did, and actually took NPO to sever the tie for them.

 

I don't think anyone disputes NPO's right to cancel with TPF over its MI6 treaty. While one would think that they would attempt work things out with TPF, as opposed to simply walking away from a years old relationship with what was arguably their most loyal ally, it is definitely their prerogative not to do so. The dissent is rooted in NPO's cancellation on TPF, followed by a pre-emptive strike on their ex-ally.

 

That was not a 'path TPF decided to take'. It was a war forced upon NPO, who first attacked TPF's ally, and then refused to give their old comrades in arms the common courtesy of letting them decide for themselves whether they would move in defense of MI6. Once can argue 'strategy', but when it comes to a war where the odds were never going to be remotely close, and where TPF was never going to be much more than a blip on the radar, this was a courtesy that could easily have been afforded.

 

The subsequent framing of TPF as somehow being at fault for the events that have occurred here is transparent and frankly, preposterous. *that* is what the argument is about. And *that* is the matter which you should probably address, as opposed to cherry-picking a topic where you might be able to make some kind of point.

[the rebel]

That doesn't change the fact that, NPO will not declare on ODN or GATO. 

I'm sure it won't be too long before the precedent of using the supremacy clause against alliances allied to Oculus is used.

[Perez]

I'm sure it won't be too long before the precedent of using the supremacy clause against alliances allied to Oculus is used.

The day that happens Oculus wont exist. 

[grahamkeatley]

 

You decided to take a path that NPO was not a fan of, thus I don't see why one could be upset or not surprised NPO decided to cancel it.  It's purely TPF's fault if they have felt this much betrayal from NPO to have kept the treaty as long as they did, and actually took NPO to sever the tie for them.

 

This is a well thought out post, and I do not disagree there there is another side also full of reasoned decisions.

 

But NPO never gave us a chance to speak to their treaty with Umbrella before they signed - if I recall correctly - NPO were already the spear tip in a Doomsphere Offensive war before TPF Gov were even commenting on the treaty announcement. I believe TPF would have split from NPO over the Umbrella treaty if the same respect was shown as TPF showed NPO by discussing MI6 treaty in advance. So I do not denounce the fact NPO cancelled on TPF for ignoring their ultimatum on MI6. I don't think anyone says they have no right, but for me, the complete lack of understanding on how there could even be hurt feelings in the manner NPO have done this... that wrankles.

 

Yes, we were obviously going to be a target as a part of a MI6 pile on. NPO were clearly going to get their pound of flesh from MI6, but to pre-empt and take the lead against TPF when the fight was coming anyway? Gain a day of fighting against an alliance the leaders of NPO now use terms like "on the slide", "inactivity"... why even bother? And then to act as if its just scratching a boredom itch? It is just acting in a real arrogant, disrespectful manner. And in that I expected more. Not because we used to be friends, allies, not just because my whole entire CN life has been burning as a member of and then allied to NPO - but because it is just common decency to admit you are being a dick, when you do dick things.

 

GK

[HeroofTime55]

 

 

So what you just laid out is NPO on many occasions you say, obviously going different FA paths from you.  If your hatred was so intolerable for the likes of NG,NSO, Umbrella and so on, and you felt NPO was not looking out for the best thing for TPF, you guys could of, and obviously should of, canceled on them.  I don't see how you'll not reacting to an ally going in a different path and/or allying alliances you dislike NPO's fault because you didn't just make the call to look to go elsewhere and cancel on NPO.  

 

I would imagine, though do not know since I'm in neither of your alliances, that you signing a treaty with MI6 was brought up, and my guess is NPO showed dislike towards the idea.  TPF went ahead and signed a treaty with them anyway as it's in your right to do, and instead of doing what TPF was unwilling to do when NPO signed treaties with people you don't like, they canceled.  NPO obviously wanted no connection to MI6, you'll wanted to be, so NPO got rid of such a tie.  

 

You can sit here and lay out NPO signing treaties with alliances TPF sincerely didn't like, but NPO didn't force you to keep the treaty between you both, and you could of easily canceled on them.  The fact you'll were unwilling to act when it seemed obvious to you that either NPO was going a different path then you wanted, or didn't have TPF's interests in mind is no one fault but your own for just going along with it anyway.  The only difference in all this is, NPO acted when your tie with MI6 connected them to alliance they didn't want any part of, where you'll should of awhile before, and now are here complaining about it. 

 

You decided to take a path that NPO was not a fan of, thus I don't see why one could be upset or not surprised NPO decided to cancel it.  It's purely TPF's fault if they have felt this much betrayal from NPO to have kept the treaty as long as they did, and actually took NPO to sever the tie for them.

It is not unexpected that you would have no concept of things like "Honor" and "Loyalty."

[Rhizoctonia]

 

I don't think anyone disputes NPO's right to cancel with TPF over its MI6 treaty. While one would think that they would attempt work things out with TPF, as opposed to simply walking away from a years old relationship with what was arguably their most loyal ally, it is definitely their prerogative not to do so. The dissent is rooted in NPO's cancellation on TPF, followed by a pre-emptive strike on their ex-ally.

 

That was not a 'path TPF decided to take'. It was a war forced upon NPO, who first attacked TPF's ally, and then refused to give their old comrades in arms the common courtesy of letting them decide for themselves whether they would move in defense of MI6. Once can argue 'strategy', but when it comes to a war where the odds were never going to be remotely close, and where TPF was never going to be much more than a blip on the radar, this was a courtesy that could easily have been afforded.

 

The subsequent framing of TPF as somehow being at fault for the events that have occurred here is transparent and frankly, preposterous. *that* is what the argument is about. And *that* is the matter which you should probably address, as opposed to cherry-picking a topic where you might be able to make some kind of point.

 

 

But I have to disagree.  Yes, many are showing their dissent toward the pre-empted strike on TPF.  Yet, in this topic, and other topics, and the quoted text I responded to makes it quite apparent, TPF felt NPO betrayed then on several occasions with who they signed with.  They want to throw up that that they kept the treaty with NPO after they signed with alliances they dislike, but NPO are the assholes because they canceled when TPF only did it once.  No, that doesn't make NPO assholes, the reacted to TPF signing with you'll, something TPF didn't do, and in fact took NPO to do.  NPO didn't feel like being tied to MI6, so they canceled.  TPF had all the chances in the world to do the same, but they didn't, so their failure to do so doesn't allow them now to use it now against NPO when they continued to go along with it.  All that's showing is poor judgement on TPF's choices, as it's apparent they feel NPO wronged them over and over. 

 

Work things out?  TPF signed a treaty that an alliance NPO showed apparent dislike for, an enemy if you will, there's nothing to work out if NPO disliked MI6 enough.  You can't fault NPO for wanting no connection to MI6, and TPF gave them that connection.  Sure, alliances hold ties with other alliances that may connect them to an alliance they dislike or not privy to..which is why pretty much every major war has allies on opposite sides.  But that being said, it's really up to an alliance to decide if they treaty is too conflicting or not, and in this case it was.  In no way is NPO betraying TPF for severing a tie that linked them to MI6, nor should it be looked at poorly.  It's a choice. TPF knew NPO didn't like it, they went ahead anyway with the risk NPO could sever ties or at least really hurt relations.  

 

I'm not cherry picking, I'm addressing the on going argument in this and other threads on here that has TPF members seemingly upset NPO canceled on them after only once signing with an alliance NPO didn't like, when NPO did it to them multiple times.  All that means is it took it once done to NPO to sever ties, where TPF failed to do so ever after multiple times they felt wronged.  NPO acted on it after the first time, TPF went along with it each time, I guess it takes more times for other then some.

TPF is not framed.  TPF decided to join up with MI6, an alliance who wasn't well liked by many political spheres, not just Oculus.  Some may not dislike MI6 as much, but its safe to say no major power sphere has been open arms to them.  There was quite a risk with signing a treaty with MI6, who was not liked by many, and had very few connections with other alliances.  They decided to go along with it, which again is their right, and I don't fault them if their relations were good.  That being said, they knew what could happen with such a choice, and thus it did.  I can't think TPF didn't know the risk involved, so they can't be surprised they find themselves in this position.  It is quite TPF's fault they find themselves where they're at, by the choice of who they allied.  That's not anyone's fault but their own, and they shouldn't be surprised that war has come to MI6, and no alliance should rely on the enemy giving allies of enemies a choice to choose if they will or not.  What courtesy should be given?  TPF signed with an enemy of NPO, an enemy of many, why should current actions of an alliance be discarded because at one time, TPF fought for NPO.  If you don't think NPO is grateful for the times TPF fought for them, then you're an idiot.  But times change, relations change, and TPF decided to line themselves up with a known alliance NPO disliked.  Such actions should be overlooked, especially when they aren't allies anymore?  TPF's decision to ally MI6 knowing NPO didn't approve shows TPF didn't need NPO to have their back anymore or look out for them as allying MI6 meant more to them then at the least pissing off NPO and/or causing NPO to cancel.  They chose MI6 over NPO by going ahead and signing and making NPO cancel, so why should they expect their most recent action to not have consequences due to years in the past?  If I have been friends with someone for a long time and they suddenly come up and punch and spit on me, I'm not just going to be cool with it or still be friends because what we use to be.  The same could be said if TPF actually canceled on NPO when they signed with alliances they dislike/enemies and found themselves on another side against said alliance.  I think it's naive of any alliance to align themselves with an ally's enemy and expect sympathy or handout from now a former ally...the former ally you decided wasn't as important as your new ally by forcing their hand to cancel or be connected to their very enemy.  Sure, such handouts/courtesy are given (or at least tried to many times) to allies who find themselves chained in on the opposite side, but we're not talking about an alliance who are chained in several connections away from the enemy, we're talking about a direct connection/ally to the enemy and not even an ally anymore.  

[malazar]

 

 

But I have to disagree.  Yes, many are showing their dissent toward the pre-empted strike on TPF.

 

Maybe this dissent explains why NPO only has 5 declared wars against our top 10 tech nations. Oh wait, that is probably just the typical NPO tactic of sending their allies out against the more difficult targets.

Edited October 15, 2015 by malazar

[Vladimir Poutine]

If we could not fight alliances we have been allies with in the past there would be very few alliances that we could fight. 

 

Ultimately, Pacifica and TPF grew apart gradually over a number of years. With hindsight, we could most likely have done more, earlier to rescue the treaty and relationship. However, by the time things started getting really rocky, many of our members only had sentimental memories of TPF, while our newer allies had put time and effort into engaging our membership. The FA leadership team put in a lot of effort into trying to salvage the relationship, however it did not work. There was no lack of effort put in by both sides, but the paths of the two alliances were always diverging. 

 

As a final note, I remember elements of TPF's leadership expressing a need to "get out from underneath NPO's shadow", and wanting TPF to  be more sovereign, more free. You wanted to pull MI6 towards STA and C&G, and carve out your own niche in the world there. Unfortunately this did not happen, but pursuing such an aggressive FA path when your own activity was not the best was always going to be risky; this war is the culmination of the risk not paying off.

 

At least you are out from under our shadow now HS, so run with it, and make yourself a future.

Oh if you only knew how well the risk has already paid off.

[wes the wise]

You can sit here and lay out NPO signing treaties with alliances TPF sincerely didn't like, but NPO didn't force you to keep the treaty between you both, and you could of easily canceled on them.  The fact you'll were unwilling to act when it seemed obvious to you that either NPO was going a different path then you wanted, or didn't have TPF's interests in mind is no one fault but your own for just going along with it anyway.  The only difference in all this is, NPO acted when your tie with MI6 connected them to alliance they didn't want any part of, where you'll should of awhile before, and now are here complaining about it. 

 

You decided to take a path that NPO was not a fan of, thus I don't see why one could be upset or not surprised NPO decided to cancel it.  It's purely TPF's fault if they have felt this much betrayal from NPO to have kept the treaty as long as they did, and actually took NPO to sever the tie for them.

They are not complaining a cancellation of a treaty, my friend. Never mind the fact that alliances such as my own allies IRON are engaging in an unprovoked and completely aggressive war...The real outrage is NPO of all AA's attacking TPF with no CB, in addition to their general "meh, deal with it needs moar targets" attitude about it. Who is next?

 

About one year ago I was fairly fond of NPO, this came after NPO reached out their hand in friendship. Then NPO decided to launch a massive and completely unprovoked attack against my Aftermath blocmates, while they were in the midst of treaty talks with us. That was low. Here we are one year later, and NPO has outdone themselves.  

 

I'm reading all of these arguments. "TPF embrace your FA choices" "TPF you did this to yourself" "shoulda seen this coming" etc. All of these words, and it all means nothing. Why? NO CB. Unprovoked war. 

Edited October 15, 2015 by wes the wise

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Maybe this dissent explains why NPO only has 5 declared wars against our top 10 tech nations. Oh wait, that is probably just the typical NPO tactic of sending their allies out against the more difficult targets.

 
... Are you kidding me?.. ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!...... 
 
Someone send this guy enough tech to get him in my range.. PLEASE!
 
Of all the incompetent commentary in this thread, this takes the cake. If there were ANYONE in my range I'd be BEGGING to hit them.
 
I am so bored.. I've resorted to POETRY..
 
 
 

The Longest Winter, by MV (Me)

I stood upon a battlefield of snow,
dressed for glory.
But none stood in the trench below,
just light flakes hoary.

The wind blew,
my troops shuddered,
Bunker lanterns were lit anew,
the windows shuttered.

A warrior without a season,
rhym without a reason.
The battlefield is cold,
not a soul to behold.

In more trying times,
I'd have a fight.
The battle roused,
internal fires did light.

But the wasteland is vast,
without rudder or mast.
With no enemy,
I drift alone in the coldest winter having nothing left to warm me.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Vol Navy]

 

... Are you kidding me?.. ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!...... 

 

Someone send this guy enough tech to get him in my range.. PLEASE!

 

Of all the incompetent commentary in this thread, this takes the cake. If there were ANYONE in my range I'd be BEGGING to hit them.

 

Listen cat, there were multiple targets in your range, you didn't declare a single war. Almost 24 hours ago you were DoW'd by an alliance with multiple targets in your range, you don't have a single war. You are in NPO, an alliance thats no stranger to war, you're almost 3000 days old, have been in the alliance your entire existence and have 4 million something casualties. I have more casualties fighting for NPO than you do. DoW someone at some point or just shut up.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Listen cat, there were multiple targets in your range, you didn't declare a single war. Almost 24 hours ago you were DoW'd by an alliance with multiple targets in your range, you don't have a single war. You are in NPO, an alliance thats no stranger to war, you're almost 3000 days old, have been in the alliance your entire existence and have 4 million something casualties. I have more casualties fighting for NPO than you do. DoW someone at some point or just shut up.

 
Get in range so I can DOW on you please.
 
Part of my problem is my infra has never gotten much past where it is now due to efficiency's sake. Casualties mean nothing in your argument. I'd still love a fight. So run your mouth all you like but anyone in Pacifica knows you know nothing of what you're talking about.

#TPFHonorForSale, #TPFPhoenixBurnsOnItsOwnHonor, #TPFHonorCoversBadDecisions Edited October 15, 2015 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Mogar]

tl;dr I am going to claim to want war but then not actually attack anyone.