Jump to content

Recommended Posts

someone's super mad about their failed recruitment strategems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, spankthefrank said:

 

wasn't it more like Kash "hit" LN, CA went in on the defensive and hit Kash, and chained the rest of you in, LC went on the defensive for Kash and hit  New Polar Order, Confederatio Aesir and  "speaking of rouges" The Final Countdown.

I'm pretty sure you can go back a few page and see for yourself, but what ever

I still fail to see this "defensive" treaty that everyone keeps going on about. It's almost like a certain LoSS treaty from 2013 that no one could ever find, either. Interesting that you completely ignore it when the AAs from that time made the effort to reconciliate, rather than constantly trumpet it like LC does. It's almost like they could care less what treaties or CBs they have. And then suddenly they care about everyone else.

 

I don't care why they declared on CA. I hate double-standards, though. And they seem happy to apply them to everyone.

 

You care to not like it, fine. But they aren't clean and the shot on them was valid from an openly-posted treaty. They chose shenanigan secret ties because oh-so-special. That makes their actions far more murky.

Edited by Duderonomy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Duderonomy said:

 

I don't care why they declared on CA. I hate double-standards, though. And they seem happy to apply them to everyone.

 

Actually, CA declared on them.  May or may not change your premise, I'm not really paying attention anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Duderonomy said:

I still fail to see this "defensive" treaty that everyone keeps going on about. It's almost like a certain LoSS treaty from 2013 that no one could ever find, either. Interesting that you completely ignore it when the AAs from that time made the effort to reconciliate, rather than constantly trumpet it like LC does. It's almost like they could care less what treaties or CBs they have. And then suddenly they care about everyone else.

 

I don't care why they declared on CA. I hate double-standards, though. And they seem happy to apply them to everyone.

 

You care to not like it, fine. But they aren't clean and the shot on them was valid from an openly-posted treaty. They chose shenanigan secret ties because oh-so-special. That makes their actions far more murky.

DK, LC, and Kashmir have had a fairly public working relationship for a while. Kashmir doesn't do treaties but hey yeah whatever they're a thing

Edited by Neo Uruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, white majik said:

Then you joined an AA as a legit member so it shouldn't be an issue for you to stay in that AA for 6 months. If you didn't join the AA as a legit member then you are a rogue and will be treated as such resulting in extra rounds. You can't have it both ways

 

Yeah, because all alliances have a minimum 6 month period of time for all members to be forced to stay in or else perma war with the single largest hegemonic group of allances in present day.  

 

7 hours ago, white majik said:

 

Why would we want to endear people who went out of their way to damage us? That's just stupid. 

You went out of your way to attack a buddy of mine after I let my position be clear.  You are at fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Duderonomy said:

I still fail to see this "defensive" treaty that everyone keeps going on about. It's almost like a certain LoSS treaty from 2013 that no one could ever find, either. Interesting that you completely ignore it when the AAs from that time made the effort to reconciliate, rather than constantly trumpet it like LC does. It's almost like they could care less what treaties or CBs they have. And then suddenly they care about everyone else.

 

I don't care why they declared on CA. I hate double-standards, though. And they seem happy to apply them to everyone.

 

You care to not like it, fine. But they aren't clean and the shot on them was valid from an openly-posted treaty. They chose shenanigan secret ties because oh-so-special. That makes their actions far more murky.

The relationship between DK and Kashmir was publicly known, and Kashmir doesn't do paper treaties.  But yea keep on spinning.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Caliph said:

You went out of your way to attack a buddy of mine after I let my position be clear.  You are at fault.

Making your position clear does not mean you get to dictate your own consequences, nor does it make your incessant whining any better.

Edited by Neo Uruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Caliph said:

I jumped into a losing fight, thats fine.  But being singled out with extra terms sends a personal message.

 

I jumped into a losing fight, thats fine.  But being singled out with extra terms sends a personal message.

 

FTFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Caliph said:

 

Yeah, because all alliances have a minimum 6 month period of time for all members to be forced to stay in or else perma war with the single largest hegemonic group of allances in present day.  

 

You went out of your way to attack a buddy of mine after I let my position be clear.  You are at fault.

 

All alliance don't have that term, but it's almost as if losing a war can result in terms that must be met to have peace. MIND BLOWN

 

We are at fault? Well I'm making my new position clear that if you engage in buying tech it's an act of war. So if I hit you its your fault.  CN lologic 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, there's nothing wrong with joining losing a war if you are prepared to face consequences. If you aren't, there's generally two options. 1) don't accept defeat and keep fighting until you come to a resolution that favors you, or 2) don't enter in the first place.

 

Quite honestly, if it's just about friends, I would have no problem going down swinging for my allies. If I were to want peace, I'd be prepared to accept that I might not be in a position to fully dictate what I want. And you know what? That's what makes it being a real friend. Being a real friend isn't a free pass to get whatever you want, being a real friend means sometimes you take that hit and sometimes you eat that !@#$ because that's what friends do. If you aren't willing to and that's too hard for you, consider something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, white majik said:

 

All alliance don't have that term, but it's almost as if losing a war can result in terms that must be met to have peace. MIND BLOWN

 

We are at fault? Well I'm making my new position clear that if you engage in buying tech it's an act of war. So if I hit you its your fault.  CN lologic 

Yeah, but terms have consequences.  I don't forget easy.  !@#$%* ass !@#$%*.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who frequently works alone, it is fairly easy to work out individual surrenders that can be agreeable with some negotiation, I am curious to know how much personal negotiation you had partaken in before the terms were agreed to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-06-22 at 7:07 AM, Duderonomy said:

If you're talking about defending Last Call, they declared war on a Non Grata protectorate.

We declared war on the New Polar Order. Are they your protectorate now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mogar said:

As someone who frequently works alone, it is fairly easy to work out individual surrenders that can be agreeable with some negotiation, I am curious to know how much personal negotiation you had partaken in before the terms were agreed to.

The disputed terms were a requirement for Kashmir to be allowed to have peace. That is: we agreed to them so that Kashmir could be peaced out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mogar said:

As someone who frequently works alone, it is fairly easy to work out individual surrenders that can be agreeable with some negotiation, I am curious to know how much personal negotiation you had partaken in before the terms were agreed to.

 

At the time of this post: individual surrenders are not allowed by Oculus. 

 

Even for those just honoring treaties. 

Edited by Unknown Smurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/06/2016 at 3:45 PM, The Warrior said:

My memory works quite well, thank you.

 

I was indeed asked about peace by addaff and a couple others on his behalf and we kindly rejected that notion since addaff is a central figure to the entire conflict that we find ourselves in presently. We decided that it would be inappropriate to let him out of war until the other fronts close down. If you or addaff have an issue with that I would strongly encourage you to not create a rogue alliance and hit my ally. Thank you.

 

Nice to know. Only the Admin would know how I'd react if your memory wasn't up to scratch.

 

We wouldn't have been forced to intervene if your ally had actually defended their allies to their fullest extent back in Disorder and Doom War. Maybe if they were still around they'd change their ways. I guess we'll never know.

 

Final thing, you do realise that the majority of MONGOLS intend on fighting Oculus until they run out of money. I've seen a few of their WCs and it'll last them a very long time. If you intend on keeping Addaff at war for another 6 months or more, then just say it. 

Edited by Isolatar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Caliph said:

Yeah, but terms have consequences.  I don't forget easy.  !@#$%* ass !@#$%*.

 

Well then maybe we should add on a few more rounds of war to make sure the job is done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, white majik said:

 

Well then maybe we should add on a few more rounds of war to make sure the job is done

You know where I'll be for the next 6 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Duderonomy said:

I don't care why they declared on CA. I hate double-standards, though. And they seem happy to apply them to everyone.

hi, alliance ca declared on alliance kashmir, is what happened. gud2cu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Haflinger said:

We declared war on the New Polar Order. Are they your protectorate now?

He's talking about CA, whom was hardly hit, he is still wrong in calling LC actions agression

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/23/2016 at 0:35 AM, Mogar said:
1 hour ago, spankthefrank said:

He's talking about CA, whom was hardly hit, he is still wrong in calling LC actions agression

 

Yeah, because LC entered in defense of our ally Kashmir and declared on New Polar Order, which is not, nor has ever been, an NG protectorate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Isolatar said:

Final thing, you do realise that the majority of MONGOLS intend on fighting Oculus until they run out of money. I've seen a few of their WCs and it'll last them a very long time. If you intend on keeping Addaff at war for another 6 months or more, then just say it. 

It sounds to me like it is the Mongols that intend to keep Addaff at war for the next 6 months or more then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Isolatar said:

 

Nice to know. Only the Admin would know how I'd react if your memory wasn't up to scratch.

 

We wouldn't have been forced to intervene if your ally had actually defended their allies to their fullest extent back in Disorder and Doom War. Maybe if they were still around they'd change their ways. I guess we'll never know.

 

Final thing, you do realise that the majority of MONGOLS intend on fighting Oculus until they run out of money. I've seen a few of their WCs and it'll last them a very long time. If you intend on keeping Addaff at war for another 6 months or more, then just say it. 

 

Isn't BONEs basically bankrupt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Warrior said:

It sounds to me like it is the Mongols that intend to keep Addaff at war for the next 6 months or more then.

 

Why is those handful of DK going rogue related to Mongols war? Honest question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Warrior said:

It sounds to me like it is the Mongols that intend to keep Addaff at war for the next 6 months or more then.

You know what they call the tactic Oculus has used in negotiation with me, Last Call, Kashmir, and now Mongols?

 

Terrorism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×