Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Our senators for the month of April are as follows!

1)  Northern Empire  [Ruler: Northern Empire] [Alliance: The Templar Knights] 10/23/2008 [Team: Maroon (Since 10/23/2008)] 111    
2)  Benfica-Land  [Ruler: Ninja] [Alliance: Nordreich]  2/1/2007 [Team: Maroon (Since 3/1/2014)] 108    
3)  Creepville  [Ruler: Steve Buscemi] [Alliance: Non Grata] 2/7/2007  [Team: Maroon (Since 9/25/2011) 76    
4) Kickastan [Ruler: Chuck Normis] [Alliance: Coalition of Royal Allied Powers] 3/4/2007 [Team: Maroon (Since 3/4/2007)] 67    
5) Frontier  [Ruler: hackerhog] [Alliance: Random Insanity Alliance] 1/9/2008 [Team: Maroon (Since 1/9/2008) 63     

For those of you keeping score at home!

Edited by Mogar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 minutes ago, SirWilliam said:

But.. but.. the Treaty for Maroon Dominance ordains it otherwise.  :(

1) Northern Empire

compose_message.png alliance_statistic.gif

10/23/2008

team_Maroon.gif

81,221.169 46
war.gif
2) Benfica-Land

compose_message.png alliance_statistic.gif

2/1/2007

team_Maroon.gif

119,892.410 44
war.gif
3) Creepville

compose_message.png alliance_statistic.gif

2/7/2007

team_Maroon.gif

89,601.284 32
war.gif
4) Kickastan

compose_message.png alliance_statistic.gif

3/4/2007

team_Maroon.gif

59,431.842 29
war.gif
5) Frontier

compose_message.png alliance_statistic.gif

1/9/2008

team_Maroon.gif

127,400.151 25
 

If I had to take a guess, it appears this current month's election will follow a similar outcome.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once we reduce your alliance nation count via attrition enough to achieve our ends, or when you disband, or when you gtfo of maroon. Take your pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Caustic said:

Once we reduce your alliance nation count via attrition enough to achieve our ends, or when you disband, or when you gtfo of maroon. Take your pick.

 

Can you actually accomplish this before the game ends?

 

Being top of the mountain is fine and all but at some point the mountain becomes a hill, then a heap, they something akin to a mound.

 

And even if you do all of this wonderment, at what point will you decide you all no longer want to share ( seems like a bunch of folks who willingly broke one treaty would have no problem just abandoning others ).

 

Seems to me...it is time to listen to the James Gang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eejack said:

 

Can you actually accomplish this before the game ends?

 

Being top of the mountain is fine and all but at some point the mountain becomes a hill, then a heap, they something akin to a mound.

 

And even if you do all of this wonderment, at what point will you decide you all no longer want to share ( seems like a bunch of folks who willingly broke one treaty would have no problem just abandoning others ).

 

Seems to me...it is time to listen to the James Gang

Let's hope we can't accomplish this in that time frame, and the game gets turned off in the near future.

 

Treaties are canceled regularly. If they weren't, everyone would be treatied to everyone else.Then nothing would happen at all. We canceled the treaty you are referring to according the to the relevant article of said treaty. (Actually, I think we gave an extra day or two before attacking, even.)

 

Are you certain you understand the purpose of this war?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Erwin Schrodinger said:

Let's hope we can't accomplish this in that time frame, and the game gets turned off in the near future.

 

Nothing stops you from deleting if you hate it that much. Please don't curse the rest of us with your apathy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Immortan Junka said:

 

Nothing stops you from deleting if you hate it that much. Please don't curse the rest of us with your apathy.

Saying we are bored, then having the drive to get up and do something about it isn't apathy. I'd argue most of our opponents are far more apathetic than myself or most of Oc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Immortan Junka said:

 

Nothing stops you from deleting if you hate it that much. Please don't curse the rest of us with your apathy.

 

Surely you of all people understand the need for purity. The alliances we are driving off MAD are filled with rapists, tech thieves, pedophiles, and communists. Maroon will be great again when out god given work is finished. If anything, we are bring the love of Jesus to those poor lost souls by driving them into their churches.. on a different color sphere.

 

#MMGA!!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Captain Enema said:

The alliances we are driving off MAD are filled with rapists, tech thieves, pedophiles, and communists.

Do you have any evidence to back this up? Additionally there are quite a few alliances filled with communists you're allied to, when can we expect your attacks against them?

1 hour ago, Erwin Schrodinger said:

Saying we are bored, then having the drive to get up and do something about it isn't apathy. I'd argue most of our opponents are far more apathetic than myself or most of Oc.

I don't think that choosing to avoid allying those who wish us harm is really considered apathy, nor do I feel that openly wishing to destroy communities in this world is a goal anyone should be aspiring to, I find it incredibly odd that NoR of all alliances would be supportive of such a goal.

Edited by Mogar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Erwin Schrodinger said:

Are you certain you understand the purpose of this war?

 

Actually I understand it pretty well. Shame it didn't work out as planned, though I guess some folks would call it a partial success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, eejack said:

 

Actually I understand it pretty well. Shame it didn't work out as planned, though I guess some folks would call it a partial success.

The fact others might have alternative purposes for this war skipped my mind for a moment. I should have clarified I meant specifically NG. The ultimate purpose of this war for us is entertainment. In fact, I think we're all here for some form of entertainment. Some people enjoy just logging in and collecting taxes. Others just want to hang out with friends, and this world is what connects them/us. NG is not content with that sedentary lifestyle. We want something more. We want things to happen. Just so happens most would rather sit and watch the world fade away, so we take it upon ourselves to go out and make something happen.

 

Some will claim we are hurting the environment and destroying communities (response to Mogar here), but I'd say this conflict has bonded people together more than they were a couple months ago, and drastically increased player activity on both sides of the conflict. The price for this: pixel destruction. I fail to see how we're hurting anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Erwin Schrodinger said:

Some will claim we are hurting the environment and destroying communities (response to Mogar here), but I'd say this conflict has bonded people together more than they were a couple months ago, and drastically increased player activity on both sides of the conflict. The price for this: pixel destruction. I fail to see how we're hurting anyone.

Well we're getting some mixed signals out of those that represent your alliance publicly as to the length of this war that we didn't want in the first place, not to mention keeping any alliance at war for more than 2-3 months is incredibly harmful to player retention for those on the losing end, you know all of this of course, but at least you're attempting to feign ignorance as to what you are doing rather than openly admit the intended goal as Caustic has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mogar said:

Well we're getting some mixed signals out of those that represent your alliance publicly as to the length of this war that we didn't want in the first place, not to mention keeping any alliance at war for more than 2-3 months is incredibly harmful to player retention for those on the losing end, you know all of this of course, but at least you're attempting to feign ignorance as to what you are doing rather than openly admit the intended goal as Caustic has.

Caustic has the odd habit of having his own opinions and goals. Pesky membership and people being individuals just spouting off whatever they think....

 

I think we've previously made our intentions clear in the TMD announcement and subsequent DoW. Caustic was kind enough to summarize your options a few posts above. You, too, made your intentions clear both in prior posts and in this very announcement: you don't want to leave. Taking a stand against the evils of the world is respectable. However, by making that stand, you are saying you want the war more than you want to move. Or in other words, that you choose to continue this war.

 

If you're so concerned about retaining inactive players, then forfeit your stand. Surrender. Move spheres (or, less desirably, disband).

Edited by Erwin Schrodinger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Erwin Schrodinger said:

However, by making that stand, you are saying you want the war more than you want to move. Or in other words, that you choose to continue this war.

I think you misunderstand, our charter states we are a maroon alliance and by simply following the document that governs our alliance we are unable to comply with leaving the sphere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mogar said:

I think you misunderstand, our charter states we are a maroon alliance and by simply following the document that governs our alliance we are unable to comply with leaving the sphere.

Oh, no worries, Article VI of your charter allows for provisions to amend the constritution to "suit the present needs of the alliance". There is even a detailed process already on how to do just that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Erwin Schrodinger said:

Oh, no worries, Article VI of your charter allows for provisions to amend the constritution to "suit the present needs of the alliance". There is even a detailed process already on how to do just that.

I don't think that 11 years of maintaining the same sphere is worth giving up because some pricks decide they want to try to force us off personally, I can't imagine your alliance would respond any differently were the roles reversed.(not that they would be of course, since none of our alliances believe in forcing people off spheres or punitive actions against our opponents.)

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.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...