Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
HiredGun

We come in pieces

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, Bajoran Federation said:

 

Are you not whining with this post?

 

I don't think I've seen a recent post from you where you weren't whining.

He's not whining, he is stating a fact that you had plenty of time to collect. The only people whining in this thread is you and Bd, all the rest of us can do is point out where you failed. lol

 

2 minutes ago, Samwise said:

Who said CN doesn't give anniversary bonuses past 1 year?! HAPPY 10 YEARS CN!

 

c5aP166.png

 

On the flip side, thanks for 10 years worth of sucky SDI's. >:| I'm glad you finally decided to average it out, admin.

Where did you get your SDI? :o

Share this post


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

Now that we've legitimized Dawners by declaring war on them, I'd like to take this time to finally say get off welcome to green!

 

Green is mine. I'll kill you. <3

The Dawners  where did they go .......... Get attacked and the whole Alliance disappears

 

Man what a Downers

 

Or are we Bloating numbers again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Wayne World said:

The Dawners  where did they go .......... Get attacked and the whole Alliance disappears

 

Man what a Downers

 

Or are we Bloating numbers again?

 

Oh look they joined UN. And claim that they are their friends who rerolled at the behining of the round. So basically they had them join now and maybe others will follow IF NEEDED inorder to win the score record that Defcon one was holding until yesterday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wasso said:

 

Oh look they joined UN. And claim that they are their friends who rerolled at the behining of the round. So basically they had them join now and maybe others will follow IF NEEDED inorder to win the score record that Defcon one was holding until yesterday. 

If I remember right when an Alliance merges with another there Casualties count does not move

 

So if DCS moves to DF1 it should not effect Most Alliance Soldiers Lost and Most Alliance Soldiers Killed which belongs to

Wolves of the North .... BECAUSE most DCS members are former DF 1 members  That should make it all ok to do such a merger, just following the logic ... Would bring DF 1 even with 28 members and make it all fair  ( Bull Droppings )

 

This message is not saying that would happen But we seem to be following last rounds lunacy 

 

come on United Nations Lets not start the crap again

Its not fair to people like the Wolves of the North that have a legit chance of winning Casualty numbers for us to start combining Alliances to make the final number meaningless and screwed up .

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha UN trying to not only win strongest alliance but trying to get most casualties hahaha....

 

Got to love that those cheap shots at the end...

 

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 5:05 AM, Bajoran Federation said:

 

Are you not whining with this post?

 

I don't think I've seen a recent post from you where you weren't whining.

Al Bundy doesn't whine, he sells women's shoes, he complains!!!   duh!

 

Never thought Id dislike anyone more than D1.....congrats UN!

 

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would probably suggest making this your last round UN, being disliked by UN and the Wolves is a sad position to be in.

 

Or come back and play fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

To: Wasso    From: Samwise    Date: 1/29/2018 12:33:12 AM

Subject: Battle Report

 

Message: You have been attacked by Samwise. 

You lost 0 soldiers and 0 tanks. You killed 0 soldiers and 0 tanks. Their forces razed 0.000 miles of your land, stole 0.000 technology, and destroyed 0.000 infrastructure. Their forces looted $0.00 from you and you gained $0.00 in your enemy's abandoned equipment.

In the end the battle was a Draw. Any existing peace offers that were on the table have been automatically canceled.

 

 
 

 

Quote

 

To: Samwise    From: Wasso    Date: 1/29/2018 2:20:16 PM

Subject: Battle Report

 

Message: You have been attacked by Wasso. 

You lost 0 soldiers and 0 tanks. You killed 0 soldiers and 0 tanks. Their forces razed 0.000 miles of your land, stole 0.000 technology, and destroyed 0.000 infrastructure. Their forces looted $0.00 from you and you gained $0.00 in your enemy's abandoned equipment.

In the end the battle was a Draw. Any existing peace offers that were on the table have been automatically canceled.

 

 
 

Clearly admin doesn't want us to fight. :wub:

 

 

Share this post


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

 

Oh look they joined UN. And claim that they are their friends who rerolled at the behining of the round. So basically they had them join now and maybe others will follow IF NEEDED inorder to win the score record that Defcon one was holding until yesterday. 

You hit it mostly on the head. The Dawners are rerolls of UN members from beginning of the round. Those members that D1 and Wolves combined to force to delete and reroll. Now both alliances are complaining that the Dawners are back home. It's gold. Your actions have consequences and for someone who claims to pay so much attention to whats going on, it should have been quite obvious who the Dawners were. All 4/5 of us deleted and re rolled nearly on the same day. We did wait on none and at 0.00 until our first build when we came together onto Dawners. UN still has fewer members than it did at its peak at the beginning of the round counting UN, LoG, and The Raiders(because less than half rerolled). Gratz for making new players quit.

 

7 hours ago, Wayne World said:

If I remember right when an Alliance merges with another there Casualties count does not move

 

So if DCS moves to DF1 it should not effect Most Alliance Soldiers Lost and Most Alliance Soldiers Killed which belongs to

Wolves of the North .... BECAUSE most DCS members are former DF 1 members  That should make it all ok to do such a merger, just following the logic ... Would bring DF 1 even with 28 members and make it all fair  ( Bull Droppings )

 

This message is not saying that would happen But we seem to be following last rounds lunacy 

 

come on United Nations Lets not start the crap again

Its not fair to people like the Wolves of the North that have a legit chance of winning Casualty numbers for us to start combining Alliances to make the final number meaningless and screwed up .

 

 

 

 

 

Well you are right. Casaulties don't move when you change alliances, so The Dawners coming home didn't add any casualties. We are however fighting this war and so of course our earned casualties will be with our alliance UN. Do I think we will win the award? Doubtful. Wolves are quite far ahead. Early round, me and my Dawners were the top 5 on the causality boards...if those hadn't deleted, UN would be at the top. 

 

Secondly we aren't doing the &#33;@#&#036;%^&amp;* merge League tried last round. Everyone that joined UN from The Dawners is an original member of UN and was in UN before we rerolled. Just to REPEAT AGAIN for those that don't understand. 

Edited by BDRocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Samwise said:

 

 
 

 

 
 

Clearly admin doesn't want us to fight. :wub:

 

 

 

We are meant to be together. No war could divide us no matter how far you are from here.

Ah. Who is cutting onions 🤤

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re-rolling and sitting in another alliance for the majority of the round doesn't mean you are UN nations in my eyes.

 

You re-rolled resulting in massive casualty losses for D1 and then think it's acceptable to just jump into the UN 2 weeks before reset? 

 

You are not doing yourselves any favours. This round you were meant to learn from your mistakes last round. I guess yous are slow learners and it will take a bit more time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, KingBilly1 said:

Re-rolling and sitting in another alliance for the majority of the round doesn't mean you are UN nations in my eyes.

 

One of the Dawners who joined is literally low-gov; does that not make him a UN nation? Or does that not qualify as a legitimate member in your eyes? You fought every single one of these 5 nations twice this round, btw. 

 

Whether or not we kept them in a different alliance is irrelevant, and was only necessary so they'd actually have a chance to build and play this game instead of getting nuked right out of the gate. We did this 3 times this round with 3 different alliances. If your leader wasn't obsessed with us, we would've never had to. 

 

35 minutes ago, KingBilly1 said:

You re-rolled resulting in massive casualty losses for D1 and then think it's acceptable to just jump into the UN 2 weeks before reset? 

 

Are you kidding me? You nuke a bunch of newbies on day 7 and then fault them for rerolling? 

 

8 hours ago, AL Bundy said:

Haha UN trying to not only win strongest alliance but trying to get most casualties hahaha....

 

Got to love that those cheap shots at the end...

 

Al

 

I don't think you understand how most soldiers killed works. Generally, an alliance has to fight wars to earn those kills. If you want to win that award, you should fight a war. In case you've failed to realize, we haven't declared one war this round; the casualties were given to us, we haven't pursued them once. And for the record, most soldiers killed is supposed to be chased and competed for by alliances. Going for it isn't bad, nor has it ever been considered so. As for strongest alliance, no, we're not trying to win, and no, we won't win. D1 will very easily beat a score of 66 after they rebuild.

 

9 hours ago, Wayne World said:

So if DCS moves to DF1 it should not effect Most Alliance Soldiers Lost and Most Alliance Soldiers Killed which belongs to

Wolves of the North .... BECAUSE most DCS members are former DF 1 members  That should make it all ok to do such a merger, just following the logic ... Would bring DF 1 even with 28 members and make it all fair  ( Bull Droppings )

 

You are welcome to do so. We don't care, nor are we the deserving alliance this round. That goes to D1, which is why they'll win it. This round hasn't been about winning awards for us since day 7.

 

However, most soldiers killed can't be manipulated, as you pointed out. It doesn't "belong" to any one AA. It belongs to the alliance that finishes the round with the most kills, period. Which, yes, will probably be the wolves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KingBilly1 said:

Re-rolling and sitting in another alliance for the majority of the round doesn't mean you are UN nations in my eyes.

 

You re-rolled resulting in massive casualty losses for D1 and then think it's acceptable to just jump into the UN 2 weeks before reset? 

 

You are not doing yourselves any favours. This round you were meant to learn from your mistakes last round. I guess yous are slow learners and it will take a bit more time.

Bajor already said but I'll repeat it because it seems like you and your friends have a very hard time understanding simple statements. 
A) We had to delete and reroll because of D1 and friends actions of nuking us/staggering us so we would eventually reach bill lock or complete irrelevancy.
B) The Dawners that rerolled, were the top 5 casualty holders of the entire game at the time of deletion. Our forced deletion hurt UN casualties numbers just as they did D1's. 
C) Don't force nations to delete and you won't be complaining about them down the road. 

Share this post


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

I don't think you understand how most soldiers killed works. Generally, an alliance has to fight wars to earn those kills. If you want to win that award, you should fight a war. In case you've failed to realize, we haven't declared one war this round; the casualties were given to us, we haven't pursued them once. And for the record, most soldiers killed is supposed to be chased and competed for by alliances. Going for it isn't bad, nor has it ever been considered so. As for strongest alliance, no, we're not trying to win, and no, we won't win. D1 will very easily beat a score of 66 after

So why accept an separate alliance into your alliance with less than 2 weeks in the round, o I know to gain more members to boost your strength an earn more casualties...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to what have been mentioned by many alliance's leaders so far and inorder to keep people playing fairly every round and especially during this round, i would suggest from you Bajor to keep your Drawners nations in their own alliance as a part of UN but separated from them. Thus their existence would help you during wars etc... but also they wont be affecting the overall total score, casualties etc.

 

So give what every alliance deserves to win fairly and what everyone has fought for during all these days and keep it clean.

Im saying this infront of everyone else, UN. Objections?  Guess not if you claim you dont want to win the score award nor the casualties or any other word. So why not?

 

Edited by wasso
English

Share this post


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

According to what have been mentioned by many alliance's leaders so far and inorder to keep people playing fairly every round and especially during this round, i would suggest from you Bajor to keep your Drawners nations in their own alliance as a part of UN but separated from them. Thus their existence would help you during wars etc... but also they wont be affecting the overall total score, casualties etc.

 

So give what every alliance deserves to win fairly and what everyone has fought for during all these days and keep it clean.

Im saying this infront of everyone else, UN. Objections?  Guess not if you claim you dont want to win the score award nor the casualties or any other word. So why not?

 

Why would we do that exactly? They were in UN at the beginning of the round. If your actions hadn't caused them to delete, they would of been there all round. Them joining this late is worse off in terms of casualties than had we stayed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beating a score of 66 is near impossible with 5 less members.

 

We have literally had the top 10 nations at several points this round, but strength counts for nothing against membership.

 

We all knew they were UN re-rolls, but that still doesn't make it fair to have them jump over this late in the round

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, AL Bundy said:

So why accept an separate alliance into your alliance with less than 2 weeks in the round, o I know to gain more members to boost your strength an earn more casualties...

 

They're not a separate alliance, nor have they ever been. If anyone would've hit them they would've found that out. They joined because they've always been UN members, since the very beginning of this round, on day 1, they were under the UN AA. They fought in both wars against D1 and one of them is low-gov and has been with us for rounds now. The plan was always for them to join up when it came time for war. Take a look at their wonders and you'll see their purpose isn't to help us with casualties (which we pretty much have no chance of winning anyway), but instead to drop WRC nukes (on D1). It's not our fault we weren't allowed to keep members on AA without them being nuked and not getting a chance to actually build or play the game. 

 

5 hours ago, wasso said:

According to what have been mentioned by many alliance's leaders so far and inorder to keep people playing fairly every round and especially during this round, i would suggest from you Bajor to keep your Drawners nations in their own alliance as a part of UN but separated from them. Thus their existence would help you during wars etc... but also they wont be affecting the overall total score, casualties etc.

 

So give what every alliance deserves to win fairly and what everyone has fought for during all these days and keep it clean.

Im saying this infront of everyone else, UN. Objections?  Guess not if you claim you dont want to win the score award nor the casualties or any other word. So why not?

 

Are you actually being serious? We should keep legitimate members off AA, one of whom is low-gov, so that we don't threaten your precious award? We have more members than you do, there's nothing we can do about that other than what you suggested, which is both childish and unfair to our members. 

 

11 minutes ago, KingBilly1 said:

Beating a score of 66 is near impossible with 5 less members.

 

We have literally had the top 10 nations at several points this round, but strength counts for nothing against membership.

 

We all knew they were UN re-rolls, but that still doesn't make it fair to have them jump over this late in the round

 

Beating a score of 66 is not near impossible, even with 5 less members. You have more cash then us; when you guys drop all that cash on tech you'll very easily surpass that score. Strength does count for something, albeit it counts a lot less than member count, but it still matters. And if by some chance you don't have a high enough score to beat it, have some friends join. Like I've said a million times, we do not care about winning strongest AA. If we did, we'd have all of our temps on AA too. 

 

And, again, for the record, this is literally the third time we've kept members in a different AA this round; it's nothing new. We did this with The Raiders, LoG and the Dawners. 

 

So please stop all the crying; it's pointless when the round hasn't even concluded yet. 

Share this post


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

 

One of the Dawners who joined is literally low-gov; does that not make him a UN nation? Or does that not qualify as a legitimate member in your eyes? You fought every single one of these 5 nations twice this round, btw. 

 

Whether or not we kept them in a different alliance is irrelevant, and was only necessary so they'd actually have a chance to build and play this game instead of getting nuked right out of the gate. We did this 3 times this round with 3 different alliances. If your leader wasn't obsessed with us, we would've never had to. 

 

 

Are you kidding me? You nuke a bunch of newbies on day 7 and then fault them for rerolling? 

 

 

I don't think you understand how most soldiers killed works. Generally, an alliance has to fight wars to earn those kills. If you want to win that award, you should fight a war. In case you've failed to realize, we haven't declared one war this round; the casualties were given to us, we haven't pursued them once. And for the record, most soldiers killed is supposed to be chased and competed for by alliances. Going for it isn't bad, nor has it ever been considered so. As for strongest alliance, no, we're not trying to win, and no, we won't win. D1 will very easily beat a score of 66 after they rebuild.

 

 

You are welcome to do so. We don't care, nor are we the deserving alliance this round. That goes to D1, which is why they'll win it. This round hasn't been about winning awards for us since day 7.

 

However, most soldiers killed can't be manipulated, as you pointed out. It doesn't "belong" to any one AA. It belongs to the alliance that finishes the round with the most kills, period. Which, yes, will probably be the wolves.

So many excuses and assumptions yet supported with no facts or sound logic. Why don't you prove to us that this member of yours was lower gov, no one even knows who they were before re-rolling but I'm amazed that you're expecting us to believe every word you say even though you're desperate to save face and why would we hit them out of the gate? I told you all we felt justice had been served and were moving on, the only people with a grudge here was the UN, you even stated Dawners sole purpose of playing was to nuke D1 with tech heavy WRC's and they are going all out to do that now. We had no idea who the Dawners were and only added them to our target list to help even out stats so it'd have made no difference if they had joined UN after re-rolling. We waged a conventional and fair war, the main reason you're trying to make D1 look bad is so it'd lighten the impact of having another alliance merge with you, a tactic you whined about Justice League for doing.

 

Your newbies were broke before we nuked them and earlier you were trying to blame D1 for them all quitting but Stevie said on discord today that only about half had quit because he knew that your numbers wouldn't add up if they all had quit.

 

We earned over 5 million kills from our first two wars, this mass deletion was done to spite D1 and deny us kills we had earned and you like to talk about how much you earned strongest alliance award last round but when it comes to others fairly earning anything, you'll steal it from the backs of them all who put in a lot of effort to gain. The big casualty earners you had that deleted were only broke cos they spent their +40 mill war chest going all out.

 

 

5 hours ago, BDRocks said:

Why would we do that exactly? They were in UN at the beginning of the round. If your actions hadn't caused them to delete, they would of been there all round. Them joining this late is worse off in terms of casualties than had we stayed. 

Our actions caused no one to re-roll, their horrible building and inability to save any cash for their post war rebuild were the main causes of them re-rolling, they were even collecting without full trade rings but keep blaming D1 to justify your underhanded actions.s.

 

3 hours ago, Bajoran Federation said:

 

They're not a separate alliance, nor have they ever been. If anyone would've hit them they would've found that out. They joined because they've always been UN members, since the very beginning of this round, on day 1, they were under the UN AA. They fought in both wars against D1 and one of them is low-gov and has been with us for rounds now. The plan was always for them to join up when it came time for war. Take a look at their wonders and you'll see their purpose isn't to help us with casualties (which we pretty much have no chance of winning anyway), but instead to drop WRC nukes (on D1). It's not our fault we weren't allowed to keep members on AA without them being nuked and not getting a chance to actually build or play the game. 

 

 

Are you actually being serious? We should keep legitimate members off AA, one of whom is low-gov, so that we don't threaten your precious award? We have more members than you do, there's nothing we can do about that other than what you suggested, which is both childish and unfair to our members. 

 

 

Beating a score of 66 is not near impossible, even with 5 less members. You have more cash then us; when you guys drop all that cash on tech you'll very easily surpass that score. Strength does count for something, albeit it counts a lot less than member count, but it still matters. And if by some chance you don't have a high enough score to beat it, have some friends join. Like I've said a million times, we do not care about winning strongest AA. If we did, we'd have all of our temps on AA too. 

 

And, again, for the record, this is literally the third time we've kept members in a different AA this round; it's nothing new. We did this with The Raiders, LoG and the Dawners. 

 

So please stop all the crying; it's pointless when the round hasn't even concluded yet. 

Poor excuse to keep them off your aa, blame D1 for all your underhanded actions, it's been the theme for the last 3 rounds. BLAME D1! Blame HG! It's the only excuse you're hoping sticks and the community buys but we can see the real motives behind it all, it's all for your precious flags. You might think your crafty politicians and manipulators but in the end I'm confident the truth will prevail and we peaked out at 64 so why would we beat 66? You already know we wont be able to beat it with our 22 members, this is your attempt to try and convince us but mostly the community that no one should have to worry cos D1 will still win it.

 

I call BS on all acounts!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bajoran Federation said:

 

They're not a separate alliance, nor have they ever been. If anyone would've hit them they would've found that out. They joined because they've always been UN members, since the very beginning of this round, on day 1, they were under the UN AA. They fought in both wars against D1 and one of them is low-gov and has been with us for rounds now. The plan was always for them to join up when it came time for war. Take a look at their wonders and you'll see their purpose isn't to help us with casualties (which we pretty much have no chance of winning anyway), but instead to drop WRC nukes (on D1). It's not our fault we weren't allowed to keep members on AA without them being nuked and not getting a chance to actually build or play the game. 

 

When they were not within your alliance so they were separate....that's what separate means...not in, but apart..... :facepalm:

 

All I hear is you been trying to keep your stats low all round, and was keeping a couple nations on reserve for the end ''to get back at d1" or just boost your stats at the end of the round......

 

So when will all the one day nations join up?

 

Al

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The nations who were formerly in Dawners have been a part of the UN community for the entire round. Due to their inexperience and multiple wars at the beginning of the round, their nations were in shambles--most of them had to re-roll. Rather than plunge them into the same situation, we elected to keep them off AA in order to have better builds, so that the next time they fought, they would have more fun and more success. So, when D1 attacked, the Dawners came back to their original AA. It seems that several of you think these were underhanded tactics, but considering the animosity for UN this round, as well as their inexperience with the game, it seems like a fair strategy to me.

 

Admittedly, I don't quite understand the complaints about boosting our score. If these nations had joined us before the war, we would hit the same score we did now (probably higher, since we lost NS at the initial blitz!). If we had asked these (and other nations who didn't return) to stay active at the beginning of the round instead of rerolling, our score would have eclipsed 70 after myself and other UN members joined the AA. Either way, we would have had the top score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you aren't understanding here Das is that these nations re-rolled and joined a new alliance, then joined UN 2 weeks before reset. Not acceptable after last round.

 

If these nations stayed at UN all round then the rest of us could have spent time recruiting.

 

You don't just hide re-rolls and then claim 1 of them is even gov for UN. If he is not in UN then he is not UN gov, really is that simple.

That's like HG leaving for a new alliance and claiming to still be D1 gov.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, KingBilly1 said:

What you aren't understanding here Das is that these nations re-rolled and joined a new alliance, then joined UN 2 weeks before reset. Not acceptable after last round.

 

If these nations stayed at UN all round then the rest of us could have spent time recruiting.

 

You don't just hide re-rolls and then claim 1 of them is even gov for UN. If he is not in UN then he is not UN gov, really is that simple.

That's like HG leaving for a new alliance and claiming to still be D1 gov.

Ah, so if UN had a higher score earlier in the round, other alliances would have recruited nations to boost their score? That's the very tactic we executed last round—the one which is still being heavily criticized.

 

Thank you for your honesty, KingBilly.

Share this post


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

When they were not within your alliance so they were separate....that's what separate means...not in, but apart..... :facepalm:

 

That's a matter of interpretation. They had no autonomy at all. I do not, and never have, considered them seperate, whether or not they were in a different AA; just as I never considered The Raiders or LoG to be a seperate alliance. This was merely a strategy enacted so we were able to build them up adequately instead of bringing them on AA right away, which would've meant they'd be hit by IRS ops, nukes, etc. How can you seriously sit there and blame us for not being able to keep all of our members on AA without them being bullied and their round ruined? We did what we had to do, and what we had to do has literally nothing to do casualties, nor AA score.

 

Can everyone stop jumping to conclusions and let the round conclude? D1 will inevitably win strongest AA and the wolves will inevitably win most soldiers killed. 

 

3 hours ago, AL Bundy said:

All I hear is you been trying to keep your stats low all round, and was keeping a couple nations on reserve for the end ''to get back at d1" or just boost your stats at the end of the round......

 

We weren't trying to keep our stats low. I'm unsure what the point of keeping stats low would even be? The plan was for them to get back at D1, yes. That's obviously part of our feud and doesn't concern you. They were never here to boost stats, nor do we need them to. I don't think you realize how many temps we have off AA; we could easily call them all onto AA and set a score that no one can beat, but have we, or will we? Nope, because since day 7 of this round we haven't been trying to win a single award. 

 

3 hours ago, AL Bundy said:

So when will all the one day nations join up?

 

They wont? Instead of making assumptions and jumping to conclusions, let the round conclude. There's still plenty of time left. 

 

7 hours ago, HiredGun said:

The big casualty earners you had that deleted were only broke cos they spent their +40 mill war chest going all out.

 

You just contradicted yourself. How was rerolling to spite D1 in terms of casualties when the ones who rerolled where the ones who topped the casualty count? If they hadn't deleted, the UN would probably be winning the race for most soldiers killed. 

 

7 hours ago, HiredGun said:

Why don't you prove to us that this member of yours was lower gov, no one even knows who they were before re-rolling but I'm amazed that you're expecting us to believe every word you say

 

Lol, this was supposed to be a secret, but Bdrocks is one of the Dawners. You know him quite well by now, yeah?

 

He's been with us for rounds now, he's an economic officer and one of our low-gov (most likely will work his way up to gov shortly.) He's in this very thread. So, tell me, is he not a legitimate member? Should he be condemned to stay off AA just to satisfy you? 

 

And another thing, WD are currently allowed access to our Discord server. They know exactly who the Dawners are. They've been coordinating with every single one of them. So, before you make a bunch of idiotic assumptions, you should really vet the situation fully. It's impossible to lie about who they are when they're coordinating with a foreign AA in our server. 

 

7 hours ago, HiredGun said:

why would we hit them out of the gate? I told you all we felt justice had been served and were moving on, the only people with a grudge here was the UN

 

Such bs. You've said several times all round you're going to continue your vandetta indefinitely. But you're most certainly right, we do have a grudge. Did you expect to nuke us on day 7, hit us with IRS ops, blockades, hit and blockade unbuilt nations then build up to 4k+ Infra, and send threatening messages to our rerolled nations who you were able to idenetify, and we would just shake hands and go seperate ways? 

 

What does reality look like to you?

 

2 hours ago, KingBilly1 said:

That's like HG leaving for a new alliance and claiming to still be D1 gov.

 

A very terrible analogy. None of our members left for a new alliance. They were told to stay off AA while they beelined WRCs; in no way is that "leaving for another alliance." 

 

If you don't like our strategy of keeping members in a temporary, non-legitimate AA, then try to actually let our players have a chance to build without your psychotic leader hunting them down. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bajoran Federation said:

I don't think you realize how many temps we have off AA; we could easily call them all onto AA and set a score that no one can beat, but have we, or will we? Nope, because since day 7 of this round we haven't been trying to win a single award. 

 

Congrats, thats like a fair play. GG to you and to all your hidden ghosts out there. 

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
Sign in to follow this  

×