Starcraftmazter Posted September 10, 2008 Report Share Posted September 10, 2008 1 The Superfriends: 18.73 --> 19.08 (+0.30)3 Orange Juice: 13.61 --> 13.41 (-0.20) 4 The Citadel: 11.77 --> 12.01 (+0.24) 5 National Alliance of Arctic Countries: 10.85 --> 10.90 (+0.05) We're beating you in the sanction race. So having an alliance beat you in points is now a cause for surrendering? So by your own logic, shouldn't you surrender to OJ? Also, it allows you a chance to join the Citadel instead, and who wouldn't want that? Who would want that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Uros VI Posted September 10, 2008 Report Share Posted September 10, 2008 Cute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted September 10, 2008 Report Share Posted September 10, 2008 And... irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dracule Mihawk1 Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 o/ Arctic Fun is ftw. Suffering is cool too though. -Drac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheListener Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 I look forward to the day when SF and Citadel regret ever posting this topic, and wasting their time and effort on surrender terms in Tournament Edition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arctic Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 After talking with some of the originators of this topic, it seems like they meant it as a joke partially. Maybe they were hoping the NAAC would cave in and its members would jump at the terms to save some infrastructure and join "the winning bloc". But given the mentality of this game over the past few years, who can blame them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 But given the mentality of this game over the past few years, who can blame them? I can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atanatar Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 (edited) Edited September 12, 2008 by Atanatar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avernite Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 After talking with some of the originators of this topic, it seems like they meant it as a joke partially. Maybe they were hoping the NAAC would cave in and its members would jump at the terms to save some infrastructure and join "the winning bloc". But given the mentality of this game over the past few years, who can blame them? Hey, it's practically individual white peace, since alliance-wide peace had some requirements we disliked. Hardly too horrible... IDIOT has harsher terms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arctic Posted September 13, 2008 Report Share Posted September 13, 2008 (edited) I have talked with both Methax and Delta1212, the NAAC has no problems with The Citadel and SF, we will continue to fight out our wars as best we can, but will be glad to end this one in another 7 days if they are willing to let us go. The White Peace offer from SF and The Citadel to the NAAC and OJ is acceptable to us. We will begin to offer peace and declare no new wars against your alliance for at least the next two weeks. However, if we find a new offensive war by one of your nations, we will triple team them into anarchy for not paying attention to their leadership. If you find one of ours doing something similar, please feel free to do the same. Edited September 15, 2008 by Arctic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drai Posted September 15, 2008 Report Share Posted September 15, 2008 The AA demand is rather weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts