Duncan King Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Could you neatly place it in the square of his back and twist it slightly? B)If it means so much to you, why not just throw down and attack TPF? They don't seem to be acknowledging a war with you. In fact, they insolently seem to be trying diplomacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panic King Posted March 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 I'm not going to debate this about our raiding policy, you are clearly with in it and here is just another fine example of how you have sent pm's to me and your threats....My nations peace out as i gave the orders, and the fact that you and others that have peace is proof of that, my point about you guys getting peace and then just re-attacking is on your war screens, as with others as well. If you had wanted peace then you would had let the peace out, not keep it going by having others DOW them. To anyone who thinks TPF is in the wrong, your not apart of the pm's and wars from UW have been deleted. I can also show you pms from UW members that the reason they keep attacking instead of peacing out is they just want to get back more tech and land. This is not the way to end a problem.... Thanks Tracer! BG. BG.. keep twisting the truth... Fact .. your policy on raids as you pmed me and stated elsewhere on these forums.. The AA must be less than 30 members and below 25 in alliance strength score. Fact..UW had 31 members when you started to raid us and was in the 25th place in alliance score. Your denial that your alliance was wrong in this attack and that your raiding nations violated your alliance raiding rules is just mind boggeling. I became aware of the pm from one of our members just this morning. Although I disapprove with that logic, I understand where he was coming from. But that does not change the facts that not all your nations offer the peace that you said would happen. Yes I peaced and a few others did also but after noticing that TPF was continuing to attack my alliance we did re-enter and attack. Once again we limited our attacks to those attacking us. My mistake.. I should of attacked nations half my size instead of defending on nations twice my size. Finally... "To anyone who thinks TPF is in the wrong, your not apart of the pm's and wars from UW have been deleted." BG that is extremely weak.. I am amazed you are insinuating that we are deleting wars and raids that would make UW look bad to he planet. We're not that smart otherwise we would not of been in this situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panic King Posted March 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 If it means so much to you, why not just throw down and attack TPF? They don't seem to be acknowledging a war with you. In fact, they insolently seem to be trying diplomacy. You're definately not paying attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lehran Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Forum wars: Tournament Edition UW, if you want a war go to war, if you don't want a war then accept the peace and come to terms with the fact that your fate and all of our fates are largely governed by the power of others. It's not nice, but we've all been there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Glory Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 BG.. keep twisting the truth... Fact .. your policy on raids as you pmed me and stated elsewhere on these forums.. The AA must be less than 30 members and below 25 in alliance strength score. Fact..UW had 31 members when you started to raid us and was in the 25th place in alliance score. Your denial that your alliance was wrong in this attack and that your raiding nations violated your alliance raiding rules is just mind boggeling. I became aware of the pm from one of our members just this morning. Although I disapprove with that logic, I understand where he was coming from. But that does not change the facts that not all your nations offer the peace that you said would happen. Yes I peaced and a few others did also but after noticing that TPF was continuing to attack my alliance we did re-enter and attack. Once again we limited our attacks to those attacking us. My mistake.. I should of attacked nations half my size instead of defending on nations twice my size. Finally... "To anyone who thinks TPF is in the wrong, your not apart of the pm's and wars from UW have been deleted." BG that is extremely weak.. I am amazed you are insinuating that we are deleting wars and raids that would make UW look bad to he planet. We're not that smart otherwise we would not of been in this situation Oh boy...Your like a thorn in my side! You had 30 members when UW was raided, that is all! How would you like to see the screen shots of wars that are now no longer there? If you would have just told your guys to peace out and also waited a few hrs for peeps to log back on you would have had peace, but instead i get pm's from your members saying that you didn't send orders to peace out...Go figure! And here is the pm i sent you; To: panic king From: Burning Glory Date: 3/27/2009 2:20:17 PM Subject: RE: BG.. WTF? Message: I didn't authorize any attacks on UW. Our rules state no raiding any AA over 30 members, I'm not sure how many you have as i haven't looked. The threat of sanctions was not cool, especially since we hold the majority of white seats and could easily bump you out not to mention over turn your sanctions and sanction your peeps as well. If you even have enough votes to do this... Now with all the BS out of the way, you know me well enough to just let me know whats up and I'll take care of it. My guys always send peace after a raid, so if none was taken and instead returned fire, then thats what lead to this on going. Let me ask you this; When you raid someone and then send peace, if they attack back you just go ahead and peace out or do you return the attack back? So tell your guys to send peace and I'll tell my guys to except it...let them know, no last hit then offer peace or it won't be excepted. And please come to me sooner and nicer next time. BG. See, it says over thirty members and when i checked you had 30 All i see in this thread is me trying to give you peace and you keep crying about the injustice you guy received yet not one time have you stepped up and said, OK lets do this and get peace...just WAR, WAR, WAR! This is fine, not wanted...but fine. BTW, how do you feel about joining this big war we have planned? BG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Glory Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 TPF, if you need us, you shall have the Fellowship's sword. Thanks DK! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WileyXero Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 TPF has the full support of The Fellowship shall this become a problem in respect to our treaty. o/ TPF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popsumpot Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 TPF has the full support of The Fellowship shall this become a problem in respect to our treaty.o/ TPF Lord of the Ring: Return of the Bandwagon. Stay out of it Fellowship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bionic redhead Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) Oh and for those of you who are confused or otherwise can't be bothered to search through the topic, here's what has led up to these events: - TPF tech raided some UW nations - UW counter-declared on the TPF nations - Panic King decided he wanted his nations to be allowed one round of attacks unopposed in order to take back tech and land - BG said no - Panic King became uppity and declared war gee, if only there were some really easy ways to avoid this, oh wait ... Edited March 30, 2009 by Bionic redhead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lehran Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Lord of the Ring: Return of the Bandwagon.Stay out of it Fellowship. Nice. You'll find that we are on very few of the TE bandwagons. If an error was made here, it was that TF pointed out where it's loyalties lie when in fact it was implicit anyway. Tell it to someone who hasn't been on the receiving end of a bandwagon - we are one of the few alliances who aren't looking for one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 be happy I'm not in charge, I'd have ran you off my sphere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 TPF has the full support of The Fellowship shall this become a problem in respect to our treaty.o/ TPF Oh god not you again Nice. You'll find that we are on very few of the TE bandwagons. If an error was made here, it was that TF pointed out where it's loyalties lie when in fact it was implicit anyway.Tell it to someone who hasn't been on the receiving end of a bandwagon - we are one of the few alliances who aren't looking for one. Neo, come and talk to me in #FACE around 7, ok? I've always been a big fan of what you have to say be happy I'm not in charge, I'd have ran you off my sphere. SEE LOOK IT'S THE EVIL TPF! but, hey I don't blame you Look evil TPF :jihad: TPF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) Lord of the Ring: Return of the Bandwagon.Stay out of it Fellowship. Our MADP with TPF says no bandwagon. Oh god not you again Oh yes, him again. If you're lucky, we'll send him on a private visit to see you. Edited March 30, 2009 by Duncan King Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) Sorry UW, TPF wasnt a good alliance to mess with. Edited March 30, 2009 by Rotavele Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Our MADP with TPF says no bandwagon. ZOMG You deserve the best treaty clause ever award!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh yes, him again. If you're lucky, we'll send him on a private visit to see you. Oh man, I really liked you too, Duncan. I hope he doesn't change that :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 ZOMG You deserve the best treaty clause ever award!!!!!!!!!!!!!Oh man, I really liked you too, Duncan. I hope he doesn't change that :/ In this world, I'm a member of Fellowship and I support my MoFA and allies in TPF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 In this world, I'm a member of Fellowship and I support my MoFA and allies in TPF. Worlds don't change leadership skills And TPF is very good. I wish I didn't deny my gov't slot lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panic King Posted March 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) Oh and for those of you who are confused or otherwise can't be bothered to search through the topic, here's what has led up to these events:- TPF tech raided some UW nations. <<<yes that's true - UW counter-declared on the TPF nations <<<yes we Defended our right to resist a tech raid - Panic King decided he wanted his nations to be allowed one round of attacks unopposed in order to take back tech and land <<<no such discusions were made on that point.. an individual ruler pmed his attacker requesting that but NO.. I did not make that a condition as I accepted the peace sent by 2 TPF nations without restrictions...an amazing jump to conclusions based of false facts - BG said no <<<no discusions were ever made unless you count the BG posting today and my affirmanation that I had just become aware of that this morning - Panic King became uppity and declared war <<< TPF attacks started on the 26th.. we countered on the 27th.. I posted the DoW on the 29th.. I've never before been called "uppity". Is that a term of endearment in TPF? I feel I have been more than patient as TPF continued to roll in nations on my alliance. gee, if only there were some really easy ways to avoid this, oh wait ... <<< Yeah TPF could surrender Edited March 30, 2009 by Panic King Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panic King Posted March 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Oh boy...Your like a thorn in my side! You had 30 members when UW was raided, that is all! How would you like to see the screen shots of wars that are now no longer there? ............ And here is the pm i sent you; To: panic king From: Burning Glory Date: 3/27/2009 2:20:17 PM Subject: RE: BG.. WTF? Message: I didn't authorize any attacks on UW. Our rules state no raiding any AA over 30 members, I'm not sure how many you have as i haven't looked. The threat of sanctions was not cool, especially since we hold the majority of white seats and could easily bump you out not to mention over turn your sanctions and sanction your peeps as well. If you even have enough votes to do this... Now with all the BS out of the way, you know me well enough to just let me know whats up and I'll take care of it. My guys always send peace after a raid, so if none was taken and instead returned fire, then thats what lead to this on going. Let me ask you this; When you raid someone and then send peace, if they attack back you just go ahead and peace out or do you return the attack back? So tell your guys to send peace and I'll tell my guys to except it...let them know, no last hit then offer peace or it won't be excepted. And please come to me sooner and nicer next time. BG. See, it says over thirty members and when i checked you had 30 All i see in this thread is me trying to give you peace and you keep crying about the injustice you guy received yet not one time have you stepped up and said, OK lets do this and get peace...just WAR, WAR, WAR! This is fine, not wanted...but fine. BTW, how do you feel about joining this big war we have planned? BG. BG ...give it up. Why do you continually shoot yourself in the foot? Do you remember this PM? QUOTE (Burning Glory @ Mar 29 2009, 12:57 AM) No, we don't really....Its one in the same, the top 25 nations all have more than 30 members. We had 31 nations at the start of this raid.... We were in 25th position at the start of this raid.. Why can't you just admit your Pack Raiders were wrong in the selection of their targets? If you want to surrender, I will offer a White Peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBoy16 Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 To quote you, panic king: "I feel I have been more than patient as TPF continued to roll in nations on my alliance." I remember multiple messages in which I very respectfully said I would order TPF to peace out all UW nations if you would be willing to return the same respect to TPF. After two or three of those PM's, you replied to me with: ---------------------------- To: JonBoy16 From: panic king Date: 3/29/2009 11:22:19 PM Subject: RE: .hmm Message: i am through trying to be reasonable. stuff it ---------------------------- hmm...enough said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panic King Posted March 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 To quote you, panic king: "I feel I have been more than patient as TPF continued to roll in nations on my alliance."I remember multiple messages in which I very respectfully said I would order TPF to peace out all UW nations if you would be willing to return the same respect to TPF. After two or three of those PM's, you replied to me with: ---------------------------- To: JonBoy16 From: panic king Date: 3/29/2009 11:22:19 PM Subject: RE: .hmm Message: i am through trying to be reasonable. stuff it ---------------------------- hmm...enough said? That's the best you could do? Notice the time line.. this was a reaction to 3 days of raids and right before I posted our DoW and before I reengaged a TPF target. You guys are grasping at ghosts...Everthing I have posted is a true representation of the time line of our engagement. You have yet to post one fact that shows We or I did something that would justify your illegal raid on our alliance. Pretty sad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bionic redhead Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 I've never before been called "uppity". Is that a term of endearment in TPF? To: Bionic redhead From: panic king Date: 3/30/2009 10:37:45 AMSubject: stop.. Message: being a bonehead I've never been called a bonehead before. I suspect that my life would be considerably worse without my skull though. Mind you, even after the surgery required to remove the bones from my head, I'd still be a better leader than you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panic King Posted March 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 I've never been called a bonehead before. I suspect that my life would be considerably worse without my skull though. Mind you, even after the surgery required to remove the bones from my head, I'd still be a better leader than you are. Wasn't that in responce to your attack on me this morning? If you don't see the irony of the post.. quick.. look at your avatar. Crybaby! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBoy16 Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) your illegal raid on our alliance. Illegal raid? You say your alliance had 31 members when the first raid happened, BG says 30, all I ever saw was 29. Oh well. A couple of your alliance members were raided in TE- that's the way it goes. That's the best you could do? Notice the time line.. this was a reaction to 3 days of raids and right before I posted our DoW and before I reengaged a TPF target. You guys are grasping at ghosts...Everthing I have posted is a true representation of the time line of our engagement. K..lets look at this: ---------------------------- To: panic king From: JonBoy16 Date: 3/28/2009 12:49:03 PM Subject: RE: .Wars w/TPF Message: I'm not suggesting that UW "back down" but rather that her leaders help facilitate in an end to the attacks. I am issuing word to all TPF members attacking UW nations to peace out, but if other UW jump in, then other TPF members will also jump in. As you know, TPF, much like UW does not take kindly to attacks on her members no matter what the reason may be, so it will be hard keeping TPF nations away if additional UW nations jump into the conflict. I simply ask for you, as a leader of UW, to step up and help me end this conflict between our alliances- out of respect for the way UW and TPF have stood by eachother's alliances in the past if for no other reason. --------------------------- Or this. --------------------------- To: panic king From: JonBoy16 Date: 3/28/2009 1:40:49 AM Subject: .Wars w/TPF Message: Good day, sir. I'm not sure if you're the leader of UW or not, but I'm coming to you for some assistance. There have been a lot of wars between UW and TPF lately, some started by UW, some started by TPF. I am willing to order all TPF nations to peace out with the UW nations they are attacking if I can get the same respect returned to TPF. If you aren't who I need to come to with this issue, can you either forward it to the person who needs to see it or tell me who to contact? I thank you very much for your time, and good luck in the senate race. -------------------------- If March 30th's response was "a reaction to 3 days of raids" then what is the reason for not accepting peace after receiving two messages on the 28th? If my math is correct, that's two days earlier meaning one day after the raids started. To quote you again, "Everthing I have posted is a true representation of the time line of our engagement." Edited March 30, 2009 by JonBoy16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bionic redhead Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Wasn't that in responce to your attack on me this morning? If you don't see the irony of the post.. quick.. look at your avatar. Crybaby! Curious. What am I supposed to be crying about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts