rabonnobar Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Sad to see so many friendships suddenly going under in close proximity. Indeed. One may even say, something seems fishy. )): Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 The courage involved in this is somewhat less considering that you waited for everyone else to go first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 What exactly is not to believe? Seriously. That this generation is finally growing the balls to fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shimmer Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Oh have they? ... dundunDUN. I'm sure you could add a 1v alliance to it. Though this is the first time in a while I can recall pacifica being on the other end of cancellations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paradigm Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 man if people keep canceling treaties because of lack of friendship, then treaties might actually start to mean something. wouldnt it be nice! long way to go but the ball is clearly rolling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 I am so glad to see this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 That this generation is finally growing the balls to fight. Ahh, so you're saying these are not sudden degradations in friendship, but in fact part of a larger plan culminating in aggressive action upon NPO? Interesting allegation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 (edited) I'm noticing a trend here..To explain my trend I shall link you to 1 wiki page that will say it all or at least I hope it will. http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Pacifica-Polaris_Dispute Hint : the important part starts here "Cancellations with the New Polar Order" Edited April 11, 2009 by Random Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 That this generation is finally growing the balls to fight. An interesting remark coming from someone in an alliance that would likely be neutral in most all the scenarios I've seen regarding any future conflict. Unless of course NSO has changed its mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmia Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 It is sad when people drift apart but things change as well as times. I wish RoK the best of luck in this. Sometimes things just have to be done even if it is sad. Holding a treaty that doesn't reflect the true relations hinders more than helps. So it is good to see actions like this taken when it does occur but sad when it is necessary in the first place. I wish both alliances the best of luck. RoK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Ahh, so you're saying these are not sudden degradations in friendship, but in fact part of a larger plan culminating in aggressive action upon NPO?Interesting allegation. Generally, that's what happens when there's about to be a big war. If you don't believe me, you can ask NPO. They've done it to plenty of alliances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Ahh, so you're saying these are not sudden degradations in friendship, but in fact part of a larger plan culminating in aggressive action upon NPO?Interesting allegation. Oh please. NPO didn't become a horrible communicator last week, prompting 3 large and prominent alliances to sever their treaties. You can all lie through your teeth to your hearts content about the intentions but people are going to be skeptical because any large bunch of treaty cancelations on a single alliance always precipitates a war involving that alliance. The timing isn't coincidental. I'm not sure I particularly share WC's optimism but there's clearly something larger at work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael von Prussia Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Congrats, RoK! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Obama Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 (edited) An interesting remark coming from someone in an alliance that would likely be neutral in most all the scenarios I've seen regarding any future conflict.Unless of course NSO has changed its mind. People in a presumably neut alliance no longer have the right to comment? That's news to me. Just because they aren't on any of the current sides doesn't mean their neutral btw. They could join in if they want to when the war starts. Edited April 11, 2009 by President Obama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 This is unacceptable. You do not get to talk about this subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Generally, that's what happens when there's about to be a big war. If you don't believe me, you can ask NPO. They've done it to plenty of alliances. Ahh, so you too believe this is a prelude to an attack. Again, a heavy claim to level on someone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 I am so glad to see this Given how much you lobbied for it, of course you are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Salovsky Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Ragnarok, FOK, Monos Archein, VE ..? My bad... 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 People in a presumably neutral(MDP with STA?) alliance no longer have the right to comment? That's news to me. Talking about fighting is cheap when its someone else doing the shooting and dying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabonnobar Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 That this generation is finally growing the balls to fight. Because all previous generations were obviously fearful subservient cowards, and all the people who have joined the game since have NOT only fought in lopsided wars, amirite? o/ The Birth of Bravery! or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 An interesting remark coming from someone in an alliance that would likely be neutral in most all the scenarios I've seen regarding any future conflict.Unless of course NSO has changed its mind. Ah-ha. Trying to frighten someone out of voicing an opinion by dragging his alliance into the conversation, implicating it in some greater scheme? You have condescended to me in the past of what is "unbecoming". Now I get to do the same to you. Delightful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 People in a presumably neutral(MDP with STA?) alliance no longer have the right to comment? That's news to me. I do not believe he told anyone that they had the right to comment, or not. Merely that his comment was more interesting than your average "HAIL ROK! BOO NPO!" or "Sad but necessary" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 (edited) Ahh, so you too believe this is a prelude to an attack. Again, a heavy claim to level on someone. You remind me of the people who said Polar and Pacifica would never be on the opposite sides of a war. Although they didn't directly fight, at the end of the day, they were on opposite sides of the Q-BLEU conflict. You also remind me of the people that said there would never be a WUT civil war, and look how that turned out. And remember those people who said GPA would never be attacked? You remind me of them as well. Oh yeah, and the people who said the OoO would never be canceled. You remind me of them a lot. I'm not saying a bunch of alliances with just gang up on NPO over night and cause a big war by the morning. However, I am saying that this kinda thing is usually the beginning of a much bigger conflict. Edited April 11, 2009 by Nintenderek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 You remind me of the people who said Polar and Pacifica would never be on the opposite sides of a war. Although they didn't directly fight, at the end of the day, they were on opposite sides of the Q-BLEU conflict.You also remind me of the people that said there would never be a WUT civil war, and look how that turned out. And remember those people who said GPA would never be attacked? You remind me of them as well. Oh yeah, and the people who said the OoO would never be canceled. You remind me of them a lot. Perhaps you just know something I don't, when it comes to this announcement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Perhaps you just know something I don't, when it comes to this announcement You barely missed my edit. And yes, I do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.