Trashcat's Corner: And They Will Look Up And Shout Save Us

[Uralica]

The Tribal Council of Uralica has unanimously voted to begin work on translating all issues into all the other official languages of Uralica (I wonder how one says "epic fail" in Nenets )

Seriously, this is awesome. And Tyga gets his deserved mentions. Keep 'em coming.

Edited May 23, 2009 by Uralica

[Kortal]

Its like you're not even trying to slam valhalla with massive reps representing every real or imagined transgression committed in the past(and lets not forget the future crimes!!) umbrella

You sicken me.

Kudos to Stumpy for this edifying piece on par with all other things he's contributed to this fine game, especially given the lack of dozens of other self-titled editorials gracing these and other boards. Well done sir.

[RandomInterrupt]

Best issue yet. Total awesome.

[Stumpy Jung Il]

Its like you're not even trying to slam valhalla with massive reps representing every real or imagined transgression committed in the past(and lets not forget the future crimes!!) umbrella

You sicken me.

Kudos to Stumpy for this edifying piece on par with all other things he's contributed to this fine game, especially given the lack of dozens of other self-titled editorials gracing these and other boards. Well done sir.

I you too Kortal!

[SirWilliam]

GET OUT OF MY THREAD SIRWILLIAM. I WANT TRACE BACK.

Don't be mad at me because you wasted your time on a subpar publication.

[Stumpy Jung Il]

Don't be mad at me because you wasted your time on a subpar publication.

At least I didnt waste my time with a subpar alliance like you. :colbert:

[SirWilliam]

At least I didnt waste my time with a subpar alliance like you. :colbert:

...

You did though. lol

[Hyperion321]

To be fair about the "too many treaties" point, a good chunk of those announcements were upgrades and reformed alliances/old friends re-connecting. I wouldn't call out everyone for stocking up on meatshields just yet.

[Stumpy Jung Il]

...

You did though. lol

lol busted.

@Hyperion - I wasnt really ragging on anyone tbh. Just noticed treaties being signed again and I began to cry.

[Hyperion321]

fair enough.

[HeinousOne]

Yeah, that whole issue with Shaneprice is all very strange.

Also, thanks for the shoutout Stump but I cant help but feel you meant to say something else instead of calling me a hater.

[Magnum T. Gundraw]

It's basically the newspaper I would read if I read a newspaper. The Times has nothing on this !@#$.

[Stumpy Jung Il]

It's basically the newspaper I would read if I read a newspaper. The Times has nothing on this !@#$.

I kind of want to sig this. Trashcat > The Times.

[Heracles the Great]

Stumpy - just curious - do you think 10,000 tech reps like what MCXA got (iirc) would have been more damaging to Valhalla's growth efforts than the banning of outside aid for 90 days? I'd like to see you go on record saying one way or the other. Also, could you give us your definition of "White Peace" just so we're clear on what is and isn't included in "White Peace." And Finally - can you provide proof of these so called "massive warchests" that most members of Valhalla still posses?

[bzelger]

Clearly the player of the week award is a sham. I smell bribery.

[Neo Uruk]

Clearly the player of the week award is a sham. I smell bribery.

That's how it goes every week.

[Stumpy Jung Il]

Stumpy - just curious - do you think 10,000 tech reps like what MCXA got (iirc) would have been more damaging to Valhalla's growth efforts than the banning of outside aid for 90 days? I'd like to see you go on record saying one way or the other. Also, could you give us your definition of "White Peace" just so we're clear on what is and isn't included in "White Peace." And Finally - can you provide proof of these so called "massive warchests" that most members of Valhalla still posses?

Warchest - See Bob_Sanders.

White Peace - No reps basically.

More Damaging - No, Id have like to have seen both. Im not saying which is more damaging.

My problem is mostly with how you guys reacted to us being upset that you didnt take our considerations into your decision. Not only did you play off our concerns as being completely ludicrous and unimportant to you, but you then played like we were being belligerent and below you by asking for some sort of retribution like what was done to us. You guys clearly didnt take our concerns into mind and didnt care to. I dont see how you can expect us to be pleased by that.

Edited May 23, 2009 by Stumpy Jung Il

[Heracles the Great]

Warchest - See Bob_Sanders.

White Peace - No reps basically.

More Damaging - No, Id have like to have seen both. Im not saying which is more damaging.

My problem is mostly with how you guys reacted to us being upset that you didnt take our considerations into your decision. Not only did you play off our concerns as being completely ludicrous and unimportant to you, but you then played like we were being belligerent and below you by asking for some sort of retribution like what was done to us. You guys clearly didnt take our concerns into mind and didnt care to. I dont see how you can expect us to be pleased by that.

1. So you're claiming Bob_Sanders = every member of Valhalla?

2. So if we had decomed all their wonders, all their improvements, banned aid of any form for 90 days, and placed a viceroy over their alliance, but didn't demand any reps - that would have been white peace?

3. So you once again won't admit that banning of aid was more damaging than 10,000 tech reps and are simply claiming we should ahve done both?

My problem isn't with you, and many others, being upset - you are free to feel however you want. Rather that you look at the terms, see no reps are included, and immediately claim they are too light and automatically claim that they are white peace. I can't speak for Umbrella but I do speak for Kronos and can honestly say that Vanguard, nor your, concerns ever crossed our mind when we gave terms, nor should they have. If you can tell me why they should have, I'm more than open to hearing your reasons. Kronos is neither your ally nor a close friend (not that we don't like you) - as far as I'm concerned, you are an ally of our ally and an alliance that we have no problem with but nothing more. I have no problem with you expressing your opinion on what should have happened but don't sit here and act like Valhalla got off scott free... if you do feel that they got off scott free, then step up to the debate and stop dodging the questions.

EDIT - Clarification of a point

Edited May 23, 2009 by Heracles the Great

[Orkules]

Stumpy - just curious - do you think 10,000 tech reps like what MCXA got (iirc) would have been more damaging to Valhalla's growth efforts than the banning of outside aid for 90 days? I'd like to see you go on record saying one way or the other. Also, could you give us your definition of "White Peace" just so we're clear on what is and isn't included in "White Peace." And Finally - can you provide proof of these so called "massive warchests" that most members of Valhalla still posses?

I think a combination of the two would have restricted their aid slots and decreased their warchests as they have to rebuy even more tech than before. Quite simply, Valhalla, like many alliances is this war, was smart and had warchests. Big warchests. Half of the use of a warchest is the rebuild later. With nothing decreasing their internal slots and forcing them to rebuy sent out tech to further decrease warchests they can sky rocket in strength.

[Fort Pitt]

now that TWiP is pretty much defunct, this is my new favorite CN news service, and another excellent read, keep it up trashcat!

[Stumpy Jung Il]

1. So you're claiming Bob_Sanders = every member of Valhalla?

2. So if we had decomed all their wonders, all their improvements, banned aid of any form for 90 days, and placed a viceroy over their alliance, but didn't demand any reps - that would have been white peace?

3. So you once again won't admit that banning of aid was more damaging than 10,000 tech reps and are simply claiming we should ahve done both?

1. Im sorry I cant poll EVERY ALLIANCE MEMBER OF VALHALLA. Ill get on that. You asked for some proof, I have someone who came to mind. Are you telling me that no one in Valhalla is like Bob_Sanders?

2. No thats not what Im saying. Im saying thats what we wanted when we !@#$%*ed about giving them too light of terms. I said basically because I didnt want to list every little term that could be considered out. I was pointing out what we would have liked to have seen.

3. I dont see how I should have to claim which is more damaging, that wasnt part of my argument.

My problem isn't with you, and many others, being upset - you are free to feel however you want. Rather that you look at the terms, see no reps are included, and immediately claim they are too light and automatically claim that they are white peace. I can't speak for Umbrella but I do speak for Kronos and can honestly say that Vanguard, nor your, concerns ever crossed our mind when we gave terms, nor should they have. If you can tell me why they should have, I'm more than open to hearing your reasons. Kronos is neither your ally nor a close friend (not that we don't like you) - as far as I'm concerned, you are an ally of our ally and an alliance that we have no problem with but nothing more. I have no problem with you expressing your opinion on what should have happened but don't sit here and act like Valhalla got off scott free... if you do feel that they got off scott free, then step up to the debate and stop dodging the questions.

EDIT - Clarification of a point

You have no reason to. That was EXACTLY my point. No one in this coalition gives a damn about the other members, hints the children !@#$%*ing remark. Basically you are doing exactly what Im claiming Karma's weakness is. Also, how am I avoiding the debate? I've made my points clear in this issue, this post, and the Valhalla thread. Im sorry Im not repeating myself over and over like you are. Thats not a debate, thats just useless.

[Orkules]

1. So you're claiming Bob_Sanders = every member of Valhalla?

2. So if we had decomed all their wonders, all their improvements, banned aid of any form for 90 days, and placed a viceroy over their alliance, but didn't demand any reps - that would have been white peace?

3. So you once again won't admit that banning of aid was more damaging than 10,000 tech reps and are simply claiming we should ahve done both?

My problem isn't with you, and many others, being upset - you are free to feel however you want. Rather that you look at the terms, see no reps are included, and immediately claim they are too light and automatically claim that they are white peace. I can't speak for Umbrella but I do speak for Kronos and can honestly say that Vanguard, nor your, concerns ever crossed our mind when we gave terms, nor should they have. If you can tell me why they should have, I'm more than open to hearing your reasons. Kronos is neither your ally nor a close friend (not that we don't like you) - as far as I'm concerned, you are an ally of our ally and an alliance that we have no problem with but nothing more. I have no problem with you expressing your opinion on what should have happened but don't sit here and act like Valhalla got off scott free... if you do feel that they got off scott free, then step up to the debate and stop dodging the questions.

EDIT - Clarification of a point

1. Many of their larger members are represented there yes.

2. That is not remotely comparable. I do not consider restricting outside aid as anything beyond light terms, barely above white peace. In fact, it's so close I call it that for ease of reference. This is because it does almost nothing to restrict their regrowth. Not to mention, restricting outside aid doesn't do much considering their allies conditions.

3. Did we ever claim that? I honestly don't know which is worse. I know the combination of both, however, does a fair job of slowing things down.

You are fighting alongside us, and have worked with this in our coalition. You are friends of friends (I think). We would like to see some consideration. At the very least, you could have reacted graciously to our objections. You did not. You insulted us, called us monsters, and made it seem like we were insane for revenge. It does not please us.

[Tygaland]

Claiming restriction on outside aid (ignoring the fact that under the terms given to Valhalla they can tech deal with a number of alliances to bring in outside money) slows down growth is incorrect. Historically, the use of such a term was to prevent other alliances paying off reparations payments mandated by said peace terms on an alliance's behalf. This was designed to ensure that an alliance paid all its reparations debts off on its own.

Large nations in an alliance with significant warchests can farm out aid to lower strength members and facilitate rapid rebuilding without any outside aid. Had those nations instead been required to pay reparations then their ability to rebuild others in their alliance is reduced until those reparations are paid.

Simply banning outside aid, while preventing outside money and tech (outside of the allowed tech deals) rebuilding the alliance, does little to slow rebuilding of an alliance these days.

Edited May 23, 2009 by Tygaland

[Monster]

My problem is mostly with how you guys reacted to us being upset that you didnt take our considerations into your decision. Not only did you play off our concerns as being completely ludicrous and unimportant to you, but you then played like we were being belligerent and below you by asking for some sort of retribution like what was done to us. You guys clearly didnt take our concerns into mind and didnt care to. I dont see how you can expect us to be pleased by that.

Well you kept being uncivil and you continue to be by twisting the knife in pieces such as these. I had good conversations with members of Vanguard and STA and we talked about it reasonably. We were well aware of your concerns and despite us not putting them over our own in the final decision, they were taken into account in the decision-making process. You're free to be angry, but don't expect to not get a response.

[Stumpy Jung Il]

Well you kept being uncivil and you continue to be by twisting the knife in pieces such as these. I had good conversations with members of Vanguard and STA and we talked about it reasonably. We were well aware of your concerns and despite us not putting them over our own in the final decision, they were taken into account in the decision-making process. You're free to be angry, but don't expect to not get a response.

Pieces like these? Does this work offend you? I do love that once again people have no problem with me ragging on GGA in just about all my issues but the moment I say one thing criticizing your decision this piece is a dagger in your back. It wasnt even impolite. This is me arguing and debating, nothing more. If you take every debate as a personal jab to your pride then you are gonna be in for a wild ride. Also, you say pieces as if Ive come at Umbrella in more than one of my works. Please elaborate.