PrideAssassin Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Giving a blank statement of calling "meatheads" of those who disagree with TOP makes you look foolish and disrespectful. You should look at the merits of both arguments before rushing to defend whoever you currently like.You should have realized before you posted that this doesn't have to do with TOP giving harsh reps. They have the right to give white peace. It has everything to do with leaving during a war and calling out another alliance by name. If you wish to argue the merits of those contentious points, be my guest. Pardon me? I didn't call those who disagree with TOP meatheads. I called the HARSH REPZ NAO crowd meatheads. Those are not even necessarily the Alliances currently (or recently, I should say) fighting alongside TOP. I am referring to the meatheads that invade other people's DoWs (WE WIN! HARSH REPS! WOO!) and general announcements with visions of vengence, cash, and tech dancing through their heads. You know, "on the flip side" of the no reps aesthestic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrideAssassin Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 (edited) Nah, no problem with independent thought or action, just expect a little poise and class. Seeing as my only reference toward your particular bloc in this mess was toward TOP being left out of talks, I don't think I've slighted you. Just commenting as an amused, rabid monkey observer. I'm a grunt, not a politician. My little peanut brain is too direct and blunt for all that dancing and prancing. Edited May 31, 2009 by PrideAssassin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reachwind Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 This is not surprising at all considering that TOP has quite a few ex-Echelon members and TSO is nothing more than the former government of MCXA who joined Echelon in the great betrayal of Polaris. I doubt anyone thought Echelon would have anything worse than white peace from either of these alliances. I do however salute you both for giving the right terms. Echelon has already been beaten, no need to keep on beating them with "terms". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boscher Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 TOP was the alliance that actually gained score during this war, sure that is because of their military skills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Some-Guy Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 (edited) So from my limited knowledge and taking the OP at face value I'll have to say good move TOP. Well, thank you most kindly for having a mature opinion in this matter, WarriorConcept. It is posts like this that I, and perhaps others, can learn something from. Echelon, congratulations and good luck. Edit I have talked to a lot of members of TOP since then and grown to like many of them, but they have consistently defended the 100k in reps from us and I will continue to believe they have not had a change of heart until they tell me otherwise. It is nice to hear that some of our former adversaries our friendly and on good terms with some of our Knights, it gives me great hope for the future. I confess that in some of the wars of my past I regret my part in requiring large reparations from beaten alliances, but as you point out, this is not the case when I think of the NpO war. In simple terms, I feel TOP needed lot of tech to help mop up all our tears that we shed during the protracted period of NpO being very mean to us leading up to the war. NpO was so very mean to us for so very long, we were so very, very sad. This was not the case in this war. Thus, white peaces. Yay! Edited May 31, 2009 by Some-Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 It's a pity you didn't realize this was going to happen before you reduced Echelon's upper tiers into range of the other alliances: you've pretty much lost your leverage now. Still, it's respectable to refuse to take part in discussions where your voice isn't being given any weight. Funny that people forget how this war started: ticking off TOP in peace talks seems to have become the new happy-fun-time pastime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMMELHSQ Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Congrats Echelon on the peace, you deserve it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saber Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Paradox Vult! Crymson Vult! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penguin Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 (edited) It is nice to hear that some of our former adversaries our friendly and on good terms with some of our Knights, it gives me great hope for the future.I confess that in some of the wars of my past I regret my part in requiring large reparations from beaten alliances, but as you point out, this is not the case when I think of the NpO war. In simple terms, I feel TOP needed lot of tech to help mop up all our tears that we shed during the protracted period of NpO being very mean to us leading up to the war. NpO was so very mean to us for so very long, we were so very, very sad. This was not the case in this war. Thus, white peaces. Yay! Glad my tech is being put to good use mopping up your tears. Sadly, that leaves less tech to mop up the tears I shed when TOP was mean to us. To make my point clear, I don't see the need for Echelon to pay heavy reparations, nor did I see the need for Polaris to do the same. I also recall some other Coalition alliances were not thrilled that you wanted heavy reparations from us. They seemed to have believed it was neither necessary nor the purpose of the war. They went along with the process anyway in an effort to keep the terms under control and they didn't decry those terms in public later on, even though some tell me they regret being a part of it. Edited May 31, 2009 by Penguin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 1. They are not taking any reps now, they have shown that they have moved past that point. The change is for better, the one promised by Karma. They're acting on their words. It's funny, because TOP have stated several times that they are not a part of Karma. They were only acting in their own best interest. And their best interest at the moment is playing the "white knight card". It makes them look so gorgeous among the teenage girl crowd and also the former Hegemony alliances licking their wounds. It's nothing but a PR move and it have nothing to do about having superior ethics. Their !@#$ stinks just as much as mine, and their extorted reps from former wars is still present in their nations. Er... They had their choice of treaties and could have come in on any side. They came in on "Karma"'s, stuck to their principals (far be it for the majority of "Karma" to grasp THAT concept) and get punked for it. See above. They did it out of self interest, and they would have suffered huge losses if they joined in on a different side If they had come in on our side, I think we could have beaten you with a bit of effort and luck. I guess IRON can praise admin that you're not their military analyst / strategist then. Because the numbers alone had ensured our victory long before TOP entered the battlefield. "The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory" Try harder. NO U! TOP was the alliance that actually gained score during this war, sure that is because of their military skills. Yup, and not because they didn't experience a full out nuclear war like the rest of us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Dan Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Congratulations on peace, Echelon. As Nofish did state earlier, we have leveled most of Echelon's nations out of our range and thus are not even at war (perhaps 1?). Accusations of abandonment are completely silly at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxNation Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 I've seen the figure offered and for an alliance such as Echelon it was hardly draconian or unwarranted. Especially considering who the proponents of it were, having had Echelon just poking them with a long stick for so darn long. Disagreements are inevitable but it's how you act on them that shows the character of an alliance. TOP has shown it's character in this conflict, threatening to and walking out of a war for not getting their way. I mean TOP has proven a very divisive figure in what is otherwise a war time coalition which is very similar minded in ushering in a new age. TOP's heart just wasn't in it by the looks of their actions. And that leads me to the next question: Why did they join the war? If all they wanted to do is remind us they weren't Karma, they didn't agree with us, their contribution although notable wasn't all that, and later they show they don't even want to end the war in a decisive victory. This wreaks of opportunism. this will probably be my only post in this, but I would like to say, TOP is surely not the "only divisive figure in a unified front" Citadel alliances have been trolled in the Valhalla surrender thread and the IRON surrender thread. I won't call anyone out, but I'm sure people know what I mean. I think I can actually add the OG surrender thread too if i'm not mistaken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Dan Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 I hope you don't think I'm defending RoK's other thread, because that was certainly mishandled as well.But the funny thing about trying to look better than the other person is that you have to actually do better. Masking petty actions and trying to pass them off as honourable moves is just dumb. Discussions favoring white peace were in discussion before the RoK thread came up. This has nothing to do with RoK at all. I had hoped everything was cleared up in that other thread, as per LM's post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacky Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 this will probably be my only post in this, but I would like to say, TOP is surely not the "only divisive figure in a unified front" Citadel alliances have been trolled in the Valhalla surrender thread and the IRON surrender thread. I won't call anyone out, but I'm sure people know what I mean. I think I can actually add the OG surrender thread too if i'm not mistaken. In my opinion the majority of Citadel have always been class acts. You don't need to look far to see my praise of the Citadel as a whole and I think that is reflected also in the community at large. We know for certain the FCC, Umbrella and the Gramlins all fought honourably and should be commended. OG wasn't even our side in this war. Whose side was TOP on? I mean really they've been taking the side of the defeated, hostile, parties which have been the biggest supporters of the hegemony over the alliances in our coalition. The whole while claiming to not be apart of Karma. Was their contribution absolutely neccessary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 TOP was Q until the very end, and NPO was their oldest treaty partner. They're pretty much hegemony in every way. TOP assured Bob on their entrance to the war that they weren't even a part of Karma. This is no new fracture, this is hostility being shown by Karma towards a big hegemony actor that went free. TOP seems to SAY a lot of things...sorry but they're as much a part of Karma as the rest. What I don't get is why they can't own it. Congrats to them however for giving Echelon peace. Echelon would do well if they can get final terms to remember the lessons of the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Dan Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 (edited) In my opinion the majority of Citadel have always been class acts. You don't need to look far to see my praise of the Citadel as a whole and I think that is reflected also in the community at large.We know for certain the FCC, Umbrella and the Gramlins all fought honourably and should be commended. OG wasn't even our side in this war. Whose side was TOP on? I mean really they've been taking the side of the defeated, hostile, parties which have been the biggest supporters of the hegemony over the alliances in our coalition. The whole while claiming to not be apart of Karma. Was their contribution absolutely neccessary? Necessary? Is it necessary for me to drink my own urine? No, but it's sterile and I like the taste. Well, we have contributed to destroying a hegemony nation or two. Was it necessary? No, I'd say a good amount of the Karma side's NS is not "necessary". As for being apart of Karma, there's a nice post on the Karma boards explaining our position, though I'm not sure who all has access there. Lastly, saying that we are "taking their side" seems to be a bit of a stretch, considering we just battered down their nations. Edited May 31, 2009 by Dr. Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Discussions favoring white peace were in discussion before the RoK thread came up. This has nothing to do with RoK at all. I had hoped everything was cleared up in that other thread, as per LM's post. I certainly thought it was cleared up by LM on page 1 as well, but it certainly kept going much longer than that, and the hostility displayed between members of TOP and members of RoK/GOD was clear as day. Then, by some mere coincidence (we all know how FULL of coincidences Planet Bob is ) this thread shows up shortly after to smear RoK/GOD's behaviour. And what makes it all the more coincidental is that, as you stated, you have already been in discussions before that other thread even came up, and could have easily said "no thanks, we'll give them white peace" and simply added to the main surrender thread that TOP/TSO will not be receiving any reps, as so many others have done in the past, and so many others will do in the future, because that would make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owney OSullivan Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 o/ TOP Seriously, it's good to see that there's still some honorable and non-bitter alliances out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Necessary? Is it necessary for me to drink my own urine? No, but it's sterile and I like the taste. Actually, while urine in your bladder is sterile, your urethra is not, and voided urine will contain traces of whatever organisms are present in your urethra. Just FYI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stumpy Jung Il Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 As already pointed out its good to see you got your fill of Polaris reps last year. But no, TOP is honorable and has always given white peace to the honorable opponents they face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rishnokof Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Er... They had their choice of treaties and could have come in on any side. They came in on "Karma"'s, stuck to their principals (far be it for the majority of "Karma" to grasp THAT concept) and get punked for it. If they had come in on our side, I think we could have beaten you with a bit of effort and luck.Try harder. You do realize that when TOP came in, Karma had a 100million NS jump on Hegemony forces. Contrary to popular belief, they aren't as important as they may believe. Anyway, I for one support our morally superior overlords in TOP and TSO, and look forward to more PR stunts such as this in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meer Republic Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Was their contribution absolutely neccessary? I'm sure UPN, BAPS, Invicta, OMFG and Echelon would also much rather we hadn't joined. For what it's worth I wish we hadn't to, hindsights a !@#$%*. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Dan Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 I certainly thought it was cleared up by LM on page 1 as well, but it certainly kept going much longer than that, and the hostility displayed between members of TOP and members of RoK/GOD was clear as day. Then, by some mere coincidence (we all know how FULL of coincidences Planet Bob is ) this thread shows up shortly after to smear RoK/GOD's behaviour. And what makes it all the more coincidental is that, as you stated, you have already been in discussions before that other thread even came up, and could have easily said "no thanks, we'll give them white peace" and simply added to the main surrender thread that TOP/TSO will not be receiving any reps, as so many others have done in the past, and so many others will do in the future, because that would make sense. Believe what you will, I suppose. The reason a separate white peace was being discussed in the first place was due to an unknown time frame given by the other participants in this war. Hopefully that clears it up for you. Tension between our respective memberships is likely due to IRON terms and any residual feelings over the misconception that TOP was trying to smear RoK. However, I would not like to go off on that tangent. We can be confident, however, that this thread has nothing to do with RoK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 As already pointed out its good to see you got your fill of Polaris reps last year. But no, TOP is honorable and has always given white peace to the honorable opponents they face. Are you saying they should do the same thing they did with Polaris or are you suggesting they move away from what they did with Polaris? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Dan Posted May 31, 2009 Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 Actually, while urine in your bladder is sterile, your urethra is not, and voided urine will contain traces of whatever organisms are present in your urethra. Just FYI. Hrm, I should probably stop doing that, then. 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.