Chet Ubet Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 You realize you asked me to show you where a bunch of their allies canceled treaties after they declared war right? I find it laughable that you actually ignore your previous posts.Besides the fact that I never mentioned the reason behind the Q alliance cancellations, it doesn't even affect the fact they they canceled after NPO attacked. Meaning, NPO lost the intimidation of their military treaties only after they declared war. My original point which you have so aptly displayed ignorance of, was that NPO still had many military treaties directly before they attacked OV. Logic seems to keep eluding you. First I'l talk to you on IRC because your really pissin me off and make no sence.Also I don't want to get banned so can you come on #cnsparta now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Ubet Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Well there sure were a lot in this thread alone: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=54884, including your own. I'm talking about on Karma not alliances which still fought for the hegemony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted June 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Ya know, of all the possible fights that could have developed in this thread... I didn't see that one coming... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinKiac Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Correct, Harmlins is an MDOAP.Remaining MADP blocs that I know of include C&G, Superfriends, Purqua, AZTEC, VE-GOD-OV, Teen Titans... Thats right and I can tell you that AZTEC is worth more than the paper its written on. Buddy doesnt know what he's talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Ubet Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 (edited) You realize you asked me to show you where a bunch of their allies canceled treaties after they declared war right? I find it laughable that you actually ignore your previous posts.Besides the fact that I never mentioned the reason behind the Q alliance cancellations, it doesn't even affect the fact they they canceled after NPO attacked. Meaning, NPO lost the intimidation of their military treaties only after they declared war. My original point which you have so aptly displayed ignorance of, was that NPO still had many military treaties directly before they attacked OV. Logic seems to keep eluding you. Ok this is what you said "FOK left Q a while before the OV debacle. VE also canceled with NPO a good bit before the war. MA canceled almost a month before the DoW" so how does that make sense?And how do you declare war after you canceled a treaty please learn how it works,you cancel then couple days later,you attack Edited June 18, 2009 by Eazy 3D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 First I'l talk to you on IRC because your really pissin me off and make no sence.Also I don't want to get banned so can you come on #cnsparta now I doubt I'm the one with a piss poor argument whose making little sense. Did you ever wonder why your alliance mates aren't running to defend you? I know there are several in this thread. I'm talking about on Karma not alliances which still fought for the hegemony No, you asked me for alliances who canceled on NPO after the DoW. I provided a thread which contained 5 of them alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Ubet Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 I doubt I'm the one with a piss poor argument whose making little sense. Did you ever wonder why your alliance mates aren't running to defend you? I know there are several in this thread. No, you asked me for alliances who canceled on NPO after the DoW. I provided a thread which contained 5 of them alone. Answer the post that i replied to you and it's funny don't see your alliance defending you either hmmmm I wonder why Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadshot Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 welp, this thread went full retard fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poyplemonkeys Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 You know something else that happens in war? Losers pay reparations to fix some of the '!@#$' they blew up. Although apparently the alliances on TPF's front consider me naive to think that reparations are to go towards fixing damage, so perhaps doing extra damage doesn't make a difference. There is no part of myself, nor my nation that is fighting on TPF's front, for or against the, and I'm the only one that claimed you were naive for thinking reparations were for repairing damages. It's just not the case anymore. What damages does forcing the nations in NPO above 1k tech to pay the reps fix/repair? Nothing. It's simply naivity to believe that reps are to repair alliances/nations anymore in my opinion. The fact is at this point that TPF have fulfilled their honourable obligations, and are just damaging their own present and future by continuing to fight what is not only a losing but a lost battle. Alliances that run before the outcome is determined are cowardly, those that fight to get their allies the best possible chance of a victory and then surrender when the game is up retain their honour. How exactly are TPF harming their future? They've a few medium NS nations in peace mode and the rest are pretty much dust. They're putting up a fight where they can and refusing to abandon their friends on the battle field. I sure would think twice about signing a treaty with the Grämlins if they're just going to fill their contractual obligations for a couple of rounds of war then say $%&@ it, you're on your own, once they realise the battle isn't going to be won. However, that's straying off topic. As for this cancellation, it makes sense in the circumstances, and everyone's life would be a lot easier if the 'paper-only' treaties were all cancelled. Indeed, and I'm probably gravedigging this particular quote of Bob's but it was staring me in the face when I opened the thread and I felt the need to respond Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 (edited) Ok this is what you said "FOK left Q a while before the OV debacle. VE also canceled with NPO a good bit before the war. MA canceled almost a month before the DoW" so how does that make sense?And how do you declare war after you canceled a treaty please learn how it works,you cancel then couple days later,you attack No one said sides weren't forming. I said NPO had most of their treaties intact right before the war. You tried to argue most people canceled already. You posted 3 alliances which left long before the declaration and don't constitute people who canceled right before the war started. The fact is, which you seem to want to deviate from, that NPO looked to have a ton of military power backing it before they got canceled on after they declared on OV. EDIT: I don't see you on IRC btw. Edited June 18, 2009 by Matthew Conrad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Ubet Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 welp, this thread went full retard fast. Is that towards me and if so can you explain how please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Ubet Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 No one said sides weren't forming. I said NPO had most of their treaties intact right before the war. You tried to argue most people canceled already. You posted 3 alliances which left long before the declaration and don't constitute people who canceled right before the war started. The fact is, which you seem to want to deviate from, that NPO looked to have a ton of military power backing it before they got canceled on after they declared on OV. First, you didn't answer my post and second i'm not going to pull out the whole list for ya,sorry I'm not a secretary.Also you said the NPO had alot of there treaties and then alot of alliances canceled when they attacked OV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 First, you didn't answer my post and second i'm not going to pull out the whole list for ya,sorry I'm not a secretary.Also you said the NPO had alot of there treaties and then alot of alliances canceled when they attacked OV. I'm pretty sure I've answered every single one of your posts. If you would point out which post I've missed, I'll be sure to answer it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Ubet Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 (edited) I'm pretty sure I've answered every single one of your posts. If you would point out which post I've missed, I'll be sure to answer it. nevermind talkin on IRC Edited June 18, 2009 by Eazy 3D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 I'm not going into depth for you, so I'll simply direct you towards the MDP web in connection between OV and SF. Also, Delta's summary of SF's pre-war conversations will also explain this in depth for you. Mhawk tried to criticize us for attacking NPO. That was what I was responding to. Please, please read what I actually respond to instead of completely ignoring context. No he did not critisize you for attacking them. He critized Sparta for trolling NPO as well as critisized them for telling lies to us and telling lies about those lies in posts trolling us. The short version is: He insulted Sparta for lies and trolling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 No he did not critisize you for attacking them. He critized Sparta for trolling NPO as well as critisized them for telling lies to us and telling lies about those lies in posts trolling us.The short version is: He insulted Sparta for lies and trolling. He said DoW on former allies. The only alliance who fits the bill is NPO. Also, I don't think you're using the correct term, unless you actually mean to, when you say trolling. Trolling is more like insulting someone with no/little evidence and only to make them angry. We criticize them, as is anyone's right to legitimately criticize someone else, based on information to back it up. Just as I don't mind when people criticize us for formerly supporting their actions, because we did. That doesn't mean, however, what some people try to make it out as. Also, EAZY 3D and I have settled our argument on IRC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 He said DoW on former allies. The only alliance who fits the bill is NPO. Also, I don't think you're using the correct term, unless you actually mean to, when you say trolling. Trolling is more like insulting someone with no/little evidence and only to make them angry. We criticize them, as is anyone's right to legitimately criticize someone else, based on information to back it up. Just as I don't mind when people criticize us for formerly supporting their actions, because we did. That doesn't mean, however, what some people try to make it out as.Also, EAZY 3D and I have settled our argument on IRC. That's precisely what I meant when I said trolling. Your man was trolling because it was lies. Attacking NPO and defending your allies in SF is more than acceptable, it's the right thing to do. Trolling them and us is what the criticism is for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadshot Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Is that towards me and if so can you explain how please? lol, not at all. It was not directed at anyone really, just the way this thread turned out in general. I in fact hold the members in TPF that I know in very high regard. I apologize if you thought I meant you dude, seriously I didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 That's precisely what I meant when I said trolling. Your man was trolling because it was lies. Attacking NPO and defending your allies in SF is more than acceptable, it's the right thing to do. Trolling them and us is what the criticism is for. Who are you saying is trolling NPO? If you're referring to GtG, he wasn't even talking about the NPO and that's certainly not trolling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathcat Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 lol, not at all. It was not directed at anyone really, just the way this thread turned out in general. I in fact hold the members in TPF that I know in very high regard. I apologize if you thought I meant you dude, seriously I didn't. No worries WtB We know you are a puttytat! I think its sad that people can't get their own thread on a topic instead of devolving a simple message between 2 alliances that have nothing to do with the current direction of "this" thread. TORN: I personally have NO idea why we aren't allies anymore *too inactive anymore* but I hope that you guys find your path and get back to being the awesome alliance I was friends with oo/ bigwoody oo/ mhawk oo/ TPF oo/ TORN Onwards to ZI! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Who are you saying is trolling NPO? If you're referring to GtG, he wasn't even talking about the NPO and that's certainly not trolling. Not in this particular thread, no. You are correct. This is probably a pointless and unproductive discussion anyway. Wuddaya say we let this one rest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Not in this particular thread, no. You are correct. This is probably a pointless and unproductive discussion anyway. Wuddaya say we let this one rest? I had no intentions of dragging this out any longer, just wanted to clarify things. Sorry for getting off topic though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortale Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 While that may be true, TORN is also better off without FOK (who were very blatantly hostile towards TORN a good month before FOK even dropped their MDP with them), in all fairness. If anyone caused hostile sentiments between FOK and TORN it was you. That said, this declaration is hardly surprising and i wish both parties well in the future Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyman Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Is that towards me and if so can you explain how please? Take it easy, man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Legally? No. As you say, he has the legal right to do what he is doing (although he will get rolled for it like everyone else in TPF due to the state of war). Leaving an alliance that he still considers 'home', and to which he intends to return after finishing fighting, to continue a war that his 'home' alliance has left is pretty close to false flagging though – the only difference is that the alliance which he is flying the flag of is okay with his temporary membership. (Members of several Hegemony alliances are forbidden from moving to alliances at war, I believe, which clearly shows that many alliances consider it a low class move.) Are TOOL happy with what you're doing, and to re-accept you after choosing to continue a fight that they have decided is not worthwhile? Your buddies in Karma set the precedent and you didnt complain this hard when they did it. 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.