theo cupier Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) NSO takes the piss, TDO bites hard, the rest of you bite harder = ZZZZZZ for Grub. NSO is a very naughty alliance who will be confined to the corner without any supper. Happy now? No supper is pretty damn harsh I think. This is what I figure and it works for me, personally. I think it'd just be beneficial to hear someone in authority from NSO confirming it was "just for the lulz" and that they're bored and will move on, rather than just making a bunch of assumptions, when there seems to be quite a bit of fur flying around this thread. My bad if this has happened and I've missed it, btw. I mean, if people want to make more out of it, then fine. We can have a big debate on whether some of the "accepted norms" of behaviour in CN should remain as accepted, or even normal if that's how people want to play it. But NSO need to come and make clear if they are playing or not. Edited July 3, 2009 by Theo Cupier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MercyFallout Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 If I recall this correctly, an ex-GPA govt member approached NSO about the poaching, only to be recruited herself, and when asked to join the Sith she stated she'd rather join IAA. I can see the claim for a lack of neutrality, but considering she's also an ex-IAA member, I think a little leeway can be made, especially since her comment was meant as a shot to your alliance. Word in the channels is that this same member was also hit on by a certain NSO member. :v Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogeWilliam Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 A CB if I've ever seen one. Good luck working this out. Oh ps: NSO....really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mussolandia Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 When you have acquired the taste for neutral blood, it is difficult to restrain oneself. Once a baby eater, always a baby eater. Let's hope your dream is realized, "Lord." That's more like it. Agreeing with me and deferring to my authority is what you should do. His old seat of power is back in prominence and his new seat of power is picking up steam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Word in the channels is that this same member was also hit on by a certain NSO member. :v A very handsome Sith Lord, I heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordiga Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) In the short term perhaps. In the long term? That guy was shown to be forthright and honest while the other side were shown to be untruthful aggressors looking to machinate any way possible to extend their hegemony even further. He was also shown to be quite handsome and charming, with that certain je ne sais quois that the ladies find irresistable. I do agree with that. We actually fought side by side for a bit, he was quite the leader. Edited July 3, 2009 by Bordiga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 This isn't worth fighting a war over, and no war is going to happen Not for lack of trying on the part of NSO ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daimos Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Poaching on neutrals...this is like robbing Switzerland of their chocolates and Swiss watches. It's wrong! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordiga Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 When you have acquired the taste for neutral blood, it is difficult to restrain oneself. Once a baby eater, always a baby eater.That's more like it. Agreeing with me and deferring to my authority is what you should do. His old seat of power is back in prominence and his new seat of power is picking up steam. The only time I'd ever find myself deferring to your authority would have to be a more kinky situation than that within this discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 A very handsome Sith Lord, I heard. Seems unlikely. Probably just another lie from the Sith to try to lower her defenses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angrator Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Wait. Is it too late for me to say, "Private Channels for the win"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MercyFallout Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Seems unlikely. Probably just another lie from the Sith to try to lower her defenses. I heard he was just ego-inflated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewolfe2015 Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Just wanted to throw this out there... but if the neutral alliances go to war nothing is stopping their friends from helping them put up a good fight. I mean, CN battling isn't that complex and I know GPA at least could handle their own. You think (NSO and tLC) that you have an advantage based on your war experience and (supposed) higher leadership, but the only question comes in when you think of activity. Neutral alliances don't have to be as active, so if their members respond to the threat and become active, then you've got a problem. Because some well placed war guides, some simple war planning, turns into enough 3 on 1 wars to destroy your entire top ranks of nations you hold dearly. This isn't something that can be laughed off, screwing with the big guys will generally have severe consequences and I'd be shocked if the neutral alliances valued their sovereignty more than their security. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Poaching on neutrals...this is like robbing Switzerland of their chocolates and Swiss watches. It's wrong! Robbing? LIBERATING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cataduanes Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Silence, peasant. I am a legend and things always work my way. I would like you to present evidence that things "didn't work out his way" for the man whose quote I reproduced. hehe i am so glad your back in action Musso, i may not agree with most of what you stand for but boy these forums were a poorer place while you were inactive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drostan Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Well, even though it's exactly what they want I think you should give it to them. I suggest replacing your policy of neutrality with one of armed neutrality. If diplomatic pathways fail (from what I'm reading it seems NSO is built to ensure diplomacy fails) I really do think you should drum up support and go to war. With the fall of the hegemony, new boundaries need to be established and NSO is merely one of the first to test the waters. You could turn this into a PR boom for your respective alliances if you change the game up and end up fighting. This doesn't have to be a huge long war but a brief skirmish to show the world that you won't sit back and become their tech farms is probably not a bad idea. Unless you lose the war in which case you may actually become their tech farms... but anyway. It'd be pretty funny if you made NSO your tech farm, am I right? I am just saying that this is a slap in the face that you cannot ignore. Taking it to the public was a wise first move of escalation but be prepared to negotiate with arms if NSO does not issue a formal apology. Take the time to prepare as if war were imminent. If you do not stand up today you will be facing similar problems tomorrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angrator Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Can someone help me out? I thought their charter prohibited them from starting wars. Is that right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daimos Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Scenario: If TDO and NSO goes to war will Frostbite intervene? Have not read all the pages in this thread so I apologize if this has been address. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogeWilliam Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Can someone help me out? I thought their charter prohibited them from starting wars. Is that right? What are you trying to show? Your motives for poaching their members, acting like pricks, and being npo-lite? I think we all get that part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) If I recall this correctly, an ex-GPA govt member approached NSO about the poaching, only to be recruited herself, and when asked to join the Sith she stated she'd rather join IAA. I can see the claim for a lack of neutrality, but considering she's also an ex-IAA member, I think a little leeway can be made, especially since her comment was meant as a shot to your alliance. Heh. No surprise here. Can someone help me out? I thought their charter prohibited them from starting wars. Is that right? They didn't start this. You guys did. Recruiting nations from an alliance is considered an act of war. They now have the choice to follow up with it or not. Scenario: If TDO and NSO goes to war will Frostbite intervene?Have not read all the pages in this thread so I apologize if this has been address. Frostbite is optional aggression, and the posts here from most of Frostbite haven't been overly in favor of activating that aggression. Edited July 3, 2009 by flak attack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Can someone help me out? I thought their charter prohibited them from starting wars. Is that right? Technically, they can call mass-recruitment of their nations an aggressive act of war. In that case, all they'd be doing is finishing a war. And seriously, just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD do it. This is starting to look like the past three years of CN all over again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 With the fall of the hegemony, new boundaries need to be established and NSO is merely one of the first to test the waters. We've been "testing the waters" long before the Karma War. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MercyFallout Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) Can someone help me out? I thought their charter prohibited them from starting wars. Is that right? Just because they aren't allowed to start a war doesn't mean they can't finish one someone else started against them. Most alliances consider mass message recruitment approved by high government as an act of war, by the way. Edited July 3, 2009 by MercyFallout Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mussolandia Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 What are you trying to show? Your motives for poaching their members, acting like pricks, and being npo-lite? I think we all get that part. Oh, right, some other person that forgot he was allied to the NPO for 3 or so years. What are you trying to show here? What is your business in this thread? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 We've been "testing the waters" long before the Karma War. There should be a distinct difference between testing the waters and outright stupidity. This particular attempt seems to blur that line. 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.