519 Nigras Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Ragnarok will be fine. If NPO was willing to fight things would be a lot different, but as it stands the general population of both Ragnarok and PB share the idea that NPO has been defeated and become a none factor. This is, by in large, because of Ragnarok being Ragnarok. Had another other alliance pulled off what Ragnarok did we'd be talking about their NS loss today. Good job Rok! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Archer Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 If talking smack annoyed you that much, you could have just ignored it instead trying to sound all big. I wasn't trying to sound big, simply suggesting a course of action for him to take if he wants to keep us in a "rut". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elendil old Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Ragnarok will be fine. If NPO was willing to fight things would be a lot different, but as it stands the general population of both Ragnarok and PB share the idea that NPO has been defeated and become a none factor.This is, by in large, because of Ragnarok being Ragnarok. Had another other alliance pulled off what Ragnarok did we'd be talking about their NS loss today. Good job Rok! 386 nations in war mode, 132 in anarchy. Around 35 percent anarchy when you can triple team everyone? Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canned B Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 (edited) At least we're doing better than *you*. Edited July 17, 2009 by Canned B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 I noticed you like to run your mouth alot but don't have the nads to back it. So what I'm saying is put up or shut up.This is my personal opinion not roks. Lighten up, just a bit of OOC banter going back and forth. Archer and Wehr understand that this is part of the OOC fun we can have around here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
519 Nigras Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 386 nations in war mode, 132 in anarchy. Around 35 percent anarchy when you can triple team everyone? Really? If a ROK nation in Anarchy hasn't been hit by a nuke then they are up against once mighty NPO nations near or at ZI with a boat load of tech (in comparison) and a warchest unattainable by the lower NS Rok nations. I rejoined Ragnarok just prior to the war. Fought 9 wars in under 30 days and waited another 70+ for NPO and friends to attack me as none who were in my range were coming out of peace mode. So yes, I'd say they are doing one heck of a job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris8967 Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Lighten up, just a bit of OOC banter going back and forth. Archer and Wehr understand that this is part of the OOC fun we can have around here. If you had typed OOC then I would of kept my mouth shut. My bad, maybe I missed judged your earlier comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Systemfailure Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 386 nations in war mode, 132 in anarchy. Around 35 percent anarchy when you can triple team everyone? Really? we can triple team everyone? with half the amount of nations as you? wow truly our math skills aren't up to par with NPO's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 we can triple team everyone? with half the amount of nations as you?wow truly our math skills aren't up to par with NPO's There are 18 alliances in your coalition. Pretty sure they total more than 632*3=1896 nations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Systemfailure Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 didnt you get the memo? Ragnarok kicked everyone out of Karma. RoK VS NPO, everyone else got sidelined by mad cow disease Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancer Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 There are 18 alliances in your coalition. Pretty sure they total more than 632*3=1896 nations. Wasn't aware this topic included every alliance in the coalition. Don't sweat it though, the topic title could be a bit misleading at times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 While we cant (or wont) deny that we have been losing NS for quite some time now, its been stated several times that this war has been damaging for our smaller nations and that we are undergoing some internal changes. Our gov has changed several times (part of that fault lies with me), and members who are out of range of the war mode NPO nations have moved on away from our alliance to forge their own futures, for which I applaud them. We are in no way defeated and are proud to be the spear that has striked down the "menace" known as the NPO. For as long as our allies remain in a state of war (please read that statement carefully ) we will continue to fight and bleed NS for what we believe to be right. As for the people who are applauding us, thank you. It is unfortunate that those that you are willing to bleed for are willing to let you bleed for them indefinately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 didnt you get the memo? Ragnarok kicked everyone out of Karma.RoK VS NPO, everyone else got sidelined by mad cow disease lol That's the problem with English, "you" is both plural and singular, leading to conversations like this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elendil old Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 we can triple team everyone? with half the amount of nations as you?wow truly our math skills aren't up to par with NPO's Everyone as in everyone in war mode or at least close to it. I apologize if that was amazingly hard to understand *shrugs* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kotic Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 (edited) i think for some reason the OWF is forgetting what alliance they are talking about. WE are Ragnarok, we fight wars, its as simply as that, since the beginning of the war we've taken a hit from some of CN's most powerful alliances, and we're still fighting. To us it doesn't matters all that much how much are NS falls because NS to us does not matter. getting the job done matters, fighting along side our allies,and friends and fighting to change the face of planet BOB is what matters. Most alliances Fret over there NS fall during a war, Ragnarok welcomes it, Most alliances back out of a war because they lose members Ragnarok welcomes it, Most alliances scream bloody murder when there Tech count falls short, Ragnarok welcomes it. We aren't like Your alliance or his alliance or her alliance. We're Ragnarok we're not most alliances. We already had stipulations in place for these falls of NS, and tech befor the war even started. of course we cant se the future and there have been some internal problems that we did not for see, but that comes with war, that comes with the speical type of situation that we are in. We we're happy to take on IRON, we we're happy to take on Legion and what was the result of that? They back outta the war. we are happy to take on NPO, because we know that how ever long NPO thinks they can keep fighting we can keep fighting twice as hard and twice as long. we're ROK what else do you expect a bunch of warrior monger nations to do? sit around and watch our allies have all the fun? Edited July 17, 2009 by kotic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMC123 Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 If you want to go off of number of nations in anarchy, perhaps we should subtract every nation fighting a nuclear nation. /me would predict the anarchy number would be vastly different. Just in case you don't get what I am getting at, I'll reiterate: It isn't hard to anarchy three attacking nations if you have nukes and they don't, and let's be honest, there are WAY more NPO nations with MPs in the ns ranges that are fighting than RoK nations. Nukes vs SDI-less nations is a guaranteed anarchy so no, claiming Pacifica is hurting RoK a lot more based off anarchies alone is plain wrong. Maybe we should look at the statuses of NPO's ever depleting warchests instead... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbrownso Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 didnt you get the memo? Ragnarok kicked everyone out of Karma.RoK VS NPO, everyone else got sidelined by mad cow disease That's what I was expecting about a year and a half ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elendil old Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 (edited) If you want to go off of number of nations in anarchy, perhaps we should subtract every nation fighting a nuclear nation./me would predict the anarchy number would be vastly different. Just in case you don't get what I am getting at, I'll reiterate: It isn't hard to anarchy three attacking nations if you have nukes and they don't, and let's be honest, there are WAY more NPO nations with MPs in the ns ranges that are fighting than RoK nations. Nukes vs SDI-less nations is a guaranteed anarchy so no, claiming Pacifica is hurting RoK a lot more based off anarchies alone is plain wrong. Maybe we should look at the statuses of NPO's ever depleting warchests instead... I'm pointing out the number of nations we have in anarchy compared to the total number in war mode. It doesn't matter whether we have nukes or not as our anarchies are totally depended upon attacks by you guys. You usually can anarchy someone when you have the numbers advantage. Edited July 17, 2009 by Elendil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Archer Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 I'm pointing out the number of nations we have in anarchy compared to the total number in war mode. It doesn't matter whether we have nukes or not as our anarchies are totally depended upon attacks by you guys. You usually can anarchy someone when you have the numbers advantage. You do mean the 18 alliances against you right? Because if it's just RoK (which is actually the topic of this thread), we have less total nations than you have in war mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canned B Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Maybe we should look at the statuses of NPO's ever depleting warchests instead... I wasn't aware that they still had war chests to speak of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elendil old Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 You do mean the 18 alliances against you right? Because if it's just RoK (which is actually the topic of this thread), we have less total nations than you have in war mode. Share the spotlight >.>. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Michaels Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 It is unfortunate that those that you are willing to bleed for are willing to let you bleed for them indefinately. Yes, because it's not like Ragnarok has far more nations in the range of most active NPO nations compared to the rest of us or anything. Seriously, when this war started the VE had about 90% of its nations fighting wars. They've since dried up because people can't find a target in the upper NS ranges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Yes, because it's not like Ragnarok has far more nations in the range of most active NPO nations compared to the rest of us or anything. Seriously, when this war started the VE had about 90% of its nations fighting wars. They've since dried up because people can't find a target in the upper NS ranges. So, they owe it to you and their possible desire for peace shouldn't be taken into account? Very nice statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriegsdrachen Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 I wasn't aware that they still had war chests to speak of. I've still got a lot left in my warchest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Michaels Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 So, they owe it to you and their possible desire for peace shouldn't be taken into account? Very nice statement. Thank you for putting words in my mouth. It's actually a very simple concept, I'm amazed you screwed this one up. We have bled for each other, and we'd be gladly out there doing it with them if it weren't for the fact there's nobody to kill for most of our nations. It's not a matter of whether or not we want to bleed, it's the simple fact there's no one to shoot at. 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.