Delta1212 Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 PC, what would you say to this:We (PC and TPF) continue our wars. TPF peaces out with all other alliances and pays all other reps: 180 million to Federation of Buccaneers 9,000 tech to Mushroom Kingdom 120 million to Avalanche What say you, TwistedRebel? That would actually be a pretty terrible deal for TPF. You'd have a de facto outside aid restriction in place from still being at war and have to pay off reps while still fighting. That just seems like a poor decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crimson King Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 I have never said good riddance to anyone.The issue is, regardless of whether your nation accepted reps, you were a member of an alliance that demanded them. The peace terms in war are handed out to alliances by alliances, not individuals. Your alliance demanded reps when they stomped alliances aggressively and now your alliance is asked to do the same when they lose a war. Them's the breaks. [ooc]Best of luck in RL[/ooc] And if you actually read what he wrote "them be" none of the reasons that he is leaving the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mushi Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 TPF has never imposed terms since noCB war? what about those terms on PC, just because you could. Please TPF, Valhalla and Co, hold on the belief you could have rolled PC, but were too nice to do it. You know your CB at every time you tired to roll us was not upto scratch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Too bad these are different than what was offered. Now I'm interested. What were the terms? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seerow Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 (edited) TPF accused PC of recruiting from them, constantly threatened to roll them in their early days, made them sign on to OPP, wanted out, got out, still wanted to roll them, still constant threats over recruiting that just simply didn't happen. Then the stuff I wasn't there for, and then I came back, STILL wanted to roll them, STILL threatening, etc. etc. etc.Basically what TPF did was taunt a rabid dog for a year, always treating it poorly and threatening to kill it.. then PC got out. I kind of expected nothing less than this. Interesting. Yet the act of 'mercy' in not rolling them while they were politically isolated is in of itself to say that they should not need to pay anything to PC, ever? This is a pretty interesting thought process from TPF. Now I'm interested. What were the terms? Obviously there were more typos, as Archon presented them while still slightly buzzed from celebrating NPO finally surrendering. Apparently cleaning up the post makes it a completely different set of terms Edited July 25, 2009 by Seerow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord GVChamp Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 I give up. Well, that may or may not the best D: I guess if TPF really wanted peace, they'd accept these terms. However, since they have not, I assume TPF does not desire peace. Obviously not at the expense of whatever they consider important them. No one really is such a big fan of peace, or else we wouldn't have just had a gigantic war involving the launching of thousand of nuclear weapons. I sure as hell know I wasn't thinking "COME ON I HOPE COOLER HEADS PREVAIL!" when Pacifican marines were jumping into OV territory. I was thinking "Hell yeah, I get to kill me some Pacificians!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 That wouldn't be fair to PC because you would out number them. Especially if everyone PC is tech raiding decided to fight back too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UberSpion Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 TPF accused PC of recruiting from them, constantly threatened to roll them in their early days, made them sign on to OPP, wanted out, got out, still wanted to roll them, still constant threats over recruiting that just simply didn't happen. Then the stuff I wasn't there for, and then I came back, STILL wanted to roll them, STILL threatening, etc. etc. etc.Basically what TPF did was taunt a rabid dog for a year, always treating it poorly and threatening to kill it.. then PC got out. I kind of expected nothing less than this. as much as my loins tell me not too, I have to agree with you. PC wasn't the only alliance under TPF protection that was treated as such. I hate to pull this card, but the former alliance Purge is a prime example of this. Under protection of TPF, was going to merge with some other alliances outside of OPP, TPF not only stopped it, crushed it, viceroy'ed it, attacked the gov members, destroyed their own protected alliance, tech raided it even... TPF was appalling then, and is appalling now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Un4Gvn1 Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 TPF accused PC of recruiting from them, constantly threatened to roll them in their early days, made them sign on to OPP, wanted out, got out, still wanted to roll them, still constant threats over recruiting that just simply didn't happen. Then the stuff I wasn't there for, and then I came back, STILL wanted to roll them, STILL threatening, etc. etc. etc.Basically what TPF did was taunt a rabid dog for a year, always treating it poorly and threatening to kill it.. then PC got out. I kind of expected nothing less than this. Wrong. About 8 months ago PC was in hot water for raiding alliances to the point of death. They triple-teamed a nation and shared the alliance name with other PC members. PC was sitting on a hot plate created by the world for those kinds of actions and became fairly diplomatically isolated. Meanwhile, TPF membership was itching to hit PC but Mhawk had a cooler view; he literally prevented war. I am telling you all that TPF's military was locked, loaded and ready to party. Mhawk set the tone by telling us we would seek friendship and he made the PIAT with PC. The PIAT that PC broke when they declared war on TPF in April; the PIAT that PC always intended to break. That is the meat of the matter (for about 8 months). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Un4Gvn1 Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 That would actually be a pretty terrible deal for TPF. You'd have a de facto outside aid restriction in place from still being at war and have to pay off reps while still fighting. That just seems like a poor decision. Good point about the 'de facto outside aid restriction'. Perhaps the world would consider making an exception? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 (edited) Wrong. About 8 months ago PC was in hot water for raiding alliances to the point of death. They triple-teamed a nation and shared the alliance name with other PC members. PC was sitting on a hot plate created by the world for those kinds of actions and became fairly diplomatically isolated. Meanwhile, TPF membership was itching to hit PC but Mhawk had a cooler view; he literally prevented war. I am telling you all that TPF's military was locked, loaded and ready to party. Mhawk set the tone by telling us we would seek friendship and he made the PIAT with PC. The PIAT that PC broke when they declared war on TPF in April; the PIAT that PC always intended to break. That is the meat of the matter (for about 8 months). Good for Mhawk for not going through with it, yet when I came back to the game, he was still trying to pin recruiting from TPF on twisted as a reason to go to war with them. Don't forget the valhalla treaty that was in effect but not in effect, that they were hoping that PC didn't remember it had a renewal clause to it, and that it wasn't renewed, which is why valhalla didn't "cancel" on them when everyone else did. Don't forget all the plotting and scheming that went on after that date to further isolate PC, to further hang these things over there head, and to further illustrate to them that they could kill them if they wanted to, but they're "nice" and that they'll "let them live" for a "price" which they had to pay to TPF. Right, all hail that sort of mercy. Oh, and wasn't it an NAP they broke? And wasn't it written by mhawk in such a way that they could break it first when the time came to roll PC? Yeah, sorry that PC finally got one up on you guys after a year of torment and !@#$ty psychological warfare. Edited July 25, 2009 by astronaut jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 TORN was almost back stabbed by NPO so they gave peace before it was too late. Some people really do prefer to be blind. Remember the TORN/OV rift thread well before the war started? Yeah, I suppose you think that wasn't a precursor or that Torn wasnt all excited when they found out that OV was supposedly spying? You do realize that someone from the NPO was talking to Archon and they were asked by Archon whether they would be willing to discuss settling the situation and the answer was yes. That wasn't backstabbing Torn. Archon took that to their ally Torn and got Woody to think they were the next alliance NPO was going to backstab. It was Woody that did the stabbing though by racing across the communication lines (IRC) spreading the word about NPO's deceit which then lead to that infamous announcement of multiple treaties dropped with NPO. It was then TORN that followed that false information and signed over all their rights in the war leaving all their allies without any aid from them. Its funny how any action done to NPO can be explained off as honorable despite the facts and details of the situation. Look, I got no love for the NPO but you people really gotta get over this syndrome of yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Michaels Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 (edited) While an excellent read, I would have to say that the person you are quoting is the same guy that posted this gem... #1 rule in CN is to not let the past be forgotten.. I wouldn't really take it for a grain of salt, sadly the nubile nations that haven't found their historical mate will read it as truth. So keep spreading the good word. I am quite familiar with Arcades record in this game. In all honesty I only posted that because I was bored. Edited July 25, 2009 by John Michaels Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Good point about the 'de facto outside aid restriction'. Perhaps the world would consider making an exception? Do you expect them to let people aid you while you're still at war with PC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Un4Gvn1 Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Do you expect them to let people aid you while you're still at war with PC? Why not? Things will be done differently in the new Karma world, or so I hear. Why not just let TPF and PC go after it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Sexy Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 I honestly can't understand why TPF would refuse these terms. That said, I have no problem watching TPF get stomped for a little while longer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velocity111 Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Wrong. About 8 months ago PC was in hot water for raiding alliances to the point of death. They triple-teamed a nation and shared the alliance name with other PC members. PC was sitting on a hot plate created by the world for those kinds of actions and became fairly diplomatically isolated. Meanwhile, TPF membership was itching to hit PC but Mhawk had a cooler view; he literally prevented war. I am telling you all that TPF's military was locked, loaded and ready to party. Mhawk set the tone by telling us we would seek friendship and he made the PIAT with PC. The PIAT that PC broke when they declared war on TPF in April; the PIAT that PC always intended to break. That is the meat of the matter (for about 8 months). What "PIAT" are you talking about? I think you're talking about a useless NAP with a cancellation clause that .. well made it a useless NAP. 8 months ago PC was in hot water for raiding... today, PC is still in hot water for raiding. Same old, same old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tygaland Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 And if you actually read what he wrote "them be" none of the reasons that he is leaving the game. It was clearly the straw that broke the camel's back as he referred to "THIS" (this announcement) as being the reason he was leaving and referred to the immaturity in the Cyberverse over the past year. The problem is, it is easier to live with immaturity when you and your alliance benefit from it. I agree with him on many things, such as the immaturity and stupidity that is now rampant in the Cyberverse. But at the end of the day, his alliance and her allies did much to create this world of stupidity and vindictiveness and now they are on the receiving end it dawns on some how ridiculous things have become. Ignoring the fact that compared to terms given in the past, these terms are not especially harsh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Do you expect them to let people aid you while you're still at war with PC? What, are those alliances going to shrivel and die without that tech and money right away? If PC wants to earn alot more reps then the others then let them actually earn it by fighting TPF alone. I like this idea. Let the two beat all the antagonism out of each other until its done and over and without any outside help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathias Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Why not? Things will be done differently in the new Karma world, or so I hear.Why not just let TPF and PC go after it? You can't do stupid things and then claim it's alright because we're in a "Karma World." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desperado Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 (edited) Now I'm interested. What were the terms? First off, the terms were only presented to article III. Second, these are completely different than what was offered. And 9,000 tech to Mushroom Kingdom taking back what TPF took from C&G in the noCB war. For reference, it was already pointed out to you that 9k was never recieved and we let that go. And we all know not paying reps is a valid CB... Edited July 25, 2009 by Desperado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagicalTrevor Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Why not? Things will be done differently in the new Karma world, or so I hear.Why not just let TPF and PC go after it? We entered the war together and shall leave it together, we may not hold a treaty with PC but we have shed blood alongside them in this war and will not leave them behind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 For reference, it was already pointed out to you that 9k was never recieved and we let that go. And we all know not paying reps is a valid CB... You should totally declare war on them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 First off, the terms were only presented to article III. Second, these are completely different than what was offered.For reference, it was already pointed out to you that 9k was never recieved and we let that go. And we all know not paying reps is a valid CB... Seriously, you need to either say what they offered you that is different then what is shown here or stop saying otherwise. The TPF tease is getting old. It was done in regards to what Torn did and now you are doing it again. We entered the war together and shall leave it together, we may not hold a treaty with PC but we have shed blood alongside them in this war and will not leave them behind. So since you fought together you should receive the same reps right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Destruction Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Some people really do prefer to be blind.Remember the TORN/OV rift thread well before the war started? Yeah, I suppose you think that wasn't a precursor or that Torn wasnt all excited when they found out that OV was supposedly spying? You do realize that someone from the NPO was talking to Archon and they were asked by Archon whether they would be willing to discuss settling the situation and the answer was yes. That wasn't backstabbing Torn. Archon took that to their ally Torn and got Woody to think they were the next alliance NPO was going to backstab. It was Woody that did the stabbing though by racing across the communication lines (IRC) spreading the word about NPO's deceit which then lead to that infamous announcement of multiple treaties dropped with NPO. It was then TORN that followed that false information and signed over all their rights in the war leaving all their allies without any aid from them. Its funny how any action done to NPO can be explained off as honorable despite the facts and details of the situation. Look, I got no love for the NPO but you people really gotta get over this syndrome of yours. While it was BigWoody who messed up by taking Archon's words incorrectly, Archon didn't attempt to word it in such a way as to get TORN to think NPO was going to backstab TORN. BW just flipped out for no reason, and didn't check Moo's query to him. If he had, this war may have been over much, much sooner. Other than that, I agree, and that's what happened. 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.