Sandwich Controversy Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 What Trace said. You may as well be a dollar bill folded into an elephant. Sure it's cool but you can't really do all that much with it. You could sell it for at least a dollar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
relyt92 Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Forever condemned to live in the shadow of the far more courageous Flying Tigers. As long as it is not a Zimbabwean Dollar I'm content with our place in the Cyberverse. It's Dongs, but you'd still be an elephant. -Bama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 I'd DoW you right now if I weren't so afraid of war! We'd all declare war on Tyler if we could. ...on second though, some of us can. brb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Well, here goes I guess. Overrated: RoK and Gramlins is all I could come up with right now. Why RoK? I didn't know Hoo was back but I guess that only adds to the point. I realize they imported some leadership but that just adds to the point as well. Don't wish any ill will on RoK but its tough times for you guys and that protectorate bloc seems a bit big for you now. Why Gramlins? The Gramlins mystique has kind of worn off I guess. Not sure how the leadership issues are going there but good luck with that. Underrated: WTF, GATO, NPO, Why WTF? Good lord, I saw someone rated them as overrated. Who talks about them? I know we havn't seen anything of them really but literally they are an unknown so how could they be anything but underrated? Why GATO? Weathered the storm and are growing again. Probably learned a few good things from the viceroyship but at the same time grew a fiercely independent streak due to it. Thus they are going to remain underrated for quite some time. Why NPO? Going to be underrated until they get out of terms. We will then see how well they are prepared to step into their new future. Always with the excuses, we both know you're afraid of war and so is all of STA based on what i've discovered about you. Why don't you go ask your alliance's newest allies. Something tells me you aren't a very thorough researcher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 The standard is the average perception of the alliance. That's the point. People are basing their own over/under-ratings on the general perception of the alliance. They're not actually pointing out alliances they've overrated themselves because that would be simply redundant and illogical. Yes exactly, so they aren't comparing alliances. Making your post sound like you were disagreeing with me while actually agreeing is quite a skill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lebubu Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Why don't you go ask your alliance's newest allies. Something tells me you aren't a very thorough researcher. He was being facetious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uralica Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 SK knows... He recruited 500 of those 800. -Bama PERKELE!! I had another Aspie moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
relyt92 Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 He was being facetious. Don't tell me what I was or wasn't doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon IIII Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Underrated: Echelon these days, USN period Overated: MHA, Old Guard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Yes exactly, so they aren't comparing alliances. Making your post sound like you were disagreeing with me while actually agreeing is quite a skill. Or you can actually read the entire context of my post and realize there was really nothing in there agreeing with you. I never said you aren't comparing alliances, which you are. This whole exercise is comparing perceptions of alliances with the general perception. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 He was being facetious. If you say so. Not too concerned about it, was just making a single comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Underrated: Echelon these days, USN periodOverated: MHA, Old Guard Really? Old Guard? I haven't heard a word about them since they were booted from Citadel, how can they be overrated? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 I find it hilarious you make any reference about 300 because you have little to no actual knowledge of our culture. I find it funny how simple your wheels turn and how embarrassing some of your statements are. We were never part of Aegis and were forced to pink in our early days by one of your then close allies off of Green when we were small. But I guess that's just an inconvenient fact in whatever world you think existed. We became sanctioned while on one of the smallest trading spheres. I'd say we persevered through adversity and see it as a source of pride. I find it hilarious that you two say that your culture isn't 300 references yet you can't give me any examples. Surely there's a few things there you can point to, if I'm what I'm saying is wrong. You fought on the Aegis side against The Initiative in GWIII, didn't you not? And you were on Pink a lot longer than you had to be, IIRC. So would you like to actually refute something, or do you enjoy waving your arms and sounding angry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Or you can actually read the entire context of my post and realize there was really nothing in there agreeing with you. I never said you aren't comparing alliances, which you are. This whole exercise is comparing perceptions of alliances with the general perception. Exactly, not comparing alliances to each other. Which you said in an earlier post. Which we aren't doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 I find it hilarious that you two say that your culture isn't 300 references yet you can't give me any examples. Surely there's a few things there you can point to, if I'm what I'm saying is wrong. You fought on the Aegis side against The Initiative in GWIII, didn't you not? And you were on Pink a lot longer than you had to be, IIRC. So would you like to actually refute something, or do you enjoy waving your arms and sounding angry? No we didn't fight for Aegis, as I had previously said. Are you so blind you don't understand such simple concepts? We were on Pink until we found a suitable other sphere to go on. Oh I'm sorry, perhaps we shouldn't have acted with deliberate, thoughtful action and just jumped into a war during negotiat... oh wait. Go to our forums, where do you see large amounts of 300 references or art. No where. Yeah, have fun proving any of your claims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathias Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 OverratedAny mass member alliance. Underrated Any selective alliance. Athens is a mass alliance alliance, so that means they're just plain awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azrael Alexander Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 I notice a lot of people putting down MHA as an overrated alliance. What you guys seem to have done is tied performance in war with how overrated or not an alliance is. Surely an alliance called the "Mostly Harmless Alliance" would give you a clue to the type of alliance it is. The MHA has never been an alliance that has acted as if it could bring the entirety of it's 13M NS to bear on anyone. So take it into account as the MHA was built from the ground up as an alliance with a lassaiz-faire attitude. To be an alliance that was "mostly harmless" we like nation building but would not mind a war or two. I think what grates people is that at lot of you feel an alliance only counts if it has been cleansed in the crucible of war where it has fought in the losing side. One day it will happen to the MHA like alliance alliance and guarantee that will bounce back. But why you consider an alliance overrated when you don't rate it yourself makes little sense. For me: Overrated: NAAC - was not here when they were around, but to me they sound rather overated Under Rated: Ubercon - Good Avg NS, Decent member size and i have never heard of them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Exactly, not comparing alliances to each other. Which you said in an earlier post. Which we aren't doing. No, you are comparing alliances. That's what I just said. Perhaps you don't understand the connection between the perception of an alliance and how it compares to the actual alliance and where that alliance fits in the norm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinite Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 (edited) Your ranking and status fell in your lap when the status quo was shattered. We went from #3 to #2 when the "status quo shattered." We built up most of our stats while on Pink, and we had fun doing it. As for TOOL surrender terms, TOOL entered the war to defend an ally. Nobody really had a problem with them. Our objective was to knock them out of the war as quickly as possible. We did. I'm the one that ok'd the terms because the terms everyone likes to !@#$%* about were, practically speaking, absolutely meaningless. TOOL was cool throughout the war, and I didn't see the problem with giving them a moral bump. Mia actually did have something t to do with those terms (not to take anything away from GK who was also cool despite being time zonally challenged) because she was one of the reasons we thought TOOL were decent folk. Clearly, it was a mistake. I won't be nice next time. We'll fight for a couple more days for no purpose, we'll retain the option of attacking a couple alliances we never had an intention of attacking, and Sparta will be a better alliance for it. Edit: We were on Pink until we found a suitable other sphere to go on. No. We were on Pink because a bunch of us had created an identity there, and I didn't want to leave. Tulak made us though. He's not secure in his masculinity. Or something about trades. Edited October 8, 2009 by Trinite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 No we didn't fight for Aegis, as I had previously said. Are you so blind you don't understand such simple concepts? We were on Pink until we found a suitable other sphere to go on. Oh I'm sorry, perhaps we shouldn't have acted with deliberate, thoughtful action and just jumped into a war during negotiat... oh wait. Go to our forums, where do you see large amounts of 300 references or art. No where. Yeah, have fun proving any of your claims. Fine, I'll go through the history. You may not have fought for Aegis, but I remember you having a run in with the Initiative. How bloody long does it take to research and decide on a sphere? Seriously, how hard is it to decide on a sphere? Look at the number of nations for trading purposes, look at the alliances residing on the sphere, figure out what you want from your home sphere, move. What took you so long? Heh, nice attempt at a deflection/flame bait, I'd give it a 7/10. I have no desire to sign up there, what would be the purpose? I tend to stay away from alliances I have nothing but contempt for. As I said, you are a cookie cutter alliance with a 300 movie poster pasted over it. Pretty much everything you have is generic, the only thing that made you stand out was the 300 connection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Fine, I'll go through the history. You may not have fought for Aegis, but I remember you having a run in with the Initiative. How bloody long does it take to research and decide on a sphere? Seriously, how hard is it to decide on a sphere? Look at the number of nations for trading purposes, look at the alliances residing on the sphere, figure out what you want from your home sphere, move. What took you so long? Heh, nice attempt at a deflection/flame bait, I'd give it a 7/10. I have no desire to sign up there, what would be the purpose? I tend to stay away from alliances I have nothing but contempt for. As I said, you are a cookie cutter alliance with a 300 movie poster pasted over it. Pretty much everything you have is generic, the only thing that made you stand out was the 300 connection. Wow so you make random assumptions and finally claim ignorance after refusing to do any research yourself? It's called being too embarrassed to admit you're wrong and digging a deeper hole for yourself. But whatever, that's your choice. You trying to simplify an important decision is just on par with the other laughable material you've provided through this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portugal Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Mk is way under-rated, people really don't have a grasp of the monstrous beast that we are, and do not cower enough in our presence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Paul Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 I'm begining to think that people don't understand what under-rated and over-rated mean. That said, since about half of the comments RE: NPO are over-rated and half under-rated, I suppose that means that people's estimation of us is what our capabilities are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Wow so you make random assumptions and finally claim ignorance after refusing to do any research yourself? It's called being too embarrassed to admit you're wrong and digging a deeper hole for yourself. But whatever, that's your choice. You trying to simplify an important decision is just on par with the other laughable material you've provided through this thread. What, because I thought you fought for Aegis in GWIII, that invalidates all my points? Interesting. So yes, I was wrong on that point. My view of Sparta is the correct one, though, and having somebody from Argent that was arguing vehemently with me in another thread agreeing with me should show you that it's not a view that I've cooked up all by myself. If you refuse to acknowledge the failings of your alliance then it is no concern of mine. You keep saying things like you do have culture besides 300 and that moving spheres is a monumentally complex decision, yet you fail to say why or provide any proof or justification. If I'm so wrong, why won't you prove it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 I'm begining to think that people don't understand what under-rated and over-rated mean.That said, since about half of the comments RE: NPO are over-rated and half under-rated, I suppose that means that people's estimation of us is what our capabilities are. Assuming that everyone's estimation is equal. 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.