Hyperion321 Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 What would you have us do different? What atrocities have we done to deserve this reputation? In my personal opinion, many of your frequent OWF posters come off as quite arrogant to those whom they perceive as lesser alliances. Have you considered being less condescending to...well...everyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion321 Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 I'd like to refine that concept and say that Citadel + either of SF/C&G/FB would result in a victory, however I don't think it's possible to defeat Citadel unless the other three team up against it, even in a 2v1 bloc scenario (which won't happen anyway). I was also factoring in allies to said bloc. Sparta, and VE are heavily tied to SF for instance. There's also Ragnablok to consider. FB has all their ex-BLEU friends. Cit has FOK, MHA, and TOOL backing (I assume). C&G also has heavy Sparta support, as does Cit through Umbrella now that I think about it (Wow....we're really screwed next war ). anyhoo, my point is that I think in terms allies' allies, depending on who was going up against Cit in a 2v1 it actually could be won if only 2 blocs threw down the gauntlet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hasin Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 In my personal opinion, many of your frequent OWF posters come off as quite arrogant to those whom they perceive as lesser alliances. Have you considered being less condescending to...well...everyone? I wasn't aware we were even talking to the lesser alliances at this point in time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion321 Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 I wasn't aware we were even talking to the lesser alliances at this point in time. You may be joking, as my sarcasm meter sucks right after waking up. If you aren't though, that just kinda proved my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hasin Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 You may be joking, as my sarcasm meter sucks right after waking up.If you aren't though, that just kinda proved my point. I'll let you decide. B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion321 Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 I'll let you decide. B) I've decided to go eat breakfast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyborgBelial Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 I voted Poseidon because I don't feel hated enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternos Astramora Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Saving money for a warchest is immoral. That money should be used to increase the amount of infra, CMs and tanks you carry.THINK OF THE CHILDREN Yeah, personally, I like our warchest strategy: Infra * technology = preferred warchest. A 10,000 infra / 10,000 tech guy should have a warchest of $100,000,000 at the absolute most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essenia Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 In my personal opinion, many of your frequent OWF posters come off as quite arrogant to those whom they perceive as lesser alliances. Have you considered being less condescending to...well...everyone? I would agree that plenty of TOP OWF posters come off as arrogant, but I'd also say that many posters from other blocs come off as immature, aggressive and generally uncouth. Such is the nature of an internet forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiss Goodbye Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 In my personal opinion, many of your frequent OWF posters come off as quite arrogant to those whom they perceive as lesser alliances. Have you considered being less condescending to...well...everyone? Like I said, you really shouldn't judge an alliance by its OWF presence. You should judge it by how they actually interact with you in a meaningful way. The folks who'd actually like to see us rolled--unlike those a bit put off by the attitudes some members display here--have long-held grievances with us. We talk to those folks about their issues with us. Those with an open mind have let the past go. I don't expect everyone to let things go. TOP gets trolled by a lot of people. Most of those people are in alliances that would rather not be our enemies. Do I hold it against them? No. Their membership has the freedom to express themselves however they wish. Ours has the same freedom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted December 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 (edited) Mmm, perhaps if SF wasn't rubbing their hands in the corner waiting for someone else to pull the trigger on Citadel for them they could get this party started, on their own. Good thing we're not, then. SF is a *defensive* bloc. We have no interest in attacking Citadel. Although many of our members do find the prospect of FB and Citadel nuking each other for 6 months to be quite interesting... I'd like to refine that concept and say that Citadel + either of SF/C&G/FB would result in a victory, however I don't think it's possible to defeat Citadel unless the other three team up against it, even in a 2v1 bloc scenario (which won't happen anyway). Well, generally, but CnG + SF vs. Cit and FB would be quite an interesting battle. Especially if NpO remained neutral due to their ties to RoK and MK. Edited December 1, 2009 by Penkala Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hasin Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 (edited) Good thing we're not, then. SF is a *defensive* bloc. We have no interest in attacking Citadel. Although many of our members do find the prospect of FB and Citadel nuking each other for 6 months to be quite interesting... You have very high expectations of our stamina. I can't speak for my friends in FB but I know I'd be a little sore after such a long period of time. On a serious note this also addresses why nothing has happened so far. If you sit out the next war you win, for it will be long and very damaging to whoever is fighting. Edited December 1, 2009 by Hasin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terveis Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Saving money for a warchest is immoral. That money should be used to increase the amount of infra, CMs and tanks you carry.THINK OF THE CHILDREN I hear you oh wise leader. I bought 600 infra, so that i would have no money, warchests are useless. :| Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Well, generally, but CnG + SF vs. Cit and FB would be quite an interesting battle. Especially if NpO remained neutral due to their ties to RoK and MK. Unlikely. There's only one CnG treaty (Vanguard-Rok) with SF and three with both Cit (MK-Umbrella, MK-Gremlins, Vanguard-FCC) and FB (MK-STA, MK-NpO, GR-NpO) and NpO wouldn't leave STA out to dry like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avernite Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Well, generally, but CnG + SF vs. Cit and FB would be quite an interesting battle. Especially if NpO remained neutral due to their ties to RoK and MK. Making NpO neutral kind of defeats the point of calling it Cit AND FB If they're not neutral, I'm not sure it'd be so interesting, but who knows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion321 Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Like I said, you really shouldn't judge an alliance by its OWF presence. You should judge it by how they actually interact with you in a meaningful way. I have. Some of your guys have been pretty !@#$%y (sp?) in non-OWF venues as well. To be honest the only TOP member I can recall that I know hasn't ever made an lolspartasucks wisecrack is Epik. I'm not saying you have made such pointlessly hurtful remarks, I'm just merely pointing out that your members seem to love talking down to other people so much that it drowns out any positive memories, and I can't remember anyone in your alliance besides Epik who has ever not been condescending. Obviously your whole alliance can't be pricks, as such large gathering of $@!-hattery is nigh impossible, but it would be nice to see some other, less arrogant (in my opinion) faces around for once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted December 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 (edited) Unlikely. There's only one CnG treaty (Vanguard-Rok) with SF and three with both Cit (MK-Umbrella, MK-Gremlins, Vanguard-FCC) and FB (MK-STA, MK-NpO, GR-NpO) and NpO wouldn't leave STA out to dry like that. Well it's obviously unlikely, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be fun. Edit: Hyperion, *I* make lolsparta jokes. It's the cool thing to do. Edited December 1, 2009 by Penkala Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 (edited) Edit: Disregard. Not really worth going into. Edited December 1, 2009 by Feanor Noldorin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white majik Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 TOP is EVIL LOLsparta Kill Citadel OMG Treaty web Buy more infra CN wants warz Seems like this somes up this thread nicely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion321 Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 TOP is EVILLOLsparta Kill Citadel OMG Treaty web Buy more infra CN wants warz Seems like this somes up this thread nicely not really... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Scott Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Roll Citadel based on individual members they hold imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 I already mentioned you as the reason LJ )): Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiquidMercury Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 I have. Some of your guys have been pretty !@#$%y (sp?) in non-OWF venues as well. To be honest the only TOP member I can recall that I know hasn't ever made an lolspartasucks wisecrack is Epik. I'm not saying you have made such pointlessly hurtful remarks, I'm just merely pointing out that your members seem to love talking down to other people so much that it drowns out any positive memories, and I can't remember anyone in your alliance besides Epik who has ever not been condescending.Obviously your whole alliance can't be pricks, as such large gathering of $@!-hattery is nigh impossible, but it would be nice to see some other, less arrogant (in my opinion) faces around for once. I like to think we have quality members all over the place. Some are outspoken, myself included, but I do not believe we truly intend to talk down to people. I think it is a matter of disagreeing with policies and then the fact that it turns into a "no u emofest" on here due to the lack of maturity by many parties (us, whoever it is we are disagreeing with, 3rd party observers). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion321 Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 I like to think we have quality members all over the place. Some are outspoken, myself included, but I do not believe we truly intend to talk down to people. I think it is a matter of disagreeing with policies and then the fact that it turns into a "no u emofest" on here due to the lack of maturity by many parties (us, whoever it is we are disagreeing with, 3rd party observers). They may not intend to, and by no means have I ever seen you do it LM, as I hold you still in high regard since your GRE days, but that's certainly how it comes off to me. Perhaps it's a matter of perspective and context based on where you stand on certain issues in some cases, but in others it is just flat out rudeness. I will admit the other side of the court can be quite abrasive and immature at times as well, but that's hardly a reason to lash out at third party observers (such as me) who chime in with thoughts contrary to your own. It seems that people (everyone) are really blurring the line in terms of who they are really mad at these days. Rather than being idiots to everyone they don't like, they are idiots to everyone who doesn't mindless agree with them, as if stimulating discussion and debate is some absurdity to these people. Is it really so hard for you all to accept that not everyone is going to hold the same opinions as you? You (everyone) can get your own thoughts out there, that's what the OWF is there for after all, but you don't have to be a prick and try to convert everyone to your mindset through insults and vague, witty references. That's just irritating, and it's getting quite old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookavich Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 (edited) Good thing we're not, then. SF is a *defensive* bloc. We have no interest in attacking Citadel. Although many of our members do find the prospect of FB and Citadel nuking each other for 6 months to be quite interesting...Everyone has seen the logs. Not fooling anyone. Also, SF is a *defensive* bloc? Have you read the treaty? Just wondering. Edited December 2, 2009 by cookavich 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.