Rainbows n Lollipops Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 The backpedalling here is glorious. So is this whole 'We've think we've got a solid CB so we're gonna ask you for a 1v1 now and see if you're interested' the next initiative the Sith are introducing to CN? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krunk the Great Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Hm? Is your warchest not 2x bigger than SCM's or something? Why don't you attack and find out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixoux Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 I think this is why everyone is so dissatisfied with the response from NSO: You came in here threatening CSN with a DoW. A DoW. As in, you had a CB and would wage a full out war, which naturally would draw in the rest of us in SF. Our reaction? Okay, go for it. Then we reach the point we're at now, where NSO is now toting about a 1v1. If you wanted a 1v1 you should have just asked them in private, instead of embarrassing yourselves on the OWF. Now instead, you've made yourselves look like spineless cowards who have backed out of a potentially major war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starcraftmazter Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 The backpedalling here is glorious. So is this whole 'We've think we've got a solid CB so we're gonna ask you for a 1v1 now and see if you're interested' the next initiative the Sith are introducing to CN? Well, NSO is good at trying to get "change the CN norms" - that is, find opportunistic ways to profiteer and warmonger, all while not getting their butts wooped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 I think this is why everyone is so dissatisfied with the response from NSO:You came in here threatening CSN with a DoW. A DoW. As in, you had a CB and would wage a full out war, which naturally would draw in the rest of us in SF. Our reaction? Okay, go for it. Then we reach the point we're at now, where NSO is now toting about a 1v1. If you wanted a 1v1 you should have just asked them in private, instead of embarrassing yourselves on the OWF. Now instead, you've made yourselves look like spineless cowards who have backed out of a potentially major war. You almost sound surprised... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youwish959 Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 More like you know they'd kick your $@! so it's "just touch, and just for practice." If we know they'd kick our $@! why'd we offer to 1v1 then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixoux Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 You almost sound surprised... Oh, I'm not in the slightest. Just trying to summarize the last few pages for everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 If we know they'd kick our $@! why'd we offer to 1v1 then? [21:29] <+Doppelganger> there would have to be some ground rules, of course Silly things like no navy, spies or nukes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phetion Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 If we know they'd kick our $@! why'd we offer to 1v1 then? You were trying to save face, perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youwish959 Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Well, NSO is good at trying to get "change the CN norms" - that is, find opportunistic ways to profiteer and warmonger, all while not getting their butts wooped. We did invent white peace after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Why don't you attack and find out? If a war's to happen here that will have to be the case. It's clear NSO is a bit cowardly and won't really fight offensively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krunk the Great Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 I feel bad now, this is my message of sincerity to anyone the NSO has offended ... ... ... ... "Oops" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyphon88 Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 I think this is why everyone is so dissatisfied with the response from NSO:You came in here threatening CSN with a DoW. A DoW. As in, you had a CB and would wage a full out war, which naturally would draw in the rest of us in SF. Our reaction? Okay, go for it. Then we reach the point we're at now, where NSO is now toting about a 1v1. If you wanted a 1v1 you should have just asked them in private, instead of embarrassing yourselves on the OWF. Now instead, you've made yourselves look like spineless cowards who have backed out of a potentially major war. Hey, not just SF! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 The no u comment. This was originally between NSO and CSN. They have been contacted and asked if they wanted a 1v1 war. They said no. In all fairness looking at it from the standard of an objective and uninterested observer, the above is that which doesn't make sense, and is the reason for a lot of the yelling I'm going to assume. Sure, obviously haters are coming out of the word work to hate, but that is collateral to the original issue. Fact of the matter is the assertion was made that there was a valid CB on CSN. Then, CSN was approached for a "1v1", something which is reserved for personal disputes and not valid causes of war. If an alliance has a CB on another, they have two logical options: 1) They cite it as a cause for war and then actually go to war or 2) They do not (mind you I'm not making any character claims if this was the option that was chosen). Pursuing the "1v1" thing either means that option two was chosen and the choice for war was shied away from or the rest of your alliance never actually considered that to be a CB, and this has all just been a case of foot in mouth. Or, is there some terribly interesting and unknown reason for offering a "1v1"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarmatian Empire Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Why don't you attack and find out? Isnt NSO suppose to be the one's DoW'ing here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daikos Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Isnt NSO suppose to be the one's DoW'ing here? This is their new "innovative" way to wage war in CN> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarmatian Empire Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 This is their new "innovative" way to wage war in CN> well hell a 5 year old can spill mindless dribble...if thats the new way to war then CN is dead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youwish959 Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 I am saddened by Dark Fist's rejection of NSO's MADP offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starcraftmazter Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 We did invent white peace after all. You just keep telling yourself that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainbows n Lollipops Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 If we know they'd kick our $@! why'd we offer to 1v1 then? This is honestly some of the worst damage control I've ever seen, rivaled only by GGA (off the top of my head). I'm not referring to you on your own, just this whole '1v1' thing trying to salvage the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaarlaamp Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 This threat is worthless without a DoW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 This is honestly some of the worst damage control I've ever seen, rivaled only by GGA (off the top of my head). I'm not referring to you on your own, just this whole '1v1' thing trying to salvage the thread. What? NSO always does this. Guide to backing down and still looking strong: 1) Threaten an alliance with war 2) When they say "bring it", ask why they won't bring it. 3) Mention how cowardly the other alliance is for not attacking you, even when you promise to keep it 1 on 1 See? So easy even NSO could do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Apocalypse Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Oh wow this is gold. Keep it up guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EgoFreaky Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 [21:29] <+Doppelganger> there would have to be some ground rules, of courseSilly things like no navy, spies or nukes. Really, I had a real nice post all typed up when I read this one Nothing I say can top this! YOU ARE TRESPASSING ON OUR PROPERTY! WE DECLARE WAR!!!!! We will show you how though we are! but please can we leave your allies out so we don't get entirely trashed? And perhaps throw flowers at each other instead of nukes? Poor show NSO, losing credibility fast, in a few months you can't even scare a micro alliance anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 I have provided NSO with another valid cause for war by ban evading in their public irc channel. I hope that is sufficient to bring war upon CSN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts