Bob Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) Almost as heartbreaking as it was to see your alliance endlessly attacking your ally and ours. But not quite. I will not post a negative comment at STA. You are too good of friends. Please, try to understand our position here and understand why we have made such posts. If you cannot, then come see us. Edited January 25, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conistonslim Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 as you wish Furthermore, xfd deal with it chumps Now were chumps? Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omfghi2u2 Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I will not post a negative comment at STA. You are too good of friends. Please, try to understand our position here and understand why we have made such posts. If you cannot, then come see us. It would be a terrible day where we would see each other on the opposite battlefields. Needless to say, I feel like I should be eating my words soon. -omfg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) Now were chumps? Nice. That was not addressed to STA, in any way shape or form. It would be a terrible day where we would see each other on the opposite battlefields. Needless to say, I feel like I should be eating my words soon. -omfg If such a day comes, I agree. I hope that we can honor each other as always if it comes to such. Edited January 25, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Was that a shot at STA? Or do you even keep up with our politics? No it wasn't, it was a shot at our other allies. I'll say this once, I don't care about any of my allies reasons for going to war-ever-I have their back and I expect my allies to have my back nothing more and nothing less. I think you're the one who needs to keep up with politics if you didn't understand whom I was referring to unlike everyone else here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I guess MK have made their choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisK Owns You Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I think you're the one who needs to keep up with politics if you didn't understand whom I was referring to unlike everyone else here. Dang you gave it away. Why didn't you pick me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The FSM Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) I dont take issue with Vanguard signing a treaty with an entire bloc, their FA choices are pretty much up to them. However, I will take issue with Vanguard signing an oA treaty with a bloc that just declared war on another alliance because it essentially gives you a free pass to hit NpO 'because you want to'. This is fairly blatant opportunism on the part of Vanguard, if this treaty is cited 24 hours from now as Vanguard's ticket into this twisted carnival then I will have lost all respect for them. Edited January 25, 2010 by The Flying Scotsman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I think it was a shot at Polaris. I was just being a dick about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Guys, its pretty obvious who this was intended for. You needn't say who but we all know. I really gotta say this war is shaping up to be one hell of a show. I personally appreciate the sign of respect Vanguard just made to STA. Perhaps I am a bit out of it when it comes to that but what the hell you sent a message to us by setting a precedent in another matter. Well played Stumpy....well played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 No kidding, $@!& over your own allies much? They're referencing the IRON NSO treaty in a transparent display of hypocrisy. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I think you're the one who needs to keep up with politics if you didn't understand whom I was referring to unlike everyone else here. Somebody needs to brush up on his sarcasm detector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I guess MK have made their choice. Well, SirWilliam has assured me that MK will not be entering this war against Polar. Let's see how good his word really is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupremePrince Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Good luck I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunnar Griffin Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 This seems very opportunistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puppet Master Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 They're referencing the IRON NSO treaty in a transparent display of hypocrisy. That's all. Wait wha? What does IRON and NSO have anything to do with this..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I dont take issue with Vanguard signing a treaty with an entire bloc, their FA choices are pretty much up to them. However, I will take issue with Vanguard signing an oA treaty with a bloc that just declared war on another alliance because it essentially gives you a free pass to hit NpO 'because you want to'. This is fairly blatant opportunism on the part of Vanguard, if this treaty is cited 24 hours from now as Vanguard's ticket into this twisted carnival then I will have lost all respect for them. I would agree, but they were already MDoAP'd to SLCB and could have came in anyways using that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Well, SirWilliam has assured me that MK will not be entering this war against Polar. Let's see how good his word really is. Did he say "We wont be attacking Polar" or "We wont be entering in this war, on the side against Polar"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafael Nadal Posted January 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 The opportunism claims will fall flat on the ground when we don't even enter via this treaty, much less attack Polar with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Somebody needs to brush up on his sarcasm detector. I don't want anyone to think I hold any disdain for STA. Your "sarcasm" could have been misinterpreted very easily and yes I really didn't think it was sarcasm at all to be honest because it didn't seem it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choader Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 However, I will take issue with Vanguard signing an oA treaty with a bloc that just declared war on another alliance because it essentially gives you a free pass to hit NpO 'because you want to'. Anyone can hit NpO "because they want to' with or without a treaty, Grub set the precedent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Anyone can hit NpO "because they want to' with or without a treaty, Grub set the precedent. This man does have a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Did he say "We wont be attacking Polar" or "We wont be entering in this war, on the side against Polar"? Doesn't matter to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Did he say "We wont be attacking Polar" or "We wont be entering in this war, on the side against Polar"? <Rebel_Virginia> Will MK be declaring war on Polar? <SirWilliam> RV, we're treatied to them. why would we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omfghi2u2 Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I would agree, but they were already MDoAP'd to SLCB and could have came in anyways using that. I already asked you this, but I just want to see if anyone else know. Then why treaty to a bloc? Why not just stick it out with SLCB and wait to announce this after a war? because otherwise, I dont take issue with Vanguard signing a treaty with an entire bloc, their FA choices are pretty much up to them. However, I will take issue with Vanguard signing an oA treaty with a bloc that just declared war on another alliance because it essentially gives you a free pass to hit NpO 'because you want to'. This is fairly blatant opportunism on the part of Vanguard, if this treaty is cited 24 hours from now as Vanguard's ticket into this twisted carnival then I will have lost all respect for them. My exact words. -omfg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts