MrMuz Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 Gay Rollers withdraws from protection, but will continue to defend other alliances in the cease fire as is reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul711 Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 [quote name='Room21' timestamp='1293774136' post='2558996'] 'hi guys im ferrie im going to change the rules of the agreement on the fly because some people did things i dont like' [/quote] Well for the record, OP also agrees that G6, or any AA, should be removed from protection of the agreement once they commit an aggressive war against another AA. I support Ferrie's decision 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Room21 Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 (edited) [quote name='paul711' timestamp='1293812790' post='2559263'] Well for the record, OP also agrees that G6, or any AA, should be removed from protection of the agreement once they commit an aggressive war against another AA. I support Ferrie's decision 100%. [/quote] yea ok even though it doesnt say you're not allowed to attack ANYONE. it's like testing a product and pointing out a flaw. you arent forced to stop testing are you? Edited December 31, 2010 by Room21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostfirefox Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 To be fair this isn't even a cease-fire. It's more of an MDP Bloc with a no-aggression clause. A cease-fire is just a stop of hostilities between nations that agree to it. But I'm just saying, I personally do not care we were removed because it is scheduled to end tomorrow anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul711 Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 [quote name='Room21' timestamp='1293813782' post='2559279'] yea ok even though it doesnt say you're not allowed to attack ANYONE. it's like testing a product and pointing out a flaw. you arent forced to stop testing are you? [/quote] I'm not arguing for or against the right to attack another AA that was not a part of it, I am supporting the decision to kick an AA out that is in a war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul711 Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 [quote name='Frostfirefox' timestamp='1293814358' post='2559289'] To be fair this isn't even a cease-fire. It's more of an MDP Bloc with a no-aggression clause. A cease-fire is just a stop of hostilities between nations that agree to it. But I'm just saying, I personally do not care we were removed because it is scheduled to end tomorrow anyways. [/quote] You are 100% correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 [quote name='Mikeyrox' timestamp='1293774499' post='2559006'] I am not arguing that they cannot defend themselves, however from my interpretation the treaty [i]could [/i] still potentially require that other signatories retaliate against the warriors. You may have been the ones to declare war, them defending against you could still count as an act of war, which could potentially require them to assist you and RE in crushing them. I am not saying that that is what it absolutely set in stone out right says - it depends on your interpretation of the meanings. But you can see how, based on different peoples interpretations, it could cause some confusion. When a WAPA guy raided a member of RE, we mistakenly thought they were part of the treaty, and we werent sure if we could retaliate without be dog-piled. As it turns out, we could have, but there was still some uncertainty there - the same uncertainty that would be caused by you staying apart of the treaty. Did you do anything explicitly wrong or illegal under treaty rules? No and I don't believe I said you did. What I did say, and am saying, is that removing you at this point makes the most sense, and provides for the least confusion to all involved. I dont see why any of you are even so angry over this anyway? Both confusion and dogbite have said they agreed with the decision, and I dont see how it negatively impacts you at this point. [/quote] oh i am all for not being part of this treaty. i am just stating that all the e-lawyering going on by you and Ferrie and Clash and memoryproblems and what not is not in the TE spirit of things and is getting as tiresome as it does in SE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferrie Posted December 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 [quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1293823383' post='2559381'] oh i am all for not being part of this treaty. i am just stating that all the e-lawyering going on by you and Ferrie and Clash and memoryproblems and what not is not in the TE spirit of things and is getting as tiresome as it does in SE. [/quote] I'm the furthest thing from an e-lawyer. I think arguing about points that cant be won is ridiculous. Which is why I'm not arguing with you. This was merely meant as a way for people to enjoy their holidays without having to run to CN every night, and check to make sure their nation was still standing. My intention wasn't to start a debate. I got what I wanted out of it, and I think most others did, too. Besides, theres only one more day til it all ends... Then we can all let our actions do the talking, and drop the E-tough guy attitudes. Good luck to everyone. Salute! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clash Posted January 1, 2011 Report Share Posted January 1, 2011 Ferrie proposed a ceasefire, not a bloc, and he was very repeatedly specific in that. In TE where there is no peace mode and war is so much more common than SE, ceasefire was the exact right way to put it. Normally, there is much firing during the time the bloc was slated to take place. Nor was it intended to be a bloc, despite so many people using it that way. At the risk of speaking for LE (and my apologies if I get the following wrong, Ferrie): LE doesn't DO blocs (much less treaties) these days, and they rarely have in the past. This ceasefire seemed to me to be merely a well-intentioned proposal to help people out at a time of year when real-life takes an even greater-than-normal precedence over CN life. That's how we took it, anyways, and oh yes, I'm well aware others chose to use it for other reasons. Revisionist history ftl. [quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1293823383' post='2559381'] oh i am all for not being part of this treaty. i am just stating that all the e-lawyering going on by you and Ferrie and Clash and memoryproblems and what not is not in the TE spirit of things and is getting as tiresome as it does in SE.[/quote] Well, that's ironic. I find a SE "join a bloc or get curbstomped" philosophy infusion into TE to be 100% against the spirit of TE, especially considering it's done little for SE except drive away a bunch of people. CN is going downhill in general, in numbers of players and fun levels (two very connected things), and that kind of attitude based on poor games-and-sportsmanship (curbstomps) is one big reason why. If the game were becoming MORE fun it would be growing - and it's not, it's shrinking. I hope this crap doesn't ever happen again. It was a huge step backwards towards SE for TE, imho. If you want a stupid treaty web of stagnating proportions, go back to playing SE. It's where you belong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted January 1, 2011 Report Share Posted January 1, 2011 [quote name='Clash' timestamp='1293903077' post='2560132'] Ferrie proposed a ceasefire, not a bloc, and he was very repeatedly specific in that. In TE where there is no peace mode and war is so much more common than SE, ceasefire was the exact right way to put it. Normally, there is much firing during the time the bloc was slated to take place. Nor was it intended to be a bloc, despite so many people using it that way. At the risk of speaking for LE (and my apologies if I get the following wrong, Ferrie): LE doesn't DO blocs (much less treaties) these days, and they rarely have in the past. This ceasefire seemed to me to be merely a well-intentioned proposal to help people out at a time of year when real-life takes an even greater-than-normal precedence over CN life. That's how we took it, anyways, and oh yes, I'm well aware others chose to use it for other reasons. Revisionist history ftl. Well, that's ironic. I find a SE "join a bloc or get curbstomped" philosophy infusion into TE to be 100% against the spirit of TE, especially considering it's done little for SE except drive away a bunch of people. CN is going downhill in general, in numbers of players and fun levels (two very connected things), and that kind of attitude based on poor games-and-sportsmanship (curbstomps) is one big reason why. If the game were becoming MORE fun it would be growing - and it's not, it's shrinking. I hope this crap doesn't ever happen again. It was a huge step backwards towards SE for TE, imho. If you want a stupid treaty web of stagnating proportions, go back to playing SE. It's where you belong. [/quote] yes, cuz that is completely what i said and not entirely made up whatsoever by you... i said treaty because even though it was just a ceasefire, it was still a treaty and one that tW did not partake in. Since tW was not part of the ceasefire (i.e. you did not sign the treaty) tW became available to hit over the course of the ceasefire. the ceasefire did not hold anything close to stating "all signatories agree to not attack [i]any[/i] other alliance in TE" instead it state that the signatories agree not to attack other signatories. Again, tW was not a signatory. this whole "violation of spirit blah blah blah" is a cop out because tW got trashed by being caught with their pants down because ya'll was stupid. also, this was far from a curbstomp so please stop calling it that. a curbstomp is where one side far outnumbers the other side typically in both number of nations and NS. RE/G-6 was only 67k NS stronger than tW/WAPA even according to your stats Clash. If we go with Confusion's stats for tW/WAPA for the beginning of the war and your stats for G-6/RE then we were only 43k NS stronger than you. that is hardly a curbstomp at all. where did i ever state i want a treaty web? because i called the ceasefire a treaty since ya know, it required signatures like a treaty does???? wow, again you are seriously just twisting everything i state to fit some stupid thing you are making up as you speak. it is people like you who !@#$%*, cry, whine, complain, moan, and everything else over being attacked that causes TE to cease being fun. people like you drive others away who see TE as a place to war since SE does not have very much of it anymore. people like you are the cause. i am not here to try to make any treaties and i will preach against having that many treaties or any at all. i don't really think treaties have a place in TE unless it is to ensure bloc wars happen but even then, i am like you i believe in close fights not curbstomps. and if you think a curbstomp is 43k NS more, than that is just sad. it was your strategy to pick people who knew nothing of how to play CN really. while that is all well and good and altruistic, it is also plain stupid in TE where war is commonplace. especially when all you do is whine and complain when you are hit and make up excuses for being a paper tiger. not to mention, lying about me coming to you while i was in CTA (again, never was in ODN ever) and now trying to make up !@#$ and pass it off as if i was the one saying it... then you tell me to go back to SE? please, e-lawyers/whiners/crybabies like you need to go back to SE. i am here to have fun and war. not listen to a crybaby whining about his alliance being trashed. WAPA took the hit like men, Warriors took the hit like babies. you really need to switch your sig to something else since Warriors definitely do not war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scytale Posted January 1, 2011 Report Share Posted January 1, 2011 All I gotta say is tic toc, I can't wait to see all the fireworks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kongland Posted January 1, 2011 Report Share Posted January 1, 2011 [quote name='Clash' timestamp='1293903077' post='2560132'] Well, that's ironic. I find a SE "join a bloc or get curbstomped" philosophy infusion into TE to be 100% against the spirit of TE, especially considering it's done little for SE except drive away a bunch of people. CN is going downhill in general, in numbers of players and fun levels (two very connected things), and that kind of attitude based on poor games-and-sportsmanship (curbstomps) is one big reason why. If the game were becoming MORE fun it would be growing - and it's not, it's shrinking. I hope this crap doesn't ever happen again. It was a huge step backwards towards SE for TE, imho. If you want a stupid treaty web of stagnating proportions, go back to playing SE. It's where you belong. [/quote] I'm struggling to find something here I don't agree with and I can't. Sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppy Fish Posted January 1, 2011 Report Share Posted January 1, 2011 [quote name='Clash' timestamp='1293903077' post='2560132'] This ceasefire seemed to me to be merely a well-intentioned proposal to help people out at a time of year when real-life takes an even greater-than-normal precedence over CN life. That's how we took it, anyways, and oh yes, I'm well aware others chose to use it for other reasons. [/quote] This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro Nakara Posted January 2, 2011 Report Share Posted January 2, 2011 [quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1293914040' post='2560244'] yes, cuz that is completely what i said and not entirely made up whatsoever by you... i said treaty because even though it was just a ceasefire, it was still a treaty and one that tW did not partake in. Since tW was not part of the ceasefire (i.e. you did not sign the treaty) tW became available to hit over the course of the ceasefire. the ceasefire did not hold anything close to stating "all signatories agree to not attack [i]any[/i] other alliance in TE" instead it state that the signatories agree not to attack other signatories. Again, tW was not a signatory. this whole "violation of spirit blah blah blah" is a cop out because tW got trashed by being caught with their pants down because ya'll was stupid. also, this was far from a curbstomp so please stop calling it that. a curbstomp is where one side far outnumbers the other side typically in both number of nations and NS. RE/G-6 was only 67k NS stronger than tW/WAPA even according to your stats Clash. If we go with Confusion's stats for tW/WAPA for the beginning of the war and your stats for G-6/RE then we were only 43k NS stronger than you. that is hardly a curbstomp at all. where did i ever state i want a treaty web? because i called the ceasefire a treaty since ya know, it required signatures like a treaty does???? wow, again you are seriously just twisting everything i state to fit some stupid thing you are making up as you speak. it is people like you who !@#$%*, cry, whine, complain, moan, and everything else over being attacked that causes TE to cease being fun. people like you drive others away who see TE as a place to war since SE does not have very much of it anymore. people like you are the cause. i am not here to try to make any treaties and i will preach against having that many treaties or any at all. i don't really think treaties have a place in TE unless it is to ensure bloc wars happen but even then, i am like you i believe in close fights not curbstomps. and if you think a curbstomp is 43k NS more, than that is just sad. it was your strategy to pick people who knew nothing of how to play CN really. while that is all well and good and altruistic, it is also plain stupid in TE where war is commonplace. especially when all you do is whine and complain when you are hit and make up excuses for being a paper tiger. not to mention, lying about me coming to you while i was in CTA (again, never was in ODN ever) and now trying to make up !@#$ and pass it off as if i was the one saying it... then you tell me to go back to SE? please, e-lawyers/whiners/crybabies like you need to go back to SE. i am here to have fun and war. not listen to a crybaby whining about his alliance being trashed. [b]WAPA took the hit like men[/b], Warriors took the hit like babies. you really need to switch your sig to something else since Warriors definitely do not war. [/quote] That's because we are men with big beards and hardy voices. We also lift sofas in our spare time for something to do. I'm quite proud were tW friends, I wouldn't like another alliance to fight alongside, because I know when the !@#$ goes down, we have a staunch friend that will back us all the way. Sure we got caught out, I guarantee the same will happen to G6 and it already frequently happens to RE and 100% it will happen again. I'm pretty sure the roles will be reversed for you at some point and I only hope you practise what you preach. Also may I thank you for keeping me #1 in casualties. This is the only thing I play for in this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted January 2, 2011 Report Share Posted January 2, 2011 [quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1293933871' post='2560435'] That's because we are men with big beards and hardy voices. We also lift sofas in our spare time for something to do. I'm quite proud were tW friends, I wouldn't like another alliance to fight alongside, because I know when the !@#$ goes down, we have a staunch friend that will back us all the way. Sure we got caught out, I guarantee the same will happen to G6 and it already frequently happens to RE and 100% it will happen again. I'm pretty sure the roles will be reversed for you at some point and I only hope you practise what you preach. Also may I thank you for keeping me #1 in casualties. This is the only thing I play for in this game. [/quote] you are quite welcome mate . as for practicing what i preach, i hoped that tW/WAPA would bring in friends. i already told Clash that i had 3 defensive slots open. but unfortunately the war ended first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikeyrox Posted January 2, 2011 Report Share Posted January 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1293823383' post='2559381'] i am just stating that all the e-lawyering going on by you and Ferrie and Clash and memoryproblems and what not is not in the TE spirit of things and is getting as tiresome as it does in SE. [/quote] I wouldn't call what I have been doing e-laywering. I have said that what you did was strictly legal according to the words of the ceasefire, it just is probably not what ferrie had in mind. And I would say removing you, even though you didn't break any specicic rule, but because it isn't what any other signatories intended, is more in the spirit of TE. In SE they would be stuck with it, and because of all the e-laywering that goes on, might be stuck fighting for you too. I'm not trying to say what you did was wrong or violated the agreement, I was just trying to explain what I saw as the rational for removing you all Anyways this whole crazy mess is over now and I can start going to bed before morning now Edited January 2, 2011 by Mikeyrox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcortell Posted January 2, 2011 Report Share Posted January 2, 2011 Well, looks like this served it's purpose for some AA's.. And now the big boys can come out to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMuz Posted January 2, 2011 Report Share Posted January 2, 2011 No ceasefire end update blitz? I am disappoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scytale Posted January 2, 2011 Report Share Posted January 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1293951708' post='2560680'] No ceasefire end update blitz? I am disappoint. [/quote] I think technically the cease fire went to midnight CN time yesterday which doesn't allow for quading. The fireworks will probably start near update tonight. Should be a sight to see. Edited January 2, 2011 by scytale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts