Jacob the Malignant Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 (edited) [quote name='SpiderJerusalem' timestamp='1293662825' post='2557646'] First of all... Props to the PC and iFOKkers that fought for their beliefs Second of all... The terms are lenient, very lenient indeed... Now... This is all !@#$%^&*. Why the hell are you giving terms in the first place? Just to clarify for NEW that you are "superior" or to prove your "power"? [i]You[/i] are the attackers that wanted to prove a "moral high road"... If you want to prove that, then beat them the $%&@ down (which you obviously cannot do), instead of giving them terms. I am disappointed and ashamed over ever fighting on your side (Not that I want the other side to win either, but you should be better than this). To the other PC and iFOKkers: You should really get your testicles checked, I think they are missing [/quote] We did not fight this war to "prove our power" or for a "moral high ground." We fought them because they attacked an alliance we pledged to protect. Edited December 30, 2010 by Jacob the Malignant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christian trojans Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Zekarde' timestamp='1293664725' post='2557674'] Also, very admirable letting NEW yield with lenient terms. [/quote] They were lenient because their top tier nations were being obliterated. They wanted out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Buscemi Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='christian trojans' timestamp='1293672328' post='2557776'] They were lenient because their top tier nations were being obliterated. They wanted out. [/quote] This did make me chuckle, oh hijacker of NEW's top 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenacres Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Steve Buscemi' timestamp='1293676852' post='2557824'] This did make me chuckle, oh hijacker of NEW's top 10. [/quote] The top tier of fark did take a tremendous amount of damage, compared to those in new/who joined new. I'm not saying new didn't take a lot of damage themselves, but they really did a number on fark's top tier that they engaged/bothered to engage them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmia Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 (edited) If WFF wanted to leave at the same time as NEW did, then why did NEW leave before WFF did? This is a poor showing on NEW's part considering they [i]started[/i] this war. I do love how people are complimenting NEW on a war well fought and ignoring WFF in the corner. Yes they're an inactive alliance but it is very ironic to see the last alliance out is not the one who even started the war. Guess the funny thing is if this occurred in the past, you would see people yelling to the skies about it but there is only one mention of it here or there. Guess times have changed, eh? EDIT: I see WFF received peace.. but later. Anyhow, congratulations to all involved. Edited December 30, 2010 by Salmia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonator21 Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 Admin help my love for bad jokes. the title. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='mushi' timestamp='1293660277' post='2557622'] 10/81 sure does equal quarter. Most in CN see nothing wrong with a few nations joining to help a friend out. [/quote] 1/4 of PC's NS (which is what really matters), I'm sorry. Semantics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Cousteau Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1293682112' post='2557877'] 1/4 of PC's NS (which is what really matters), I'm sorry. Semantics. [/quote] NS > Members eh? Good to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Jacques Cousteau' timestamp='1293685532' post='2557921'] NS > Members eh? Good to know. [/quote] NS matters more than mere members in a war, so yeah, kinda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Cousteau Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1293686130' post='2557938'] NS matters more than mere members in a war, so yeah, kinda. [/quote] No, not kinda. I guess its fine if you disregard the dozens of alliances that fail during wars when their millions of excess ns turn out to be backed by inactive or incompetent nation rulers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Jacques Cousteau' timestamp='1293686315' post='2557948'] No, not kinda. I guess its fine if you disregard the dozens of alliances that fail during wars when their millions of excess ns turn out to be backed by inactive or incompetent nation rulers. [/quote] I don't think that the nations who came to NEW's aid are incompetent, do you? Either NS or numbers anyway, both will be rendered useless by inept rulers, but high NS nations are more likely to have been around longer and thus have more experience. Unless you want to deny that your efforts had any effect, I don't know what you're aiming at here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nutkase Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Jacques Cousteau' timestamp='1293686315' post='2557948'] No, not kinda. I guess its fine if you disregard the dozens of alliances that fail during wars when their millions of excess ns turn out to be backed by inactive or incompetent nation rulers. [/quote] I rather have that option to be honest, meatsheilds for the competent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='UltimateDogg' timestamp='1293651838' post='2557533'] it is on a case by case basis, they are officially members of NEW (otherwise it would be roguery and they arent rogues remember ), good luck getting that curbstomp on us going though. But really though, its like 30 aid slots (if that). I have faith in NEW to complete it soon. not doing all the alliances, but i did the INT, TPE, FARK and NEW stats in about 10 minutes we dont want them to stop raiding. If they want to raid thats fine. If they want to raid our allies, that is not fine. And yes, we did stop that, unless you see some wars on DF I missed. 1502060.098 Lost by NEW (not counting the NS lost by all the ghosts/new members) 2037225.098 Lost by NEW (counting the NS change by all the ghosts/new members) 814914.997 Lost by FARK (not counting the NS lost by all the ghosts/new members) 941127.997 Lost by FARK (counting the NS change by all the ghosts/new members) 856375.272 Lost by INT (not counting the NS lost by all the ghosts/new members) 304061.285 Lost by TPE (not counting the NS lost by all the ghosts/new members) didnt count any of INT or TPEs ghosts NS changes, since they all gained NS This gives you a slight damage lead 2101564.554 on our side to 2037225.098 [/quote] Do you have the infra and tech loss stats? That's a better indication than NS which is skewed by buildup and then loss of military (especially nukes). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Cousteau Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1293686545' post='2557950'] I don't think that the nations who came to NEW's aid are incompetent, do you? Either NS or numbers anyway, both will be rendered useless by inept rulers, but high NS nations are more likely to have been around longer and thus have more experience. Unless you want to deny that your efforts had any effect, I don't know what you're aiming at here. [/quote] I believe you recently suggested someone should read your posts more thoroughly. Maybe you should take your own advice. Or maybe you are simply looking for an argument that shouldn't, and doesn't, exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Jacques Cousteau' timestamp='1293687021' post='2557969'] I believe you recently suggested someone should read your posts more thoroughly. Maybe you should take your own advice. Or maybe you are simply looking for an argument that shouldn't, and doesn't, exist. [/quote] You said that the raw nation count was more important than the NS that moved, correct? I was merely taking that conclusion to its logical end and debunking it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Cousteau Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1293687362' post='2557977'] You said that the raw nation count was more important than the NS that moved, correct? I was merely taking that conclusion to its logical end and debunking it. [/quote] No, i used the terms 'members'. To be fair, my idea of a 'member' is probably a bit different than yours. I don't consider someone who is inactive or incapable to be a member. They are excess. Unhealthy fat, if you will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Jacques Cousteau' timestamp='1293687613' post='2557985'] No, i used the terms 'members'. To be fair, my idea of a 'member' is probably a bit different than yours. I don't consider someone who is inactive or incapable to be a member. They are excess. Unhealthy fat, if you will. [/quote] And I don't? Damn, you need to teach me how you get these mind-reading powers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Cousteau Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1293687727' post='2557987'] And I don't? Damn, you need to teach me how you get these mind-reading powers. [/quote] Maybe I will someday. You aren't yet ready. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twink Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 Haven't got to be in a war in almost a year. I'm starting to get that itch. 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.