G-6 Announcement

[Clash]

[quote name='StevieG' timestamp='1294173219' post='2563345']Also clash, I take a bit of issue with this line.[/quote]
The part you quoted was more aimed at G6, who made this announcement.
But what if it's true for you, too, considering this treaty?

Consider the part Confusion stated, that I was commenting on: You would accept them hitting someone who hit YOU even if it was a fair and reasonable fight? You would take a curbstomp rather than fight even-up? You can say whatever you want, too. You might SAY you like carnage - but what if what you appear to DO says it's not accurate?

Anyone can play any way they want. No one ever questions that. Yet if playing TE like SE is your option, then prepare to receive criticism for it. That's the stuff I hate most about SE. It's the stuff many people who don't even play TE say hurts SE. I for one do not want a massive restrictive treaty web like you see in SE. These kinds of treaties are a step down that path. I think it would suck, just like it does for SE.

That's how I feel.
I am obviously far from alone on it.

[Confusion]

[quote name='Clash' timestamp='1294176297' post='2563404']
The part you quoted was more aimed at G6, who made this announcement.
But what if it's true for you, too, considering this treaty?

Consider the part Confusion stated, that I was commenting on: You would accept them hitting someone who hit YOU even if it was a fair and reasonable fight? You would take a curbstomp rather than fight even-up? You can say whatever you want, too. You might SAY you like carnage - but what if what you appear to DO says it's not accurate?

Anyone can play any way they want. No one ever questions that. Yet if playing TE like SE is your option, then prepare to receive criticism for it. That's the stuff I hate most about SE. It's the stuff many people who don't even play TE say hurts SE. I for one do not want a massive restrictive treaty web like you see in SE. These kinds of treaties are a step down that path. I think it would suck, just like it does for SE.

That's how I feel.
I am obviously far from alone on it.
[/quote]


Your complaints have been noted, and they'll be on our top of our to-do list. Really.


No, not really. We don't really care what you of everyone has to say. Anyhow, Keep on complaining, it's like music to my ears. No matter what anyone says or does the G-6-DR relationship won't change.


o/ 6 Ducks.



Confusion.

[Anon1]

For those of you opposed to treaties, see here:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=91953 IR - RE

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=91505 OB - TPC

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=67869 RE - TC

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70511 TPF - RnR

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70435 RnR - FK

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=72180 JE - OB

Treaties have been around in TE forever. After looking through the forums, it looks like this may be the first protection treaty of the round. Don't complain about something so common to the game.

[Hiro Nakara]

And you wonder why the game is on the decrease? If not, maybe you should think about that. I could see your point if the game was on the increase, but it's not. People hate treaties in TE. Because they are becoming more common makes it okay? N0!


[quote name='Anon1' timestamp='1294180413' post='2563487']
For those of you opposed to treaties, see here:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=91953 IR - RE

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=91505 OB - TPC

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=67869 RE - TC

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70511 TPF - RnR

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70435 RnR - FK

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=72180 JE - OB

Treaties have been around in TE forever. After looking through the forums, it looks like this may be the first protection treaty of the round. Don't complain about something so common to the game.
[/quote]

[Confusion]

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1294182397' post='2563533']
And you wonder why the game is on the decrease? If not, maybe you should think about that. I could see your point if the game was on the increase, but it's not. People hate treaties in TE. Because they are becoming more common makes it okay? N0!
[/quote]

People hate no matter what. Which is why I don't care anymore, we'll play our way, you play yours.



Confusion.

[Anon1]

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1294182397' post='2563533']
And you wonder why the game is on the decrease? If not, maybe you should think about that. I could see your point if the game was on the increase, but it's not. People hate treaties in TE. [b]Because they are becoming more common[/b] makes it okay? N0!
[/quote]

Nope. Treaties are becoming less common; most of those were from previous rounds. This is the only treaty from this round? How long have you played TE anyways? If you've played as long as I have, you'd see how important it is to have treaties such as this one.

[memoryproblems]

[quote name='Anon1' timestamp='1294180413' post='2563487']
For those of you opposed to treaties, see here:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=91953 IR - RE

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=91505 OB - TPC

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=67869 RE - TC

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70511 TPF - RnR

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70435 RnR - FK

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=72180 JE - OB

Treaties have been around in TE forever. After looking through the forums, it looks like this may be the first protection treaty of the round. Don't complain about something so common to the game.
[/quote]

Common to the game? Of these treaties, based on who doesn't exist anymore, looks like only about two or three of those are still active.

Its one thing to sign a treaty, its another to say 'yeah, we'll get involved even if its a fair war or an up-declare. Confusion is free to live in whatever fantasy land he wants to live in, but the sheer stupidity is not lost on those of us who are rational and have functional brainstems.

[Confusion]

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1294188952' post='2563664']
Common to the game? Of these treaties, based on who doesn't exist anymore, looks like only about two or three of those are still active.

Its one thing to sign a treaty, its another to say 'yeah, we'll get involved even if its a fair war or an up-declare. Confusion is free to live in whatever fantasy land he wants to live in, but the sheer stupidity is not lost on those of us who are rational and have functional brainstems.
[/quote]


Give. It. A. Break. No matter what you say, the DR-G-6 relationship won't change.


Why don't you do something about it? All you do is complain and complain... But what more can I expect from you.


Confusion.

[StevieG]

[quote name='Clash' timestamp='1294176297' post='2563404']
The part you quoted was more aimed at G6, who made this announcement.
But what if it's true for you, too, considering this treaty?

Consider the part Confusion stated, that I was commenting on: You would accept them hitting someone who hit YOU even if it was a fair and reasonable fight? You would take a curbstomp rather than fight even-up? You can say whatever you want, too. You might SAY you like carnage - but what if what you appear to DO says it's not accurate?

Anyone can play any way they want. No one ever questions that. Yet if playing TE like SE is your option, then prepare to receive criticism for it. That's the stuff I hate most about SE. It's the stuff many people who don't even play TE say hurts SE. I for one do not want a massive restrictive treaty web like you see in SE. These kinds of treaties are a step down that path. I think it would suck, just like it does for SE.

That's how I feel.
I am obviously far from alone on it.
[/quote]

DR hasnt done the same thing in the past 2 rounds, and we are changing it up again. Whats wrong with that?

I dont think this even comes close to the stagnation in SE, so the comparison is a little off. Add to that the 60 day limit of rounds, and not having much to lose even if you lose a war, and we can see less stagnation. All it really takes is an influx of 50 or so nations to challenge right up in the top ranking spots, as we have seen in past rounds with DR, tW, and now G-6.

My point is pretty much that treaties dont, and wont kill TE. TE has been losing members so fast in the recent past, and surely you cant pin that on treaties, as there were hardly any.

[memoryproblems]

[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1294189337' post='2563675']
Give. It. A. Break. No matter what you say, the DR-G-6 relationship won't change.


Why don't you do something about it? All you do is complain and complain... But what more can I expect from you.


Confusion.
[/quote]

You act as if using periods between words and recycling an overdone insult is going to make your actions palatable.

Heads up, it doesn't work, bro.

Edited January 5, 2011 by memoryproblems

[Mussolini the Great]

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1294190622' post='2563701']
You act as if using periods between words and recycling an overdone insult is going to make your actions palatable.

Heads up, it doesn't work, bro.
[/quote]

And you wont respond to his point, which is if you dont like G-6, just attack us, and see how that goes for you

[memoryproblems]

[quote name='Mussolini the Great' timestamp='1294193541' post='2563755']
And you wont respond to his point, which is if you dont like G-6, just attack us, and see how that goes for you
[/quote]

Your really not worth my time for either, but between your requests for me to attack you and Confusion's edict to 'do something about it', seems like you want to war with me, so by all means, come after me.

[Clash]

[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1294179197' post='2563471']No matter what anyone says or does the G-6-DR relationship won't change.[/quote]
Oh, I'm sure of that and it speaks volumes

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='Clash' timestamp='1294203223' post='2563977']
Oh, I'm sure of that and it speaks volumes
[/quote]

i would say all the whining and crying over anything that is not done in a particular way is far closer to how SE is than simply signing a treaty is. now if G-6 were to sign a treaty with half of TE, then you would be onto something but a single treaty and you are stretching it.

now the whining and crying is something that people see all over SE. Thanks to people like you, i barely read the TE forums anymore cuz it reminds me of the SE forums and i just started reading TE forums again at the beginning of the round. i quickly grew tired of you and others whining in every single G-6 announcement because we have the gall to not play TE the way you guys think it should be played. The nerve of us, to play TE and have fun the way [i]we[/i] want to.

this is why i quit playing TE a while back. way to many whiners and crybabies that make it look just like SE.

[gonftw]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1294253609' post='2564552']
now if G-6 were to sign a treaty with half of TE, then you would be onto something but a single treaty and you are stretching it.[/quote]

Lol, they tried. Obviously you weren't filled in.

rock on, bro.

[memoryproblems]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1294253609' post='2564552']
i would say all the whining and crying over anything that is not done in a particular way is far closer to how SE is than simply signing a treaty is. now if G-6 were to sign a treaty with half of TE, then you would be onto something but a single treaty and you are stretching it.

now the whining and crying is something that people see all over SE. Thanks to people like you, i barely read the TE forums anymore cuz it reminds me of the SE forums and i just started reading TE forums again at the beginning of the round. i quickly grew tired of you and others whining in every single G-6 announcement because we have the gall to not play TE the way you guys think it should be played. The nerve of us, to play TE and have fun the way [i]we[/i] want to.

this is why i quit playing TE a while back. way to many whiners and crybabies that make it look just like SE.
[/quote]

You know what I find interesting.

How you respond to everything you don't agree with 'you crying', not only that, but you go on to say thats ruining the game, that its the reason you quit a long time ago, and why you don't read these forums. You know what that sounds like to me?

[b]It sounds like your crying[/b]

If you want to sit there whining while spouting that hypocritical BS, be my guest, but we aren't as stupid as you think. I've always wondered why Confusion and his Cronies (hey, that'd make a good band name for you sorry lumps) can't think up anything better then 'you crying' to respond to their detractors. Seriously, is that all the better you can do on your limited intelligence and vocabulary?

I don't know why I was expecting better considering that its Confusion, but seriously, "crying" is the best that you have?

C'mon, try harder.

Edited January 5, 2011 by memoryproblems

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1294256708' post='2564589']
You know what I find interesting.

How you respond to everything you don't agree with 'you crying', not only that, but you go on to say thats ruining the game, that its the reason you quit a long time ago, and why you don't read these forums. You know what that sounds like to me?

[b]It sounds like your crying[/b]

If you want to sit there whining while spouting that hypocritical BS, be my guest, but we aren't as stupid as you think. I've always wondered why Confusion and his Cronies (hey, that'd make a good band name for you sorry lumps) can't think up anything better then 'you crying' to respond to their detractors. Seriously, is that all the better you can do on your limited intelligence and vocabulary?

I don't know why I was expecting better considering that its Confusion, but seriously, "crying" is the best that you have?

C'mon, try harder.
[/quote]

hahahahaha. i don't care if you have an opposite opinion but don't they are going around claiming that a single treaty is bringing down CN. that is crying. I am saying that given the sheer amount of whining over anything done by G-6 kinda ruins the fun of TE which is supposed to be about warring and fighting and !@#$ like that. i never once called ya'll stupid but it appears that you have resorted to insults. congratulations on thinking i have a limited intelligence and vocabulary because i consider the fact that people like Clash, who from all it appears, has consistently gone out of his way to complain about what G-6 is doing, gone out of his way to smear Confusion, gone out of his way to basically cry. Even when we do refute ya'lls claims, you insist on repeating the same argument ad nauseum so yes, i have given up on arguing with the likes of you or Clash as it is useless to attempt to do so, since you refuse to even consider anything other than what is in your own narrow point of view.

maybe if ya'll tried something new, like actually come up with sound arguments, i would take more time in coming up with sound defenses instead of resorting to "ya'll be crying". but frankly, that is what it sounds like and the fact that people be crying over a single treaty that G-6 holds in a single round of TE, where i remember rounds where alliances had 5+ treaties. i remember trying to organize wars but having to consider this and that and the other alliance when i want to war a single alliance. This is a single treaty and if ya'll truly wanna hit Duckroll bring along some friends. i would love to fight a multi-alliance war and have fun destroying more nations and getting my nation destroyed. that would be a blast (yes, pun intended).

i am in this solely to try and get up there in the casualties ranking (currently sitting at #10, stupid raids not peacing out ). if i wanted to stick with just SE, i would. but SE is fun for the politics and this is fun for the wars. Wars become less fun when people !@#$%* about being attacked instead of just going with it and fighting hard.

TE is also a place where people should play the way they wish. if they want to rogue out, go for it. if they want to treaty, go for it (this may make planning a war a !@#$%* but the end result tends to be a huge war which is always fun). if people want to build up and try and be #1, go for it. i don't try and tell others how to play unless it comes down to be !@#$%*ing and crying over how i or my alliance is playing. Even then it amounts to simply, "stop crying".

so you can think as you wish, you matter little to me. your opinion of me is laughable at best and also matters even less than you do. the fact that you had to resort to insulting me shows how little actual argument you have to defend your actions.

[dogbite]

Confusion has went inactive. I will take full command of G-6 till he returns. That is all.