Roy Mustang

Hey I just know the audience I'm playing to. Don't hate the player hate the game.

At minimum he implied it. Which is fine in the macro sense of I think the way you guys handle bank transactions is probably better than most mass member alliances, and if I'm reading between the lines properly is probably pretty damned close to the way tS handles them to be honest. The model has nothing to do with the size of the alliance, and I'm wondering why we never exchanged notes on this back when we were allied I would have appreciated it if he, like you, had actually said what he was trying to get at. When you leave vague statements, you leave yourself open to attack really easily. Using the city thing as an example, instead of smugly saying "check the bank transactions" when you know good and well no one is going to click out of the thread (ffs, people are going to tl;dr this post, you think they're gonna click on something??), he could have shut it down with a one-line "Uh, those were my deposits which you can probably see if you look back further than 5 days". You're incorrect regarding the bank transactions as well, but at least you've put forward a coherent argument, which is literally all I've asked for this whole time. Unfortunately, this concludes your free Forum Debate 101 lesson. Just remember, PR is a game you have to play to win.

You are entirely missing my point, and I genuinely feel bad because you have lost every single argument you've attempted since you came into possession of those leaks, so I'll help you out: When you view your bank transactions screen (fix your link btw, the period got sucked into the hyperlink and broke it), the default view only shows the most recent 15 transactions. Until tonight's resource swap, those last 15 transactions showed all of the bank transactions you had done since open war commenced. Based on that cursory glance, you were a net receiver from the Alpha Bank, to the tune of $73 million in cash (I can't be bothered to go check the resources and it's not important to the argument I'm making for you). As you and I know full well, 99% of posters aren't going to look past that default, so you simply pasting that link and handwaving some shit about strength/infra ratios (which is totally irrelevant to the situation and I really hope you already know that) makes you look like a tone-deaf !@#$ who is only out for number 1. Now, the proper retort to said shitposting would be to point out that over the past 60 transactions (which doesn't even go back a full month! You've been a busy boy!), you're actually a net contributor to the Alpha Bank to the tune of over $500 million in cash (again, can't be assed to pull the exact number and it doesn't matter). But because you cannot seem to grasp that facts are a thing that should be used in arguments and debates, we will truthfully never lose a forum argument with you at this rate. Which is disappointing because my guys need the intellectual challenge. Moreau and Caecus just ain't cutting it. We haven't underestimated you, as I should hope my post (clarifying that we are, in fact, tracking your bank transactions) demonstrates. Though, weren't you just insinuating that we should have 1v1ed you in another thread? Wouldn't that mean we in fact overestimated you? Keep your story straight dude. I mean, I guess you could call us a mass-member alliance if you want, but we're not. We have literally never sent a generic recruitment letter out in our history (I've been running Internal Affairs since the beginning of time for tS, I assure you I would know), we don't have an academy, we don't accept applications off the street, and generally don't have anything in common with your typical "mass-member" alliance. We are a large alliance numerically, but we've gotten there by inviting friends to join us (who, while they may have small nations, are known quantities who we feel comfortable investing large amounts in) and two mergers almost exactly a year apart. That's really it. But please, elaborate on the superiority of your model over the tS model. I'm curious to see how incorrect your perception of our model is.

I understand this is an attempt at implying that we didn't bother to look, but uh, you didn't notate shit in your bank transactions, so one could quite plausibly infer that you skimmed some bank money off the top for your fresh new city (since you're up 73 mil in bank transactions since the beginning of hostilities and all). Feel free to actually demonstrate that you're not. We're not making your case for you.

So, uh, to state the obvious, there aren't any slots to ghost Anyone else wants a piece of Alpha, you'll have to goad them into hitting you because we're not giving up shit

I still don't understand why you (not Keegoz because you are in fact an adult with his own agency) couldn't have just presented this offer instead of taking every available opportunity to grandstand...?

Caecus, managing to prove Yosodog wrong from the past.

There does exist a mechanism for peacing out in-game, presumably he'd use that if he were interested in surrendering. I would interpret his actions as a middle finger but that's just me.

Remember kids, skill is bad!

I mean if you want to play checkers while the rest of the world plays chess around you, then sure ignore the context

tS & test are launching a common offense similar to Rose/Fark last war. This is not the same as defending someone without any defense treaty.

This post was worth everything else <3

Oh shit who let this dude out of the house

It's okay buddy, at least you got in there before the Dutch wall began.

So they only bought 14 new nukes? I hope you realize that's a difference of degree and not of kind.

I'll ask the question here now, since you've been ducking me on it for literally months: Why couldn't you just sack up and say "hey we're taking Rose's side on this one straight up because we feel Mensa's the aggressors"? Instead you did this idiotic half-assed line-walking thing that barely helped take any heat off of Rose while infuriating your other major ally because you made promises and then went back on them. I simply do not get it, your actions were literally detrimental not only to your alliance but to both of your allies. Damn with friends like that who needs enemies?

Honestly, Steve? You're wasting our time. You've made your claims, feigned innocence, and asked for us to explain ourselves. So we did. In detail. With extensive documentation. Your reaction has been to variously evade the question, spuriously imply that we are taking logs out of context without bothering to supply the context which would, if your claims have any veracity, exonerate you, and criticize us for a member crossing the line (which was handled literally within seconds of me being notified). You are not behaving as a serious person and as such there is zero reason for Partisan to continue responding to you as a serious person. If you would like to have James or Greatnate respond on your behalf in a serious manner, or actually do so yourself, then by all means we're happy to have a real discussion. As boony said, if Partisan is full of shit, prove it. We'd have a literal rebellion on our hands if you did. I promise you that.

Then we shall make 4 posts.

A conversation without spin, you say? This, perhaps, could fit the bill? I've been playing these games for well over a decade, and could fairly easily reference logs of any conversation I've been a part of in the last 2 years (I, however, am entirely too lazy to do so typically). Beyond that, if I had access to my old desktop (which is 3000 miles away from me), I'd be able to dig up stuff from literally 2006. It's really not that hard or unusual. The statement that brought peace to the world At my request (well, really order), that post has been removed. In the interest of maintaining somewhat civil discourse, I'd ask you to remove the quote as well. It's been handled.

https://www.google.com/?ion=1&espv=2#q=verbal ver·bal ˈvərbəl/ adjective 1. relating to or in the form of words. "the root of the problem is visual rather than verbal" 2. GRAMMAR of, relating to, or derived from a verb. "a verbal adjective" nounGRAMMAR 1. a word or words functioning as a verb. The word you are looking for is either "vocal" or "oral". (Oral is the more precise word to use)

Poor Metro. Won't somebody please think of the children Metro???

That makes two of us.

No TL;DRs this time. Why? Because you'll seize on that one line and run around like a below intelligence puppy with a chew toy and ignore literally everything else in the post. We know this because we have seen it happen before (not by you specifically, but from your leadership). So you'll forgive us if we pass on providing a handy little snippet to be removed from context entirely. No, we're going to clearly and systematically demonstrate precisely how full of shit your leader has been both here in this thread and over the past 4 months.

The second definition doesn't even make sense at all in this context. Acquire and attack are not synonyms.

Ah yes with our massive militarization levels, of course! (Protip: Ask whoever runs war or econ for you guys. Presumably they track actual militarization as opposed to wildly speculating based on the score chart) (Serious answer: I am gainfully employed and Partisan is a full-time student in higher ed. Neither of us is really swimming in free time to write this shit up midday) https://www.google.com/?ion=1&espv=2#q=preempt pre·empt prēˈempt/ verb verb: pre-empt; 3rd person present: pre-empts; past tense: pre-empted; past participle: pre-empted; gerund or present participle: pre-empting; verb: preempt; 3rd person present: preempts; past tense: preempted; past participle: preempted; gerund or present participle: preempting 1. take action in order to prevent (an anticipated event) from happening; forestall. "the government preempted a coup attempt" synonyms: forestall, prevent "his action may have preempted war" act in advance of (someone) in order to prevent them from doing something. "it looked as if she'd ask him more, but Parr preempted her" (of a broadcast) interrupt or replace (a scheduled program). "the violence preempted regular programming" 2. acquire or appropriate (something) in advance. "many tables were already preempted by family parties" synonyms: commandeer, occupy, seize, arrogate, appropriate, take over, secure,reserve "many tables were already preempted by family parties" NORTH AMERICAN take (something, especially public land) for oneself so as to have the right of preemption. 3. BRIDGE make a preemptive bid. nounBRIDGE noun: pre-empt; plural noun: pre-empts; noun: preempt; plural noun: preempts 1. a preemptive bid.