WarriorSoul

I, for one, am so gratified to have your pity. 🤮

🤢

not enough infra

Yes, your expectation here is that, even if it's true, someone in Hedge is going to come to this merciless hellhole and openly admit they were planning an aggressive war? Is that what you think is going to happen?

I figured as much. That's a privilege reserved for people on your side

Yes, and one of those interpretations necessitates ignoring like a decade and a half of nation sim history about what terms like "countering X's growth" means. And once again, are you going to take whatever that person would say at face value? If so, your analysis again boils down to "Swamp and Hedge said they had no interest in an aggressive war!" and your job is done.

This goes back to my earlier post about the simplest answer usually being true. In order for your interpretation of events to be true, both of those people would have had to clearly misinterpret the not-too-ambiguous "countering Quack's growth".

surely you realize that these screenshots reveal someone looking to confirm their own preconceived notion of how the events unfolded? and furthermore go to show that you are willing to simply take anything your own coalition leaders say at face value while not only not affording our coalition the same privilege, but denying the aforementioned slew circumstantial evidence in our favor? it's not that I blame you for this - anyone would do the same in your position (or would simply choose not to speak). but to do so, you'll need to drop this pretense of being in some pursuit of truth and peace, and just admit to being a shill for your side like 99% of the other inhabitants of this wasteland

When you put it that way, it sounds more like the war was declared against TCW for past grievances, which would qualify as revenge, which I would define in far different terms than I would define preemptively declaring against a pre-assembled coalition who were planning to attack us anyway.

Dude i've spent the vast majority of the last 8 months at home. this is the most entertainment I get. The optional aggression component of the Swamp Bloc treaty necessarily refutes this claim. In all seriousness though, it's almost farcical to say something like that. "The every essence of Swamp is defensive in nature" he says literally three months after Swamp and Hedge aggressively dogpile TCW.

are we the people pushing him around for his cherry cola?

You are agreeing with me in that despite weeks of evidence mounting against the narrative you have so painstakingly constructed, you are basing your belief that Swamp did not want to strike first exclusively on what they said. Which, if the court reporter would please read my words back to me:

Your analysis literally boils down to "Quack declared war on reasonable suspicion of a coalition building against them. Despite a mountain of evidence, circumstantial and otherwise, coming to light before and after their DoW, I am instead choosing to take the verbal denials from Swamp at face value". You must be able to see why people aren't taking you seriously?

You have devoted countless walls of text to create a story which requires assumption upon assumption to check out. The simplest answer will usually suffice. What is the simple answer here? Three of the four spheres in the game secretly agreed to what amounts to M-level treaties, forming a de facto coalition before the outbreak of war. In the history of this game, and others like it, coalitions don't form as a precaution. You build a coalition because you plan to do something with it. What is the only thing you can do with a coalition that comprises three of the four spheres in the game? Roll the outlier sphere. But by all means, keep up with this mental gymnastics routine. That post count isn't going to up itself.

And here I thought he only did it to us.

damn i bet you thought you did something here

Unless your people were planning to "curb" our growth by recruiting 100% of new players to the game *and* actively poaching our current players, the only way to do so would be war. The only way we have been growing is organically, as opposed to forming blocs and signing secret M-level treaties. You are either very naïve or acting in bad faith here. "Hey guys, it's us, the people you've all secretly agreed to dogpile in the event of a war? Are you guys plotting to roll us at any time in the next few months?"

Very easy to make the result a foregone conclusion when the other three spheres in the game are signing (what amounts to) M-level treaties in secret with each other

I wasn't saying you're *worse* than a wall. So your implication is that our coalition's leadership is lying. Obviously there's no one on these very public forums saying "hell yeah bro let's offensively attack Quack and openly admit to our scheming to do so". But you've been presented with a mountain of circumstantial evidence that, when taken together, paints a pretty clear picture of a coalition forming to "counter" (read: attack) Quack for its substantial growth over the last several months. That you fail to connect all the dots is not our failure to provide the evidence, but your own inability to make inferences.

I wouldn't necessarily call you a wall.

"Show me a single post where someone admits outright the very thing they've all committed to deny entirely!"

I have a flair for the dramatic.

I realize that your whole brand in this thread has been disingenuous bullshit, but this may still be the most egregious.

Cool, so based on your research, it seems that Swamp, Hedge, and Rose were determined to peacefully coexist together with Quack in a constant state of war-less bliss, despite the numerous people from your coalition on this very forum(!) explaining how Quack's size was an obvious threat. Am I getting that right? Please tell me I'm not the only one seeing the dissonance here!