Jump to content

Smith

Members
  • Content Count

    631
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Smith last won the day on June 27

Smith had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2662 Mythical Upvote Hero

7 Followers

About Smith

  • Rank
    The New and Improved Pigeon

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Alliance Pip
    The Knights Radiant
  • Leader Name
    Smith
  • Nation Name
    The Land of Simple
  • Nation ID
    51491
  • Alliance Name
    The Knights Radiant

Recent Profile Visitors

7283 profile views
  1. Alright so a few things here. 1. The conditions were not known. I'm not sure what kind of spin this is but after Kayer left not even your own allies knew about the agreement you had to protect BK 2. You mention BK has "attracted a lot of heat". But you didn't want to "throw them to the wolves". So let's think about the situation your agreement put the rest of the game in: Assuming BKsphere/N$O are two different spheres that means BK is by far the biggest BKsphere was continuing to expand the size of their sphere Logs were revealed that BK was planning to dogpile a much smaller sphere to "contain" them No single sphere would be able to stand against BK on their own (except maybe N$O who refuses to fight them). This means that the rest of the game has the option to either unite against their aggression or let them pick us off one by one. Of course if we unite then you join in to help them because you don't want to "throw them to the wolves". What is the rest of the game supposed to do?
  2. It's not. I am talking from a completely OOC/Meta perspective. You'll noticed both of example I gave actually hurt TKR directly and I did that intentionally. The point I am trying to make is that leadership changes often result in political change even if I disagree with what that political change is and even if it hurts TKR. But when the same leaders are bringing up the same 3 year old grudges it makes it difficult for change to happen.
  3. This is really indicative of one of the main problems with the game. If you look at basically ever major alliance in the game you will see consistent leadership changes (Rose, tS, BK, etc) that often bring political change with them (partisan bringing tS into knightfall, Curu helping form IQ etc). How can anybody expect the political meta of this game to change when the largest alliance in this game has had the same leader forever, continually brings up grudges from 3 years ago and continually attacks the same alliances?
  4. "You did something a year ago we said is bad so now we are going to do the exact same thing." ??????????? You realize you are dogpiling people besides us right? Like I get your obsession with whataboutism and I get your all-consuming hatred of TKR but this war is not just about us. You are not just dogpiling us and you are not just threatening to run just us out of the game. Ironically you are actually dogpiling some of the same people you are referring to. Also good lord. Are you still referring to grudges from 3 years ago?
  5. You have spent almost half of the last 12 months dogpiling your opponents. Stop acting like the victim because people are unhappy about this.
  6. "Your desperate attempts before and after to keep getting us on gotchas just validate our perceptions of you and your alliance" This is the second time you have dogpiled us in a row so I don't think anybody is concerned about what you think of us. You clearly are going to keep using us and Grumpy as a scapegoat to justify your continued expansionism. Furthermore, you realize the NPO/DB relationship is not the only one that ever reached a breaking point right? Typically that does not end with one party colluding to get them rolled while they were still allied.
  7. Smith

    War Goals?

    So what is your war goal?
  8. It is not "courageous" to dogpile the same alliances over and over again. It is not courageous to to say you have a rock-solid CB, accuse the other side of lying and then provide no proof. It is not courageous to set your ally up to be rolled. It is certainly not courageous to do all this and then brag about how brave you are.
  9. "Yes we helped get our ally rolled but people were making fun of us for protecting them earlier."
  10. I don't want to distract from whats going on here too much but it makes me smile that you refer to them as IQ too
  11. So to clarify, NPO did not know about you hitting them once the treaty lapsed and we will not find out later that they did?
  12. What does "next to no" mean in this context?
  13. So DB's protectorate with NPO was downgraded just as this was happening. So NPO must have known about this? Which would mean they were planning the rolling of their ally while still allied to them.
  14. Smith

    War Goals?

    Singling out specific posts to justify this as a "death match" is pretty blatant spin. Our side was never in a position to make this a "death match" because it is another dogpile perpetuated by your sphere. Also it's not a "gotcha" post when I am asking somebody to clarify their position. We have to do that because you never actually do, instead you rely on secret CBs and secret protectorate agreements that are so confusing that not even your allies understand what you are doing.
  15. Smith

    War Goals?

    Wait are you saying that is what you are doing?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.