Smith
-
Posts
767 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Smith
-
-
10 hours ago, Mikey said:
It's quite odd really. I can understand why t$ might feel threatened in the upper tier by Grumpy/Guardian, considering how badly they are being thrashed right now. But if the constant argument from their side is that we have 'consolidated' most of the upper tier forces used to fight them last war, it leaves a crucial question. Why didn't t$ intervene when we were fighting KETOG? We have SK/CoS and the upper tier of Soup/TKR. If their goal was simply to take down Grumpy/Guardian, that would have been a much better time to do so. Sure, there is KT/TGH/Empyria to deal with as well, but they also have NPO, House Stark, Enterprise, and all t$ nations not big enough to fight in the super tier. The only reason to do so now, rather than earlier, is to relieve pressure on BK while trying to maintain a laughable deniability that they are cooperating.
Is anybody from the SyndIQ side going to address this or are they just going to continue selectively ignoring arguments.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Ripper said:
@Roquentin, @Dio Brando, any attempts to spin this one? Although NPO is really talkative in the t$-DoW thread, I don't see much activity here. I wonder why...
If possible, stick with your standard style of verbose statements and walls of text. A conspiracy theory would be entertaining too.
Something like: "Horsemen's sustained infra damage wasn't high enough and Chaos-KETOG didn't go all out against them, so this war may have been a training/fun war. Also, Chaos Bloc - KETOG accepted to make peace with them too quickly. This makes you wonder whether there was a plan all along and Chaos Bloc - KETOG have secret ties with Horsemen and by extention Fark / WTF."
You fool. It is the same reason they are ignoring this thread now:
They will not give your blatant agenda-driven arguments the time of day when they could focus on their agenda-free claims of fake war conspiracy theories.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Roquentin said:
You quoted a specific sentence and then you're talking about something else. Given what we've intimated about your medium-term intent, you have an agenda to push here so I'm not tempted to indulge you.
I am talking about the same thing. You said you had no intention of hitting anybody while you were planning a war to hit somebody. This is a clear contradiction that you do not have an explanation for. I quoted your post as well so anybody can click on the link and see the context. I am sorry if you think this is me pushing an agenda, don't let it distract from your agenda-free claims of Fake Wars.
-
23 minutes ago, Roquentin said:
It was worded as compulsion to express that there wasn't any rigidity in who'd we hit. It was very possible for some sort of offer to be made before that post and between that post and the declaration on wednesday. e.g. "Okay we get your concern about almost everyone who took down GOB and Guardian in the last war being retired or on the same side. We'll deal with the issue in this way," since they went in knowing that there was a decent chance of a few alliances hitting them.
So I don't see how this contradicts anything. Are you saying there were no plans when you made that post? Everything else you guys have said then seems to contradict that. Multiple people have said this was already in the plans and it was an unfortunate coincidence these wars happened at the same time.
Can you please give a clear and concise explanation to this? Because I don't see how anybody is supposed to interpret this except as a blatant lie.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 6/13/2019 at 3:50 PM, Roquentin said:We just have no compulsion to hit any particular party.
It's amazing how poorly this comment has aged in such a short amount of time. Given the admittance on your side that you were already planning this war when you said this, it's hard to see this as anything but a blatant lie.
-
10
-
1 minute ago, Dio Brando said:
I assumed that, as it was back-and-forth between us, and most of our conversations have taken place in DMs... yeah. That was my misunderstanding, I suppose. Apologies. One small gripe: BK's sphere didn't slowly trickle in altogether. They waited a significantly lesser period of time than us. We didn't hit everyone, we didn't launch a full frontal assault. That said... fair points, old friend. You're right as far as answering questions and concerns go. I will do my best to set up a thread and detail them at length soon. Does that work?
Sure, let's see what ya got
-
3 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:
You started out believing we hadn't split after IQ dissolved. We had similar conversations leading up to the day of the leak and you weren't of that mindset before any actions had taken place, so please cut the whole "we can't believe you *crosses arms*" bullshit. It was explicitly written down that the leak about N$O was either intentionally false or an incredible misinterpretation of whatever had been discussed, because NPO gov held no such gov-level conversations with BK/tC that he would so openly declare we were with them. Insofar as the hit on Grumpy/Guardian went, it wasn't in defense of BK nor was it an attempt to bail them out. If it were, we would have gone in day 1, when we were all prepared. We didn't. We wouldn't have allowed CHAOS-KETOG to keep cutting their planes either. But that doesn't matter, right?
Let me be very clear. It is reasonable to expect you to not believe us, and that is your prerogative. I don't expect you to believe us, I'd just appreciate if we dial back the 'I wasn't given an explanation' crap.
This was p funny ngl.
I mean I'm not sure why you are making this about me in particular or the conversations we have had in DMs. I had my doubts but as you said there were other's who have been more willing to believe you. The point is you did what those leaks showed. As for why you came in later? I could ask the same question of half of BK's sphere. They all trickled in instead of fighting at once, why would you be any different.
Also my criticism of your lack of explanations is on the whole not just any one thing. There is my question to Keshav that has been unanswered (albeit that is not you). There is my question of what exactly makes the BK/N$ long term hegemony so "untenable". These are important questions that you are expecting us to take on face value while you two work continue to work as a united coalition.
5 minutes ago, Alexander Hamilton said:Please don't use your voodoo magic on Puloy, good sir.
He is but a humble Roqbot, as myself. It gets pretty antsy for us kids, over here, like when you're at your first prom as an awkward nerd, unsure of how to even introduce yourself to the cute girl you've had a crush on all year.
Our hearts are very fragile, please proceed to play P!ATD and FOB in our honour as we awkwardly stumble through this, gratuitous, endeavour, together. ❤️
I would never harm Puloy, he is a Smoff
-
Just now, Senyor Puloy said:
War coordination leaks? What is this, 2007?
You realize a leak from the leader of TCW saying they were going to hit Chaos and n$o was going to hit Keto is what started this war right
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Just now, Auctor said:i believe i speak for keshav when i say that was a misspeak and what he actually meant to say is well sit back and let tkr roll us. thanks for the opportunity to clarify
Imagine being inst but less people pay attention to you
-
1
-
6
-
4 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:
Not really. We've always been in this and where we can help out, we will, as stated in the DoW
2 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:*sigh*
If you reach any harder you might start chasing your own tail. T$ actually didn't call anyone in, nor did we 'have' to come in. We "came in" (it's three wars, calm down, no need to panic) because we wanted to, but... keep trying?
Yes. The implication therein relevant to my status as an NPO member was that N$O was still conspiring with BK/tC. We were not. This has been seen/admitted by members of your own sphere. Our war plans are our own. Their war plans are their's.
We've cleared this up at-least half a dozen times. You not accepting that clarification does not mean I've tried to dodge this.
You have never clarified anything. Saying "please believe us" while everything you do contradicts what you say is not a clarification.
Also since we're talking about clarification, Keshav can you clarify what you meant by saying you weren't going to sit back and let TKR roll you? Was there a leak of war plans that I missed or something?
-
1 minute ago, Shadowthrone said:
2.) The Syndicate and its affiliates have no intent to expand their war on the coalition currently fighting the Black Knights and their allies beyond Guardian and Grumpy Old Bastards.
3.) Any counters upon The Syndicate and its affiliates by any alliance outside of Guardian and Grumpy Old Bastards will be met with extreme prejudice.
^ The Syndicate and its affiliates. We're surprisingly on the DoW, and have always been. But keep trying.
1 minute ago, Dio Brando said:Oh dear. It looks like you've missed how this conversation began. The first post quite clearly details T$ affiliates may hit Grumpy and Guardian, NPO is a T$ affiliate... see where I'm going with this?
It didn't say they'd end up having to do it because they'd be so bad at fighting though which was Arch's point. They had to come in because they performed poorly.
Thanks for missing my other questions though.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:
Please read the first post in this thread, it'll help.
Sorry it didn't, still looks like you can't provide evidence of anything. Did I miss a log dump of Keto planning to hit IQ or something? Or did t$ say "hey we are actually going to fight really poorly for the lolz".
Edit: Deflecting to somebody else's post is kinda proving my point. You talk a lot about things we don't understand, but you can't actually explain anything
-
6 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:
Expecting you to have any understanding of the situation whatsoever and refrain from shitposting? No, not really.
You sure do like to make vague references to behind the scene actions that the rest of us are ignorant of and then never provide anything to back it up. You seem to do it anytime somebody calls you guys out on anything.
The Sphinx leaks: "There is more to this, you just don't understand"
IQ still being a thing: "There is more to this, you just don't understand"
t$ doing poorly and needing a bunch of alliances to come in: "There is more to this, you just don't understand"
Can you do less of the former and more of the latter?
-
1
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, George Clooney said:
Hypothetically speaking, since I will not confirm any of your assumptions, if I knew a hit was planned, I'd pull out my trusty copy of the treaty web and have a long talk with my allies. Traditionally around here, the treaty web favors the defense. Planning and executing a successful offensive war is much more work, even if you are already stripped score inflating infra and have a full military. The attack on BK and TC was much more spur of the moment. So either those involved quickly figured that their diplomatic position was just that weak, and they might as well go out with a bang, or they acted in haste and now they'll pay the price.
Your side had already demonstrated a complete unwillingness to fight each other because it would be "boring" and there was a lack of "tension". There were then leaked logs of you discussing an offensive war together and BK planning to hit Chaos. N$O is also saying they were going to hit Ketog regardless. Treaty chess doesn't matter if you were both going to hit us anyway, might as well get the first strike advantage.
-
2
-
-
44 minutes ago, Micchan said:
So you are basically saying that your entire bloc joined this war but you don't want to go full knightfall with the risk of having many nations damaged in a long war
They just had another alliance join in (Horsemen who isn't even allied to t$). So yes, they will just keep comitting the minimum amount that they think is necessary to win
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:
Okay, let me put it this way. BKsphere is a mixture of competent fighters and seasoned warriors, with a not-insignificant mass of untested players. Whether it is via recruitment practices, signing/maintenance of treaties, it is inherently a disingenuous position to adopt to claim that one is a hegemony and incompetent. If they draw their competence via numbers/quantity, then surely you see that negating the first point. If they are not drawing competency/martial prowess from any of these, then surely it contests the idea that they are a hegemony. Do you see where I'm going with this? Smith's point was cleverly delivered and I had a laugh. I saw fit to respond to that with a shitpost, apologies if that does not meet the standard.
I think you are being pretty silly if you are suggesting that the people who call BKsphere bad means they are saying they are literally bad at everything. Most of the time people say "x is bad" they are referring to war
-
1
-
-
Just now, Buorhann said:
You've yet to prove anything wrong about it. Knightfall, now this.
Your allies/alliance's actions > Your words.
And they just admitted they are going to continue rolling Grumpy until either they have caught up or disbanded
-
1 minute ago, Shadowthrone said:
I mean the fact that 30 nations can out produce most alliances in the game, just because they existed and haven't been fighting far too many dogpiles like most folks in other tiers, itself is something that showcases why this is necessary.
Didn't you just fight a 3+ month war with this same CB? How many more wars in a row can we expect with this justification? Is it until Grumpy disbands?
-
4
-
-
13 minutes ago, Robert Taber said:
Fair enough, but 'untouched' sounds a lot like trying to take them down a notch, so they can actually fight in the war they joined, I suppose there are more reasons outlined simply in 'untouched' than the actual definition, I think it might've been the context around why they were untouched per se
So you think they are knocking them down so they can get hit in the war they said this is unrelated to?
-
3 minutes ago, Robert Taber said:
I don't think you get the comparison I was making, which Smith gave importance to
Grumpy's econ shouldn't matter as t$ has said this war has nothing to do with the ongoing war with BK. They are apparently hitting them because they are "untouched." Therefore I am playfully pointing out there are targets in BKsphere that are also "untouched" that they could hit. I am not expecting them to actually do it
-
Just now, Dio Brando said:
By nature you must be good at something to be a hegemony. Lol.
Indeed! You certainly seem good at something ?
-
1
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:
You seem to be engaging more with the semantics of my statement as opposed to the ideas behind them. As an aside, competency via numbers is very much a thing, and you seem to be missing my point. Third try?
This made me laugh really hard, something I really needed. Thanks man.
So we agree then that you can be bad and a hegemony? If you agree with that then we never really disagreed
-
7 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:
Not to worry, I'll give you attention too.
Those statements absolutely do clash. Hegemonies by nature demand an extremely slanted advantage to one side. Given the claim that BKsphere is hegemonic in nature (BK and N$O, if you want) an attempt to simultaneously claim that they are inept and not a massive threat (please see the post directly above mine, and some that precede it) is contradictory in nature. Not necessarily, of-course, but more often than not the context demands that it be so.
Either you're bragging to reassure yourselves, or you're lying about the other being a hegemony. Choose.
As an aside, who is Moetaz?
Except now you are changing the argument. "You're incompetent, you need the whole game to help you take us down!" / "You're hegemonic, we couldn't possibly do anything to you!"
Nowhere in there did you say anything about them not being a massive threat. You can be both bad and win by superior numbers, which is why what you said doesn't contradict.
Edit: I thought Ibsheway was Moetaz. They have the same avatar of somebody that used to have that name iirc
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:
Not to worry. We are a benevolent hegemon.
It's good to see you are leaning into it at least. Now can you respond to my comment here:
Or do you only respond to Aku and Moetaz
We are here for the Whales
in Alliance Affairs
Posted
Thanks for your response. I can almost assure you that Kayser is fine. He would do the same thing when he was in charge of our FA ?
I appreciate the advice from an alliance that never performs well in a war. At least you are admitting your only advantage is that you have an insane amount of numbers consolidated in a single tier. Competent indeed.