Felkey
-
Posts
520 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Felkey
-
-
Should be interesting for UPN, good luck.
-
Please Dio Please!
There was a term 5 about them acknowledging Dio as the one true God but we had to scrap that. Next time vanek and I should push harder for it. Hail Dio.
-
You folks are really serious about that second term?
You know, I knew your leaders were odd about the whole re-wording the peace terms to avoid admitting defeat - trying to spin it in somewhat of a positive light to your respective alliances of some hard fought war... but I didn't expect this. I honestly did not.
All we wanted was an admission of defeat and we'd throw in a 90 day NAP. But seeing that second term and the reaction it's getting, geezus.
Next time we just perma war until they go bankrupt, sound good? At least then they can have something legitimate to complain about. Would be a nice change of pace.
-
2
-
-
We'd still manage to beat them.
You're right... So sad... RIP Shamblesphere :'(
-
90 day NAP? Why don't you just take a cue from GIO and make it 365?
Because giving a full 365 days might give IQ enough time to at least fabricate something resembling a real CB for next war
-
1
-
-
Every action done by a Syndisphere member will wire 2% of their entire combined wealth to Vault 111
Why, so KT actually has a reason to roll catsby again?
-
I'll only say two things:
1. The 2nd term is quite possibly one of the most stupid terms I've come across; it achieves the exact opposite of what you wished to achieve with that term. It sounds forced, and quite honestly just says, "We were trying to be nice, so we gave a consolation prize to Inq: We won't collectively shit on you." The wording is also interesting, "[...]can or should be construed as humiliating or degrading[...]". Yes, I'm sure that very sentence doesn't humiliate you further.
2. So then, no clause about Inq' CB being valid?
1. Yes.
2. No: things that do not exist are not valid
-
6
-
-
!@#$ it, sheepy should just delete all of syndisphere
-
1
-
-
Well to be fair, Boony probably does have a tramp stamp tattoo that says "Syndisphere b4 hoes"
And tbf senry was one of ours till very recently
-
That depends, will the new leadership make them git gud?So Syndisphere is seriously suggesting that members of NPO should coup Roquentin.
ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
-
1
-
-
While we're at it why don't we limit the updeclare declare range and say !@#$ it, who needs strategy and planning?
-
1
-
-
An alliance that can be couped has a variety of issues and any coup will destabilize any decent alliance, especially one done to appease foreign powers. If an alliance can be couped, it means its institutions are weak and that there is no respect for the office, so it is not a good alliance by definition.
So you're saying this hypothetical coup could be used to destroy NPO from within...
-
Exactly. If they peaced out such that you could focus on BK, that puts you at an advantage.
On the other hand, BK was engaging Rose as well which split its forces. Rose is also far stronger than Teutonic Order and Cobra Kai. It has more members at a comparable level to engage BK with.
Saying it's not a decisive advantage is denying the obvious unless you're talking about your lower tier members who have to deal with them being below you because you're not recruiting enough new members to support them.
We already have enough Milton logic in this world, don't need more, k, thanks, bye
PS: at least you know how quotes work...
-
Finally I can stop reading Milton's posts, simply because I cannot read them.
Excellent.
No one should ever read a Comrade Milton post, it's not worth the trip down that rabbit hole.
-
2
-
-
The implication here is there was political capital to be spent with certain people in the first place.There wasn't. I'm talking about realistic chances not just "oh anyone could change their mind." One is worth spending time on, the other not so much.
Your Mensa hypothetical is really the most unrealistic because they openly are the most directly antagonistic and have the lowest opinion of us and that's saying something given our relations with other alliances in that sphere. The 2+2 image post and direct insults are just part and parcel. So basically your jillions is just talk to everyone regardless of chances of success. I know other alliances with less baggage had been trying and their results weren't too great, so this is really bogus.
It's happened in almost every major conflict. Oktoberfest took a lot of people out. At the end of the day, it's up to the individual alliances to deal with people who can't cope.
Like I said, our low tier consolidation allowed us to launch further offensives even after the big hits in the first and second rounds because you couldn't keep all of the nations pinned down. If you were to ever be in a situation where you'd need to avoid being pinned down, then it would definitely come in handy or if you were willing to fight someone who was a bigger alliance.
Who said they were fighting in the bottom tier? We didn't have a chance in the upper tier, but we did have a shot in mid tier. Considering many of your core nations were compromised for a decent amount of time, this hasn't been a low tier battle entirely. If we were just fighting some city 6-8 noobs, you'd have a point here. I don't think anyone was promised a clean sweep and most of the upper tier people expect to get dinged up at this point since they knew what they were getting into. I don't try to sell anything as a clear win. I just say "this is our best chance or we have a shot."
I don't think so man. I remember you being pretty upset when Rose fought in Silent and there had been outreach to Rose before last June by Mensa and Mensa complimented Rose a lot. If you had wanted to keep getting targets, then you would have had something else to go with signing Rose, instead it was just adding them to a group with unprecedented control over all tiers. It's bizarre when one of the major alliances wanting to perpetuate the status quo says they want to fight as many targets as they can.
Nope again. You spent a lot of capital on BK, and they actually had a lower opinion of you than Mensa before you did. You did that, and not Mensa, because BK complimented your tiers and Mensa didn't. You just don't want to have to have a hard fight in your tier, and don't care if you stagnate the game to get it. It's a sensible strategy! Just stop pretending to care if the game is stagnant. It's not something that's ever come through in any action you've actually taken.
You make capital by talking with people, dude. What capital did you have to spend with BK before you started? Probably none.
You're really off target with the Rose bit, Roq. It wasn't until Keegoz got replaced and the war was finished when we opened up talks with them. You may have mistaken our usual banter as being "friendly" banter. I mean, some of us had no problems with Rose admittedly (Like me, I only had issues with Keegoz/Pub leadership but the overall alliance I had no issues with personally - I don't even have issues with Keegoz or Pub as individuals, just how they led the alliance during their respective times). But the approach after the war was a complete surprise.
It doesn't surprise me though that you're missing the point, just like how you're missing the point that Manthrax is trying to bring up to you.
Can we just get to the part where everyone starts yelling NO U and be done with it already?
-
1
-
-
I appreciate that you are being active within the community by posting, but please do much better.
1. We're at war with VE also (This may have changed, I've not been paying much attention)
2. We also fought tTO and CKD
3. BK was double their score when the war started and either one above or below us in rank.
If you're going to throw shade, don't talk crap
also... this
-
Let's talk about BK and Zodiac's continual score dropping while following some suicidal plan by Roq and Friends.
Psst, what about CS? Their at rank 45, they're already dead. Acadia is about to join them too.
BK is below 100k and still dropping
Zodiac is at 77k
pssst you guys know how to end this
-
Do you guys think the game is about growing every person as fast as possible? It's not a race. If an alliance decides to strategically control its growth that should be a lot more effective than Syndisphere's "Good God, if we don't continue to grow how will we ever live?-strategy. Different people play different ways. I just deleted three cities to drop back down to 8 and I've been playing for years.
I just noticed this. Wow.
Ummm..... Winning???
I've seriously lost track of what the !@#$ is going on...
-
Printer says hiCan I join? Am I small enough?
Am I small enough to be considered a small nation?
-
2
-
-
While I don't agree with publicly suggesting that one of your coalition allies disband, the problem here isn't that UPN surrendered. tTO, Lordaeron, and SK all managed to exit the war without any public backlash from BK gov. The difference here is that UPN exited the war on objectively worse terms than what the coalition was offered as a whole, as well as the terms Syndisphere was giving for individual allince surrenders. If Lordaeron, of all allinces, could get surrender without terms after the whole surrender camp debacle, there's no reason for UPN to settle for less. Furthermore, accepting such terms validates the Syndisphere's approach to negotiations and suggests desperation among the other coalition members. While this can't be entirely avoided, a simple surrender without terms would have mitigated the damage. I'm obviously not involved with the peace talks, but I doubt that the coalition leadership authorized UPN's surrender (or at least knew the terms), judging from their reaction. Anyways, I've nothing against UPN and am just trying to clarify why the reaction to this surrender was so harsh, compared to the earlier ones.
I mean the point we are trying to make is, the longer you stay in and drag it out, the more unpleasant the terms are going to be for you. CKD and TTO peaced out almost instantly so they got incredibly easy terms.
Lordy wanted to wait a few weeks, ok fine, but the terms got a bit tougher with us demanding a bail bond of sorts.
UPN waited even longer so the terms got tougher once more with infra caps so that they can't just rebuild and be all cozy while we deal with the rest of IQ's stubbornness.
If you want to stay in and fight it out even longer, fine that's your choice, but actions have consensuses and you need to be prepared to deal with them because terms are going to continue to get tougher the longer people want to stay in.
It would depend on if it was good enough in your eyes. What's good enough for us, may not be enough for you so you could just dismiss it. Given you would stand to benefit from the political damage of it being released if the parties involved were displeased with the disclosure, the spot it puts us in is a very tricky one.
I mean, if that's the case, they just didn't ask because most people know the basic outline of it coming to our attention that tS had been asking people to commit to some sort of offensive action that would take place that week and that setting it in motion for us. I didn't make it up and everyone was perfectly content with the build up being a false alarm like the previous ones and the mutual decom had been offered right before it came to our attention. The VE issues made it so it was a lot more likely there'd be a war, so we had built up, and we hadn't reacted to Syndisphere's constant "defensive" builds up until that point.
Is it really any trickier than forcing both sides to basically perma war? I mean, there are those of us that even though we might not agree with your reasoning, we would be accommodating enough to understand it (essentially put ourselves in your shoes) and say "OK, I might not have made that exact choice but that seems reasonable". As for political damage, I think the parties on both sides know where they stand so I'm not sure the damage will be all that much anyways...
Furthermore, I even suggested at one point in the peace chat WEEKS AGO that who ever has the logs, redact the names of the people involved to protect confidentiality. However, that was met with another excuse.
-
1
-
-
This isn't a court of law and wars have been started on less. It was the smoking gun for us, but we don't really need it to see your side as a threat. Like I said, as soon as it's okayed by the parties involved, we'll have no issue disclosing it. The alternative would be to cause unwelcome headaches. I don't think you guys are gonna be like "welp, well tS did it. IQ was right"
Considering you're one of the main leaders in your coalition, perhaps you should pressure them. I mean if it is a legitimate cb, there are many of us who would love to see it and may be accommodating if you gave as an actual reason...
But as it stands, even some of the members in your coalition didn't even know what it was beyond "yeah we have a good chance to win this". Which is just further evidence that you are talking out your ass.
-
I disagree. People will naturally get defensive and respond back after constant disrespect. No one's going to take that kind of abuse.
So attacking us without cause and trying to get us to publicly sign off on your reasoning without even showing us said reasons is respect. Cool, got it.
-
2
-
-
They don't and never have. The constant disrespect or any sense of decency makes it a lot easier to stay at war because it's not changing.
Let's be real here, that lack of respect goes both ways.
-
1
-
-
Keep up, we don't want white peace, why would we pay for it?I believe if the Syndisphere transfers $500m to me I can convince our governments to grant you white peace.
Now if you said send me $500m and I'll convince IQ gov to surrender you may have something there
-
1
-
War. War Never Changes.
in Alliance Affairs
Posted
Are you saying your gun is tiny?