Ryleh Posted September 10, 2016 Share Posted September 10, 2016 It seems that having discord servers so that people from other alliances can talk to you is cool. So due to this fact, the NPO now has a server that's open to the public. Aside from the new server for you non NPO people, we don't have much else going on. Perma link: https://discord.gg/jRgNCBh I posted this because Roq was too busy to 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Posted September 10, 2016 Share Posted September 10, 2016 Totally thought this was gonna be a DoW Welcome to the wide war of discord. Quote Archduke Tyrell, Lord of Highgarden, Lord Paramount of the Reach, Warden of the South, Breaker of Forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post johnl023 Posted September 10, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted September 10, 2016 "We don't have much else going on." Declares on BK 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rache Olderen Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 "We don't have much else going on." Declares on BK Probably the reason why they declared war on BK. There is no CB greater than Boredom these days. Quote 2nd, 4th, and 6th Adelphotes Princeps of Cornerstone, Ambassador to Black Knights, 4th Grand Pilus of Cornerstone, 2nd Chaplain of Cornerstone, 5th Questor Princeps of Cornerstone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatkitteh Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 FOR STEVE! Quote :sheepy: :sheepy: Greatkitteh was here.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roquentin Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 Probably the reason why they declared war on BK. There is no CB greater than Boredom these days. No. It's pretty simple. In any potential war, BK would hit us again simply due to alliance composition. The Syndicate wouldn't have been able to execute an all out war against us in the last war without BK going along with it and oAing. At least not with the same amount of ease. We had and have no issues with BK on a personal level, but it was clear they were the alliance most well positioned to hit us again so any movement on their part would likely be directed at us. The addition of a Mensa treaty showed that Syndisphere consolidation would continue and no shake up would result so an attack was imminent and we had to prepare for it. A month ago, when we lost several treaties our situation was a total disaster. We saw a last stand for us as inevitable. We have known for quite some time we would be targeted again. I would not force another losing war where we had to eat an enemy offensive as the first shot on our members. If we have to go down, we're doing it swinging. The amount of anti-NPO rhetoric on the forums has only grown and the militarization was quite worrying and we knew we had to do something. A major reason we lost the last war and ended up in a position where our side lost a statistical advantage was our side's lack of aggression. BK was allowed to go from 0 mil to 100% in 6 days. While we no longer possess a statistical advantage and cooperation is last minute because of the cancellations, this is the best we can do even if it's another loss. This was the rationale your alliance openly supported in the last war and it consisted of "consolidation and preemption". This is preemptive. <Partisan> The thing that prompted it for us was the treaty between UPN and NPO <Partisan> To us, it signified a change in stance from pro-peace towards anti-t$. This is by all means a pre-emptive strike. <Partisan> UPN, Rose, VE, NPO <Partisan> all chumped together. All of them claim they want peace yet form the foundation of a coalition against us. There isn't much else to say. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 This was the rationale your alliance openly supported in the last war and it consisted of "consolidation and preemption". This is preemptive. Is this the justification for the sneak attack? Well at least you made an argument! Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 Is this the justification for the sneak attack? Well at least you made an argument! If you were comfortable with the rationale for last war and the rationale for this one isn't good enough for you, there isn't going to be some kind of fun explanation that fulfills you emotionally and enriches you spiritually. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PackAnimal Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 Back onto the important stuff, I look forward to joining your discord and shit posting. Quote Mans two modes of existence can be thought of as his light and dark side. He is either the Protector or the Ravager. The Immovable Object or the Unstoppable Force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yosodog Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 No. It's pretty simple. In any potential war, BK would hit us again simply due to alliance composition. The Syndicate wouldn't have been able to execute an all out war against us in the last war without BK going along with it and oAing. At least not with the same amount of ease. We had and have no issues with BK on a personal level, but it was clear they were the alliance most well positioned to hit us again so any movement on their part would likely be directed at us. The addition of a Mensa treaty showed that Syndisphere consolidation would continue and no shake up would result so an attack was imminent and we had to prepare for it. A month ago, when we lost several treaties our situation was a total disaster. We saw a last stand for us as inevitable. We have known for quite some time we would be targeted again. I would not force another losing war where we had to eat an enemy offensive as the first shot on our members. If we have to go down, we're doing it swinging. The amount of anti-NPO rhetoric on the forums has only grown and the militarization was quite worrying and we knew we had to do something. A major reason we lost the last war and ended up in a position where our side lost a statistical advantage was our side's lack of aggression. BK was allowed to go from 0 mil to 100% in 6 days. While we no longer possess a statistical advantage and cooperation is last minute because of the cancellations, this is the best we can do even if it's another loss. This was the rationale your alliance openly supported in the last war and it consisted of "consolidation and preemption". This is preemptive. There isn't much else to say. Actually, we called dibs on UPN. Real talk though, I personally have no reason to hate what you guys did. If I were in your shoes I would've done the exact same thing. For once, you all made the correct move. 3 Quote [22:37:51] <&Yosodog> Problem is, everyone is too busy deciding which top gun character they are that no decision has been made BK in a nutshell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 If you were comfortable with the rationale for last war and the rationale for this one isn't good enough for you, there isn't going to be some kind of fun explanation that fulfills you emotionally and enriches you spiritually. My spiritual enrichment is high. Last war was super rational lolz! But I am fine with the rational of "we were scared" it is actually a reasonable reason. Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatkitteh Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 Roquentin get some sleep Quote :sheepy: :sheepy: Greatkitteh was here.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karrde Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 If you were comfortable with the rationale for last war and the rationale for this one isn't good enough for you, there isn't going to be some kind of fun explanation that fulfills you emotionally and enriches you spiritually. The rationale for the last war was fine, as is this, and perhaps it is the most honest one I've seen. Good to hear! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatkitteh Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 The rationale for the last war was fine, as is this, and perhaps it is the most honest one I've seen. Good to hear! Bored war Quote :sheepy: :sheepy: Greatkitteh was here.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostWorld Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsPigeon Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 (edited) Yawn the whole "they looked like they were going to attack us" as a CB is boring. Rose had the same reasoning to attack TKR, when it was bogus because TKR had no intentions on attacking Rose. If anything, BK probably armed up because they were hoping someone would hit them and..... Voila. Edited September 11, 2016 by Piratemonkey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatkitteh Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 Nice meme, as the BK saying goes. Quote :sheepy: :sheepy: Greatkitteh was here.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 (edited) Can't blame you for "pre-empting".Can blame you for sucking dicks at it. Edited September 11, 2016 by Wilhelm the Demented 1 Quote One must imagine Sisyphus happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foltest Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 No. It's pretty simple. In any potential war, BK would hit us again simply due to alliance composition. The Syndicate wouldn't have been able to execute an all out war against us in the last war without BK going along with it and oAing. At least not with the same amount of ease. We had and have no issues with BK on a personal level, but it was clear they were the alliance most well positioned to hit us again so any movement on their part would likely be directed at us. The addition of a Mensa treaty showed that Syndisphere consolidation would continue and no shake up would result so an attack was imminent and we had to prepare for it. A month ago, when we lost several treaties our situation was a total disaster. We saw a last stand for us as inevitable. We have known for quite some time we would be targeted again. I would not force another losing war where we had to eat an enemy offensive as the first shot on our members. If we have to go down, we're doing it swinging. The amount of anti-NPO rhetoric on the forums has only grown and the militarization was quite worrying and we knew we had to do something. A major reason we lost the last war and ended up in a position where our side lost a statistical advantage was our side's lack of aggression. BK was allowed to go from 0 mil to 100% in 6 days. While we no longer possess a statistical advantage and cooperation is last minute because of the cancellations, this is the best we can do even if it's another loss. This was the rationale your alliance openly supported in the last war and it consisted of "consolidation and preemption". This is preemptive. There isn't much else to say. A respectable answer but probably one which should've been in the OP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 No. It's pretty simple. In any potential war, BK would hit us again simply due to alliance composition. The Syndicate wouldn't have been able to execute an all out war against us in the last war without BK going along with it and oAing. At least not with the same amount of ease. We had and have no issues with BK on a personal level, but it was clear they were the alliance most well positioned to hit us again so any movement on their part would likely be directed at us. The addition of a Mensa treaty showed that Syndisphere consolidation would continue and no shake up would result so an attack was imminent and we had to prepare for it. A month ago, when we lost several treaties our situation was a total disaster. We saw a last stand for us as inevitable. We have known for quite some time we would be targeted again. I would not force another losing war where we had to eat an enemy offensive as the first shot on our members. If we have to go down, we're doing it swinging. The amount of anti-NPO rhetoric on the forums has only grown and the militarization was quite worrying and we knew we had to do something. A major reason we lost the last war and ended up in a position where our side lost a statistical advantage was our side's lack of aggression. BK was allowed to go from 0 mil to 100% in 6 days. While we no longer possess a statistical advantage and cooperation is last minute because of the cancellations, this is the best we can do even if it's another loss. This was the rationale your alliance openly supported in the last war and it consisted of "consolidation and preemption". This is preemptive. There isn't much else to say. I sincerely disagree that war was inevitable. We were not planning on harming you. We wanted to be left in peace. But I doubt we'll ever see eye to eye on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 I sincerely disagree that war was inevitable. We were not planning on harming you. We wanted to be left in peace. But I doubt we'll ever see eye to eye on that. Oh cool, I remember making a similar argument a few months ago. Worked great. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordStrum Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 Nice meme, as the BK saying goes. but I'm the only one who says it Quote On 3/16/2016 at 9:54 PM, Lykos said: Our next move is obviously rolling LordStrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 Oh cool, I remember making a similar argument a few months ago. Worked great. That was he entire joke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Bolivar Posted September 12, 2016 Share Posted September 12, 2016 Oh cool, I remember making a similar argument a few months ago. Worked great. That was he entire joke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TellUrGrlThx Posted September 12, 2016 Share Posted September 12, 2016 If you were comfortable with the rationale for last war and the rationale for this one isn't good enough for you, there isn't going to be some kind of fun explanation that fulfills you emotionally and enriches you spiritually. I think you are asking the wrong person that question. As a member of Mensa, we all feel the same about war: we don't give a !@#$ what the reason is as long as it happens and isn't shit. For real though our rationale to roll GPA was for cash to rebuild. 1 Quote ☾☆ Priest of Dio º¤ø„¤¤º°¨ ø„¸¸„¨ ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¨°º¤ø„¸ GOD EMPEROR DIO BRANDO¨°º¤ø„¸¨°º¤ø„¸ DIO BRANDO GOD EMPEROR¨°º¤ø„¸¨°º¤ø„¤¤º°¨ ø„¸¸„¨ ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.