Jump to content

Bloody Horsemen


Raoul Duke
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, James II said:

2000+ nation's don't like you

I dont believe it. The only people who don't like us are people who are getting rolled by us. You are just salty since 2000+ nations havent been able to defeat 600 till now. I daresay people don't hate us. Fyi, KETOG and Chaos were at war-we hated each other during the war yet kept decency. When the plans were leaked, we turned from foes to friends. Ofc that was a big drama scripted by us so you won't be surprised by it. We were just killing each other's infra after all to defeat you people ryt?

3 hours ago, James II said:

Going around liberally calling people pieces of shit and retards, likely won't fly with the rest of Orbis either

Once again, is it wrong to call people retards if they really are retards? Don't act retarded here. I call a dog a dog-calling it a cat or a human will be insulting to it. If you get it, shut up retard. Your coalition of 2000+ nations are unable to put 600 people down. If I call it a brilliant performance, that will be a blatant lie. I'd rather put salt on the wounds than lie that there is no wound. Your coalition performed shit-if you want to call it a non-shit performance, then you might want to see a therapist.

3 hours ago, James II said:

Your statement about IQ is entirely false. You botched it and got rocked in the end, get over it.

@Sketchy @Abbas Mehdi if you got logs from AC, please post them to support me.

3 hours ago, James II said:

You conveniently ignore the tiering advantage for this conflict. If you didn't want everyone coming after you maybe you should have partook in some diplomacy instead of needlessly shitting on people who didn't laugh at your 'jokes.'

IQ's entire strategy is based on pulling people with more cities down into a grinder and keeping them there. Just because it isnt working, you are complaining about how we have a tiering advantage. Even if I agree with you for once, please tell me why IQ doesn't have the tiering advantage? Surely they could have gave it to themselves but chose not to. Isn't this a case of a man who doesn't want to work but will complain how there is no work to be found or that he has no money to live?
As for diplomacy, who will we have diplomatic relations with? Are you suggesting we ally with CoA, an alliance that went 2B negative net in one day? Or are you suggesting we ally with IQ which basically makes us allied to 75% of the game?
As far as I can tell, this war with IQ isn't because they didn't laugh at our jokes, it is because they decided to dogpile us later on.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Epi said:

Keep in mind the reason why i pointed at Arrgh [old paperless], Chaos and Ketog in my previous post is that unlike the blob they do not protect new players and they aren't accepting of even larger alliances.

Because we don't want to turn into a blob....If we start treatying and all, we will become a blob.

2 hours ago, Epi said:

the blob can't dissolve slowly because the alliances that leave will get picked off 1 by 1

The blob won't dissolve at all. This is because the blob they leave will be angry and send some innocent murderers their way. You do know what I mean btw. KETOG doesn't  have the time to organize raids against one alliance. All our wars have been uphill ones.

2 hours ago, Epi said:

They just think they'll be served better if we're divided. Less of a threat if we're divided.

*Looks at stats* Yes, yes, we are terrified of IQ. Look man, currently, the people outside the blob are the biggest threat and not the ones on the inside. The blob won't disappear because of us-the idea to dissolve it needs to come from within and that is something someone tried once but no one liked the idea.

2 hours ago, Epi said:

We've already seen Citadel and Fark/Horsemen put their own spin on the concept.

Citadel is an extension of Covenant. It is a well known fact. Mini-spheres are grey areas under no influence. Citadel is not a mini-sphere- it is just a few nations playing bloc.
Unless they move away from BK-sphere, there is no way anyone will recognize them as a bloc.

2 hours ago, Epi said:

Though i think, to sustain mini-spheres, there needs to be some consensus against purely opportunistic peace-time wars. And that these hyper active alliances need to look at splitting up post war and taking on more casual ones to help drive more of the player base into frequent conflict. ? hopefully some of the more stagnant alliances are also willing to go out on a limb here. <.< Both of them failed the last 2 times we tried this (Post-Ayyslamic and Post-Knightfall).

I agree that if there are to be peace-time wars between these spheres, we can't let a sphere get massacred. Something like that will just kill the type of society we want to make.
And as I already said, such concepts of dissolving the blob can only come from within the blob. Although the blob itself will suppress those ideas. There is so much salt when alliances change spheres- there will be even more when they make their own. 
Post KF, spheres were going well. But then BK just started allying everyone. They had a lot of allies- sure they weren't competent, but still. BK could have easily just not signed tCW and tCW could have formed their own sphere. But such things never happened. Unless the meat-shield mentality changes, there cannot be any dissolution of the blob.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mad Max said:

Oh gosh, this thread. haha

Also, there is a certain way that you need to call people shit and retarded - it must be with finesse. If you do it perfectly, you'll put yourself into a position to be loved and hated at the same time.

You can order my book on how to achieve this status for 3 simple payments of $39.99 - OR - sign up for a free 7 day trial which will give you quick access, after that just $99/month to unlock all of my available resources. 

Do you also offer classes that do not exhale mediocrity?

  • Haha 2

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Epi said:

My issue with it was that it was a means to an end, it was a political move to encourage the other spheres to break up. Which i reasoned isn't the way to go about the problem since if successful it would result in a ton of mini-spheres yes. But the same losers year round and eventually a return to old bipolar politics.

If you have a solution, you are free to DM me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Queenzo eMzo said:

I don't want to get into whatever this is, but I do want to clear up this lie....again. TGH hit us because there was an open window to do so and they wanted to "teach us a lesson" to lighten up. That's what I was told and I was fine with it. To my recollection, it was a two round war, I talked to who I had to talk to (Buorhann, to be specific, as KT is....KT) and cleared the air there. Any beef and ill will still coming from that is 1000% on your side until your allies continuously OOC attack me with repeated slaps on the wrist as repercussions, if even that.

TRF did not start that war. TCW and TKR were already going to declare on you because they'd been threatened. TRF didn't know about it until we were invited, which was 3 days before. They held off to wait for us to mil up. We were never in the position to "start a war." We were a fricking micro, ffs. We were in a position to add bodies and we did. 

Also, TRF and TKR were never ever ever allies. TRF and TCW had a one and done MDP because of the threats to both them and TRF.

 

That is that on that. 

giphy.gif

Marry me.
 

7 minutes ago, Keegoz said:

>Is in CoA

>Talks about being relevant

If you want to be relevant James maybe you should do something big and brave. Instead you're picking on a sphere that is outnumbered heavily in a pre-existing war backed by NPO protecting you. You're a coward and an idiot. You don't deserve to be treated with any respect. Your only relevancy is being a brain dead idiot on these forums. I don't need to even need to get people to down vote your dribble.

....huh. this refrain sounds familiar. In the words of the people that responded when it was our side complaining about this once upon a time, 'get moar better' 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

STFU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Keegoz said:

>Is in CoA

>Talks about being relevant

If you want to be relevant James maybe you should do something big and brave. Instead you're picking on a sphere that is outnumbered heavily in a pre-existing war backed by NPO protecting you. You're a coward and an idiot. You don't deserve to be treated with any respect. Your only relevancy is being a brain dead idiot on these forums. I don't need to even need to get people to down vote your dribble.

In the two global wars we've participated in, we were vastly outnumbered in our range. Was this the mental gymnastics you were talking about?

"Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ShadyAssassin, @Queenzo eMzo is correct.

The TRF conflict was simply meant to be short and to the point.  It was meant to put a clean slate.

Granted, if their allies at the time had joined in, we wouldn’t have complained either.

Seeing as how they didn’t, it would’ve been in poor taste to drag out the conflict any further.  TRF at the time was in a bad situation, so it was meant to let bygones be bygones.

There wasn’t much more beyond that.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2019 at 8:35 PM, Epi said:

Raiding is fun, but the large scale raiding by players in tkr-ketog is the reason most micros aren't paperless. It even extends to other alliances outside the Web, Animation Domination was an alliance only on the peripherals and died immediately. Pantheon lost its ties to other major powers and died immediately.

Your coalition was responsible for both of those alliances requiring treaties. And when they lose wars they become less desirable to your selective blocs. So they have only 1 option, the blob.

And what do they call the alliances that pursue survival, they call them cowards and protectates and incompetent etc.

Chaos and Ketog have the primary trait of preying on weaker alliances. It's no wonder so much of the game ended up tied together in response. 

The only potential exception is the fark soup war which played out like the rest, with an added bonus that they weren't permitted to activate their treaties! It didn't harm their alliance as much as the others, but they still sign pantheon postwar. Strength in numbers.

If they want a dynamic environment post war they need to stop killing and insulting all the alliances willing to work outside the blob.

I don't particularly agree with the idea. In my opinion, the absurd amount of protectorates stems from the blob signing literally anyone, no matter how incompetent they may be. Now, you can blame Ketog and Chaos for not signing these micros themselves, sort of as us 'missing the opportunity,' but while I don't speak for Chaos nor Ketog, I believe we'd rather protect competent leadership with at least some grasp on alliance function. I could name all the different micros located in the blob that are absolute garbage, bottom of the barrel type shit, but the blob will sign them. That is, not because they genuinely care about them being raided to mass Hell or survival, but because they'll make for good cannon fodder if war ever strikes, bonus for them if the micro actually turns out to actually be something of substance though they'll be wrapped around their protector's (maybe now MDP) thumb. I think the issue is not having standards when it comes to choosing alliances to protect, and that probably stems from their being no cost to the protector for doing so. Nobody wants to start a treaty-chain reaction from hitting the protectorate, and that can also be faulted on the humongous blob. So yes, I do label these filth micros that hide behind the blob as cowards, arguably, Rose seems to be the one alliance "within the blob" that does right by protecting alliances that have meaningful potential.

Edited by Skittles
reworded
I have no idea what I'm doing but that doesn't stop me from doing it.

pfp_maybe_1_15.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

With Horseman there seems to have been some miscommunication between them & NPO, causing them to attack without backup.

So doesn’t make them a bad alliance, they were willing to fight at least.

I don't believe anyone called them a bad alliance......?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TheRebelMan said:

I don't believe anyone called them a bad alliance......?

If anything, them ditching NPO for legitimately decent allies in Fark and WTF (alliances that won't use them as meatshields) was a good move. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, James II said:

On the contrary, he was quite right. Your community is unnecessarily rude to people,  and for the most part you partake in fights that are extremely one sided. You even sat out the last global war, and instead of fighting you hit an alliance significantly smaller than you. The last time KT did anything relevant is when they went after IQ, and even failed that. A fight you should have won. After that I guess y'all were too scared to do anything other than jump smaller alliances. I'm aware TKR rolled you, but that wasn't because you were being brave, it was likely due to the way you treat folks. KT and TGH contribute little to Orbis, other than toxicity. Now go get your buddies to pat you on the back so they can tell you how brave and beautiful you are. While you're at it, tell them to all log on and downvote my post too. That'll make you feel better! 

Wait a second here!  I could swear the last two wars your alliance has been involved with, and I think the only two, have been ones with huge numerical advantage, knightfall, and the one you are in right now, its what like 330 to 60?   Since Grumpy joined the block, we have started two wars, one against TKR, where we did have the city advantage, but they had the numbers, and then BK, were half of our numbers attacked with half a military, and little to no spies, against a completely fresh opponent with a 2-3 numbers advantage again.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ShadyAssassin said:

Once again, is it wrong to call people retards if they really are retards? Don't act retarded here.

Actually it is.  you can shame and insult your opponents without calling them names.  It just takes slightly more effort.  I dont know if you noticed, but I post all the time, and I will very very rarely ever name call someone.  See post above.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish Horsemen everything of the best with their new independent course. I hope very much that they won't be punished for it in the future, by being rolled by the likes of Arrgh, though I fear they may be.

One thing that is obvious to me as a new player is that this game punishes individuality and independence. Not everyone wants to be in an alliance, but you have to be to survive. And I am sure many small alliances would prefer not to be protectorates, but again, they have to be to survive reasonable well.

That being so, it is ironic to hear people who love raiding unprotected nations and small alliances complaining about the existence of a large hegemony, when, as others have pointed out,  that very hegemony is largely the result of raiding and aggression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2019 at 11:20 AM, Queenzo eMzo said:

TRF did not start that war. TCW and TKR were already going to declare on you because they'd been threatened. TRF didn't know about it until we were invited, which was 3 days before. They held off to wait for us to mil up. We were never in the position to "start a war." We were a fricking micro, ffs. We were in a position to add bodies and we did.

So TRF started the war. Thanks for the clarification.

  • Downvote 2

settradirect.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Torleif said:

I wish Horsemen everything of the best with their new independent course. I hope very much that they won't be punished for it in the future, by being rolled by the likes of Arrgh, though I fear they may be.

One thing that is obvious to me as a new player is that this game punishes individuality and independence. Not everyone wants to be in an alliance, but you have to be to survive. And I am sure many small alliances would prefer not to be protectorates, but again, they have to be to survive reasonable well.

That being so, it is ironic to hear people who love raiding unprotected nations and small alliances complaining about the existence of a large hegemony, when, as others have pointed out,  that very hegemony is largely the result of raiding and aggression.

I see no reason they’d be at increased risk of attack from Arrgh.

Also not calling NPO out or any others, but if any alliances feel they are stuck in a Protectorate Relationship they don't like due to no other options; I'm willing to hear out any alliances in the top 50 who want to change their FA up a bit and see if there is potential. Although I don't think alliances should base their treaties just on it being the only option; they should be happy with their alignment and sphere.

What I'm not interested in for treaties with Fark are alliances who spam treaties all over the place, in order to try seeing how many people will accept. Quality over quantity; although with other established spheres not taking more members really & the war; I'm open to diplomatic overtures from those interested in seeing if we can find enough common ground. There are always options for alliances, well usually. Although I'm interested in mutual allies; not signing a bunch of protectorates or alliances with treaties tying them everywhere.

Also I fought Arrgh a bunch of rounds way back when I started using the forum for fun (At least more than 15 wars in a row); although fighting them I got to know them & they're actually not bad (Ended up friends with a good amount of them, guess its true what they say about those fighting them becoming friends later often times). Never been raided by them myself. Also a Protectorate versus several Mutual Defense Pacts I don't think would hold off the Pirates any better.

Edited by Noctis Anarch Caelum
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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