Jump to content
TheNG

[NAP] The Best Deals, The Greatest Deals

Recommended Posts

Just now, Roquentin said:

Are we Coalition B or Memesphere? 

This pigeon however knows the Art of the Deal inside and out and we are seeing the results right here. This is the type of dynamic politics Orbis has been craving.

Both, haven't you got the secret memos?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IQ is Coalition B, Memesphere, KERCHTOG, Syndisphere, Farksphere, Chaos, KETOGG, Alex, Sheepy, you, and me.

Also yey NAP. War won't be dragged on even longer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are you guys against war dodgers and pixel huggers or not 🤔

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats? Though I thought R&R had a one way non aggression pact with everyone..

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, KindaEpicMoah said:

And join Arrgh

Who

@Tarroc Youre such a stalker. Always down voting my stuff. Bit creepy

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10,000 IQ. 

Syndi without a sphere. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Litterally the worst treaty ever signed in the history of PW, Manthrax was right about you you dirty flying rat!

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Akuryo said:

So are you guys against war dodgers and pixel huggers or not 🤔

RnR were never going to enter the war. We specifically told them we wouldn’t be activating the treaty because a) it’s neither their nor their direct ally’s war. There really was no reason to drag them into the meat grinder apart from upper tier support when the majority of the fighting is happening in the mid tier. And b) a narrative being pushed around earlier was equalising or even gaining the upper hand in the net damage side of things. While I’m sure RnR doesn’t have enough infrastructure value to equalise, I’m not going to give Coalition B the satisfaction of using the net damage gap being much smaller to be used in any future arguments.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Cypher said:

RnR were never going to enter the war. We specifically told them we wouldn’t be activating the treaty because a) it’s neither their nor their direct ally’s war. There really was no reason to drag them into the meat grinder apart from upper tier support when the majority of the fighting is happening in the mid tier. And b) a narrative being pushed around earlier was equalising or even gaining the upper hand in the net damage side of things. While I’m sure RnR doesn’t have enough infrastructure value to equalise, I’m not going to give Coalition B the satisfaction of using the net damage gap being much smaller to be used in any future arguments.

I can see you managed to entirely miss the point of what was said and go on an irrelevant rant.

Well done!

  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disappointed. Not enough HS in that picture....cause HS is treatied to RnR not t$. 0/10 meme please try again. 

Edited by Zygon
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> Fighting with your ally regardless of e-law. 

>> You're gonna lose anyway, no point

>>> ¶.¶ Non-chaining Mfer

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I applaud IQ 2.0 on learning from their mistakes, it’s also amusing on how quickly they moved to sign 6mo NAPs with certain alliances now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cypher said:

And b) a narrative being pushed around earlier was equalising or even gaining the upper hand in the net damage side of things. While I’m sure RnR doesn’t have enough infrastructure value to equalise, I’m not going to give Coalition B the satisfaction of using the net damage gap being much smaller to be used in any future arguments.

I doubt this could ever be achieved :P Doubtful it's a coalition wide goal either, so I wonder who's selling that narrative <_< 

1 hour ago, Buorhann said:

While I applaud IQ 2.0 on learning from their mistakes, it’s also amusing on how quickly they moved to sign 6mo NAPs with certain alliances now.

Why we're great at learning! Thank you very much Buorhann-senpai. I guess if anything, we've learnt that "fun" noCB wars against Fark and co. isn't something we like doing on a bi-annual basis :P 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

Why we're great at learning! Thank you very much Buorhann-senpai. I guess if anything, we've learnt that "fun" noCB wars against Fark and co. isn't something we like doing on a bi-annual basis :P 

Totes agree, I love these toxic, hidden CB, yearly wars that really bring out the best in everyone.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Hodor said:

Totes agree, I love these toxic, hidden CB, yearly wars that really bring out the best in everyone.

Always better to punch someone you dislike and that opposes you than to hit an innocent bystander. Who even wants a grudge free Orbis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2019 at 6:41 PM, Akuryo said:

So are you guys against war dodgers and pixel huggers or not 🤔

We've gone over this.  They're against war dodgers and pixel huggers, only so long as they view it as an easy hit, and the NPO overlords approve.

Share this post


Link to post
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...

  • 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.