Shellhound Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Woah, GPA making snarky comments? Tone it down guys, that's a bit too aggressive. Not as aggressive as it will be when you roll everyone, but we're still pretending like you won't be the future overlords. Edited October 30, 2014 by Shellhound 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 EoS uses the weak defense that TAC was planning to attack them and rather than sit and wait to be attacked (which TAC says wasn't going to happen) EoS attacks first. TAC starts to beat EoS, so EoS called their buddies to jump TAC. Why only skeptical about one side? Could one alliance buying war resources really tripple prices? Come on now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Quoting this before it gets edited away. There is really no need, it was only a suggestion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 There is really no need, it was only a suggestion. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 That wasn't about TAC's allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George W. Bush Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Has the war stagnated or should it be announced as over? Quote You're no longer protecting the II? We have still teamed with II and TAC (and others) to rival The Covenants. This is getting complex. #FA_Problems Big problems for TSG. Really, not kidding. If Casey and Cyradis are King and Queen does that mean they're married? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taliburn Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 @hansarios & @vincent: it's not debatable.. Useless.. As long as we know what's the real score why EOS then UPN and VoC attacked TAC,(logically speaking it's not 1v1 as clearly TAC got its financiers outside of TAC so it's rightful VOC and UPN must join. We can see trade activities and TAC and it's allies are doing it.. Now, it's alright.. Just how funny they moved to purple to destroy the color bonus by economy is another thing that theyve plotted, and I'm putting up a draft right now about color change.. This to avoid, though rules in the game it's allowed they shift colors and divided their nations in alliances, to hurt the purple bonus, I'll be sending a draft that must be signed by our officers and Allies, if ever they would change to the color we choose, it will be an act of war and DoW it will be. Afterall if we change to another color, they just can again easily follow our color and do the same old thing.. But this time, DoW it is... If it can be solved diplomatically, it's fine, but if not, force must be put upon.. What do you think you own colors now???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grillick Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 It wouldn't be out of character for their organization. This is hardly the first time an alliance has claimed dominion over a color. Quote "It's hard to be a team player when you're omnipotent." - Q Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 It wouldn't be out of character for their organization. This is hardly the first time an alliance has claimed dominion over a color. I completely agree with what you're saying and everything, I'd just like to point out the hilarity of the comment considering it's from someone in GPA. the Green Protection Agency.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taliburn Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 I completely agree with what you're saying and everything, I'd just like to point out the hilarity of the comment considering it's from someone in GPA. the Green Protection Agency.... lol i didnt even see he was from GPA... I just thought that was the most stupidest thing someone could say... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 This is hardly the first time an alliance has claimed dominion over a color. That implies a color was claimed, it was not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyler215 Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 What do you think you own colors now???? No, this only applies to your guerrillas to destroy such bonus... Cause if ever we decide to change colors, then you can just simply follow it and your guys to the color we move, as it's clearly you made and your play lands that thing to destroy the bonus. It's a suggestion... Now, if we can talk over it(but I doubt) diplomatically, it's fine, but if not, then like the alpha times, we can do it over again. Hurting us economically makes us unstable but it is our right to defend our stability, and if its a must that I sponsor our members some lofty donations every month just to counter what the two new alliances did to us (TAC separatist to do guerrillas) I then must supply them $25 worth every month (afterall sheepy would love it to sustain the expenses of the game) to counter that kind of thing... Let's say...... 5 members x 2... What would the TAC alliance feel if we do the same like what you're doing now... Afterall, I told our members VoC is so lucky getting me.. Cause I'm very generous and "maybe" VoC would be so generous too to return the favor to TAC... Afterall, christmas is coming to town.... ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caillou Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 No, this only applies to your guerrillas to destroy such bonus... Cause if ever we decide to change colors, then you can just simply follow it and your guys to the color we move, as it's clearly you made and your play lands that thing to destroy the bonus. It's a suggestion... Now, if we can talk over it(but I doubt) diplomatically, it's fine, but if not, then like the alpha times, we can do it over again. Hurting us economically makes us unstable but it is our right to defend our stability, and if its a must that I sponsor our members some lofty donations every month just to counter what the two new alliances did to us (TAC separatist to do guerrillas) I then must supply them $25 worth every month (afterall sheepy would love it to sustain the expenses of the game) to counter that kind of thing... Let's say...... 5 members x 2... What would the TAC alliance feel if we do the same like what you're doing now... Afterall, I told our members VoC is so lucky getting me.. Cause I'm very generous and "maybe" VoC would be so generous too to return the favor to TAC... Afterall, christmas is coming to town.... ;) So you plan on only threatening to declare on alliances you are already at war with? Also, did you just admit to paying donations for every VoC nation? 1 Quote [17:17:58] <&Ashland> I will give you hops if you say this phrase: [17:18:13] <&Ashland> "Man, I really wish Rose had allied BoC a couple months ago when we had the chance instead of picking Vanguard." [17:20:16] Man, I really wish Rose had allied BoC a couple months ago when we had the chance instead of picking Vanguard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 No, this only applies to your guerrillas to destroy such bonus... Cause if ever we decide to change colors, then you can just simply follow it and your guys to the color we move, as it's clearly you made and your play lands that thing to destroy the bonus. It's a suggestion... Now, if we can talk over it(but I doubt) diplomatically, it's fine, but if not, then like the alpha times, we can do it over again. Hurting us economically makes us unstable but it is our right to defend our stability, and if its a must that I sponsor our members some lofty donations every month just to counter what the two new alliances did to us (TAC separatist to do guerrillas) I then must supply them $25 worth every month (afterall sheepy would love it to sustain the expenses of the game) to counter that kind of thing... Let's say...... 5 members x 2... What would the TAC alliance feel if we do the same like what you're doing now... Afterall, I told our members VoC is so lucky getting me.. Cause I'm very generous and "maybe" VoC would be so generous too to return the favor to TAC... Afterall, christmas is coming to town.... ;) I thought pre-empting an alliance would hurt your stability, if you can't take what comes with a war don't declare it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwynn Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 That implies a color was claimed, it was not. Technically, the post that it was in regards to does say a color was chosen. I know it's difficult to follow threads sometime so I drew you a map: http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/3173-anyone-want-to-explain-the-war-that-broke-out/?p=38876 1 Quote He's right, I'm such a stinker. Play my exceptional game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placentica Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Prefontaine - I doubt anyone who want to go for war just for the rankings. Suffer so much damage just for ranking? Even if you are Rank 1st, So what? You got rewarded by having your daily income doubled if you are ranked 1st? Then perhaps. I don't give a damn about rankings and that's why I hardly even look at the Alliance Ranking Thread. Wrong. If EoS hadn't sucked so bad at war, they'd easily be the #1 alliance right now. And yes, people go to war to reclaim the #1 spot all the time. You clearly haven't played many other browser political games. Quote Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) Well, at least I am kind of certain that DEIC didn't go to war to help EoS regain their top spot. 100% sure about it Edited October 31, 2014 by vincentsum8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placentica Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) No you went to war because if EoS gets owned it makes your whole bloc look bad and weakens you. Truth is that it made your bloc look way worse when you had to bail out EoS for a war it started. Edited October 31, 2014 by Placentica 1 Quote Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Oh, my. People really got worked up about this, I see. 1 Quote ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [10:47] you used to be the voice of irc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenodolf Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 interesting to read everyones reasons n stuff but shouldn't this be in ' orbis central ' and not ' National Affairs ', no? Quote - Anarkhist leader of the Svøbødnäyä Tęrritøriyä Groznyj Grad - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ooohu Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 The Pleasuredome issues the following statement: "It is with a heavy heart that we say the following, any nation found to be undercutting our market offers will be forever banned from entering the pleasure houses of our great nation. Furthermore, the purple people are rude and threatening war against any alliances seeking to join Purple is an outrageous offense!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Well, at least I am kind of certain that DEIC didn't go to war to help EoS regain their top spot. 100% sure about it Oh man, the things I want to say to see how 100% you are about that. It's almost like that time you were 100% sure DEIC wasn't going to enter the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikhail Gorbachev Posted October 31, 2014 Author Share Posted October 31, 2014 So before opinions, which inevitably are going to be posted, make it here, I would suggest you take in what people say and deduce something for yourself. Both sides have their own opinions on what happened, and neither is necessarily wrong per se, but it is a matter of perception. Here goes for my recap: TC is created (The Covenant) which are the (easiest way to explain it) purple powers. Hostilities prior to the war jack up prices EoS says TAC has been plotting against them (Empire of Spades, and The Atlas Confederacy) and declare war TAC says it would be a 1v1 EoS does not agree UPN (United Purple Nations) and DEIC (Dutch East India Company) join in on the war Some things to note here are that these are all very big alliances, and there is still some controversy as to how it went down. I'll edit this if anybody disagrees. Wonderful, thank you. What side did UPN and DEIC join in on?> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Wonderful, thank you. What side did UPN and DEIC join in on?> the winning side 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbas Mehdi Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 they joined on the eos side Quote I am not a member of Guardian p&w 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.