Jump to content

The First Snek on The Moon (No Whales Allowed)


Agent W
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

The reality is that your sphere, owing the heavy top tier and the escalation of effectiveness thereof, can rather comfortably take on any other sphere solo and have a reasonable chance at victory. The same cannot be said on the inverse. In spirit, it's quite similar to Quack in that as a sphere it was meant to have a reasonable chance at deterring a 1v1 and in good conditions, withstanding a 2v1. The reason Quack retained such set up, though, is because there was a very credible reason for believing that such would happen owing to immediate post-NPOLT diplomatic and narrative developments; to put it in other words, people had jumped to conclusions and began narrative crafting before the people in Quack had any chance to reassess the dramatic FA landscape change that had occurred towards the end of NPOLT and properly adjust to such, instead being forced into the defensive from the get-go. Your sphere lack any such rationale justifying that sort of set-up because you put it together based on what you saw as being pragmatically beneficial for you, as opposed to having what was effectively a leftover infrastructure which was not allowed to be revised. Put in another way, you had a clean slate you could've worked with, and from the ground up went with this. The fact that Quack also showed considerable restraint throughout it's existence, owing exactly due to it's size and perceived threat, while you pretty much didn't care about the latter two as evidenced by the fact that you deemed it sensible to start right off with a war also didn't help matters on your end and how your sphere is perceived.

Can we touch on this a little bit here.  Comparing us to Quack is a little disingenuous. Quack was so much larger than everyone else that no one sphere could take them in a one on one, to the point that even a 2 on 1 would be tight.

Then to say that you stayed together because of post IQ stuff, sure that could have been the case for the first 2-3 months post war, but we had a 6 month NAP, in which you guys moved exactly 0, then the nap ended, and still you moved exactly 0.  You guys had 8-9 months to do something, and 0 movement from you before the quack war started, even then you wanted another 6 months.  How much time do you need to assess? You stayed together because you thought you were untouchable.  As for showing restraint, when even the slightest whispers came out that you may be hit, you mobilized at the drop of a hat, and 3 blocks had to come together to take you down. 

HW is not nearly the powerhouse that Quack was, when we formed were we the strongest bloc in the game?  I would say yes, but it wasn't by an order of magnitude like quack was, we were like 25-30 percent stronger than Rose at the time, and about 10-15 percent stronger than tS.   Since then Rose has added a lot more strength, and HW has gotten weaker.  You guys might be about the same, your upper tier alliance hasn't really grown much.

As for how we are perceived, the goal was to fight more wars but have them be shorter.  You do this by fighting wars.   You will notice that the wars we have fought have all been relatively short with the exception of the quack war because tS dragged it out another month with wanting a 6 month nap.  I really dont have an issue with you hitting us, we knew it was coming.  I would say we are surprised that you brought Rose with you, considering how much chatter comes from tS about how bad dog piles are.  I dont begrudge Rose for attacking as we hit them 2 months ago.

The reason we are in here arguing with you and not with Rose, is because rose doesn't engage in the forums which is no fun..  But at the same time they dont scream from the sidelines about dog piles and unfair wars, and then turn around and to do the exact same thing when they get the chance.  That is why we are here, your CB was horse shit, when you could have used an actual legitimate CB.  And the hypocrisy coming from BW is palpable.  

I personally dont have an issue with unfair wars, I think the goal of a war is to win, so do what you gotta do.  But if tS wants to sit on your high horse and criticize others for easy PR points, dont be surprised when you get called out for it, when you do the same thing everyone else does.

 

Edit: that really turned into a wall of text eh? sorry!

Edited by Sweeeeet Ronny D
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

Can we touch on this a little bit here.  Comparing us to Quack is a little disingenuous. Quack was so much larger than everyone else that no one sphere could take them in a one on one, to the point that even a 2 on 1 would be tight.

I said that it was similar, not 1:1. The other spheres are also a bit smaller compared to some of the stuff we had back then, so it's not like one variable changed and the others remained constant.

1 hour ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

Then to say that you stayed together because of post IQ stuff, sure that could have been the case for the first 2-3 months post war, but we had a 6 month NAP, in which you guys moved exactly 0, then the nap ended, and still you moved exactly 0.  You guys had 8-9 months to do something, and 0 movement from you before the quack war started, even then you wanted another 6 months.  How much time do you need to assess? You stayed together because you thought you were untouchable.  As for showing restraint, when even the slightest whispers came out that you may be hit, you mobilized at the drop of a hat, and 3 blocks had to come together to take you down. 

The bolded part is simply a lie (I presume unintentional), by virtue of TI and associated parties leaving. Regardless of the rationale, it was a a not minor change.

That aside, there had been no change on the situation that spurred it. So yes, lack of reason to change caused things to remain the way they are. You're free to ask your now MDP partner pertaining how unassailable we actually deemed Quack to be. Or rather more simply, just check old conversations with them.

Given the fact we, quite frankly, not only had the chance to roll you, but also had potential to gain diplo wise from such when you hit tCW (by virtue of securing them as an ally), but didn't take it; yes, I'd say that plenty of restraint was shown. Those "whispers" were plenty credible enough and, as things aired, proven to be not only correct, but also run deeper than what we had initially thought.

1 hour ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

HW is not nearly the powerhouse that Quack was, when we formed were we the strongest bloc in the game?  I would say yes, but it wasn't by an order of magnitude like quack was, we were like 25-30 percent stronger than Rose at the time, and about 10-15 percent stronger than tS.   Since then Rose has added a lot more strength, and HW has gotten weaker.  You guys might be about the same, your upper tier alliance hasn't really grown much.

Circle back to my first response. Also compounded by how your first maneuvers as a sphere were perceived.

1 hour ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

As for how we are perceived, the goal was to fight more wars but have them be shorter.  You do this by fighting wars.   You will notice that the wars we have fought have all been relatively short with the exception of the quack war because tS dragged it out another month with wanting a 6 month nap.  I really dont have an issue with you hitting us, we knew it was coming.  I would say we are surprised that you brought Rose with you, considering how much chatter comes from tS about how bad dog piles are.  I dont begrudge Rose for attacking as we hit them 2 months ago.

Short wars benefit you (by you, I mean your alliance, not even sphere) because you're at the top of the pyramid and have such a massive edge that you just btfo whatever is there on a one-on-one match-up, and provided you got the hits in first, more than that. And once you do, it's up to your allies to pick up the pieces and deal with turreting or mil suiciding that the other party might do because, again, you're at the top of the pyramid. Good chance that your nations can't even be reached in the first place, especially as the other party loses their infra which is inflating their NS, and if they can, people won't send their suicide nations on them. They'll hit as low as possible in order to best leverage their military edge. So you come out relatively if not virtually unscathed and basically workaround what is an otherwise normal rebuild cycle that other alliances have to deal with in a semi constant basis. This fundamentally renders the argument that your grouping is ok because other people can grow faster moot (not mentioned here but I've seen been used, hence why I'm mentioning it here since I'm already elaborating on it), since those people are dealing with billions spent on widescale rebuild which you seldom have to engage in.

That's why I find your endorsement for short wars to be laughable at best, self serving at worst.

As for the six month thing; you pitch higher than what you're aiming to get to have leeway in negotiations. I didn't think that it need be explained, but apparently it does. Especially given how you deemed it to be perfectly fine to give tCW and friends a three month nap for a 10 day war, whatever was to be finally agreed on was nowhere near as outrageous as you make it out to be.

1 hour ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

The reason we are in here arguing with you and not with Rose, is because rose doesn't engage in the forums which is no fun..  But at the same time they dont scream from the sidelines about dog piles and unfair wars, and then turn around and to do the exact same thing when they get the chance.  That is why we are here, your CB was horse shit, when you could have used an actual legitimate CB.  And the hypocrisy coming from BW is palpable.  

You already have my opinion on lopsided wars with credible reason to justify concern. 

 

Edited by Shiho Nishizumi
Minor edit.
  • Like 2
 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Charles Bolivar said:

@Hodor

Remember that time we had a convo in the old TGH server about this sort of logic (which I agree with I might add, even when it is used against my own interests) with a particular tS gov member who just refused to accept such logic as being reasonable when we rolled tS last year? I even remember myself saying tS was being rolled on account of lazy FA.

I wonder how @Justin076 feels now? No doubt changed his tune I dare say 🤣

 

Yea, goes back to my first response and I think what Adri and Cooper are getting at: just [email protected]#$in say you wanna roll us because you feel threatened and you have the coalition to do so without much risk. I'd certainly [email protected]#$ off out of this thread and I think they would too. Including this other nonsense makes them look insecure, paranoid, and petty.

5 hours ago, hidude45454 said:

Continuing from my previous point, if the war is about GG and not about TKR, why was there the need to get so many alliances involved?

They've tried that before... didn't work so good the last time... and they wonder why we aren't exceedingly cordial with them...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Eumirbago said:

If I wake up one day and want a Viceroy, boi I want to have the option for it to be done.

How are your plans for that going? TLE warming up to the idea yet?

BrOQBND.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Eumirbago said:

GOB on the other hand needs to be rolled about 1-3 more times until I get to about c40. That ain't paranoia, maybe petty, but I just wanna fricking dominate the game in every fricking aspect of it. Full on Hegemony shiiiiieeeeeeeet. If I wake up one day and want a Viceroy, boi I want to have the option for it to be done.

ITT: Eumir longs for a world where he can play on easy mode again. ❤️

  • Like 2

Humans cannot create anything out of nothingness. Humans cannot accomplish anything without holding onto something. After all, humans are not gods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Eumirbago said:

@Cooper_ is just fricking mad the game doesn't give a two shit flying [email protected]#$ about TKR's end of the sphere while he's in FA.

Babe, I'm just jealous we have to share your commentary with Grumpy.  Give the people what they want.  More Eumir for TKR!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Kyubnyan said:

ITT: Eumir longs for a world where he can play on easy mode again. ❤️

Amen 🙏

Similar to a parent wanting bigger and better things for their child. I want new members of The $yndicate/Enterpri$e to know how it is like to dominate the game for years on end

4 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

Babe, I'm just jealous we have to share your commentary with Grumpy.  Give the people what they want.  More Eumir for TKR!

You insert yourself where there is nothing to be talked about. So I’ll throw your legacy a bone.

1 minute ago, WarriorSoul said:

dollar store partisan with a pinky's worth of the charisma

Still have more effect than the entirety of TKR FA. Don’t let some lowly t$ IA !@#$worker talk to your asses like that

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Lxr4VfE.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still just love the irony here. 

t$ known for prominently have many of it's members including a leader, go all Terminal Jest on people, is angry because a couple grumpy people ghosted KT while KT was also hitting a Hollywood alliance. I mean, I just absolutely love it. 

Also, SRD said mean things is a lovely point. SRD's comments on a radio show speak more to our intentions to roll Blackwater than idk... our legit discussions the day of the blitz to try and deescalate tensions because we didn't want a war? Usually when a old grumpy man yells at the clouds, you just laugh and walk on by, but this time you decided to take a baseball to his entire family. Fun times! 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

big_morph-sig.jpg.dc5493086dfd6fa978316880fe6a6c62.jpg

The Knights Radiant 
Ghostblood Babsk of Foreign Affairs

Journey before Destination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

I said that it was similar, not 1:1. The other spheres are also a bit smaller compared to some of the stuff we had back then, so it's not like one variable changed and the others remained constant.

But in comparison, if any two spheres hit Quack it would be a tossup at best for the aggressor to win, where as BW and Rose have completely slotted Hollywood, and you will completely stomp us. (trust me, I did the math back then when we were looking at what kind of a chance we would have had if we hit you, it didn't look good.) 

 

1 hour ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

The bolded part is simply a lie (I presume unintentional), by virtue of TI and associated parties leaving. Regardless of the rationale, it was a a not minor change.

That aside, there had been no change on the situation that spurred it. So yes, lack of reason to change caused things to remain the way they are. You're free to ask your now MDP partner pertaining how unassailable we actually deemed Quack to be. Or rather more simply, just check old conversations with them.

Sorry, I forgot that TI left, but if i remember correctly TI left like 2-3 weeks after the war ended, possibly sooner?  But that still left you over 7 months where you made no efforts to deescalate yourselves. 

1 hour ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Given the fact we, quite frankly, not only had the chance to roll you, but also had potential to gain diplo wise from such when you hit tCW (by virtue of securing them as an ally), but didn't take it; yes, I'd say that plenty of restraint was shown. Those "whispers" were plenty credible enough and, as things aired, proven to be not only correct, but also run deeper than what we had initially thought.

You dont get a pat on the back because you didn't get involved in a war that didn't involve you.  You also know that you didn't do that because if you did, it would have painted an even larger target on your back than you already had as the by far dominate block in the game at the time.  Could you say that we made that error by attacking out of the gate as HW, yeah but we knew that when we did it, and we knew that by winning the war against rose, that we cemented the chance of us getting rolled in the next war, I mean its a main reason why 404 and Cotl left, they didn't want the heat.

 

1 hour ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Short wars benefit you (by you, I mean your alliance, not even sphere) because you're at the top of the pyramid and have such a massive edge that you just btfo whatever is there on a one-on-one match-up, and provided you got the hits in first, more than that. And once you do, it's up to your allies to pick up the pieces and deal with turreting or mil suiciding that the other party might do because, again, you're at the top of the pyramid. Good chance that your nations can't even be reached in the first place, especially as the other party loses their infra which is inflating their NS, and if they can, people won't send their suicide nations on them. They'll hit as low as possible in order to best leverage their military edge. So you come out relatively if not virtually unscathed and basically workaround what is an otherwise normal rebuild cycle that other alliances have to deal with in a semi constant basis. This fundamentally renders the argument that your grouping is ok because other people can grow faster moot (not mentioned here but I've seen been used, hence why I'm mentioning it here since I'm already elaborating on it), since those people are dealing with billions spent on widescale rebuild which you seldom have to engage in.

That's why I find your endorsement for short wars to be laughable at best, self serving at worst.

They do benefit us, they also benefit the entire game, because what is more fun, fighting for 2-3 months where the outcome is already determined after a week, or fighting for a few weeks doing your damage and calling it a day?  Look at how badly tS victimizes about the IQ war and you were only involved for a few months not the entire thing.

There are all kinds of advantages to shorter wars, especially ones now where the entire world doesn't get involved.  You limit the time the noncombatants can grow while you are fighting.   Does grumpy take less damage as a whole? sure, generally after the first round or two assuming we did our job most of our guys are out of range and with the score changes everyone keeps crying about it's now next to impossible for us to sell down into range. (your upper tier is about to learn this)  That being said, I know the cheapest rebuild that I can remember besides the TCW war, was around 750 million.  So to act like we dont take any damage the 150 nukes I have eaten over the life of my nation tend to disagree with you.  And for tS to act like they dont have the resources to instantly rebuild after a war ends is laughable on your end.  But I am glade to know it also takes you 2+ months to save up enough to buy a city.

1 hour ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

As for the six month thing; you pitch higher than what you're aiming to get to have leeway in negotiations. I didn't think that it need be explained, but apparently it does. Especially given how you deemed it to be perfectly fine to give tCW and friends a three month nap for a 10 day war, whatever was to be finally agreed on was nowhere near as outrageous as you make it out to be.

tS dragged out a war for another month because you wanted a 6 month nap.  From what I hear from my current allies that was a tS thing.  Your excuse was you needed 6 months to assess the world to make any changes, where really you just wanted to avoid another war and let everyone else fight it out while you profited, to say otherwise either means you are out of the loop or just lying.  The difference between you and TCW, is you are a major world player and TCW is not, if we give TCW a 3 month NAP it doesn't really make a difference because we accomplished what we wanted to do and had no desire to hit them again.  We offered you a 3 month one too, because that should have been plenty of time to do whatever FA moves you needed to do.  That wasn't tS's goal.

FYI i wrote this while on a conference call at work, so if something doesnt make sense it was because i was distracted while typing, sorry!

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

1 hour ago, BigMorf said:

Also, SRD said mean things is a lovely point. SRD's comments on a radio show speak more to our intentions to roll Blackwater than idk... our legit discussions the day of the blitz to try and deescalate tensions because we didn't want a war? Usually when a old grumpy man yells at the clouds, you just laugh and walk on by, but this time you decided to take a baseball to his entire family. Fun times! 

You know you try to be entertaining, give the people something beyond boring monotone PC answers, and everyone uses it against you... this is why you guys cant have nice things.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

But in comparison, if any two spheres hit Quack it would be a tossup at best for the aggressor to win, where as BW and Rose have completely slotted Hollywood, and you will completely stomp us. (trust me, I did the math back then when we were looking at what kind of a chance we would have had if we hit you, it didn't look good.) 

I recall checking myself on stuff towards the latter half of the sphere's existence (which is when I was checking more often because, obvious reasons), and I recall stuff such as Rose+HM having a pretty good lineup for such. I can see the argument of it being extremely large early on, but it quickly diminished as other spheres formed and consolidated (I don't say consolidation in the negative sense, but simply establishing themselves and growing) while Quack remained relatively stagnant in part because it was policy not to sign more stuff.
 

44 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

Sorry, I forgot that TI left, but if i remember correctly TI left like 2-3 weeks after the war ended, possibly sooner?  But that still left you over 7 months where you made no efforts to deescalate yourselves. 

I'm not sure what you expected Partisan to do in the face pertaining to actors which had sprung far too quickly on the narrative, instead of chilling for a few weeks and perhaps using that energy to focus on rebuilding their communities. 

Granted, he had actually poured a fair amount of diplo effort on parties which were (or least were perceived as such) neutral at the time. The portrayal that nothing was done is inaccurate.

55 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

You dont get a pat on the back because you didn't get involved in a war that didn't involve you.  You also know that you didn't do that because if you did, it would have painted an even larger target on your back than you already had as the by far dominate block in the game at the time.  Could you say that we made that error by attacking out of the gate as HW, yeah but we knew that when we did it, and we knew that by winning the war against rose, that we cemented the chance of us getting rolled in the next war, I mean its a main reason why 404 and Cotl left, they didn't want the heat.

A couple of people were already negatively predisposed against us. It had the risk of alienating a sphere, certainly, but it'd have secured another. Frankly, it'd have been probably a net neutral if not a win, and certainly better than the alternative which came to pass. Granted, easy to win the lotto with Monday's newspaper.

You're certainly right in that, in spite of what there was to be gained with the opportunity, the conflict itself didn't concern us. Which was a big reason why Quack didn't do anything about. Still something which contrasts with much of what would happen afterwards.

1 hour ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

They do benefit us, they also benefit the entire game, because what is more fun, fighting for 2-3 months where the outcome is already determined after a week, or fighting for a few weeks doing your damage and calling it a day?  Look at how badly tS victimizes about the IQ war and you were only involved for a few months not the entire thing.

I tend to lean on one month being a good period of time for a war to last for. The wars I've fought on which dragged for longer than that did so because of political considerations not being met. 

1 hour ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

There are all kinds of advantages to shorter wars, especially ones now where the entire world doesn't get involved.  You limit the time the noncombatants can grow while you are fighting.   Does grumpy take less damage as a whole? sure, generally after the first round or two assuming we did our job most of our guys are out of range and with the score changes everyone keeps crying about it's now next to impossible for us to sell down into range. (your upper tier is about to learn this)  That being said, I know the cheapest rebuild that I can remember besides the TCW war, was around 750 million.  So to act like we dont take any damage the 150 nukes I have eaten over the life of my nation tend to disagree with you.  And for tS to act like they dont have the resources to instantly rebuild after a war ends is laughable on your end.  But I am glade to know it also takes you 2+ months to save up enough to buy a city.

You mean the nukes that you just laugh off as being able to cover the expense of in a few days' lapse, while the guy launching them is making basically zero income of his own? You mean the rebuild I've seen people brag as being able to just build up during the duration of the war itself, because it usually takes that long for the drag-down to happen, if it does happen? 

Relative to other alliances; yes, the damage sustained is negligible. 

1 hour ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

tS dragged out a war for another month because you wanted a 6 month nap.  From what I hear from my current allies that was a tS thing.  Your excuse was you needed 6 months to assess the world to make any changes, where really you just wanted to avoid another war and let everyone else fight it out while you profited, to say otherwise either means you are out of the loop or just lying.  The difference between you and TCW, is you are a major world player and TCW is not, if we give TCW a 3 month NAP it doesn't really make a difference because we accomplished what we wanted to do and had no desire to hit them again.  We offered you a 3 month one too, because that should have been plenty of time to do whatever FA moves you needed to do.  That wasn't tS's goal.

Much of the sphere was actually on board with a longer NAP. That said, I hope your ally did notify you that it was chiefly them the ones who wanted the NAP to be non blanket.

That argument doesn't make sense because if they're irrelevant, then no NAP for them would've been perfectly fine. They don't matter after all. The actual reason you gave them that sort of NAP was just to prevent them from tagging alongside us if such possibility were to happen, and it cost you nothing to have such guarantee in place.

As for your assertion, I'd say that the events which unfolded the past half a year put a big question mark on them.
 

  • Like 1
 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Keegoz said:

Rose somewhat gave them a poison chalice imo. They'll likely get out of this war relatively well PR wise, t$ probably less so.

No comment on how Rose tries to pull this shit every war and thinks it can get away with it every time 🙃

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

20 hours ago, Charles Bolivar said:

Respect to Rose over this one. Takes some serious FA skill to manipulate a whole other bloc into enacting your own revenge.

o7 Rose

Put all their skill points into Charisma

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I could leave zero stars I would. Came here to see the 'first snek on the moon.' Instead, all I was able to see was some chubby dude in a cheap rubber snake suit out in the desert with a goldfish bowl on his head pretending to be in space. Clearly the syndicate need to contact NASA and get advice on how to make fake pictures of the moon look realistic.

Save your money and go somewhere else. 

 

Edited by Charles Bolivar
  • Haha 1

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Charles Bolivar said:

If I could leave zero stars I would. Came here to see the 'first snek on the moon.' Instead, all I was able to see was some chubby dude in a cheap rubber snake suit out in the desert with a goldfish bowl on his head pretending to be in space. Clearly the syndicate need to contact NASA and get advice on how to make fake pictures of the moon look realistic.

Save your money and go somewhere else. 

 

 

Clearly, the wrong founder of t$ returned to lead in this crucial time.

Come back home Chuck. Return to t$. We need your leadership more than ever, and I need someone to talk about bogan things with which is absolutely not at all the reason I am asking for you to return.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

In paradisum deducant te Angeli; in tuo adventu suscipiant te martyres, et perducant te in civitatem sanctam Ierusalem.
Chorus angelorum te suscipiat, et cüm Lazaro quondam paupere æternam habeas requiem.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zed said:

 

Clearly, the wrong founder of t$ returned to lead in this crucial time.

Come back home Chuck. Return to t$. We need your leadership more than ever, and I need someone to talk about bogan things with which is absolutely not at all the reason I am asking for you to return.

Sorry old friend. You are on your own with this one. As great as I am, even my godly form has its limitations and the syndicate is just too far gone to save.

That said though, did you ever get a ute?

 

Edited by Charles Bolivar

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We used to be friends... :c

I also considered a top ten anime betrayals joke but I don't think that fits so enjoy my TV Tropes reference about how BK and t$ used to be friends. cri

I tried making it so half of the link led to the tv tropes page and the other half led to the old BK+t$ treaty announcement but Invision is finicky

Edited by Nukey6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unsurprisingly, what a toxic cesspool forums are during war lol. For an unsolicited opinion, HW probably deserved to be hit for a) being the strongest coalition by combining HM + TKR and for b) recent war-mongering against Rose, and, before that, HM war-mongering against tS (although I do believe Syndisphere also merited a clapping back then, being by far the strongest sphere). Obviously that's what SRD does though, war-monger, but it's still a valid CB when HW is the largest, top-tier sphere and when Grumpy is a significant component of HW. Also obvious is that tS wanted this war because they are direct rivals with Grumpy, and Rose wanted retribution for GNR. Everything else is superfluous, asinine and self-serving propaganda. As it stands, coalitions cry about dogpiles and immediately seek dogpiles, but w/e, that's the political landscape at this point. It would make the forums less nauseating if CBs would just admit that wars are retributions for prior conflicts and to knock a rival down a peg (which is completely fine for a nation sim, hell, how the hell else do you find reasons for war and to shred pixels?), rather than some dumb bs about KT ghosting and SRD being aggressive in back-channels. 

Edited by EliteCanada
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, BigMorf said:

I still just love the irony here. 

Also, SRD said mean things is a lovely point. SRD's comments on a radio show speak more to our intentions to roll Blackwater than idk... our legit discussions the day of the blitz to try and deescalate tensions because we didn't want a war? Usually when a old grumpy man yells at the clouds, you just laugh and walk on by, but this time you decided to take a baseball to his entire family. Fun times! 

SRD is the leader of the arguably the strongest alliance in your sphere. He's also far from being FA inept like how you paint him out to be given how long GoB has managed to trudge along from sphere to sphere, avoiding any meaningful damage to them save for KF (3 years ago) and NPOLT (in which every single alliance suffered damage).

As the leader of arguably the most prominent alliance in your sphere, it is a natural step in reasoning to assume from the outside looking in that his thoughts have a large impact on the actions and FA direction of your sphere, no? Therefore, when he mentions wanting to hit t$ in public and back-channels, it doesn't take a mental gymnast to come to the conclusion that those words have some weight behind them.

I don't blame him for talking shit because it does make things more interesting, but to cry wolf the moment it's used against you is ridiculous. You can't go 'lol old man' when it suits you, because as leadership his word holds sway. 

Edited by Vemek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Vemek said:

SRD is the leader of the arguably the strongest alliance in your sphere. He's also far from being FA inept like how you paint him out to be given how long GoB has managed to trudge along from sphere to sphere, avoiding any meaningful damage to them save for KF (3 years ago) and NPOLT (in which every single alliance suffered damage).

As the leader of arguably the most prominent alliance in your sphere, it is a natural step in reasoning to assume from the outside looking in that his thoughts have a large impact on the actions and FA direction of your sphere, no? Therefore, when he mentions wanting to hit t$ in public and back-channels, it doesn't take a mental gymnast to come to the conclusion that those words have some weight behind them.

I don't blame him for talking shit because it does make things more interesting, but to cry wolf the moment it's used against you is ridiculous. You can't go 'lol old man' when it suits you, because as leadership his word holds sway. 

I think you misunderstand us here. We've said over and again, yes, his words have weight but you also take him far too seriously when he's literally goofing off and it's still weak sauce to use that and your KT line as your CB. You have an actual good CB and it's not one that makes you look easily spooked at best and paranoid at worst. I don't know why you guys are clinging to/getting defensive over these points instead of using your actual overarching one.

  • Upvote 1

BrOQBND.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Charles Bolivar said:

Sorry old friend. You are on your own with this one. As great as I am, even my godly form has its limitations and the syndicate is just too far gone to save.

That said though, did you ever get a ute?

 

The used vehicle market is crazy right now, and nobody has any inventory. Still working on it, but we will get there soon.

In paradisum deducant te Angeli; in tuo adventu suscipiant te martyres, et perducant te in civitatem sanctam Ierusalem.
Chorus angelorum te suscipiat, et cüm Lazaro quondam paupere æternam habeas requiem.

 

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.