Prefontaine Posted April 28, 2015 Author Share Posted April 28, 2015 Except we didn't. He is in Arrgh after we declined his application. Got myself confused. Derp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Got myself confused. Derp. It's ok, you're not in government now. You can be confused. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aleccs Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 A lot of my posts in this thread are offensive towards Syndicate as they merged with TEL. Pre what is with all the hate? I joined the game rather late (very end of December) and didn't start getting involved in government and community til much later so I just have to ask what is the basis of all this hate? I'm not going to sit here and argue a defense or anything I'm just genuinely curious does all of this stem from Cuzo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted April 28, 2015 Author Share Posted April 28, 2015 Pre what is with all the hate? I joined the game rather late (very end of December) and didn't start getting involved in government and community til much later so I just have to ask what is the basis of all this hate? I'm not going to sit here and argue a defense or anything I'm just genuinely curious does all of this stem from Cuzo? It all stems from Cuzo. He's not the only issue, but how things were handled by TEL parties. Lots of things leaving a bad taste in my mouth, so I spit that bad taste out in this thread, and on the radio show. The more I talk about it, the more people I get giving me shit about it, which I've no problem with people giving me shit.. But do it for the right reasons. I've been over the top about it because it's fun to do that in these sort of threads. I'm not plotting to take down TEL, or tS now rather. I've spoken to Partisan somewhat about it, and my future plans. An option to suicide against tS is an option but I've not decided on which of the many options I have once Malone gets out of Vacation mode -- But I'm getting off topic. To me, Cuzo will always be trash, and those who house and defend him will be idiots. It's plain a simple. He betrayed his alliance, and his alliance allies simply because he was in a bad mood. Why would you want that sort of element in your alliance? No alliance of quality should want something like that. If he had voiced some discontent, had come to me privately to find out more about the reasons for the war -- which there were beyond what was made clear because as I've said many times it asked to be kept personal, and it could have been explained. You rarely have conflicts where every alliance member is on board with the reason for war, but you're in an alliance so you support the group that supports you. You can speak up, and if that doesn't work and you're really unhappy about you can leave, but you don't betray your comrades. Cuzo's reasons were he was quitting the game, and didn't like the "reasons" for the war, and thought it would be fun to leak the plans. So we slapped him and when TEL came asking for us to let him join him so they could bleed him for taxes before he quit I said fine because I had no interest in wasting resources on someone who was supposed to be quitting. But shockingly he didn't quit, because he's a liar, and a coward. He is the scum of the game, make no doubt. I'm sure he's given you no reason to distrust, or dislike him, he didn't with us. Then without an warning, care, or regard for all the people around him who he chose to surround himself with shoved a knife in all of there backs. He will do the same. He is the filth of Orbis, when he stabs you in the back, you will deserve it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Sterling Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 (edited) https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=3767 Feel free to not be just words. If I'm not in your range, I'll happily bulk up so you can declare on me. Just let me know if you're not going to be full of !@#$. I do not intend on attacking a fellow asswipe, but if you insist I cannot decline. Edited April 28, 2015 by Sir Topham Hatt Genesis, best band NA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aisha Greyjoy Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 For those wondering VE will go to large scale war to protect a member they've just accepted, Good to know. Duke of House Greyjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 You call the leakers scumbags, but hitting a alliance that never wronged you in anyway so you can mask your militarization to hit another alliance is perfectly acceptable and makes you a hero among men? I also find it interesting that you also let some of those GPA "rats" into your alliance, and if I am not mistaken they fought for you against their former members. Lets be honest, Guardian and friends are a much greater threat to the world than GPA ever is or was, so you can continue to paint the world in Guardian colored glasses that say you are the best, and every action you conducted was justified, and anyone that went against you is scum. But dont let me stop you, please continue, I find these endlessly entertaining. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pfeiffer Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 >threat to the world holy crap Ronny D my sides are in orbit 1 ☾☆ Chairman Emeritus of Mensa HQ ☾☆ "It's not about the actual fish, themselves. Fish are not important in this context. It's about fish-ing, the act of fishing itself." -Jack O'Neill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 (edited) >threat to the world holy crap Ronny D my sides are in orbit To be fair. Ronnie is correct. GPA was never a real threat to the world and regardless of what anyone may think- Guardian has been a threat to more alliances than GPA has ever been. If only because they have been a threat to GPA, UPN, CU, VE etc. etc. at one point or another. It's not a snipe at guardian in any way from my side- merely stating fact. GPA was more neutral than Guardian and wielded less power (in terms of political clout). Therefore, GPA was a smaller threat, if any. Edited April 28, 2015 by Partisan 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Armstrong Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 I also find it interesting that you also let some of those GPA "rats" into your alliance, and if I am not mistaken they fought for you against their former members. . The two former GPA members we accepted left GPA because they did not agree with what was going on there. They had no idea that war was coming when they left GPA but they committed to Guardian, just as we committed to them. It shows Prefontaine's generosity of spirit with forthright players that he accepted them in and trusted them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Armstrong Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 To be fair. Ronnie is correct. GPA was never a real threat to the world and regardless of what anyone may think- Guardian has been a threat to more alliances than GPA has ever been. If only because they have been a threat to GPA, UPN, CU, VE etc. etc. at one point or another. It's not a snipe at guardian in any way from my side- merely stating fact. GPA was more neutral than Guardian and wielded less power (in terms of political clout). Therefore, GPA was a smaller threat, if any. Partisan, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. The question isn't really who was a bigger threat as you've indicated here. It's more a matter of seeing the warning signs that GPA was no longer neutral and holding them accountable for their actions. I do want to point out that Guardian did not claim to be neutral. Therefore, we made choices in the game that stunted the growth of our nations in order to engage in all aspects of the game. GPA grew unchecked with no one questioning their commitment to neutrality. Then we started to see GPA bulking, there was the whole Green Enforcement Agency thing and Grillick conducted spyops, which by all definitions I've seen is not neutral behavior. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godfrey Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 (edited) there was the whole Green Enforcement Agency thing Because this keeps getting mentioned I'll post the link to the thread here: http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/4398-gpa-leaks/?hl=leaks and people can decide for themselves whether they believe it or not. Belisarius posted a dropbox with screenshots from our forum and you can compare them to what was posted in the OP and see for yourselves. It wasn't even used in Guardian's declaration of war so I'm not sure why it keeps getting brought up. Pre even posted in that thread implying he knew it was bs. As for the GPA bulking up it doesn't break our Neutrality to strengthen our military. Edited April 28, 2015 by Godfrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Armstrong Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 And spyops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filthy Fifths Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 All great empires fall one day. rip "In an honest service there is thin commons, low wages, and hard labor; in this, plenty and satiety, pleasure and ease, liberty and power; and who would not balance creditor on this side, when all the hazard that is run for it, at worst, is only a sour look or two at choking. No, a merry life and a short one, shall be my motto." - Bartholomew "Black Bart" Roberts Green Enforcement Agency will rise again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Partisan, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. The question isn't really who was a bigger threat as you've indicated here. It's more a matter of seeing the warning signs that GPA was no longer neutral and holding them accountable for their actions. I do want to point out that Guardian did not claim to be neutral. Therefore, we made choices in the game that stunted the growth of our nations in order to engage in all aspects of the game. GPA grew unchecked with no one questioning their commitment to neutrality. Then we started to see GPA bulking, there was the whole Green Enforcement Agency thing and Grillick conducted spyops, which by all definitions I've seen is not neutral behavior. Oh, I in no way condemn your attack on the GPA. My apologies if I gave you the impression that such was the case. I quite honestly had no business with the hit and therefore had no care for it. My comment was solely geared towards the "bigger threat" notion. Would I have made the same move as Guardian did? Doubtfully. Do I fault you for making it? Not one bit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted April 28, 2015 Author Share Posted April 28, 2015 You call the leakers scumbags, but hitting a alliance that never wronged you in anyway so you can mask your militarization to hit another alliance is perfectly acceptable and makes you a hero among men? I also find it interesting that you also let some of those GPA "rats" into your alliance, and if I am not mistaken they fought for you against their former members. Lets be honest, Guardian and friends are a much greater threat to the world than GPA ever is or was, so you can continue to paint the world in Guardian colored glasses that say you are the best, and every action you conducted was justified, and anyone that went against you is scum. But dont let me stop you, please continue, I find these endlessly entertaining. Tim answered the rest of your post, but that first part. Did I not say our allies asked for help, and I saw an extra opportunity to use as an advantage to the bigger plan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kastor (Old Account) Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Partisan, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. The question isn't really who was a bigger threat as you've indicated here. It's more a matter of seeing the warning signs that GPA was no longer neutral and holding them accountable for their actions. I do want to point out that Guardian did not claim to be neutral. Therefore, we made choices in the game that stunted the growth of our nations in order to engage in all aspects of the game. GPA grew unchecked with no one questioning their commitment to neutrality. Then we started to see GPA bulking, there was the whole Green Enforcement Agency thing and Grillick conducted spyops, which by all definitions I've seen is not neutral behavior. By this logic, Guardian has claimed to be paperless but now has a protectorate, should we gather 7 or 8 alliances to hold you "accountable" for your actions? "That ain't Cologne, that's the smell of success." 17:00 <•Sheepy> I don't want you to leave the game 19:20 <•Pubstomber>: 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...
George W. Bush Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Tim answered the rest of your post, but that first part. Did I not say our allies asked for help, and I saw an extra opportunity to use as an advantage to the bigger plan? Well congratulations, you responded to his post. Now what's the next step to your master plan? 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...
Neo-Nexus Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 (edited) Guardian: -Wars an alliance to cover up another major war -Initiates a massive 3 on 1 (or 6 on 1) alliance gangbang -justified "heroes" GPA: -some internal drama (which idk why you're concerned about it, and if at all, proves the GPA is less of a threat) -Several spy ops (a good portion of them intelligence) -Menace warmongering non neutrals- must be destroyed. -Claims GPA is a threat to Orbis because there were doubts about their neutrality and this is coming from an alliance who just wars whoever and whenever they wish. Please, who's the real "threat" to Orbis ok.... And at least keep your CB consistent pls. That's just my opinion though, I probably have a bias since I use to be apart of the GPA. I do enjoy how this threads provides insight on how things led up and insight on the strategies you guys used. Edited April 29, 2015 by Neo-Nexus 1 Concilium Populusque Mandalórus ("The Council and the People of Mandalore") : Carter and me have nukes, and Saxplayer is just sassy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonnorman Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 I just wish we all had a little more war mongoring in our alliances 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayayay Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 1000 is about the max you need to be. Says the man at over 2000 2 Orbis Wars | CSI: UPN | B I G O O F | PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea. On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said: This was !@#$ing gold. 10/10 possibly my favorite post on these forums yet. Sheepy said: I'm retarded, you win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grillick Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 The "Green Enforcement Agency" thing that people bring up from time to time was nothing more than doctored screenshots in an attempt to discredit the GPA and get SK/Guardian/VE to fight them. Guess it worked haha. To be fair, the "Green Enforcement Agency" thing was, actually, part of my campaign platform for ToFA back in November. Nobody believed I was serious, though, and I changed my mind about it less than a week into my tenure. "It's hard to be a team player when you're omnipotent." - Q Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ELPINCHAZO Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Guardian: -Wars an alliance to cover up another major war -Initiates a massive 3 on 1 (or 6 on 1) alliance gangbang -justified "heroes" GPA: -some internal drama (which idk why you're concerned about it, and if at all, proves the GPA is less of a threat) -Several spy ops (a good portion of them intelligence) -Menace warmongering non neutrals- must be destroyed. -Claims GPA is a threat to Orbis because there were doubts about their neutrality and this is coming from an alliance who just wars whoever and whenever they wish. Please, who's the real "threat" to Orbis ok.... And at least keep your CB consistent pls. That's just my opinion though, I probably have a bias since I use to be apart of the GPA. I do enjoy how this threads provides insight on how things led up and insight on the strategies you guys used. just a correction: The blame you're laying on Guardian there should be directed a bit more towards TEst ,if you want to single one AA out. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Bubblegum Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 (edited) Orbis needs wars. Any warmongering alliance gets a +1 in my book. Edit: From my perspective, GPA wasn't a threat because they could turn out to be warmongers, but because they could use their weight to prevent wars from happening by being the deciding factor (that presumably would punish the initiators of wars). Edited April 29, 2015 by Princess Bubblegum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apeman Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Aren't all wars decided by who jumps in and who chooses to stay/ keep others out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts