I really don`t need you or whomever to take me seriously! I might be out of this game soon enough ...

But when some of you guys around ( and i do talk generally ) suck at politics - and because of that you ruin more "an already dieing" game , you should step down and let better ones to raise.

If you hate drama so much don't read AT and join Monsters or omega. I'm sure they'd be happy to keep the membership up :P

Well you`ll never understand me. :)

Anyway out of here!

I was just suggesting you stay in the game. Nothing to not understand there. I always suggest those clans and PDM to people :)

"Out of here " - meaning out of this thread.

And i do have my friends in this game - no need to play with folks like Pang ( j/k ).

ahh well you said out of this game :P I guess I interpreted that literally ;)

Son Goku is FAT!

dagga, you lost the thread for reading me rambling, also you have a small monitor

I also love the fact that dagga's only defense is that he can't run a war country unless he gets two weeks to prep.

@Tertius, we didn't leave anyone behind, inactives decided to stay behind themselves.

@Alin, I'm not even going to bother, go back and read threads.

just because some loud mouths claimed pacts were broken, doesn't mean it actually was.

I love how people always points to LaF and blame them.

what about KJ, who decided to ruin MANY peaceful netter's resets to achieve his motive to ruin OTHER netter's resets?

what about some questionable methods of information collecting by anoniem through a 'higher power'?

what about said same 'higher power' threatening to make another player quit?

what about having a theme to collectively insult one of the oldest and most respected alliances in the game?


Are those not more direct attempts at forcing players out of the game?


Anyways, I'm going to quit the game, because EVO are assholes and derails every single LaF thread.

That's right, EVO forces players to quit the game.

wtf are you talking about? if evo/md/sol wanted to do something to you then what was stopping them?

You really trying to plead ignorance here?

you really dont know what the fluff you are talking about, as usual.

you can't even answer simple questions. how fluffing stupid are you?

I already stated that i am speaking GENERALLY ( that includes all the alliances involved in fluff ). If you take it personally is not my fault.

P.S.: that "low level" sarcasm in the bottom really proofs that you are in THE OTHER SIDE!!! - the side that can`t really understand all the points of view.

For a moment i tought you worth a reply - i might be wrong.

Now really really out of here!

Awww Angry? :) Perhaps you should go read those logs Hanlong posted not so long ago that involve evo md and sol. Pretty sure as usual it is you who doesn't know what you are talking about.

Still as thick as ever. lawlz

again:
if evo/md/sol wanted to do something to you then what was stopping them?

i didn't say that i hadn't seen the logs. i asked you what was stopping md/sol/evo from gangbanging laf this set, if that was our grand-plan?

Read what's in front of you. You don't have the intelligence to cross-reference or infer.

p.s. you are trying to insinuate evo/md/sol wanted to get revenge against laf for no reason. you gave all 3 alliances reason to do so from your previous acts within the game.

really why would evo have signed a UNAP with laf if we wanted to gangbang them this set? why would sol have set up a friendly (meaningless war) with lcn and imag if they wanted to gangbang laf?

you are taking things out of context.

Since Hanlong claims he had the logs last reset, and has claimed that that was why they hit SoL, I'm guessing somewhere after the FS on SoL and quick ceasefire, a deal was made with SoL about this reset ruining that grand plan.

Unfortunately, you can't seem to grasp why those talks were necessary. MD, being a mostly neutral force, are actually seeing the cancer of LAF in its entirety. The fact that MD, a pretty solid LaF ally, sought to hit them tells you everything you need to know.

A little accountability and remorse from you LaF retards might garner you some respect. When was the last reset LaF didn;t first strike someone? Two years ago? But you rat fluffs always seem to play the victim card. Hilarious! lol

lol @ all this rubbish.

If we wanted to gangbang LaF. It would've happened simple as that. More pacts then ever were signed, SOL MD and Evo alone would make up for 200 countries alone(without any other allies involved) Our with LaF pact has many abuse able loopholes which would allow us to perform a gangbang. We decided differently and organized our b-day party with a fun upfront war for all returnees. All 3 tags agreed to go our own way.

The fact that LaF lost MD as a core ally in their charades of the past 2 years says something. It either says something about the way LaF has worked with it's core ally(s), or how their core ally(s) look upon their actions of the past. (It's not like there was anything to gain for MD by leaving LaF it was all risks nothing else).

Oh and when it comes to acquiring logs through questionable methods btw, LaFfers have some balls to talk trash about others. Those of your leaders are just as questionable.

I will not say SOL lives by the bible of E2025/EE holiness but we do show accountability for our actions. Yes I am saying out loud it is highly possible players left over the wars we've fought. But being obnoxious about it and saying it ain't so or that your actions are different is just flat out silly.

Wars cause leave people to leave, so does forcing netting sets upon those that do not want to net. Believe and accept it. Or remain blind for what has always been a vicious circle for this game.

The only way to counter this is to bring fresh member influxes(can read this for a tag or the game btw). That way players lost are replaced by fresh blood and you can keep stability and best case scenario you could've even get some growth going.

Wrong again. It was Arsenal who wanted to hit LaF. Just because he represents the interests of MD, it does not fully reflect the true nature of what may have been happening. For all we know he could have been spreading lies about how LaF was going to drop MD and "gangbang" them this set, or how LaF is going to ruin this game by hitting "innocent" clans, in an attempt to rally his members onto the anti-LaF bandwagon. As always, the truth is always the strongest arguement. Everyone knows what's really going on. :)

What did EVO try to do this set? They pacted everybody so that they could net...

You both speak of LaF "losing" MD. When clearly, as evidenced by the logs, the real situation was that Arsenal was a vendetta against LaF as saw this as an opening to launch his crusade against LaF. And now you're trying to spin this as a "LaF is driving MD away".

If that's really the case, there really wasn't any necessity for Arsenal to lie to his members about the circumstances surrounding this war.

Good to see the rubbish is still flying.

you guys give me a headache. :P

oh, also, bonus.

imag is ranked too high.

Actually SOL is the cancer and LaF is the scalpel, I'm not surprised that Dagga would be confused though.

eh I think everyone here knows that its not as simple as to what SOL/MD/EVO wants to do Makinso

lol@makinso

"If we wanted to gangbang LaF. It would've happened simple as that."

you didn't mind gangbanging us 2 resets ago when you thought you could win (but then got crushed still). after we called in SoF because of your GB attempt, and we were still outnumbered, you decided to bring in TIE and to GB more.

don't make it sound like you haven't tried.

hanlong still talking about ssnake's war on evo, which apparently he (hanlong) didn't condone, but yet still complains about sol coming to the defence of evo when you (laf) blindsided evo (and broke a pact).

it's no wonder this goes in circles. there are so many lies - it's hard to know where the lies end and the actual reasons for war begin.

i never complained that sol came into the defense of evo.

i was already going to retire that time and i didn't care what happened.

however, it was highly unnecessary to bring in both sol and imag to that war. that's what got me active again.

if it was just "sol coming to the defense of evo" then you probably would've never heard of me for the last half a year or so ;P

and when we tried to even it up (although still outnumbered in NW and members) by calling in SoF, SOL promptly added in TIE to GB on.

do you know why it goes in circles? because LaF is trying to exit that circle but makinso (and later on arsenal from last reset's chat) keeps on finding reasons for it not to be.

i already told everyone last reset i was done and wanted to go back to RL, and KJ/Arsenal/Makinso decided to get cute so i had to stay on.

stop getting cute if you don't want it to go in circles.

talking to a lot of the other Evo and SOL and MD leaders even they understood this simple concept and a lot of them agreed with me. there's only a few of you guys who still try to perpetuate this stupid plotting and planning.

i'll play devil's advocate on both sides and say it how it is.

Evo shouldn't piss everyone off on AT and let KJ plot stupid fluff if they wanted to be a netgaining alliance. it weakens evo's "we are just innocent and netting" argument.

LaF shouldn't have FSed Evo that reset. it weakens LaF's "blindside netgainers" argument.

either SOL or Imag should've helped Evo that reset, not both. even if both was the best solution, then TIE shouldn't have been called in. this weakens SOL's "GB = bad" argument.


synopsis on how to stop the circle: evo stop acting dumb on AT, LaF stops FSing Evo, SOL stops GBing.


i thought we made this clear 10000x times. :P but you are still going on about it anoniem :P

it's highly unnecessary to break pacts. you reap what you sow. if you want to war an alliance then war them, no need to blindside and break a pact.

nobody would have held any grudges or had secret meetings if it hadn't have been for your alliance's dirty actions.

big deal sof don't like evo, but do you think evo hold a grudge against sof? no, because they didn't break a pact and don't try and hide the truth.

i like how evo acting dumb on AT => it's ok to break a uNAP/FOP or whatever you want to call it. i also like how laf members are infallible. you have some of the biggest idiots posting for you on AT, with no basis or fact behind their assertions. heck, maybe i'll try and recruit 100 members and FS laf cos i think locket and forgotten "act dumb on AT".

weakening laf's argument? that was the whole premise of the pact between evo/laf. so it doesn't weaken your argument - it makes your whole argument null and void.

comparing laf to IX is not too far off.

it's not even like i care about this issue(s) anymore, but i just cant stand for things being twisted beyond recognition.

How do you lack such basic reading and comprehension skills that you still maintain that we actually broke a pact with you.

Yes we blindsided you in that you wernt prepared to war, but no we didnt break the pact, you did.

whatever anoniem, i already addressed this issue 100s of times.

like i said, it's about time we moved on =)

That's right, folks...the longer you idiots keep arguing over the same stuff, the longer I decide to stay away from Alliance.

http://i43.tinypic.com/1gpwf5.jpg

http://i43.tinypic.com/1gpwf5.jpg

http://i43.tinypic.com/1gpwf5.jpg

just kidding for the second time, my icq is 152961076

well nobody takes you seriously..

But, if you say something 100s of times, eventually it becomes true! Keep up the PR campaign. :)

LaF FSes EVO because in their mind EVO broke a pact.

EVO trashes LaF on AT because in their mind LaF broke a pact.

Looks like one side takes action and the other opens their mouth instead.

As an old timer who's back for his first set, all I can say is:

Doesn't matter who's right or who's wrong or whatever, fact is we're all part of this earth ecosystem and it exists because we all just wanna fck around and have fun;)

ma·jor·i·ty/məˈjôrətē/
Noun:
The greater number: "in the majority of cases"; "a majority decision".
The number by which votes for one candidate in an election are more than those for all other candidates combined.


--
You still gonna say LaF had the 50% majority? Don't talk about reading comprehension when you're still reading at a level akin to Key Stage 1.

You have proved yet again why you are fluffing dumb.

I can predict that someone from LaF will soon reply that there was no "supermajority" or "50%" clause in the pact, that it was just QZ's insertion.

--Terms--
The coalitions purpose is to prevent netters from being blindsided during netting sets by alliances engaging them for the express purpose of having an easy war. Past examples include SOL -> Collab, SOL -> Evo, SOL -> LaF, and others. The emphasis is towards unprovoked wars, or wars provoked by minor slights that would otherwise have been ignored had the aggressor not badly wanted a war. The coalition can also act preemptively if there is (super-majority, ie 66% ?) agreement on an aggressors supposed future entrance into war.

All alliances in the coalition will enter into war (preferably simultaneously in a large strike) against the Enemy; after they are sufficiently beaten down, farming may commence. NO ALLIANCE IN THE COALITION SHALL SIGN A PEACE TREATY WITH THE ENEMY WITHOUT ALL MEMBERS OF THE COALITION GETTING THE SAME PEACE DEAL, UNLESS THEIR LEADERS APPROVE.

The agreement will be unbreakable auto-renew; however if an alliance fails to hold up their end of the agreement (ie does not enter into war), then they will be immidiately dropped from the coalition and will not thereafter be allowed to resign unless a UNANIMOUS vote by other alliances allows their reentry.

New entrants to the coalition must be admitted by a UNANIMOUS vote of the existing parties.

What constitues a blindside will be voted on, with a 50% majority required to commit the coalition to war.

Alliances in the coalition will not sign UNAPS or DP's with "warring clans" unless they provide UNAP/DP to all in the coalition; warring clans may be those commonnly known as "warring clans" or those listed before the set & pacting begin; if an additional alliance becomes a problem they may be listed for futher inclusion in the "warring clans/aggressors".


---
And, again the above shows that LaF broke multiple clauses in the anti-gangbang pact. I don't want to have to rehash logs again.

So accept you (SS) broke a pact and shut the fluff up. Then we can all move on until the next time SS becomes Don and breaks a pact with Evo =)

There was no supermajority or 50% clause in the pact. QZ inserted it!

Regardless of discussions on the pact (Son Goku and I agree it was a cluster fluff so ha! agreement!) both sides could have been more careful with their FA work.

Evo could have contacted LaF and said, "hey guys, you pacted SoL previously, we are netting next set and are hoping to pact them with a breakable clause to defend you, is that okay?"

LaF could have contacted Evo and said, "hey guys, we're concerned you and SoL are cooking something up. If that's the case, we're probably going to FS you whether you are netting or not. Let us know if that's not true so we don't ruin the relationship between us for the next 4 sets."

Honestly, all of this conspiracy talk in the logs doesn't seem to have happened until after that first blindside FS. Sure LaF and Evo have always had contention over netting issues and dropping members, and despite the flaming on AT both sides said they would duke it out by netting the next set and seeing who won.

From the Evo side, they were ready to challenge them to the netting duel and a lot of people were really excited about it. It was then strange that LaF was war-prepping early in the set. I wasn't in Evo at this time but I still had access and everyone assumed they were going to hit Rival or something, so it was a huge surprise when they hit Evo.

Communication could have gone a long way in preventing all of these issues. It's all in the past now. People will still argue about who did what wrong, but if current leadership wants to put it behind them, it's probably best for all parties for the purpose of enjoying the game and growing both alliances. But my thoughts aren't too important, as Anonymous said, I'm just a troll right?

Lmao @ how a game with tanks troops nuclear missles was turned into Sim-City fluff!

This made my daY!!!

trifey has the best answer to all of this:

http://i43.tinypic.com/1gpwf5.jpg