Souly, I will answer that question.

1. While things are strained at this point in time, I have had a very long and strong friendship with SOF for much of its history.

I was first reset Omega with many of SOF's founders.
I have real life freinds who helped found SOF.
I am honored to call Helmet a friend of mine over the last 14 yrs.
I have had good relationships with current SOF leaders, including Chevs and Aponic, who I highly respect...even if we are currently on different sides of the fence.
I even spent some time in SOF as a division leader over a decade ago, and then I got married lol. (I should have stayed a division leader in SOF LOL)

ANd other than the ECM war preplanned war with SOF a couple of years ago, I have never once fought against SOF in a war.

However, about a year ago, when due to RL issues I began to step away from the game for a few sets, I had a conversation with Sov.

I simply said, Leave LCN and Monsters alone.
Monsters had answered a FDP request and hit TIE, (an FDP that was supposed to be a kitchen sink, last resort option, and understood we would only call SOF in if SOL hit Monsters as SOL had pushed Monsters reset after reset early in my tenure there...) We answered it, even though we didn't feel it was a kitchen sink situation.

So, what does Sov do?

1. He drops LCN as a FDP, and hits LCN. Forcing LCN from a nuetral inactive TIE type alliance into the middle of the server political situation......(if SOV had left LCN alone, the current politics would be very different.
2. He drops Monsters and kills off Soda, and has issues the following set, again killing off Monster countries. IN 14 yrs Monsters had FS'd allainces 3 maybe 4 times.

In EE, We hit Imag after multiple resets of FA issues, and Imag pushing retal issues and well imag being Imag. Again it took resets before Monsters took action.

in EE, Monsters FS'd SOF OOP....again after 2 sets of SOF bullying Monsters.

Anytime, an alliance can get Monsters to FS you out of protection, or FS you period. That said alliiance is beyond reasoning.

At some point in the last 2 years, Sov went Egomaniacal Tyrannical Makinso style (Makinso Style should be a You Tube hit song btw). And, had a great run, and is now suffering the consequences of that style, just as SOL as the last few years.

As far as this set goes. LCN hitting Rival, has everything to do with the cheapshot, we took last set. We offered Rival and RD a pact, got turned down, and got hammered 3-1 in membership We offered 1-1 terms, we didn't get them, that's Rival's choice. I would still argue, we gave Rival a MUCH FAIRER shot at us, Rival was ahead in TNW and AVE NW and nearly equal in active countries. That is a MUCH fairer war than Rival gave us last reset. Anyone want to argue that?

SO yeah LCN didn't sign SOF...LCN was a longtime (multi year???) FDP of SOF, SOF dropped LCN for no reason, then turned and hit LCN, for very little reasons......and LCN has been warring ever since (We did get to net my first Reset back playing in LCN two resets ago.)

Us pacting or not pacting SOF shouldn't be a big issue. We're a strong 25-30 member alliance, like Rival. Whether we pact SOF isn't any bigger or smaller than Rival pacting MD. Its small potatoes. I just happen to have a bone to pick with Sov...over his leadership style, and its affect on the 2 alliances I most love.

I highly respect most of SOF's leadership. Aponic, Cypress, Flamey are all people I respect. I have many friends among some of SOF's vets (Chevs for example) (mostly inactives ones but a few active ones.)
SOF is a great alliance.
ANd Sov is one of top 3 most influential people during the EE era of Earth.

I look forward to the day LCN and SOF are FDP's again. They have been for much of both alliances histories. (As least the parts I'm aware of.)

I hope that answers your question Souly.

Do you want to lie any more? You will find it was LCN who rejected our offer for a UNAP after SoF downgraded from a FDP and it was also LCN who FSed SoF. At least if you are going to try and manipulate/spin the truth you should not make it blatant lies.



Incorrect again. SoF delivered Monsters a pact and Monsters did not reply to us. Every single set of this game since I have been in SoF we have offered Monsters a pact. Our pact offer was EXACTLY the same as other Alliances have signed. In fact I also offered a FDP to you personally.

As posted elsewhere on this thread we killed Soda, which was an issue you and I negotiated a settlement on, which Monsters later rejected. I'd be happy to post our exchange of messages on this issue if you wish to debate it. The other 2 countries SUICIDED on SoF over two landgrabs.



Again, you lie. I posted our reasons for **DOWNGRADING** LCN. No communication with their leadership for two entire sets, FSing PDM for no reason and plotting against other SoF allies (RD and Rival) were among our reasons. I think those are pretty good justifications for downgrading an Alliance.

And I repeat... It was LCN who FSed SoF.



We'll see how that works out for you.

Sov...

I was not in Monsters or LCN at the time, I don't know the full exact reasons. i was not there. I do know, both moves helped Solidify your current position.

I was not playing in Monsters that set, I had left the game by that point. I did come back and attempt to Mediate due to my longstanding relationships with both alliances. Monsters never agreed to you killing Soda, that choice is on you. After the short attempt at mediation I retreated back to get real life stuff straightened out.

I still do not believe either deserved the treatment you gave them.

Just b/c you can kill someone, b/c you can, doesn't mean its the wisest use of power. Eventually misuse/overuse of power bites you in the ass.

I do agree LCN leadership went inactive. I do not know any details of the PDM war, nor do I know of them conspiring against RD and Rival. Those events happened before I joined. All I know is I took a break, and you're hammering on LCN and Monsters.

I do believe tact could have handled things in a much more positive light. With much more tact, and could have achieved different results that wouldn't have resulted in pushing an inactive neutral LCN into a corner that required them to either actively oppose you or die as an alliance.

And for good weight, add ICN into the mix:). Killing them was overkill also.

Again my bone to pick isn't your skill, your abilities, how strong your alliance is, I respect all that.
My bone to pick is HOW you handle situations. And, your inability to listen to multiple respected people who are ALL saying the same thing.

As far as how it works for LCN....
We probably won't get to net for a while. We know that.

Thing is, we've gone from 11 to 20 to 26 to start out the last 3 resets. So, so far, its working.
The future is never guaranteed....The winds blow and the dynamics change. Today's enemy is tomorrow's friend. Today's friend is Tomrrow's enemy (except for a few exceptions, this is true.)

As long as smaller alliances are left alone and can grow, without worrying is SOF going to bully us this set, ICN and Monsters for example...then we're happy with whatever the result:)

Um two lies here. First of all, it took one set of issues for monsters to FS Imag, thats it, ONE SET, not anymore. I told you my reasons for not pacting you as I had not pacted other alliances. You didnt like those reasons however imag during my whole reign in leadership (which is when you fs'd imag, so dont go blaming past presidents when I gave you very valid reasons for no pact, we only wanted a limited number of FDP's and no uNaps.) I never once threatened war with monsters, I only ever said we would war over grabbing issues which there were none at the time. I told you our policy on grabbing and how I would sort out any issues. I also provided you examples of how I tried to resolve every single war imag had been in since I took over.

It is not imag's fault you are paranoid and delusional, so dont put that down to imag being imag, that was you being paranoid when we had no ill will towards you and were happy to work towards a FDP in the future.

LCN on the other hand was fs'd by imag and by sof for being a bad FDP.

Both alliances had valid reasons to fs LCN, they were distant and did not communicate after Deci left, it was almost impossible to get hold of purp and communication broke down. I tried often to contact LCN and set up accounts in each others alliances to ensure harmony between alliances.

The fact remains LCN was a bad ally, it may of changed now but at the time, with hardly anyone in leadership being active they deserved what they got. So dont try and claim LCN got dropped by SoF for no reason because sof was not the first to drop LCN, imag was, Sof infact had more patience than imag with the lack of communication.

How the fluff do some of you even remember this fluff? Do you keep logs of it to pull up at this time or are your memories really this good?

I always remember when people stab me in the back.

Servant if you are not informed on issues then you are not in a position to comment on those issues nor make valuable decisions for your Alliance based upon them. We understand, you have a grudge with me and you are trying to win support of the general community in championing that grudge.

If you want to try and assassinate my character then it pays to know what you are talking about and not lie about specific issues.



Maybe you are blind to how this game has been played since it's inception. Maybe you are even blind to how your own allies deal with such issues. Even on this very thread it has been discussed how SOL had issues with RD and how MD had issues with RD. It was also discussed how MD dropped their FDP with LAF wanted to FS them just because they wanted to be the best. Yet somehow you are hypocritical and twist SoF's dealings as to being worse.




Maybe you don't remember the details of the PDM war but I am sure PDM do. In fact they lost half their membership over it. But I know, LCN are a great Alliance and it's only bad when SoF hits other tags... Well guess what, at least SoF had reasons. LCN didn't even bother trying to invent reasons for hitting PDM.



Once again you highlight your hypocracy. I like it.

It's alright for MD wanting to kill RD over 2 members farming MD (who were also publicly humiliated and killed by Omega as a result), but it's not alright for SoF for acting in a similar fashion against ICN. There are countless events of much the same in the last how many years of EE. If SOL or MD were in SoF's position regarding what happened with ICN then no doubt they would have acted in the fashion. But I know, it's only bad when SoF do it.



I don't know who you think I have been speaking to lol. Maybe you should enlighten me.



Stop pretending to be the defender of the small Alliances. You do NOTHING to help them. Trying to win their political support by assassinating my character won't win you any friends.

Here is the reason why LCN hit PDM

A few LCNers really wanted to war. PDM was aggressive with grabbing us and perhaps our leaders didn't do a good job relaying our displeasure to them. We didn't really want to land trade even though we retalled for more land and came ahead. I remember trife noting this often but members were getting cranky. So leadership decided to go to war. That's it. Debatable if we over reacted.

Now PDM came back from that. What hurt them was the hacking. Sov is playing this up for political reasons that LCN did something over the top.

And really is such a joke to point this out as long as I've been in LCN have we rarely been aggressive.

uhh What hacking hurt PDM?

Yeah not sure if it was hacking or what but it was something to do with their host site and data being compromised/deleted. That happened a set or two after we hit

Sov is a smarmy SOB.

He 'joined' SOL to 'help rebuild' when really it was a vain attempt to spy and use Suni as a crutch to get SOL to let their guard down, then backstabbed as hard as he could.

What a grub.

Yeah thats what happend. Take a closer look at your main ally md who stabbed you in the back...

Not entirely sure on the details as I wasn't in PDM at the time, but someone deleted most of the PDM boxcar site.

Not entirely sure on the details as I wasn't in PDM at the time, but someone deleted most of the PDM boxcar site. It was later restored from a backup, but still did damage overall.

So, Sov please enlighten us...


This is your recruitment message:

The new Dec/Jan set is about to start and there is still time to jump on board for this set! If you are interested in playing with SoF head over to the SoF website.

We will be taking it relatively easy over xmas and new years, but it will be a great warring set nonetheless!

SoF is on a mission this set. We got screwed over last set and now it is time for redemption. When SoF is angry the warring is usually great!

Aponic has rejoined the SoF leadership team as Head FA and Cypress has assumed the role of Vice President. There have been lots of leadership changes within SoF over the past couple of weeks and more to come as we look at making SoF a better place to play.

We hope to see you playing in SoF soon

Also join our facebook group for more updates!


...


After this was sent, you asked SoL and MD and LCN for a pact.

If you were out for redemption for getting screwed over, and definitely warring, who were you planning to hit? It wouldn't have been SoL and MD and LCN as you wouldn't have been able to if they were pacted.

That leaves only our small allies that you claim to be on good terms with and helping (which we vowed to protect, and in doing so refused to pact you to ensure we could) or your own allies...

What i learned most from this thread (so far) is that Servant is severely uniformed. He forms strong opinions and spins a beautiful story, brings his alliance to war, and stands in opposition of SoF....but does it on what I'm going to assume is extremely biased second hand accounts.

PDM was going to disband following LCN's FS on them. I had to convince Tisya and TAN to persevere and offered my assistance. PDM did emerge stronger the following set on the back of an excellent recruiting campaign.

There were no land issues with PDM other than normal exchanges between Alliances. Pretty flimsy excuse for a war.

The point is LCN is no innocent and Servant is being hypocritical.

If you believe this is what happened then you have taken gullible to an entirely new level.

lol this is how I pictured the story

The nerdy guy/skinny guy (other alliance) bumps into the guy that's always at the gym (SoF) on the street.

Nerdy guy - Oh sorry for bumping into you, how can I make it up to you?
Big guy - You must get on your down on your hands and knees and lick my boots
Nerdy guy - No wai!
Big guy - Beats up the small guy and puts him in hospital
Big guy - I tried to negotiate but he left me with no choice

If you are referring to SoF/ICN, which I assume you are considering you are from ICN it would be more like this:-

*Nerdy guy bumps into big guy
Big guy - Hey you bumped into me dude, apologize please
Nerdy guy - F--k you. Hey everyone, I bumped into this dude and he ain't going to do anything about it
Big guy - Come on now, this is a bit ridiculous. Just say sorry and let's move on
*Nerdy shoves big guy
*Big guy slaps nerdy guy in the face

mdevol must be jealous of SoF recruiting

That's not true Flamey. If you still believe that, it explains some of your views though.

I was VP under Arsenal and I was a lot closer to the debate on whether or not to hit LaF than you were, even if you were happily eating up hacked Boxcar posts from hanlong.

The #1 reason we hit LaF was MD's desire to be #1 on the server. We knew that until we could beat LaF in war, we would not be. We also expected to lose but to learn from the loss how LaF beat us.

No, we did not intend to gangbang LaF, that is just flat out wrong.

I will give you that Arsenal's longstanding hatred for LaF and the suspicion of LaF's cheating also helped tip the scales to get the Heads team to vote for the war, but those were not the driving reasons.

Kalick beat me to it. ;)

So basically you guys dropped a FDP with the intention to FS them for no reason other than your own desire to be #1 and you see nothing wrong with this? And then you all criticize SoF for how you perceive we do things? Interesting ;)

You should hide that from Servant because you are destroying his angelic image of the righteous MD.

However in SoF we value our allies a little more than that.

Better read a good book instead of this thread.

It is a game and we wanted a fun, fair fight. The alternative was to just beat up on SoL every set (whom we were enemies with since we returned to EE), and that did not seem fun at all.

We had other issues with LaF from the set (or sets?) prior, and it didn't look like the FDP was going to last much longer anyway. hanlong was not somebody we wanted to be associated with any longer, as his playstyle was not MD's playstyle. He preferred to crush his enemies until they could no longer pose a threat, and we were just playing a silly nostalgic game from a decade ago.

And looking back on it now, we were naive to think we could avoid the political cesspool that is Earth. We've been dragged back into the mud along with everyone else.

We all still remember this is a game, right?

Spitz is right, there were land grab issues between us which fueled our reason to hit them.

Yes, that is correct. We've been pretty clear about it ever since. We felt LaF was better than us. We wanted to test ourselves against them. We knew they would beat the crap out of us in a pre-arranged and so we felt the FS might even it up.

We were wrong on two accounts. One, LaF was still way better at warring than us. Two, they were already hacked into our site and saw everything coming which removed any element of surprise (and later made the hacking clear).

Sov and Servant are both guys I've played under and have a huge amount of respect for.

From my personal observations, you guys both possess more similarities then differences. You are both fiercely protective of your own, and for this, people want to play for you. You are also both passionate people and through sheer will alone have pulled your respective alliances through tough times.

I think these qualities are the reason why you guys at present do not see eye to eye. If you forget the politics and the allegiances, I think you guys would both get along quite well, if at least come to respect each other.

We all want this game to be fun for everyone and for this server to prosper. and I think you guys both have the influence to ensure it happens ;)

We did get along t4t, that is until Servant decided to start a vendetta against me which he is ruthlessly pursuing.

How many times has Servant gone out of his way in the past couple of months to make comments about me on AT in the last 4 months. Unfortunately it is part of his ongoing campaign which is based on his political motives.

Servant has yet to post anything substantiated to support any of his claims against me and has done nothing more than allow me the opportunity to highlight his lies, contradictions and hypocrisy.

Do you remember when SoF first FSed MD (whilst warring TIE) because one of your allies had informed us of Pride trying to raise support to fight SoF? Do you remember how upset you were? Do you remember all the names you called me and SoF as a result?

Yet somehow your conduct in dropping a FDP purely to FS them by surprise is somehow better?

Yes it is a game, in SoF we play the game within the rules and how we like to play it. Isn't it ironic you publicly vent your hatred and disgust at the way SoF plays the game yet in essence you are no different yourselves.

SPIN SOV SPIN!!!!

DANCE DANCE DANCE!!!!

Hatred is a strong word. It's a game. You're a douche and you cavort with dirty players, but I don't hate you =)

And I just went back and read some of my posts from the time you were talking about, I don't appear that upset. I made a few posts explaining how SoF's actions were not for the betterment of the game. You had me thinking I was screaming like a madman =p I'm not really sure what you are referring to in regards to name calling. (Although now it does appear I just called you a douche).

You might be correct, I have not checked recently, you certainly were more vocal in later sets and maybe that is where I mistook it from. However the point remains the same and can be applied to many other MDers ;)

[quote poster=Sov; 28624; 520672]

Well, when it was "pact us and these other alliances, or else..." I found it hard to see it any other way. I abhor blocks except out of necessity. Your convenient history suggests LCN searched for a block, with SOL no less. It's just a comical notion.

You're right about the PDM point and I don't think we deny that. Shoot, many of us retrospectively think it was a poor decision. Outside of that, yah, everyone else to you plays the victim, but really it's only you that's the victim. Which just puts everyone back at square one.

You are mistaken. SoF never had the policy of pact or else. SoF was pacted to 2 Alliances who were on the opposing side last set who fought with LCN directly, we did however include clauses to ensure we could protect our allies. The intent of fostering amicable relations with those Alliances remained intact.

LCN did not approach SoF at any stage for a pact for last set. With Servant running around prior to that trying to rally other Alliances against SoF and publicly demonizing myself and SoF on AT we just assumed you were not interested and did not even bother contacting you. So there was no necessity, it was a choice LCN made.



I hardly consider myself or SoF a victim. I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy in the arguments presented, highlighting the lies that are being publicly posted and calling for people to substantiate their indictments made against me personally.

LCN kicked my dog and stole my GF

how about everyone forgets the past and stop pointing fingers and actually creates a political enviroment that is beneficial for everyone, what you guys did now(SOL, LCN,SoF, MD,RIVAL) is create a war or political situation that is not beneficial for any of your members, no one really cares about this war or so it seems to me acording to the hit stats , one side knows they can
destroy the other one and one side knows they cant really win so its a joke of a war and a waste of my first set back ... to me all the leaders are full of fluff and you both acuse each other of lies so if both of your accusations are even 10% correct you are all liars and second of all everyone should have some balls and not even sign pacts, like 500 people play this game its all like 30 member alliances and everyone has a thousand pacts.....to me that is so stupid

From my recollection of the "turning point" in MD/SoF relations (and no, my recollection isn't backed by some voluminous log collection like Sov has)... I was on the Heads team at the end of 2011 / beginning of 2012. We considered our relations with SoF to be good at that time.

Things soured a little after we planned our hit on LaF (b/c is caused trouble with the some MD/LaF/SoF taking turns warring SOL arrangement or something that predated me and that I never understood).

But things went REALLY bad when SoF backed LaF after the TC/hanlong cheating scandal. It came out that SoF was benefiting from that cheating, as Flamey has openly disclosed, and SoF stood by LaF while the rest of the server wanted to punish them.

That really made most of the remaining SoF supporters in MD turn against SoF. We still have some MD members who ask if the relationship can be repaired (like Slash did earlier) but overall that was the real turning point, IMHO.

Now fast forward to today and essentially the same thing happened with RD. Alliance gets caught (and this time deleted) for cheating and SoF takes their side again. It (again) comes out that SoF was working closely with the cheating alliance, just as it had come out about SoF benefiting from LaF's hacking.

For many in MD, its just a "same old SoF" story at this point. SoF wants to win and is happy to cavort with anyone who will get them there regardless of their actions and impact on the game and community.

Sov, if you are really helping out other alliances in a positive way, I applaud that. I don't hear about it from anyone but you, but that kind of help is great if its happening. But helping out the alliances brought down by cheating/hacking scandals just doesn't sit well with me. I cannot speak for all of MD on that.

oh, and more pew pew.

BTW, this is also why I've never wanted to be President or FA for MD. I'm just not the best representative of all of MD. I'm one of those opinionated members who ought to pay more attention to the AT ban. ;)

Jealous of your recruiting?

You added RD players that have since begun to run off current leadership because of their attitude and fluffiness. Solid recruiting...


What I AM jealous of is your partner in crime to blatantly lie in public about your clan and your abilitiy to continue to have your minions blindly follow you without even as much as questioning you about these issues. I know in SoL, our members ask questions when things like this come up, do yours? If they do, they will be awfully upset to find out you are lieing to them...

You were either planning to hit your own allies this reset, or you were planning to kill multiple small clans for assisting us in recent sets to claim "redemption". Which one was it Sov?

i would have loved to see him personally hit his own allies.. would have been funny to watch md come to the defense of laf

All clans have black sheeps to do their dirty work. Nothing new.

Apparently, SoF isn't interested in "clearing things up" as much as trolling and trashing their opponents reputation.

Flamey already lied about it, Sov is simply ignoring the question as to not put his name on it. I'm sure he would have no problem throwing aponic to the wolves over it though.

That is what good leaders do right? Take all the credit when it's going good and shift all the blame and claim they didn't have anything to do with it when it gets bad?

The spotlight is on you, Sov.

Table, you are mostly correct.

Except, for a few things.

Here are 3 area's where Sov and I differ.


1. You've never seen me scheme to burn down the server.
2. You've never seen me plot to create a server war for the fun of it. Intentionally bringing in allainces that don't want any part of said war.
3. You've never seen me take an alliance and bully someone 1/3rd my size.

I much prefer 1-1 wars, and have a track record that backs this up.

1. Preplanned ECM war vs SOF...out of which Monsters FDP with SOF rose..
2. War with TIE, where SOF and Rival both wanted to gang bang TIE, and I made it a condition of Monsters coming that Monsters get to take TIE on 1-1. BTW Mosnters were 20 and TIE 28 members beginning of that war. It resulted in a fun war both sides remember fondly.
3. AFter multiple sets of issues Monsters hit a similary sized Imaginary numbers. I can't remember who was bigger...only that (no surprise) Monsters had better built countries. Again 1-1. Similar sized war.

That was my 3 wars in Monsters.
Last Reset, LCN took 2 FS's from RD and Rival.
This reset, LCN hitting a similar sized Rival.

Compare that to SOF's reign of terror the last 2-3 years. That's where we differ.

Just wanted to point out that this part isn't really fair for SoF. They didn't really 'take RD's side' after the cheating scandal (aside from taking in a few members. Note: Not colors, to my knowledge). They were already FDP'd and in a separate war, so kinda unsure how you could imply that they 'took RD's side after the cheating'.

It seemed to me that LaF, SoF, Neo and RD's innocent members all pretty quickly distanced themselves from the offenders.

You must not know who the colors were then...if the members that told me who joined from RD were correct you picked up at least 2 colors, one of them closely connected to the scandal.
(this information was given to me by a collection of 4 RD colors during my independent investigation, none of them being mr.orange, as well as a former head of war for RD and another regular member)

mdevol reminds of a little boy that wants to so desperately sit at the adults table. He's got his shiny new pair of leader boots and wants all of the attention and respect from the rest of the big boys. Xyle is a meanie.

"...We did however include clauses to ensure we could protect our allies."

You never had a policy of pact us or else, just "clauses" to ensure you "could protect" your "allies," aka your block as borne out by the RD logs fiasco.

If you're going down the path of hypocrisy then you're going to be here until you die talking about different players, alliances, pro-cheating/anti-cheating, pro-block/anti-block, yada yada. And you're going to be called out on it by others whom are also hypocritical. It's a waste of breath.

My beef was over the block done through diplomatic force. You want to dictate the terms of other alliance's pacting to ostensibly protect your allies, fine, but don't cry wolf when they join together and start opposing you. My suggestion to my alliance has been to avoid blocks. And from what you say, it seems like you guys are moving away from this strategy, perhaps by choice or by necessity.

So this is all much ado about nothing.

There is alot of butthurt in this thread.

Makes me laugh.