AtomicRXN
#206299656Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:39 PM GMT

"This began last year with RAT vs UAF (devolved into RAT vs UAF, FoA, ...) and then failed, and I swore that if this attitude of unilateral intervention continued then no wars would take place. What has happened since? Like, two real wars? In over six months?" No wars would take place because of leaders like you who think they're on the progressive side, yet happen to make enemies out of everyone. The only person who stopped that war from happening was you.
Polymorphic
#206299729Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:40 PM GMT

"No wars would take place because of leaders like you who think they're on the progressive side, yet happen to make enemies out of everyone. The only person who stopped that war from happening was you." I've already stated why the war hasn't happened, why don't you tell me why I'm the reason?
nitroyoshi9
#206299888Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:42 PM GMT

"You haven't given me evidence of A-SOV cheating." you already admitted to cheating in your thread "The last 2-4 wars FEAR has launched have resulted in failure. A-SOV has warred clans that also have a history of unsuccessful wars;" oh but when ASOV fails its wars it's not asov's fault it's everyone else's LOL!!!!!! "That's not our fault." hasn't been able to get a successful war in a very long time after numerous attempts NOT OUR FAULT LOL! you're such a narcissistic brat i can see what made ASOV so toxic and how the only thing it's capable of doing is further degrading and destroying this community
AtomicRXN
#206299968Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:43 PM GMT

I take that back, sorry.
CptArcadia
#206300002Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:43 PM GMT

(dmoney agreed with me in the past that RAT was the reason that FoA v RAT never happened) killer9094 add 10k
l3lamingo
#206300126Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:45 PM GMT

2 arguments on 1 thread? Interesting
Polymorphic
#206300201Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:46 PM GMT

"Attitudes like this against the ally of the Federation is what is going to incite people to join. [1]" Saying "Sleet Clan is going to have people unilaterally intervene, we will still win" apparently causes people to do it more, that's the stupidest thing. How about people just DON'T do it? "Attitudes like this against the ally of the Federation is what is going to incite people to join. [2]" I never complained about FoA joining, I stated a fact. Intervention is why FoA's wars failed in the past. Sorry if the truth hurts. [2] "I never complained about FoA joining, I stated a fact. Intervention is why FoA's wars failed in the past. Sorry if the truth hurts." I never complained about FoA joining, I stated a fact. Intervention is why FoA's wars failed in the past. Sorry if the truth hurts. [3] "You keep inciting people to join if you keep blasting FoA for absolutely no reason." No one is "blasting FoA". Cut the victim complex. "You would do the same for an ally that is going through a rough time right now too that you are bullying." No, as of my declaration of the dangerous of unilateral war intervention we would not (last summer-ish). I'm not in the business of intervening in wars unless both sides acknowledge and are fine with it.
[rfa#hidefromsearch]
#206300245Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:46 PM GMT

[rfa#hidefromsearch]
AtomicRXN
#206300285Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:47 PM GMT

I take back taking back. I honestly don't know who to believe regarding what happened about that war, I heard several accounts and we were not kept in the loop. JC and FoA were doing back to back raids on RAT pre-war, we went to one negotiation with Poly afk for 100% of the meeting, and nothing more was heard. We were out of the loop and the war just disappeared.
CptArcadia
#206300445Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:49 PM GMT

People are doing it because of past problems with RAT, you "enforcing" that agreement in CSP is causing people who fought in that war to join SC. Your actions against FoA with the Flights and the +2 damage will cause people to join in on RATs future wars because they remember what you did and hate your clan for it. "I never complained about FoA joining, I stated a fact. Intervention is why FoA's wars failed in the past. Sorry if the truth hurts." Yet it hasn't been happening and you're making assumptions without any evidence of any sorts of FoA telling its own to join SC. Can I assume then that you personally will do something stupid like how you did to CSP in the beginning of the war with the "enforcing" or worst -- even cheat? No, can you assume that FOA will FULLY intervene? -- No. killer9094 add 10k
Polymorphic
#206300520Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:50 PM GMT

"Youre making enemies out of clans and are fine doing so until they get into your wars because of it and it becomes "unfair"" Making enemies out of clans encourages conflict, encourages competition, but this should be controlled it's a damn game. If they want to be involved, they can do so by COMMUNICATING rather than JUST DOING! Why is communication such a polarizing topic.. smh
MyPurgeBegins
#206300657Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:52 PM GMT

And added to all of this a former RAT officer has told some people that Sleet Clan is recruiting ex-RAT high ranks. This is the quiet before the storm hits.
CptArcadia
#206300695Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:53 PM GMT

"former RAT officer has told some people that Sleet Clan is recruiting ex-RAT high ranks." how war did vak won killer9094 add 10k
Polymorphic
#206300803Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:54 PM GMT

"People are doing it because of past problems with RAT, you "enforcing" that agreement in CSP is causing people who fought in that war to join SC." I fail to understand how enforcing an agreement is wrong of me? If it was agreed upon, I will enforce it if they will not. As simple as that. "Your actions against FoA with the Flights and the +2 damage will cause people to join in on RATs future wars because they remember what you did and hate your clan for it." Childish, considering this happened now nearly a year ago. "Yet it hasn't been happening and you're making assumptions without any evidence of any sorts of FoA telling its own to join SC." When you say things like "can you assume that FOA will FULLY intervene?", that implies some level of group sanctioned intervention. Words mean things.
[rfa#hidefromsearch]
#206300875Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:55 PM GMT

[rfa#hidefromsearch]
Tenal
#206300876Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:55 PM GMT

Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! Mikenize 3050 EPIC! v
MyPurgeBegins
#206300902Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:55 PM GMT

Funny. @Mikenize but I'm not HauWay I'm known as karth to you or I was. This is the quiet before the storm hits.
[rfa#hidefromsearch]
#206301033Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:57 PM GMT

[rfa#hidefromsearch]
CptArcadia
#206301117Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:58 PM GMT

"Childish, considering this happened now nearly a year ago." Well it is a game meant for children. "I fail to understand how enforcing an agreement is wrong of me? If it was agreed upon, I will enforce it if they will not. As simple as that." Call it what you want, nobody agreed with you doing it. "When you say things like "can you assume that FOA will FULLY intervene?", that implies some level of group sanctioned intervention. Words mean things." Huh. no it's not happening and I can EVEN SHOW the logs of Auquies saying it won't happen WHAT killer9094 add 10k
Shinyehh
#206301203Tuesday, January 03, 2017 5:59 PM GMT

I can't understand why Sleet Clan can even act as if they have a stance on the ideology of intervention in clan wars. Take the AC vs SC war for example. It almost didn't start because of the fear that Resade were joining AC purely for the war, even when Jamber was shown to be wrong and even allowed it to occur in the first place (which AC did not advertise). Since the humiliation of their defeat, SC has continuously bashed AC whenever possible, even shaming us on their teamspeak at times, and have since excused their behaviour in the war on AC's apparent approval of allowing Resade intervention. How can Sleet Clan, going to war with RAT, allow this behaviour when they were so against it happening in their most recent war with AC?
MyPurgeBegins
#206301373Tuesday, January 03, 2017 6:01 PM GMT

Agreed with Shiny. This is the quiet before the storm hits.
Polymorphic
#206301387Tuesday, January 03, 2017 6:01 PM GMT

"Call it what you want, nobody agreed with you doing it." If I make an agreement with you, you expect me to keep my side of the deal. If I don't, you have every right to seek enforcement. This is true in the real world, this is necessary to ensure civilized behaviour. "no it's not happening and I can EVEN SHOW the logs of Auquies saying it won't happen WHAT" Then don't say stuff like that, I have no real reason to believe FoA is doing anything. Also, How can Sleet Clan, going to war with RAT, allow this behaviour when they were so against it happening in their most recent war with AC? How can Sleet Clan, going to war with RAT, allow this behaviour when they were so against it happening in their most recent war with AC? How can Sleet Clan, going to war with RAT, allow this behaviour when they were so against it happening in their most recent war with AC? How can Sleet Clan, going to war with RAT, allow this behaviour when they were so against it happening in their most recent war with AC?
CptArcadia
#206301391Tuesday, January 03, 2017 6:01 PM GMT

Because in this case it isn't happening Shinyehh, there are so few FoA members in SC and people are taking it out of control. Literally. The Overlord is against intervening in a war. l3oss and Jay were not, because they participated themselves killer9094 add 10k
CptArcadia
#206301465Tuesday, January 03, 2017 6:02 PM GMT

"If I make an agreement with you, you expect me to keep my side of the deal. If I don't, you have every right to seek enforcement. This is true in the real world, this is necessary to ensure civilized behaviour." That is what happens every single CSP war, it wasn't an agreement. killer9094 add 10k
Polymorphic
#206301767Tuesday, January 03, 2017 6:06 PM GMT

"Because in this case it isn't happening Shinyehh, there are so few FoA members in SC and people are taking it out of control." This is not "just about" FoA, because we established (I thought?) FoA isn't involved. This is about Cloud9, for example.