I agree 100%… and your alliance got what was coming around. again, and again and again.
You are not involved in this enough, most of what you say is going to be true by your perspective.
Sadly there is alot of blood in the water - and your perspective is not going to be welcomed by most of the community - because the sharks you swam with.
Not your fault.
I would stay out of this bloodletting.
Pure friendly suggestion.
Im grateful to that remark to be fair lol I just see a lot of good players i enjoy playing with quiting. I hold no grudges and stand by any actions i did and accept any grudges.
O and your correct on the attack made on you and he isn’t active or talking Sorry. Story of my life this round. think his name is Papabear so maybe you know him.
Oh they will be back.
They are all just dealing with the fact they are going to have to play differently to win.
Their friends will tell them it is better in the most important ways, and they will get sick of me and @HydroP being able to build so much infra unopposed.
Our buildings sing to them.
They will come back and see if they can’t swipe a few in no time.
Till then you, me, and 60 other people will have a lot of fun seeing what Pie grows the game into now that he doesn’t have to babysit it all the time.
Man there are alot of new people around this round…
Good times.
I will take and use your own words against you.
00 leader swagga NEVER signed a nap with 98,04,96 so consider the nap was never a nap and so here are your own words I send back your way.
I agree 100%… and your alliance got what was coming around. again, and again and again.
Even if we don’t win, and I doubt we will at least we go down helping allies unlike you.
And we’re justified since you declared you never signed the nap thus there was no nap then swagga never signed so there is no nap.
I dunno if forums ever been this lit since 2008.
I think what people are failing to see take into account is that a NAP is defined as follows
A non - aggression pact between two or more families where the signatories promise not to engage in aggressive action against each other.
Now that UA is a factor what you have to consider is funding a smaller family that is not bound by the rules of the NAP considered an aggressive action? I believe it is. And if i am being 100% honest with the benefit of hindsight the only thing i think my alliance should have done differently is declare publicly our intention to attack you moments before we did so. I hold no grudges with anyone and i stand by the actions of my family. That is my take on this whole thing.
I’m loving reading the forums. I dunno how accurate it is to gameplay but I’m really getting a feel for a lot of the players.
Wait wait wait, @Darrk are you denying this is what you did before our scheduled EOR war (before we ‘broke’/void the NAP):
Quite funny your alliance is speaking of our alliance being napbreakers and dishonorable
And claiming u wanted a fair head on battle when you tried to do the exact same thing
So yeah very justified that nap break right ?
And the reason for breaking the nap was because of aiding another fam to preform aggressive ops while we have a non aggression pact. The no nap signage was just icing on the cake
Let me put it this way: if the EU and America sign a peace treaty with Russia and then pay Ukraine 500 billion and supply then with weapons and ammunition to attack Russia, you can bet your ass Russia will drop a nuke on Washington.
Isn’t that right USSR guys?
You should make up your mind
Either you broke the nap or you never had one
Wait wait thats unfair i also searched for a family to op there savings After they opped first. We never planed the ops first. I asked 95 and 05 i think. Nothing but honestly
I’ve already explained why we broke the nap.
But according to you pickle you didnt have a nap bcuz you never signed !
Actually 05/95 were asked before we opped you guys so thats not true
That’s true we never signed a nap… what are you getting at? You seem upset.
We msgd him after the ops.