| Monday, November 23, 2009 - 09:00 am |
With all this greif and distruction recently, have we entered a world war in GR? Or are we leading to one, because I looked at the war map, and theres at least two wars in every region basicly that deals with the war between GREFF and the UC. So are we in a world war, or almost getting there. lol. Or am I just looking at things wrong
| Wednesday, November 25, 2009 - 02:05 am |
Actually this is a pretty limited war all things considered. It just so happens the handful of combatants all have good sized empires spread around the planet.
There are a LOT of members on both sides not actively engaged. And this is probably the first major war on GR in more than a year. Its not typically quite this violent.
GREF Founding Council member
| Thursday, November 26, 2009 - 02:18 am |
Ahhhh ok. Yea I am in UC, and my area was a conflict area for some time, but I'm not going to join in the fighting. I dont see the point in this war, that and I have friends in GREF.
| Thursday, November 26, 2009 - 02:33 am |
Well we at GREF don't consider this a GREF vs UC war - just a fight against few specific individuals. We have many friends in UC too ;)
Heck, Wendy wasn't even really on our radar, we had no beef with her at all. Its unfortunate she decided to back JohnL.
GREF Founding Council member
| Thursday, November 26, 2009 - 03:30 am |
I think it is more unfortunate that more of the UC members have not backed its current chairman, as many in GREF have taken up fighting on a strictly party line.
| Thursday, November 26, 2009 - 10:28 pm |
I am not sure what you mean by the "strictly party line" thing. GREF is modelled along the lines of a federal republic. The elected ruling council makes decisions by consensus, and its not like Abe is ordering any of us to fight. Note that despite your throwing some nukes at me, I have declined to engage you despite my being on the council and being an ex-president of GREF - I really have no issues with you.
If UC members aren't backing their chairman against the "evil GREF aggressors", I think that says a lot about the chairman's approval rating. Its probably the same reason we have former UC members fighting him.
For all of the talk urging GREF to remove Abe, I have to wonder if John has already been de facto removed, if not de jure.
I really think you backed the wrong horse here Wendy.
| Friday, November 27, 2009 - 06:48 am |
Thats the thing Slare. Everyone wants to jump on the first horse they see charging ahead taking the lead. I don't get down like that. You could be the underdog in any fight, if I were on your side, you'll know I'll be there. Win lose or draw. That is the problem with most feds and their subsequent downfall. Everyone wants to be on the winning team. It is always fun to gang bang an outnumbered opponent. But how much fun is that? When you don't have the numbers, who will stand by your side regardless of the outcome. I guarantee you, less than 8 out of 10.
If i will fight you all, and continue to hold my own, how much easier will it be to humble the remaining two? I'm not saying it will happen over night, but give it some time, I promise you things will enter an even ground for us to meet on.
Because you have chosen not to engage me, is probably the reason your country isn't flat like Mikey's. (Psst, he had 100 million, you don't). For that, I respect your decision not to fight.
Obviously, the whole of UC doesn't back what you said. The UC has it's own devices to remove hostile presidents from it's ranks.... peacefully, and then otherwise if necessary. You guys talk like you have an inside line or something. Do you guys secretly run the UC or what? I was asked to rejoin, by someone with a greater UC authority than you or whoever you spoke to. You seem to imply that the UC has hung John L out to dry. I was asked to help? So that means I am being sacrificed as well, yes? Why the deception, why the trickery? I am certain you are being deceived. Maybe it was easieer to ask me to help, becuase it was easy to see what I will inevitably do to you. Rather than mobilize an entire federation who was attacked suddenly and without warning. There is no doubt many don't want to fight or won't fight. But that is exactly the prrof of the example I gave you.
8 out of 10 will not stand with you when it really counts. I stand at the ready . . . Only an act of God will stop me from what i will do. Are you even ready? Your horse jumped out of the gate fast, have you given thought to the backstretch? The first horse out the gate almost never wins the race.
| Friday, November 27, 2009 - 05:11 pm |
So you really think GREF members are fighting you and John just to be on the winning side?
You don't think this has anything to do with the fact that John was out recruiting off-worlders specifically to come attack us? He brought this on himself with his own actions.
We may have been the first horse out of the gate, but that's only because we weren't going to stand around waiting to be taken to the glue factory. We are a peaceful fed, but not a suicidal one.
As for the internal politics of UC - you yourself seemed disappointed that the UC membership isn't supporting John more. The UC isn't some tiny, helpless fed here, it has the capability to join the fight on an equal basis, I can't see fear or weakness as being an excuse to stay out of the fight. More likely passive non-support of the leadership is what we are seeing.
Whatever method the UC has for removing a chairman, its probably a lot easier to sit back and let outsiders do most of the work for you. After all, if someone in UC rocks the boat and fails because John hasn't yet done anything truly incompetent, he'd be next on John's beatdown list.
But once John has been defeated as a result of his own schemes, getting active support for a change of leadership would be much more successful.
At least that's how someone politically competent would do things. Maybe UC has a lack of politically competent people it its ranks?
| Friday, November 27, 2009 - 06:09 pm |
You are joking right? You are betting on alot of assumptions you had better hope to be true. I am not dissapointed to see anyone who doesn't wanna fight, fight. I always fight alone, it is rare that you will ever see me go in and gang bang someone's country from under their feet with a coalition. Thats not my style. I like to be outnumbered. I KNOW what I can do to a president one on one. I look for a challenge not an easy kill. If I weren't outnumbered, this wouldn't be a contest. That is a fact. This is what makes it fun.
I like to antagonize on the forums... and what better way to do it, than by frustrating several opponents at the same time.
Tunnel vision you have.
Pride....my favorite sin. When I run out of nukes, which will be a long time from now at this rate, I'll be coming to test your conventional skills and see how incompetent you are. Meanwhile you have some time to prepare. Use it wisely. This is something else I will find challenging, even though I will Isolate you, you KNOW I am coming.
As far as John being defeated, it is unlikely that you will defeat anything. He may quit fighting if he so chooses to. And you can call it how you see it. Remember you all declared on him. When will I quit? In the next simlife.
| Saturday, November 28, 2009 - 06:53 am |
You want a challenge, I can respect that. I guess I personally prefer fighting *for* something, rather than fighting for fighting's sake.
As you noted: ""I think it is more unfortunate that more of the UC members have not backed its current chairman".
You obviously see the same thing I see, you even brought it up first. I see only two explanations for it:
- UC members who would normally fight for a just cause they believe in don't see backing their current leader as being a cause worth their effort
- UC (as a whole, excluding yourself of course) just isn't *able* to effectively defend their leader. Either because of military weakness, or possibly a total lack of organization/leadership.
There may be other explanations, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts. I just don't buy #2. And #1 pretty much means GREF is doing the right thing.
| Saturday, November 28, 2009 - 07:31 am |
Yes I think it is unfortunate that more UC members have not entered this war. Which would show support for John L. However, I don't understand how you turn it into an assumption of dissapointment. Dissapointment would somehow indicate that I had a prior expectation of anyone joining in. I came to fight before being asked to rejoin the UC, regardless of what they did independently of me. What does that tell you?If more entered the war and intended to win, I am sure your eco fed of b00b warriors would be quickly crushed. That is NOT an assumption, but a matter of fact. You are fortunate that it has been a limited response.
With all that said, it is cute to come out here and paint a pretty picture of John's defeat. This game is not setup for anyone to be defeated. The loser is the one who taps out first.
I am sure for now, I will give your federation complex all it can handle.
I don't find this situation challenging at all. The outcome is inevitable. You just need more convincing. The result of the instigation of a war against the UC chairman, is what I find challenging. A real total war. How many countries will I take while being undermined by several opponents.... now that is challenging.... The amount of time it will tkae to fully demobilize your main combatants armies.... now that will be a challenge. But this situation as it stands is rather hilarious. You guys were prepared well to tkae one or maybe even more than 1 of John''s countries. You were in no way in the world prepared to fight the kind of fight I will bring to you. It has been refined like pure gold, and trust me, the outcome is inevitable....
| Saturday, November 28, 2009 - 09:46 am |
Just for the record, The United Confederation backs John 100%. We know there may be some differences amongst other players and realize most people don't get along with eachother, the only objection against John at anytime was allowing entrance to Steven Ryan in the UC which John dealt with accordingly. However, most of us in the UC are not active due to real life issues, I do know though if this was the full UC fed against two GREF players this war wouldn't of lasted this long it would of been done within 24hrs. I applaud Wendy and John for holding thier own even when out numbered; the question is though, what happens when UC "awakens"? Will GREF than decide that is was a bad choice to make?
On a side note, I hope everyone had a Happy Thanksgiving and that you all should start your Christmas shopping early it's around the corner,
| Saturday, November 28, 2009 - 10:00 am |
Hey crosss, message me. Kingdom of Gondolia. lost your countrys name in my messages
| Saturday, November 28, 2009 - 05:40 pm |
hmm. I am not sure that adds up, Crossdale.
100% backing, yet no one can find the time to convert that supposedly solid backing into action more than two weeks into the conflict.
100% backing, yet your members didn't feel it worth the effort to spend the 30 seconds entering anti-boycott votes.
I don't know exactly how UC is structured, but in GREF that would pretty loudly scream "NO CONFIDENCE" and anyone who cared about keeping the fed a viable entity would be working on getting new leadership in place.
I am not talking theoretically here either, this pretty much exactly what happened to Q back in our early days. Its why I got appointed as acting President by the council, then elected as GREF's second president shortly thereafter. The people spoke and Q heard it loud and clear, though he wasn't happy about it. I have a feeling the people are speaking now, but the UC leadership isn't listening.
| Saturday, November 28, 2009 - 05:59 pm |
Ok let me help you get it....
You or your eco b00b fed do not decide when anyone does anything apart from your own members. Even that is in question when Zeb states, "We of course planeed to attack John for some time now, but Aqua's war decs caught everyone off guard."
The UC is half inactive. Most of it's fighters are anyway. If UC members wanna fight they will fight. You were half prepared. And more than half of that 'free' war protection is over. Now it is gonna cost you to keep those pretty mornin gems in protecto, and further cost you to adequately defend them. It is only a matter of time before this bites you in the bum. You have to pay the cost to be the boss. Unless you plan on swiping it is theoretically impossible for you to continually protect entire empires. When you slip, I will grip.
When skimming through a few of your countries in your fed complex. The local news papers give a clear sign of weakness.... "Such and Such not able to maintain its army. 20 percent of weapons have been moved to the reserves" I hope you tighten that up before you run out of real life cash to throw away.
| Saturday, November 28, 2009 - 07:03 pm |
As far as I can see this is all about a group of renegades called 'The Rat Pack' trying to get away with day light robbery. I've seen many empires taken and stripped when the president was dealing with RL. And each time it turns my stomach. So on that note I offer up my empire to John L and Inanna.
It is the season to sacrifice.
May the good be victorious.
May the bad burn in the fire ball of hell.
| Saturday, November 28, 2009 - 07:26 pm |
Why Thx nix, join the party
| Saturday, November 28, 2009 - 07:35 pm |
For those who realize it and ignore it, as well as for those who don't realize it yet:
-UC is almost entirely inactive.
-It will almost certainly come back
-Of the members in UC when Q was attacked, there are currently.... 3ish remaining, of which Crossdale deregged his empire.
I left UC when I came back to the game because quite literally no one I knew was remaining or active in UC, and my friends there had either gone inactive or had left UC. This last spring, there was indeed a debate in the UC about whether or not to crush GREF, for which I was against. Many worried that GREF would grow, get bored, and attack (lol), but the MAJORITY thought that it didn't matter and voted this down. An active UC would be able to take care of any upstarts. Funny how this stuff works out.
UC is not what it once was in size, power, or personality, but it also is not what it will be in the coming months. No one seems to realize any of this so I figured I' toss in my two cents from the sidelines.
| Sunday, November 29, 2009 - 07:56 am |
I suppose John shouldn't have been out attempting to recruit our friends on other worlds to come attack us, if he didn't have an active fed to back him up when word inevitably got back to us from those he tried to recruit.
If we were truly going for daylight robbery we could have gone after all those inactives that currently litter the UC. But clearly our strikes have been limited to John and whoever else decided go get involved for their own reasons.
We are hardly attempting to dismantle UC here....in fact we would welcome some friendly rivalry with an active UC under some responsible leadership, because UC isn't our enemy. Its unfortunate John had to attempt to upset things.
| Sunday, November 29, 2009 - 04:00 pm |
LoL UC isn't out enemy, LOL!!! Why are you still talking?
| Monday, November 30, 2009 - 04:03 am |
Feds have neither friends nor enemies, just interests. That's pretty much international relations 101 right there.
Its in neither UC or GREF's interest to get in a fight over the actions of John. Again, if UC as a whole were our target we wouldn't nearly as selective with who we are attacking.
The only reason I'm still talking is because you guys are still spouting nonsense about what's going on in an attempt to garner some support. Not a bad concept in principle, but its not been very well executed.
All I have to do is just tell it like it is, anyone can go and verify what our targets have been and make up their own minds as to our intentions.
| Monday, November 30, 2009 - 04:34 am |
This war is both UC and GREFF's fault. Mostly GREFF as stated you all were planning to attack John. Clearly John got wind of that and knew everyone was away with holidays so he went and got people from out of world to kick your asses. So yes, UC is GREF's enemy, or why would you all plan an invasion on its leader. Thats an act of war, own up and stop using big proper words to hide your selves. I lost all respect for GREF when I watched them call Wendy and bitch and make fun of her kids. So piss off and fight. No more words from here on out, don't even respond to this post as I will not be checking the forums no more. I myself won't be fighting, but I am jsut saying.
(Sorry for the rudeness and abrupt talks...I've had a very bad day...and if any of you bash me for having a bad day I will go off...just saying that from what I've seen how you all treated wendy..)
| Monday, November 30, 2009 - 04:35 am |
Fight the war you started GREF. Winner takes all, end of story. Stop talking.
| Monday, November 30, 2009 - 09:05 am |
No-one in GREF made fun of wendy's kid's King Yahuchtka, though some of the posts got rather more aggressive and on more of a personal level than was really neccessary, but this is something both sides were guilty of.
At the end of the day this is just a game, some people enjoy the econ side, some the war side and some the social-political side.
GREF's issue was isolated with John, as previosely stated in another thread many UC and ex UC members are friends with many of our members, i personally have never had an issue with any member of the UC, nor have most in GREF. Many issues with Jonh L actually pre-date his membership in the UC, and those that dont are with his recent conduct.
I have spent time recently helping you King Yahuchtka, this is not something i would have done if i considered the UC an enemy of GREF, my desire is to keep new players in the game, irrespective of the federation they are in.
| Monday, November 30, 2009 - 09:15 am |
...... Tendo, you're right. It did get a bit personal. We have moved passed personal issues. Although, calling my children's mom a 'whack job' was a bit insulting to them. They were quite upset, which is why they have not stoppped clicking the button on the red screen since. I have to disagree with you about it being both parties getting personal, when I say, 'Taste the PAINBOW' is hardly an insult. I find it rather LuLzy, and it was intended to be so. Hope that clears things up
| Monday, November 30, 2009 - 09:16 am |
Oh, and while I am here....
Die GREF, DIE!!! You guys suck!!! I never liked skittles anyway!!! Eco b00bs!!! and so on
| Monday, November 30, 2009 - 01:46 pm |
Haha, yes you are probably right, your posts have been more provocative than personal, however i feel that since it being brought to the attention of GREF members they have ceased being personal and realise this was not acceptable.
| Monday, November 30, 2009 - 04:15 pm |
Hey! I appreciate you request to build a corportion in my country of Map Dominion. As I explained in game message, I don't have enough unemployed workers to support another corporation.
| Monday, November 30, 2009 - 05:01 pm |
I DO!!!!! LOL send it.
| Tuesday, December 1, 2009 - 12:56 am |
keno on GR lol
| Tuesday, December 1, 2009 - 01:53 am |
U posted 'If we were truly going for daylight robbery we could have gone after all those inactives that currently litter the UC. But clearly our strikes have been limited to John and whoever else decided go get involved for their own reasons.'
Exactly my point. Robbing inactives is midnight robbery. Sneaky, underhanded robbery. The victim doesn't even know it's happening. Daylight robbery is when a crew comes up to you in the street and robs you at knife point. But you've gone one step further. Your also beating him up.
Acts of common thug life criminals.
Renegade's. You will bow down to the power of the people.
| Tuesday, December 1, 2009 - 02:52 am |
Very true Nix, I would even consider these guys terrorists by their actions.
| Tuesday, December 1, 2009 - 03:28 am |
I dont know. To me a terrorist attacks from behind then runs away.
I recon this is just a crew beating. And normally behind a crew beating is someone who dare not do it by them self.
And like most crew beatings, the first attack is always just the start of things.
Thats why I like the good old one on one
| Tuesday, December 1, 2009 - 06:19 am |
"I dont know. To me a terrorist attacks from behind then runs away."
No a terrorist is someone who attacks from behind and goes "POP"(explodes lol..)
| Tuesday, December 1, 2009 - 01:18 pm |
Just to make my position clear. I saw a crew beating and offered my help to the victim. My offer of help was accepted, but as yet, not been called upon. If it turns out my help is not needed I will walk away. The more time that passes without being called upon, the less likelihood of The Forces of Nature being unleashed.
The issue to me now is one of time.
It seems like this has been going on for a while. But that, in my eyes, does not excuse the behaviour of Rat Pack. Life is Honour. Without it you are nothing.
Mother Natures Army
| Tuesday, December 1, 2009 - 08:50 pm |
"This war is both UC and GREFF's fault. Mostly GREFF as stated you all were planning to attack John. Clearly John got wind of that and knew everyone was away with holidays so he went and got people from out of world to kick your asses."
No, that timeline is inaccurate. John was out recruiting in the October timeframe. We got a lot of info from numerous independent sources about the recruiting effort, and the fact it was being conducted specifically to attack us. While it was obvious our sources weren't going to join in, there is no way to tell how many other people were asked or who was going to join up.
So we debated what to do for the better part of a month. Being as the small "hawk" and "dove" wings of the council pretty well cancel each other out, the moderates swung the vote over to war because we had solid intel about a clear and present danger to GREF, and it all led back to John. That's a legitimate casus belli in anyone's book. To allow John to assemble an army specifically to take us out would have been highly irresponsible on our part.
So there it is Nix, Yahuchtka, whoever else is interested. If you are backing John out of some sense of honor, you may want to re-evaluate the facts, because there is no honor to be found with him.
| Tuesday, December 1, 2009 - 10:56 pm |
I've been playing SC for 1.5+ years now and have been a member of the UC for the majority of that time. I haven't been involved too much with the politics of the game and rarely engage in the general board banter.
But I can say this: Unless John had a secret agenda that was only shared with a few select members of the UC there was NO (none, zero, zip, nada) talk of war with GREF from him or anyone else in the UC in the weeks leading up to the current hostilities.
Maybe there were messages going out to everyone else in the fed but me....but I doubt it.
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 12:25 am |
Look which one of you idiots is Q in disguise??? Thats all I wanna know.
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 03:39 am |
You know its me Wendy. 78^)*
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 05:20 am |
I AM Q! (a la Spartacus)
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 05:48 am |
F*** Q who cares where he is and who he is. Let's deal with the situation at hand!
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 06:44 am |
Actually I'm Q?
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 02:47 pm |
I thought was a secret EO?!???!!!
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 04:16 pm |
I had to go back a ways and dig through our discussions of intel we received back in October, because I know you were mentioned in there somewhere.
So we got some chat transcripts from Oct 4 with Crossdale, John and others discussing how GREF was peaceful, but that UC should take us out anyway to stop us from spreading our wings", how GREF was going to be crushed, "squeeze first and ask questions later", preparing the troops, etc.
And then around Oct 7 there is a plea (via the UC common market I believe)from within UC to stop targeting GREF. (Why would this have even been brought up if this wasn't being discussed behind the scenes?) And to your credit, Jack, you replied saying that some of your best trading partners were in GREF, and that a war would make things difficult for you. And oddly enough, John chimes agreeing that GREF should not be attacked.
I am not really going to release more of our intel from those John tried to recruit, since we really appreciate our sources keeping us informed of this crap, and we hope they continue doing so....but it looks very much like John wasn't including you and some others in the UC in the real discussions, because you would have opposed the plans. Or leaked them, which ended up happening anyway.
If UC really is as inactive as is claimed, then there wouldn't have been much point to John rallying a bunch of presidents that wouldn't be around to heed the call anyway....and some of the few remaining active ones had already voiced their disapproval of the whole concept. So John did the next best thing, and tried to bring in active outsiders to do the job. I imagine it would have been presented to the UC at large as a fait accompli after the war had already started.
So there's another dose of straight up facts to ponder. And another reason we aren't targeting the UC in general - because most of them weren't involved or apparently even informed.
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 04:41 pm |
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 05:52 pm |
Please cross examine the thread "GREF SHOWS ITS TRUE COLOR". John and anyone else (within the few weeks) alotted never once plotted the demise of GREF. Myself and Beast do acknowledge there was a vote almost over a year and a half ago of attacking GREF but that did not go through.
If you examine the conversation that Abe and I had you will see pure evidence that GREF itself was always planning an attack on John regardless of what anyone did, just for the simple fact they felt it was in thier power to do so.
Slare, please stop spreading false allegations and trying to seduce any other players that are in UC to join you and your fed in thier views about John or UC. Since Jack has been in UC and many other members aswell, they have always been independant and know the value of loyalty and respect, where most of you don't.
Upon reading these forums you can tell who is mature and who is not, please leave this to the big boys and keep on building your corps and make money if that's what you really want to do.
Also, I have plenty of chat logs, forum convos, and many witnesses aswell if I want to further back up my statement.
Now furthermore, information is not and never was leaked out, there are simply mutual friends of GREF and UC where information may be exchanged on a common area. However, I think GREF is getting confused as to who is willing to help them in the long run. The best advice I can give to you Slare and GREF as federation DO NOT always assume that if you gain certain info from someone that they are on your side.
Thank you all for your time and consideration.
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 06:08 pm |
GREF did not exist a year and a half ago.
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 06:31 pm |
Yes you are right Tendo. I acknowledge that the time frame that I have given previously was not accurate. "Seems to me like GREF is dying. Haven't heard anything from them on the forum, no CEO requests, and nothing really. I have a friend in GREF and he said their forum is almost entirely inactive."- that quote was taken from a UC member from the UC forum who I will keep private, but this was posted in May 21, 2009 and most of the dates given where we talked, debated and discussed GREF's presence start in the month of May 2009. This is about 6-7 months ago.
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 06:37 pm |
Everyone please take the time to consider what was made to achieve peace on GR. GREF has broken this agreement and used this agreement for thier hidden agenda to attack without just cause. This was completed by my friend Nute Gunray.
--A pact against personal, economic, political and armed aggression between the United Confederation Federation on Golden Rainbow and the GREF Federation on Golden Rainbow
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED having the courage to stand as individual Federations united in friendship and brotherhood on the World of Golden Rainbow do hereby wish it to be known our beliefs.
WHEREAS we acknowledge that mere spoken agreements may prove themselves to be at times inept, to keep the members of our two Federations from entering into personal, economic, political and armed conflict.
THEREFORE we act as individuals and as federations, in order to change the world of Golden Rainbow for the better do enter into this pact of non-aggression.
ACKNOWLEDGING that adherence to this pact will require much effort and vigilance on the part of the leadership in both federations.
TO THESE ENDS we therefore establish and provide certain fundamental precepts measuring our conduct toward one another:
FIRST, that we declare that every member of the two federations have the right to be free from personal, economic, political and armed aggression by any member in the other federation
SECOND, that we believe neither federation should use the initiation of force, or threat of same, either personally or collectively, towards the other federation.
THIRD, that we shall regard the rights of both federations to remain neutral in any conflicts faced the other federation from sources other than these two federations. This agreement does not include any provision for Mutual Assistance or Mutual Defense and no one should be expecting to receive any such help from any members of the other federation.
FOURTH, that through trade or commerce we shall not exploit, nor be complicit in the exploitation of, the members of the other federation. Nor shall we engage in, or be complicit in any form of, economic warfare such as hostile bidding or boycotts against members of the other federation.
FIFTH, that by any reasonable means at our disposal we shall make sure that this pact is enforced by both federations.
SIXTH, recognizing that personal misunderstandings that arrive from time to that could cause some to be angry with others we agree that we should each establish and maintain 2 diplomatic representatives from each of our federations to be charged with working out reasonable solutions between the aggrieved members. We will have said diplomats assigned to a new joint diplomatic federation. Such diplomats should be paying members of simcountry, with a minimum of three real life months experience of playing simcountry and have at least two countries in their empires.
AND SO in full knowledge of the duties we freely commit ourselves to we do hereby agree to and sign this Pact.
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 06:44 pm |
Nous Ã la ConfÃ©dÃ©ration unitaire dÃ©clarons nos actions militaires de la dÃ©fense pure et stratÃ©gique des mouvements militaires dans l'espoir de parvenir Ã la paix sur Golden Rainbow
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 06:47 pm |
Excuse my french. Translation--We at the United Confederation hereby declare our military actions of pure defense and strategic military movements in hopes of achieving peace on Golden Rainbow
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 07:25 pm |
All federations have their quiet periods, and there active periods, such as the UC at the moment, going through a suspiciousely quiet period. Perhaps not as inactive as we are be led to believe...
During my time in SC i do not believe i have had much to do with you Diz, perhaps this was an oversight on my part, perhaps on yours; probably both. Im pleased to see you taking a more active role again.
Something i would like to ask on both sides is that 'we' as a collective take no actions which would result in newer players leaving the game as this does not serve any of our interests, only detracts from the long term enjoyability and longevity of the game.
| Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 10:12 pm |
Thank you Tendo Ryu. I have never really talked to you but my associates (Yankee, Beast) speak highly of you, so because of this I show my full respect to you.
I agree that both feds or 'we' as a collective group can keep newer players here as long as we do not intimidate or conduct harmful actions this can be accomplished. We were all new players at one time and becuase of this I know how it feels if one does not recieve the proper information (help) and can get irritated and leave the game. Key component is mentorship in this game, find these new players and help them grow, I can assure you that they will not leave once they 'learn' to love the game.
War is fun and so is the economic part at times. However, it can only last for so long and must have a solid reason for it. On another note Tendo if you need any corps please let me know I will send you some.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 01:14 am |
I know many UC presidents who are unhappy at John L and are planning a coup against him which I support fully.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 01:15 am |
Won't be long now John L! They're coming for you!
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 02:07 am |
The whole of GREF is now being warned....
Nute Gunray, a great hero of my starting days in Simcountry has been declared upon. Should one single shot be fired upon his inactive countries, I will be forced to revisit a b00b hunt on GR of GREF eco b00bs.
I personally am sickened by this low down scheme. Slare you just mentioned you guys weren't after UC inactives, yet Aqua PAINBOW is launching declarations on The Viceroy's empire as we speak. Stevie Wonder is positioned on his flanks, setting the stage for a ground invasion.
At first I was puzzled by this. The statement that is.... No highway robbery, right? But why declare on Nute if that is not true? Then it dawned on me. Aqua is trying to set off counter decs and, maybe, just.... maybe, enough countries will declare on him so that I cannot continue destroying what is left of his Centura Donna Powerbase... The countries are vulnerable, I get it. But Nute.... NAY... This will cost some of your subordinates. If it is greed that motivates you, then continue.
Contradictions... I will not stand by as innocent players from the United Confederation are attacked. Tendo was just saying how we don't want players leaving the game. Now Nute may not leave, but what I will do in return may cause some of your friends to want to leave. I will accept the responsibility of my actions, but the responsibility of preserving and protecting players who may leave lies with both of us.
I agree with Tendo, not just in principle, but in substance; as I have halted all my aggressions(conventional or otherwise) towards weaker inexperienced GREF players and or Inactives. Why the change of heart? This will be the point of no return. If you think I have shown up for John L., Imagine how I will show up for Nute. Surely, you haven't seen anything yet.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 02:26 am |
I just found out about this. Aqua was not given permission for this action. it was not even discussed. I will look into it immediately.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 02:54 am |
Aqua is just REALLY REALLY wierd.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 04:26 am |
GREF policy has been that UC in general and Nute in partiular is 100% off limits to attack. We'll have an official announcement about this in the morning US time. This is not so much Aqua jumping the gun as going off the deep end.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 05:08 am |
I have dec'd on Aqua and will dec on anyone who threatens Nute's countries. This is not intended to be me choosing sides other than Nute's side.
If you dec on Nute, I will kill you.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 07:18 am |
Did they add a new booster?
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 09:25 am |
I do not understand the current situation or where it has come from, we have always considered Nute a friend of GREF and these decs are as much an unwelcome suprise to us as it is to you.
Thankyou Wendy/Diz, regardless of the situation between our 2 feds, new players should not suffer and i appreciate your help in this matter. Recently i have been giving advice to one of your new members in fact, despite the current situation.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 02:10 pm |
I just like to say that the decs were an accident against any member of the UC apart from John and his sidekick Wendy!
No shot will be fired on Nute or anyone else apart from John and his sidekick.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 02:49 pm |
How do you accidently dec on Nute?? Now you have Steven Ryan involved, and this could get REALLY out of hand. I may be completely wrong, but I just do not believe that these dec's were an accident.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 02:51 pm |
Great..... I'm greatly honored to be singled out for hostile aggression. You are the best Aqua.
| Thursday, December 3, 2009 - 05:16 pm |
How do you accidentally dec with 12 countries?
I am watching Aqua and will not fire on you if you do as you say and do not fire on Nute.
| Saturday, December 5, 2009 - 11:52 pm |
Aqua Rainbow II is trying to keep wars going and is trying to get new ones started. And Tendo Ryu has helped me greatly with advise on my country ALOT of kudo's to you Tendo Ryu! He is a great person and has got my country(As well as many others ) ) on the right track! :D Thanks everyone!
| Sunday, December 6, 2009 - 12:36 am |
Congrats King Yahuchtka, this just goes to show that despite all the conflict going on, that people can still actually work together in harmony and put thier differences behind. Two thumbs up to both of you guys (Tendo, King Yahuchtka).
| Sunday, December 6, 2009 - 01:24 am |
i just dont get it....this war is it cos im thick?
| Sunday, December 6, 2009 - 02:31 am |
Hi Keno. Apparently this all started a couple of years ago. It's one of them ones. Something happens, you brood on it for a couple of years, then you see a chance to get your own back. So you call up ya mates to meet you in the pub where your enemy is having a quiet beer and you all proceed to give him a good kicking. Fortunately there's a baseball bat behind the bar and the locals aren't the sort to stand by and let this kind of behaviour happen.
| Sunday, December 6, 2009 - 10:34 pm |
Perhaps you shouldn't bother trying to 'get it'. The war does not concern you in any way.
nix001, it was nothing of the sort, again the issue has nothing to do with you either and the only information you base that opinion on is one sided and biased, so respectfully please keep your opinions to yourself.
| Monday, December 7, 2009 - 02:14 am |
Ryu. My info comes from your side. Yea sure, my analogy might be a bit far fetched, but not the facts.