Jump to content

Starting 2018 the Right Way


RightHonorable
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Buorhann said:

We'd have much rather have more people to potentially roll, not less.

But durmij, Oblige, Lilac, and Yang put in some serious work to reconcile differences between our alliances then.  There were some others as well, but those four stood out.  We even constantly made fun of them in our embassy thread, but they took it in stride and showed us that they had some humor.  Really good times.  I actually went back to read some old posts there.

Mensa always said this but never backed it up through actions....ever.

IMG_2989.png?ex=65e9efa9&is=65d77aa9&hm=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

There are definitely more reasons than just one for a move such as that.  Rose approached us to reconcile and find new friends.  I looked at it much differently than what the rest of Mensa saw it as.  Half the membership in Mensa didn't want to sign Rose because "!@#$ Rose" (Or similar grudge like sentiments, plus it'd be less war for us overall).  The other half trusted my judgement on the matter.  Regardless of which side a member was, we did appreciate and enjoy the conversations we've had with them on our embassy thread for them.  It was good friendly banter.

However, "I" won't deny the fact that it served multiple purposes.   I've been a long time advocate against people who are shitty leaders for their alliances, and Rose was one of the alliances I was adamantly vocal about in the past (Both Keegoz and Pubbie can agree with this).

Here's a list:

-I actually enjoyed a lot of conversations I had with Rose members, so getting me to work on signing them wasn't too hard to persuade me with

-I wanted to show them how we operated in Syndisphere and why we were effective

-I wanted to lessen the growing numbers of a coalition forming against us, especially considering the fact we were starting to lose members for various reasons

-The fact Rose was being thrown around like a ragdoll between alliance ties, I honestly felt bad for them.

There are other reasons, but those are the four that stand out to me from the top of my head.  Notice something there though, I stated " I " a lot.  While I was the FA of Mensa and one of the more vocal leaders in the Syndisphere coalition, I had to take all of that and talk to our allies and Mensa's own members to get them on board with it.  There were quite a few people not happy with the idea of it, but quite a lot of people trusted me on the matter.  And I'm glad they did, because I worked hard to be honest with all of my connections and the communities I've been a part of.

Anyways, getting on a tangent here.  In short, I had to put down a lot of work to get it done and I made sure not to step on too many toes.  It was roughly a week or so of talks to make it happen.  I also told my Rose contacts what we expected.  They just wanted to be protected while they fixed their internal issues and reform, but we told them we don't do protectorates.  So if we were to get attacked, we wanted them immediately on board with us.  If they were to get attacked, we would immediately jump to assist them as well.   None of this lollygagging bullshit that some alliances do.  We gave them our expectations, nothing more, nothing less.  I'd like to think they appreciated the upfront honesty and dedication we were to provide in assisting them in rebuilding.

 

Sidenote:  You did claim that Rose was talking to Mensa "presigning" in the past arguments with durmij and Sketchy.  Other than us making fun of each other and just keeping in touch, that wasn't the case.  When I was approached "about a protectorate tie", it was a complete surprise.

Thanks for the exposition. I was just saying if you wanted more people to fight,  not less, you wouldn't be trying to lessen the numbers of potential opposition.

Now durmij is saying he signed Mensa because he liked Mensa and not for protection/avoiding getting rolled. I'm not the one being inconsistent here.

My statement in the post you quoted was  "don't really think I ever made the claim that Rose [wasn't(emphasis here) talking to Mensa presigning", so I was consistent with that. I did claim that Rose was talking to Mensa presigning, which is because I knew durmij had been a diplomat to Mensa so I had made the assumption there was a gradual build up of relations.

 

 

1 hour ago, Insert Name Here said:

Okay so on one side we have a sphere who's afraid of attacking because they think the EMC splinters are still working together. On the other side we have a sphere that has imploded (I do think it's genuine because, like Dr. Rush said, EMC could just stay together and still be able to fight IQ as a whole, without going through the trouble of cancelling treaties and all that involves).

So we're doomed not to have war, as one side is paranoid and the other has fragmented itself, leaving the former alliances vulnerable to go on the offensive against a much larger force. I guess you guys can just pack it in and go play something else then. There's many other places where you can just bicker, having it result in absolutely nothing.

If the goal of the move is to peel alliances away from IQ by breaking up formally as EMC, then they wouldn't be able to stay together.  They have spots where they don't have an advantage, so it is beneficial for them for IQ to break up. The split hasn't actually happened yet. Rose cancelling isn't the execution of the split. 

It would be pretty easy for people to arrange stuff like DrRush brought up if they were so inclined. Plenty of people usually don't fight more than a round in wars against lower tier opponents, so they could easily do some limited wars without really setting themselves back much especially if they had ground rules.  If a normal war happens, it'll just be the usual people fighting most of it and then people will say it's going on too long, so there isn't much of a rush to get back to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I don't really blame you for being skeptical, Roq. Better safe than sorry after all. But in this case I do believe most of the alliances that composed EMC are tired of the old dynamic (2 big spheres going at it time and time again).

Sure a similar war - more or less with the same alliances fighting each other - can happen. I'm not in the loop so I can't be 100% sure EMC's fragmentation is genuine. Do I think it is? Yes. Is there any way IQsphere can find out? Also yes, by testing the waters. Get a coalition to hit TKR, Guardian, Panth, TCW and maybe TFP since they'd jump in, even though they can't make that much of a difference in a large scale conflict.

I mean, sure there's a chance the likes of t$, Rose and tC jump in, but I highly doubt it tbh. At least then you'll know where you stand and if EMC's former members do join forces, the worst thing you'll have is good PR from them lying through their teeth about splitting up. And if they don't jump in IQsphere will do some serious damage. Sure the upper tier would be a pain in the ass, but you'd certainly rip the likes of TKR to shreds.

As things stand all you have is a never-ending doubt about what's going on.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Insert Name Here said:

Okay so on one side we have a sphere who's afraid of attacking because they think the EMC splinters are still working together. On the other side we have a sphere that has imploded (I do think it's genuine because, like Dr. Rush said, EMC could just stay together and still be able to fight IQ as a whole, without going through the trouble of cancelling treaties and all that involves).

So we're doomed not to have war, as one side is paranoid and the other has fragmented itself, leaving the former alliances vulnerable to go on the offensive against a much larger force. I guess you guys can just pack it in and go play something else then. There's many other places where you can just bicker, having it result in absolutely nothing.

What EMC splinters? Only Rose has did shit and Bad Company formed up with NB? That’s such a big move? BC wasn’t that big anyway and NB never even fought for EMC, neither did BC. On top of that, majority of EMC is still together. 

IMG_2989.png?ex=65e9efa9&is=65d77aa9&hm=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Insert Name Here said:

Meh, I don't really blame you for being skeptical, Roq. Better safe than sorry after all. But in this case I do believe most of the alliances that composed EMC are tired of the old dynamic (2 big spheres going at it time and time again).

Being skeptical is best tactic 

4 hours ago, Insert Name Here said:

Is there any way IQsphere can find out? Also yes, by testing the waters. Get a coalition to hit TKR, Guardian, Panth, TCW and maybe TFP since they'd jump in, even though they can't make that much of a difference in a large scale conflict.

I mean, sure there's a chance the likes of t$, Rose and tC jump in, but I highly doubt it tbh. At least then you'll know where you stand and if EMC's former members do join forces, the worst thing you'll have is good PR from them lying through their teeth about splitting up.

And if they don't, then IQ would face a devasting blow to our PR. There's no guarantees, and a PR war can win or lose a global war. The question is, is it worth the risk or not, to get the pros to outweigh the cons, and right now, the cons outweigh the pros for a risk to be taken, but that's just my opinion. I do not speak for IQ :v

  • Upvote 1

PoJQyFJ.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Roquentin said:

In this case, the problem is prolonging a winning streak at all costs isn't reconcilable with caring about "what's good for the game", which is the sudden rationale for the splits here.  The issue is the new narrative clashes with the old of always trying to come out ahead. Constantly winning by one group will definitely result in a fairly rigid, unchanging situation.  When people go on about how they've always and insisted the records reflect that and then expect other people to compromise themselves by shedding the allies who have been willing to stay through losing wars, it's not going to get a positive reception. When people tout their record of winning every war, winning every war since x date, and so on any move will be seen as a power play to procure an advantage. Nukes launched is a different thing since nukes launched wouldn't always coincide with material superiority. I mean winning in the traditional sense of material superiority. If there was an alternative culture where people cared about the nukes launched or whatever, then it'd be a different value system. The two could co-exist.  No one is trying to make you feel bad about succeeding but when people(I'm not talking about you specifically since obviously you're not in a mainstream alliance) who have been part of that  start preaching about how they're making changes for the good of the game, they're going to get a lot of cynicism rather than taken at face value. That's why it matters a lot.

Oh, I never sold or bought the narrative that EMC or Syndisphere, whatever you wanna call it, did what they did for the good of the game. From my point of view what happened was that we reached the top, we climbed the mountaintop, and once we were there a lot of people started asking "okay, so what next"? We just started looking for the next mountain to climb, the next challenge. I'm sure there were some people who employed the rationale that their actions would benefit the game as a whole (and maybe their actions did, in some way) but I strongly doubt that was the main motivation for most.

You're right that constant winning from one side creates a rigid status quo and that the prospect of shedding loyal allies will usually get a negative reception. Both these things happened to Syndisphere/OO/EMC, first with the split in OO that led to IQ and second when the Syndicate and friends went paperless. They abandoned the hegemoney because they were bored with it, because they wanted new and exciting challenges. And as it turns out, going paperless is perceived as being more challenging than maintaining a hegemoney. Now, you're free to believe that the split wasn't real, it doesn't really matter to me if you do or not. I know it was real, but I also know that just because the split was genuine and we don't have the same obligating ties to what remains of EMC doesn't mean there aren't people who split from it that are willing to fight on EMC's side. I don't see any point in denying this. But the fact of the matter is, the only reason post-EMC alliances would be willing to team up with their previous sphere is the threat IQ represents. You can claim you don't have any hostile intentions towards anyone if that's what you want to do but none of that matters to any of us when we don't trust you. There's clearly a mutual lack of trust that is in many ways shaping the current dynamics of the game. The point is, if there was no perceived threat from IQ, there would be no reason for EMC splinters to join forces with their former allies in order to counter said threat. IQ serves as a justification for such actions the same way EMC and splinters serve as a justification for IQ to consolidate and maintain the status quo. It's all very dialectic. I don't expect you to abandon any of your allies for the sake of anyone outside IQ. I really don't. But I do expect you to understand that as long as IQ is seen as a threat, people will be willing to band together to oppose it.

The two do co-exist. There are alternative cultures, certainly when it comes to nukes in the form of nuke bloc. They don't give a damn about material superiority, they just want to nuke people. To them, the defining value of winning is nuclear radiation. Arrgh is another example of a different value system, where infrastructure is the least valuable thing they have. My point was that the values that define what winning is aren't set in stone and aren't universal.

4 hours ago, Kastor said:

What EMC splinters? Only Rose has did shit and Bad Company formed up with NB? That’s such a big move? BC wasn’t that big anyway and NB never even fought for EMC, neither did BC. On top of that, majority of EMC is still together. 

I'm pretty sure he's referring to the alliances that left the hegemoney and went paperless.

 

Edited by Big Brother
Typos
  • Upvote 3

orwell_s_1984_oceania_s_currency_by_dungsc127_d97k1zt-fullview.jpg.9994c8f495b96849443aa0defa8730be.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Buorhann said:

There are definitely more reasons than just one for a move such as that.  Rose approached us to reconcile and find new friends.  I looked at it much differently than what the rest of Mensa saw it as.  Half the membership in Mensa didn't want to sign Rose because "!@#$ Rose" (Or similar grudge like sentiments, plus it'd be less war for us overall).  The other half trusted my judgement on the matter.  Regardless of which side a member was, we did appreciate and enjoy the conversations we've had with them on our embassy thread for them.  It was good friendly banter.

However, "I" won't deny the fact that it served multiple purposes.   I've been a long time advocate against people who are shitty leaders for their alliances, and Rose was one of the alliances I was adamantly vocal about in the past (Both Keegoz and Pubbie can agree with this).

Here's a list:

-I actually enjoyed a lot of conversations I had with Rose members, so getting me to work on signing them wasn't too hard to persuade me with

-I wanted to show them how we operated in Syndisphere and why we were effective

-I wanted to lessen the growing numbers of a coalition forming against us, especially considering the fact we were starting to lose members for various reasons

-The fact Rose was being thrown around like a ragdoll between alliance ties, I honestly felt bad for them.

There are other reasons, but those are the four that stand out to me from the top of my head.  Notice something there though, I stated " I " a lot.  While I was the FA of Mensa and one of the more vocal leaders in the Syndisphere coalition, I had to take all of that and talk to our allies and Mensa's own members to get them on board with it.  There were quite a few people not happy with the idea of it, but quite a lot of people trusted me on the matter.  And I'm glad they did, because I worked hard to be honest with all of my connections and the communities I've been a part of.

 

 

53 minutes ago, Big Brother said:

You can claim you don't have any hostile intentions towards anyone if that's what you want to do but none of that matters to any of us when we don't trust you. There's clearly a mutual lack of trust that is in many ways shaping the current dynamics of the game.

 

Quoting these two specific points for one reason. Rose worked out their issues or put in work on the Mensa tie and vice versa. There was a gradual build up of relations and that helped them work on whatever issues I guess, i.e build trust. The second quote pretty much adds into the very problem we have with this whole split. We don't trust you and neither have you folks reached out to clean the slate and build ties. If we break up, we're not going to be able to build new ties (because EMC splinters have no intention to be friendly, their posts here and lack of action on building ties further adds into that belief), which leaves IQ or the split parts to be talking with one another because, well you folks have no intentions to really come across the board and start discussions and work on building trust. You can't expect us to break up when we see nothing from it, or from your FA folks, because there has been no change in dynamic. You folks dislike us for whatever reasons, have no intention to build trust/work on ties and are overtly hostile at every turn. Under those circumstances, it makes no sense for us to break up just to play into your narratives. If this break up is real as you all so claim then get your diplomats of their asses and actually go about building new relationships. Seeing how you've been asking us to do thing for the last few weeks yet have done nothing but complain and expect us to do all the work for you, only goes to shore up my belief in the fact that this split is not real. 

Work on your goddamn FA in making us believe in your moves and then go from there. You folks don't get to complain and offer us no means to build ties when its all just some preachy dogma you folks are selling for the peanut gallery and really zero change in the political dynamics of the game. We don't trust you and you are hostile and refuse to talk with us (NPO being the us here), then you're not going to find any of us believing in any of the shit you folks try to spin out here. A lot can be done if you know, you follow what @Buorhann outlined above. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That also goes for IQ aligned alliances too, @Shadowthrone.  Goes both ways.

We also didn't exactly trust Rose initially, but we did clearly mention that we're putting a lot on the line for the treaty.  They were aware of what could happen if things went differently.  (Plus there was more behind the scenes that they can talk about if they wish to do so) I'd say a lot of trust buildup occurred AFTER the treaty signing, which is strange to hear but they showed they were willing to work with us.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

Quoting these two specific points for one reason. Rose worked out their issues or put in work on the Mensa tie and vice versa. There was a gradual build up of relations and that helped them work on whatever issues I guess, i.e build trust. The second quote pretty much adds into the very problem we have with this whole split. We don't trust you and neither have you folks reached out to clean the slate and build ties. If we break up, we're not going to be able to build new ties (because EMC splinters have no intention to be friendly, their posts here and lack of action on building ties further adds into that belief), which leaves IQ or the split parts to be talking with one another because, well you folks have no intentions to really come across the board and start discussions and work on building trust. You can't expect us to break up when we see nothing from it, or from your FA folks, because there has been no change in dynamic. You folks dislike us for whatever reasons, have no intention to build trust/work on ties and are overtly hostile at every turn. Under those circumstances, it makes no sense for us to break up just to play into your narratives. If this break up is real as you all so claim then get your diplomats of their asses and actually go about building new relationships. Seeing how you've been asking us to do thing for the last few weeks yet have done nothing but complain and expect us to do all the work for you, only goes to shore up my belief in the fact that this split is not real. 

Work on your goddamn FA in making us believe in your moves and then go from there. You folks don't get to complain and offer us no means to build ties when its all just some preachy dogma you folks are selling for the peanut gallery and really zero change in the political dynamics of the game. We don't trust you and you are hostile and refuse to talk with us (NPO being the us here), then you're not going to find any of us believing in any of the shit you folks try to spin out here. A lot can be done if you know, you follow what @Buorhann outlined above. 

Woah man, I'm paperless and bloc neutral. Don't group me in with everyone in EMC or with the EMC splinters. I'm not telling you that you need to split up IQ, I'm just saying that you shouldn't be surprised that people see you as a threat nor that people are willing to combine their forces to counter the threat they perceive. The point I was making is that the number one cause of a supposedly non-genuine split is the existence of a larger threat that forces the alliances that would like to commit to wholly different courses of action to prioritize countering that threat. This isn't a narrative, it's just observation and reason. Personally, I have very little interest in the relationship between IQ and EMC. I'm not a part of either and if anyone in IQ wants to improve their relationships with anyone in EMC or previously in EMC, that's between you and them. Leave me and my alliance out of it. Maybe I shouldn't speak for everyone but if we (CoS) ever want better relations with anyone in IQ (or anyone else for that matter), I'm pretty sure we'll let you know.

You're right that the will to improve ties has to exist, but they have to exist on both sides. Improving relations is a two-way street, you know. One side making overtures isn't going to be enough, it has to be reciprocated. Right now, it doesn't seem to me that either side is making any attempt to develop and strengthen ties with people in the opposing sphere and thus the status quo remains. Frankly, telling people's diplomats to get off their asses when your own diplomat's asses are seemingly just as planted in their seats, just strikes me as rude and hypocritical. I don't give a damn what the relations between EMC and IQ are or if you fix them, but to shuffle the responsibility entirely over to the other side is wrong and counterproductive, plain and simple. Like I said, both sides have to take steps.

I'm not trying to sell you a narrative, I don't care what your two spheres do. It's your responsibility to work it out and change the status quo if that's what you want to do. Don't tell me and my alliance what to do and leave us out of it.  It really doesn't matter all that much to us, we'll always find some way to have fun even if you guys don't. Your problems aren't our problems.

Edited by Big Brother
  • Upvote 2

orwell_s_1984_oceania_s_currency_by_dungsc127_d97k1zt-fullview.jpg.9994c8f495b96849443aa0defa8730be.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Roquentin said:

When did I say that?  I used stockholm syndrome multiple times. Either way, it entailed bandwagoning to avoid getting rolled or avoiding disbandment I guess(since people are saying Mensa saved Rose from disbanding) and you joined the dominant side by doing so shortly after a war. It contributed to the most unipolar situation the game has ever seen in its existence and it will always appear that to many people. The fact it got a fairly uncritical reception by the mainstream crowd doesn't change that. I definitely don't think you would have signed Mensa if it was them that had kept getting rolled, however.

"When did I say your motives weren't genuine. I really said you were too stupid to know your own motives." Your constant attempts to gaslight me about my own actions are pathetic and insulting. We've been at this for a year, you can stop now.

6 hours ago, Roquentin said:

Now durmij is saying he signed Mensa because he liked Mensa and not for protection/avoiding getting rolled. I'm not the one being inconsistent here.

You're acting as if people only ever have one motivator. Are you blind to nuance? I said my FA was relationship led, not pure happy friend fun times. If Mensa was as good as they were, but I didn't like them, I wouldn't have signed them. If I liked them but they we're like, Cornerstone tier, I wouldn't have signed them. The 2 benchmarks for signing, at least at the start of my term when I gave a shit, were that I liked them and they were functionally competent. This is the answer to the great unsolved mystery of why Rose and Mensa signed.

48 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

~snip~

Have you tried not being dicks? What have you done to reach out other than seek to add alliances to your victim card circlejerk? The first step in fixing Rose's FA I had to undertake was eating a ton of crow about our situation. What have we seen from IQ? More consolidation, dragging a war out so they can get a useless pity term in a white peace, lying/being delusional about how well certain alliances did in the war and enough text about how we're all disingenuous to fill a shelf of a library.

You have the upper hand after the destruction of EMC so you have the responsibility of putting in work on the first steps. You are far and away the strongest single bloc as well as the most treaty dense and immobile because of your supremacy clause.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Durmij asking Roquentin if hes blind to nuance lmfao.

Durmij bruh are you blind to Roquentin?

Dude wouldn't know nuance if it hit him over the head with a 2x4 and kidnapped his whole family.

  • Upvote 4

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sketchy said:

Durmij asking Roquentin if hes blind to nuance lmfao.

Durmij bruh are you blind to Roquentin?

Dude wouldn't know nuance if it hit him over the head with a 2x4 and kidnapped his whole family.

It's a rhetorical question designed to help a third party reader understand my argument and empathize with my dismissal of it. Roq has basically been trying to softboy me for over a year. He knows exactly what the !@#$ing nuance is.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, durmij said:

It's a rhetorical question designed to help a third party reader understand my argument and empathize with my dismissal of it. Roq has basically been trying to softboy me for over a year. He knows exactly what the !@#$ing nuance is.

Roquentin would never pretend to be a delusional moron in order to advance political narratives against his opponents.

Such slander must be met with the full force of IQ's wrath. This is a valid CB.

No balls declare a war !@#$.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

Roquentin would never pretend to be a delusional moron in order to advance political narratives against his opponents.

Such slander must be met with the full force of IQ's wrath. This is a valid CB.

No balls declare a war !@#$.

Honestly, giving Roq a CB everyday is half the reason I haven't deleted yet.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Buorhann said:

To be fair, durmij, Mensa was always dick-ish, lol.

But honest. Nicety isn't worth much if you can't trust the other person. You were the first group of people I met in this game who consistently spoke their minds with no filters. Others were "nice" to me, but it was always with the FA sheen of doing diplomat work. That's why it meant so much when Rose was finally not garbage and you lot saw it. I knew I wasn't getting smoke blown up my ass. People think be friendly with someone is always about telling them how perfect they are, but some times you have to tell them to get their shit together.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Karl VII

Half a year ago:

Syndissphere: You guys did declare war on us with a flimsy CB, you guys are the !@#$ing worst!

Now:

Ex-Syndissphere: You guys are not starting wars left and right, you guys are destroying the game!

confused amy poehler GIF by Sisters
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Karl VII said:

Ex-Syndissphere: You guys are not starting wars left and right, you guys are destroying the game

1

Nobody is irritated at IQ for not starting wars. They're irritated at IQ for consolidating more and more while the other side has been breaking up.

  • Upvote 6

new_forum_sig_2.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Thalmor said:

Nobody is irritated at IQ for not starting wars.

Well, I am. Not that that irritation is solely with IQ, but still.

  • Upvote 3

Dec 26 18:48:22 <JacobH[Arrgh]>    God your worse the grealind >.>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stopped reading this somewhere around page 3 apologies if this has been said already  

 

Someone has to lose. Everyone seems to be too afraid to do something that might risk them to lose. It’s a game, take a chance, losing or winning doesn’t matter. Having fun does. 

  • Upvote 2

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Judge Dredd said:

I stopped reading this somewhere around page 3 apologies if this has been said already  

 

Someone has to lose. Everyone seems to be too afraid to do something that might risk them to lose. It’s a game, take a chance, losing or winning doesn’t matter. Having fun does. 

The thing is, EMC has pushed away a big majority and clumped all the losers together. Now they finally have power and don’t want to lose.

Just now, Judge Dredd said:

Only under Pfeifer. Mensa after him rode on the legacy he established without adding much to it. 

This^^^^ @Buorhann

If you take Pfeiffer’s leadership away, Mensa was your average Syndisphere alliance. Very tame and did what Partisan said. Never hit another alliance aligned towards them, and only rolled people they could dominate until the next big war.

IMG_2989.png?ex=65e9efa9&is=65d77aa9&hm=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.