Ex v TRE, Clearing the truth from the lies

[DeletedUser]

The only duke as far as Nathan was concerned was Chris, even as far as Chris was, was you he told me you was a co player not a co duke which is why he made me duke when he left

He only gave you baron privs, i still had my duke privs.

 

[DeletedUser]

I say how the war started should not be the topic of the day but the LAZINESS and inexcusable lack of fire from ex should be...They are just embarrassing as a tribe.

I have no idea on wich of our members you have been fighting, cause my general opinion is that we fight back very good. At least in K72 where I am. And please elaborate on what level we are embarrassing as a tribe cause I dont really understand what you have drawn that conclusion from. Cause the majority of us sure aint lazy.

 

[DeletedUser94483]

[spoil]

[/spoil]

Not lazy?

 

[Deleted User - 4669627]

I say how the war started should not be the topic of the day but the LAZINESS and inexcusable lack of fire from ex should be...They are just embarrassing as a tribe.

i wonder why they are incapable of putting up much fight :icon_confused:

[spoil]since we are all posting stats :icon_redface:

Side 1:
Tribes: HotRex, ~MW~
Side 2:
Tribes: Ex


Timeframe: Forever


Total conquers against opposite side:


Side 1: 1,762
Side 2: 479
Difference: 1,283

Points value of total conquers against opposite side:


Side 1: 16,531,132
Side 2: 4,503,876
Difference: 12,027,256

[/spoil]
while we all appreciate the sudden burst of activity in the w64 forums, really there is not much to be said
ex declared on tre, tre has done very well against them, so they want to talk shit (understandably so)
but we all know why Ex cannot seem to put up much fight
regrettably, it is simply not a situation where much shit can be talked

your tribe is doing very well in your stats, we all know it, we all see it
but it is, by your own admission (all the talk of what a bad move it was for Ex to declare when they were already fighting a losing war), a "gift horse"
and what is the rule about gift horses?

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/don't_look_a_gift_horse_in_the_mouth

 

[DeletedUser]

you dont look at theyr theet?

 

[Deleted User - 4669627]

when the horse gets older, the gums pull back, the teeth look longer

if somebody gifts you a horse, you do not check to see how old is the horse
it is a gift, you do not question a gift

 

[bronzed]

TBH for the stats I don't think Hotrex can be used as a excuse the majority (I would estimate about 90%+) of what TRE has taken is the FU guys who joined Ex, who TRE has been at war at for three months, which just shows how idiotic the decision was for Ex to side with FU over TRE

 

[DeletedUser107592]

But then the thing is the anger I had towards you for constantly lying and betraying TRE with the FU merge, which is what the insults I gave you was founded upon was shared by the tribe maybe they didn't agree with me insulting you publically but they agreed with the reason that I was, your alliance and then merge with FU was a completely p*** take, and a insult to the alliance, and I genuinely think that is what you aren't getting.

It's not like I insulted you and slagged you of for no reason I did so because of your betrayl of the alliance, if I had done so for no reason I would probably of been kicked, but when I was slagging you off the TRE council was talking about the possibility of ending the alliance and declaring war, there was votes going on in the tribe about doing just that, a council member told me that your friend in k50 could be rimmed the next day if the talks went the way they thought it would, with the alliance being dropped, I just didn't give you chance to stack it before the declaration and with the incoming support I was right to do so.

so bottom line, you blame me but the annoyance/anger/betrayal of Ex I felt by your decisions was shared by TRE members, which is why there was votes to end the alliance and people did vote for war, I was just the only one to tell you what I thought of you rather than play nice to your face and discuss ending the alliance behind your back.

Apr 28 23:52

The tribe has canceled their relationship with Ex.

thats when TRE done it so can we put it to bed TRE ended the alliance

So your friend on Council told you that if talks went well you could "rim the ex player in k50 the next day".

So then that means you did that on what 4/27? 4/28? 4/29

One of those dates ^^^ would have been the "next day" correct?

 

[bronzed]

At the end of the day he wasn't in your tribe when I launched attacks (He only joined because I did, which he admittied) We agreed to not attack your friend so he could learn to play the game before he took a Ex account, after obviously learning and nobling a village he had learned, there was no formal agreement in place.

At the end of the day it was just that a friendly, non-formal agreement, it seems silly to me a tribe wants to keep the friendly agreements in place that benefit them while at the same time allying with someone the tribe is at war at. Thats just bonkers logic.

 

[DeletedUser107592]

You never answered my question above.

Could it be despite what you said you actually nobled his village on 4/8. That was two weeks before your supposed convo with some supposed council member in TRE and about 3 weeks before your tribe ended the alliance.

We have covered this attack you made on an EX player several times before yet you keep trying to manipulate the time line. I understand why you want to do that. You want to be able to flap your gums about how EX recruited FU, etc, etc, etc, ..

and not about how you not only came into my forums using profanity but nobled an EX player in violation of the alliance two weeks before FU was recruited because you "don't like other players in your area".

.....when bronzed talks about nobling the Ex player, how he was not in the tribe, travel times, etc.
Ex has the reports. The travel time the nobles were sent from to the Ex players village was 1 hour 52 minutes roughly. That player had been in Ex about 12 hours when the noble were sent.

So no misunderstanding there, just another of the endless attempts by him to stir up conflict between the two tribes.

1. You are allied with a tribe.
2. You know a player is going to join that tribe
3. You are protective of "your farms"
4. You go noble the player and then claim it was before he was in EX and it was because of Ex and FU's alliance.

He nobled the village on April the 8th and we allied FU on April 21st. Pretty much speaks for its self as to if it was a "misunderstanding or a lie".

The "attack" you are trying to flap your gums about the "day before he joined EX" was a scout attack that you made that you lost all scouts on and was not the "day before he joined" but well before that.. So quit trying to manipulate the time line it is not going to work.

You attacked and nobled an EX member approximately two weeks before the alliance was ended. So there was a formal agreement "at the end of the day" which you broke.

Try and tell the truth for a change huh?

What it actually came down to was "you didn't like other players in your area" and attacked an allied member in an allied tribe just like you attacked your own member when you did not like where he took barbs at

 

[bronzed]

Actually i never said the date if you say it was the 8th it happened, that it means this conversation I had with said council member happened on the 7th of April, feel free to ask Lish who said that to me, but as i said, rather than waiting for you to attempt to stack, I took it out straight away. Lish shouted at me, but you was merging with an war enemy, if others want to be blind to your attempts to screw over TRE, thats there choice, but i wasn't going to risk my area which i had worked hard to screw in the past because of the soft line which was being taken on Ex and the attempts to screw over TRE

A) Even if it was just a scout attack, you recruited from a member who had just been attacked from a ally, meaning you knowingly recruited a refugee

B) I had sent attacks and 1 train before he joined anyway, I had never noticied he joined Ex when i sent the second attacks (He was highlighted on my map, and i never his villages co-ordinates anyway) So I never knowingly attacked a Ex member, you knowingly recruited a TRE refugee.

But then again this shows why I like and trust Lish as the leader of TRE, he was one of the council he could see through FU and Ex, and knew we had to stand up for ourselves, and was prepared to go to war, not attempt to hug and only fight when we had to, like the previous duke.

TBH cry over those villages if you want but as the merge was agreed before i took those two villages, as a result of the merge, we was always going to take those villages, even if we just dropped the alliance and had no diplomacy we would of took those villages, and there would of been no alliance after a Ex/FU merge, so I don't see the point of crying over them, you would of lost them anyway.

As has been said at the end of the day, TRE are in this war because of Ex merging with FU. Ex are (apparently) in this war, because I insulted them, which I did because of Ex merging with FU.

So both situations result to this war happening because Ex merging with FU

 

[DeletedUser107592]

Actually i never said the date if you say it was the 8th it happened, that it means this conversation I had with said council member happened on the 7th of April, feel free to ask Lish who said that to me, but as i said, rather than waiting for you to attempt to stack, I took it out straight away. Lish shouted at me, but you was merging with an war enemy, if others want to be blind to your attempts to screw over TRE, thats there choice, but i wasn't going to risk my area which i had worked hard to screw in the past because of the soft line which was being taken on Ex and the attempts to screw over TRE

A) Even if it was just a scout attack, you recruited from a member who had just been attacked from a ally, meaning you knowingly recruited a refugee

B) I had sent attacks and 1 train before he joined anyway, I had never noticied he joined Ex when i sent the second attacks (He was highlighted on my map, and i never his villages co-ordinates anyway) So I never knowingly attacked a Ex member, you knowingly recruited a TRE refugee/

Straight utter bovine excrement.

The problem with chronic liars is as you have just proven they can't keep their stories straight because they tell so many lies.

Lie #1 above. "but you was merging with an war enemy"

You nobled him on the 8th. No merge occured until the 21st.

Lie #2. "A) Even if it was just a scout attack, you recruited from a member who had just been attacked from a ally, meaning you knowingly recruited a refugee"

You had already been told to leave him alone. Not only that, an unsuccessful attack on someone does not make them a refugee. If that was the case everyone playing this game would be a refugee. Send one ram at them, wham bam, they are a refugee. You know better than that.

Even Lish said he was no refugee since you are so fond of mentioning him.

Lie #3. "Actually i never said the date if you say it was the 8th it happened, that it means this conversation I had with said council member happened on the 7th of April"

You already covered the dates above and you know it.

" next day if the talks went the way they thought it would, with the alliance being dropped

The alliance was dropped on the 28th following the TRE discussions. They did not happen on the 7th.

Lie #4. " I had sent attacks and 1 train before he joined anyway, I had never noticied he joined Ex when i sent the second attacks "

He joined EX 12 hours before you attacked him from one hour and 52 minutes away. AGAIN We have the reports archived from where you attacked from and they have already been posted in this thread previously.

Any more lies?

At the end of the day it was just that a friendly, non-formal agreement, it seems silly to me a tribe wants to keep the friendly agreements in place that benefit them while at the same time allying with someone the tribe is at war at. Thats just bonkers logic.

So at the end of the day it seemed silly to me to maintain an alliance with a tribe where the allied tribe members feel free to attack your members because they don't like their locations and when they repeatedly come into your forums using unacceptable profanity repeatedly. Thats just bonkers logic.

Even more bonkers logic is when they (you) then come into this forum claiming your reason for doing what you did was because of some merge that did not happen until two weeks after your actions.

 

[Deleted User - 4669627]

TBH for the stats I don't think Hotrex can be used as a excuse the majority (I would estimate about 90%+) of what TRE has taken is the FU guys who joined Ex, who TRE has been at war at for three months, which just shows how idiotic the decision was for Ex to side with FU over TRE

tbh, it is far from me and does not concern my tribe, so i have no idea who is killing who or where anybody came from
if they are FU caps, my bad, no offense was meant either way, i just get sick of seeing people talk about how lazy the tribe that has the most incomings is because they do not retaliate when anybody who has been in their situation knows they are lucky if they can even defend halfway decent and launching a counter-op would be like pulling a rainbow out of their ass

 

[bronzed]

I do love you have shown your 'change of diplomacy' with FU, and saying, that clearly can't be the reason i took out your player.

We all know the arguments about FU/Ex started on the evening of the 7th of April, after Warlord the duke of FU said this

[4/7/2013 1:34:14 PM] Warlord228: 2 with links to Ex now
[4/7/2013 1:34:16 PM] Warlord228: which btw
[4/7/2013 1:34:19 PM] Warlord228: is our family tribe.
[4/7/2013 1:34:35 PM] Warlord228: as of tomorrow an attack on Fu will be one on Ex.
[4/7/2013 1:34:41 PM] Warlord228: well not even tomorrow
[4/7/2013 1:34:43 PM] Warlord228: later today

Though of course you denied it, amusingly you guys had different stories, your council said 'we have never spoke to FU', and the co-duke said 'We have started talks with them, but nothing is decided'

It was on the evening on the 7th of April TRE had a vote, the three options was

A) End the war with FU
B) Continue the war with FU, at risk of Ex ending the alliance
C) Continue the war with FU, end the alliance with Ex and look to NAP with Hotrex.

I think it was close but B won out, but people was peeved at Ex from there, but we wanted to focus on FU.

Now as i said some attacks was launched on the enemy, as i was launching them at night and his co-ords was in my history, and i wasn't checking the map, just sending from villages, however i had launched before he joined, and he launched when he had incoming, which does make him a refugee, and he admitted such a fact. So you recruited a refugee.

And join you guys? That was never agreed the agreement was he would be left alone so he could learn the basics of the game, he clearly had, and then join the Ex account and the villages would become TRE's.

So he could noble, so i decided he had clearly learnt all he needs to know, and i didn't want the friend of the tribe who was trying to screw us over in my back yard (afterall i run a tight ship) so i took him out, afterall he was friends with our enemy's ally. Afterall after you guys become allies with FU, it was obvious TRE/Ex alliance would have to end.

Though i do love how back on the 7th, Ex denied talking to FU or having a alliance, yet everything FU said, having a alliance, being family, merger with Ex is all coming true, so maybe just admit you was lying to us a month ago, makes it all easier .

Its boring now I'm quoting my own posts.

Once this intel came out talks with Ex and TRE council started.

On the evening on the 7th I messaged are now duke then baron The Lish saying what about those villages which i then scouted in prep for attack (It was a successful heavy scout attack so unsure what makes you think it was a failed attack, but whatever) Lish like me believed the talks was pointless and said if talks go the way they think he will, we will take the villages aggressively. I decided to just do it, get rid of him, he had done everything he wanted to, so it was his time to depart.

When i noticed he joined Ex, i messaged Lish and Nathan, Nathan didn't seem to bothered Lish wasn't happy as he said it didn't help matters, even though quite clearly from the 7th it was Obvious the alliance was dead.

However considering TRE was told he just wanted to learn the basics, and it wasn't a real account, TRE members sent resources to help, yet after rimming him Ex started to demand two villages in return, even though he only had two villages in the first place coz of TRE's help to get him to do what he wanted so he'd be gone, and the fact FH has admitted bringing in a refugee.

The 7th of April a Cold war with Ex and TRE started, it just took three weeks for it to become a real war.

 

[The Lish]

The timeline isn't as clearcut as you'd like to make it (IMO); bronzed / we were seeing & hearing enough to seriously suggest there was something going on between Ex & [Fu] way before the 'merge' (nice spin on what I'd call recruiting some food and leaving some behind btw), it was denied at every turn by Ex though, and turned out we were right.
There's a lot of hearsay around this though and we'll likely never agree on it at this stage.

Let's agree for a second, just for the sake of argument, that you declared war because of one TRE player and the fact that you don't think we dealt with him properly; if your solution to not liking how we discipline a player is to declare war that's your call, but it's one I disagree with.

You chose to break up what I believe was the only remaining (decent) western alliance over the transgression of one of our players because we wouldn't dismiss him; I refuse to bow down to any other tribe when they demand the dismissal of a member of my tribe as the only solution to a problem.
You were given assurances about it but you chose not to accept them, again your call, but the path you then chose instead was to recruit from a tribe that had backstabbed us and was attacking us, including ex-TRE players that had already shown a propensity to tribe-hop and attack the players that previously supported them.

That led to us dropping the alliance, a few hours later you declared .. my theory is that you thought one of two things would happen - either we'd roll over and say 'ah yeah it's okay we'll get over it it because of the "bigger picture"' OR Ex/[Fu] would wipe us out.
Guess what .. neither happened - all you did was screw the alliance with us and recruit some food ..

I've also asked myself what I'd do if the roles were totally reversed - and I come up with the same answer every time. Pull the shared forum, instruct my members not to engage with him, seek assurances from my ally etc.,
I would have trusted my ally if they said it's been dealt with and won't happen again and I probably would have wanted recompense for the villes as well.
I wouldn't trust or like the loudmouth aggressive player, and I might keep a mental note to come back to it and deal with him, but I wouldn't have tried to bully my ally in to kicking him .. nor would I have merged with my ally's enemy then declared war; there were & are bigger issues to address other than trying to have my ally kick a member and face another clean-up operation in their own backyard.

At this stage the cause of the war is moot and is coming down to 'he said, she said' sort of BS - I think it was Ex's fault and I've no doubt that Ex think it was ours .. we are where we are though and we'll carry on against the tribe that declared on us if that's what we have to do


Edit
Cross-post with bronzed believe it or not :icon_redface:
We weren't happy - but we were still going to be loyal to the member of our tribe, with conditions relating to future conduct obviously.
There was enough evidence for us to be concerned at the [Fu]/Ex situation and enough loyalty that we wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. As already mentioned it really didn't sit well that an ally would make demands on us to dismiss a member of our tribe, especially when all evidence pointed to the fact that we were in the process of being backstabbed by another ally, as bronzed had said already.

We'd offered two villes to compensate for the 2 that were nobled by the way (even though they'd been nobled from a temp account, not from an account Ex were keeping going forward) .. the location of the villes we offered was an issue.

Between 7th April and the night of the 'merge' the alliance remained - when we saw the members moving from [Fu] to Ex (including members that had been attacking us, and members that bailed on us previously and were being attacked by us) we ended the alliance.
It was AFTER that the Ex declared war .. either way you cut it Ex caused this war (either by declaring because we wouldn't kick one of our players, or by recruiting from [Fu] knowing full well what and who they were recruiting).

 

[bronzed]

But Lish, if you remember the two big issues with my slagging of Ex was as a result of the Ex/FU alliance and then the Ex/FU merge coming to light

So if Ex try to say we merged/allied with FU because of me, that is simply not true, i was insultive and agressive to the Ex leadership because of their actions, there actions never happened because of me.

 

[DeletedUser107592]

The timeline isn't as clearcut as you'd like to make it (IMO); bronzed / we were seeing & hearing enough to seriously suggest there was something going on between Ex & [Fu] way before the 'merge' (nice spin on what I'd call recruiting some food and leaving some behind btw), it was denied at every turn by Ex though, and turned out we were right.
There's a lot of hearsay around this though and we'll likely never agree on it at this stage.

Let's agree for a second, just for the sake of argument, that you declared war because of one TRE player and the fact that you don't think we dealt with him properly; if your solution to not liking how we discipline a player is to declare war that's your call, but it's one I disagree with.

You chose to break up what I believe was the only remaining (decent) western alliance over the transgression of one of our players because we wouldn't dismiss him; I refuse to bow down to any other tribe when they demand the dismissal of a member of my tribe as the only solution to a problem.
You were given assurances about it but you chose not to accept them, again your call, but the path you then chose instead was to recruit from a tribe that had backstabbed us and was attacking us, including ex-TRE players that had already shown a propensity to tribe-hop and attack the players that previously supported them.

That led to us dropping the alliance, a few hours later you declared .. my theory is that you thought one of two things would happen - either we'd roll over and say 'ah yeah it's okay we'll get over it it because of the "bigger picture"' OR Ex/[Fu] would wipe us out.
Guess what .. neither happened - all you did was screw the alliance with us and recruit some food ..

I've also asked myself what I'd do if the roles were totally reversed - and I come up with the same answer every time. Pull the shared forum, instruct my members not to engage with him, seek assurances from my ally etc.,
I would have trusted my ally if they said it's been dealt with and won't happen again and I probably would have wanted recompense for the villes as well.
I wouldn't trust or like the loudmouth aggressive player, and I might keep a mental note to come back to it and deal with him, but I wouldn't have tried to bully my ally in to kicking him .. nor would I have merged with my ally's enemy then declared war; there were & are bigger issues to address other than trying to have my ally kick a member and face another clean-up operation in their own backyard.

At this stage the cause of the war is moot and is coming down to 'he said, she said' sort of BS - I think it was Ex's fault and I've no doubt that Ex think it was ours .. we are where we are though and we'll carry on against the tribe that declared on us if that's what we have to do


Edit
Cross-post with bronzed believe it or not :icon_redface:
We weren't happy - but we were still going to be loyal to the member of our tribe, with conditions relating to future conduct obviously.
There was enough evidence for us to be concerned at the [Fu]/Ex situation and enough loyalty that we wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. As already mentioned it really didn't sit well that an ally would make demands on us to dismiss a member of our tribe, especially when all evidence pointed to the fact that we were in the process of being backstabbed by another ally, as bronzed had said already.

We'd offered two villes to compensate for the 2 that were nobled by the way (even though they'd been nobled from a temp account, not from an account Ex were keeping going forward) .. the location of the villes we offered was an issue.

Between 7th April and the night of the 'merge' the alliance remained - when we saw the members moving from [Fu] to Ex (including members that had been attacking us, and members that bailed on us previously and were being attacked by us) we ended the alliance.
It was AFTER that the Ex declared war .. either way you cut it Ex caused this war (either by declaring because we wouldn't kick one of our players, or by recruiting from [Fu] knowing full well what and who they were recruiting).

No Lish it was not being dealt with. We repeatedly received assurances from TRE that it would be dealt with and he would repeatedly come back into the shared forums and do it again.

There reaches a point if you are concerned with maintaining the alliance you handle that problem permanently by force internaling that player if need be. When you give assurances repeatedly and the problem is not handled that tells your ally quite clearly you are not interested in remaining their ally.

According to Nathan you were not in a leadership position there, but while still allied with EX and supposedly while at war with Hot Rex with Ex you were contacting Hot Rex players trying to negotiate a Nap with them.

You have tried to instigate to get TRE to ally with Infest and fight against EX while still allied with EX and supposedly fighting with them against Hot Rex.

And this all predates the FU situation its not a new development. Bottom line TRE was using the FU situation to do anything they could except fight Hot Rex just like Cities and his tribe used the situation with Infest to avoid fighting MW.

And yeh there was some talk of a NAP so we can focus on FU, yano where that started from the duke himself? It was a option TRE was considering, dropping the alliance, NAP with Hotrex so we can focus on FU.


So to cut through it all,

(A) Yeah I have wanted TRE to declare on Ex, and ally with Infest...

This predated the FU situation on our part by quite some time. Funny how its ok for YOUR tribe to conduct negotiations with another tribe to bail out from the war with us but we should still consider your tribe to be trustworthy allies. But because we feel your tribe is no longer trustworthy because of your player actively trying to instigate a war between us its not ok for us to conduct negotiations with another tribe. Sort of hypocritical there are you not?

Lets set the record straight. In every tribe you always have some player in this case you who thinks they know better than everyone else. You tried the same garbage of instigating things when you were in @2 to include bullying your own tribe mates there. When that didn't work you ran to TRE where once again you started the same garbage all over again there.

You couldn't get along with leadership no matter what tribe you were in. No matter if it was @, no matter if it was TRE and Nathan. You always knew better, you were always right and they were always wrong.

...why the hell would i want to work with a group of players who was so wrong about FU and Ex, and I was the only one who was right, but instead of anyone apologizing because i was right and they was wrong, all I got was flurries of abuse. Who was the one who dealt with a lot of the FU stuff, who got the alliance with Infest, and secured the border agreement, sat players when no one else would, yet never once is there a thanks, or even acknowledgment, just flurries of abuse and insults.

The fact of the matter is you created the situation, you provoked the situation, just so you would be right and everyone else would be wrong.

I am glad Infest has joined us, as I have always got on with them, tbh I would of joined them long ago, but the council forbid it because of Ex's attitude so they didn't look weak, so I look forward to working with them, as they seem to have a lot more respect and integrity that members like yourself SJ

Thats pretty funny as when you were in @ and I was trying to get @ and Infest to work together you fought it tooth and nail telling me how infest could not be "trusted" and I should believe you.

You chose to break up what I believe was the only remaining (decent) western alliance over the transgression of one of our players...

No Lish. You had a player who thought he knew better than everyone else no matter what tribe he was in, he knew better than the leadership in every tribe he was in, by his own admission only he was right and everyone else was wrong. He was committed to destroying the alliance, his actions clearly showed that yet your tribe not only to no action to stop it, but allowed him to continue it.

TRE destroyed the alliance by allowing him to do so.

EX declaring war was the results of that lack of action.

 

[bronzed]

I hated the leader of ~@~, as did many he had a baron who would be very verbal in sexually abusing women in the Skype chat room to the point every female ~@~ member left.

And feel free to refresh my memory as I don't remember this, I left ~@~ 6months ago now I didn't even realise Infest was around then.

I disagreed with Nathan but we still worked together, quite well, but many did disagree with Nathan, TRE under Nathan had many internal problems, and there was some, even council members who was considering leaving, though TRE is working much better since Lish took over, and now with TRI, Lish and Putrid I'm quite happy with leadership.

The NAP we was considering trying to arrange with Hotrex was to focus on FU, yano just like the NAP you had with FU, difference is you then went and made it an alliance and then merge.

Though I am going to have to look on Skype later as I think NAP consideration with Hotrex wasn't until after Ex and FU started their little pact.

I think the problem here as many have said before, Nathan was maybe a little to soft, Ex knew this and thought they could piss over TRE whenever they wanted, started way back when Ex threatened Infest with TRE, but in the end Ex crossed the line. We all know Ex hoped to manipulate TRE with their declaration and go crying to Ex to get the alliance back, but they pushed TRE to far and as a result they now have no allies and are just considered food to the entire world

 

[DeletedUser107592]

I hated the leader of ~@~, as did many he had a baron who would be very verbal in sexually abusing women in the Skype chat room to the point every female ~@~ member left.

And feel free to refresh my memory as I don't remember this, I left ~@~ 6months ago now I didn't even realise Infest was around then.

I disagreed with Nathan but we still worked together, quite well, but many did disagree with Nathan, TRE under Nathan had many internal problems, and there was some, even council members who was considering leaving, though TRE is working much better since Lish took over, and now with TRI, Lish and Putrid I'm quite happy with leadership.

The NAP we was considering trying to arrange with Hotrex was to focus on FU, yano just like the NAP you had with FU, difference is you then went and made it an alliance and then merge.

Though I am going to have to look on Skype later as I think NAP consideration with Hotrex wasn't until after Ex and FU started their little pact.

I think the problem here as many have said before, Nathan was maybe a little to soft, Ex knew this and thought they could piss over TRE whenever they wanted, started way back when Ex threatened Infest with TRE, but in the end Ex crossed the line. We all know Ex hoped to manipulate TRE with their declaration and go crying to Ex to get the alliance back, but they pushed TRE to far and as a result they now have no allies and are just considered food to the entire world

Yes yes ofc, everyone but you is to soft, everyone but you is wrong, etc, etc,

and once again, we did not threaten INFEST with TRE

I just have one question to Putrid.....so Ex and your friend screwed you over, but why did you declare on every tribe in the west because of that?? It is between you and Ex, not between you and the west.

All those tribes are in alliance.We expect the tribes would of followed and declared on us.

If you notice the specific question was asked why INFEST declared on every tribe in the west. And the reply was not..Hobos threatened us, Hobos used TRE as a weapon against us....but...omg...since we were in an alliance together they just expected the other tribes would follow.

So...another lie.

 

[bronzed]

Actually infest said you did, Nathan said there was quotes of this I think he had posted them at the time.

And a lot of people bought Nathan was to soft so don't make me out as the only one, the day before Lish became duke he was considering leaving and creating a separate tribe due to the softness of Nathan