T*F Trustworthy? You decide...

Bellerion

Guest
But lets be honest for a second. While it is deceptive, it is a tactic they are using and the world must either get over it or be less trusting. We are not all here for hugz are we? Just means you must be more awake and at the end of the day all you have done is lost a player that couldn't defend himself
 

spleen mage

Contributing Poster
But lets be honest for a second. While it is deceptive, it is a tactic they are using and the world must either get over it or be less trusting. We are not all here for hugz are we? Just means you must be more awake and at the end of the day all you have done is lost a player that couldn't defend himself
Of course it's a tactic, a legit one too. However, the title of this thread is "T*F trustworthy"; clearly the answer is no, they are not. They may be gaining a short term advantage by employing this tactic, but in the long term, i'd be willing to bet the effects are much more harmful :icon_wink:
 

Bellerion

Guest
Agreed, assuming they don't become too strong, then tribes will be eating out of the palm of their hands.
 

ViolentlyHappy

Guest
- You could have kept them neutral? What does forming a NAP solve; now they'd just noble closer to you while under your protection.



- Fair enough.



- You just showed the entire world while it it would be foolish for any tribe to Ally/NAP with you.




- You did.




- Reputation/Trustworthyness does matter on this game. If no-one wants to ally/NAP with you, since you've proved yourself too opportunistic time and time again, then eventually you'l end up subject to a good 'ol gang bang, with no friends to watch your back.

You're ignoring the point though; I never once questioned the reasons for you making a NAP.

The point is, whether you like it or not, you still had a NAP, even if it didn't benefit you(though you made it, so that's your problem). If you wanted to cancel it, you could have easily done so; you could have even attacked them, and when thy asked why you could have mentioned you were terminating the NAP. Instead you chose to keep the NAP whiling nobling their members, and making up excusesto fob them off.

You have shown that you don't take seriously your diplomatic relations. How is any tribe meant to form any relations with you, when they now as soon as their back is turned you might try and get one up on them? Of course you could give them your word that you wouldn't, but at the moment, your word counts for nothing.

What I found perhaps the most worrying, was this point.



At least before, I figured that while OP/Kebabe may not be trustworthy, some of the other T*F leadership might be. Turns out you're all the same.
You all say I happily NAPd with them, but in all honesty, I didn't have much of a choice. One of BoS's advisors, Patriot 13 or whatever he's called was right next to me, as well as his 20 or so PAs. Had I refused his NAP offer, then I would have been a very tasty target for him, and with 20 vs 1 isolated guy (surrounded by tribe members under attack who couldn't support) I had to accept the NAP.

Now end of story. See it from my point of view and stop calling me an idiot. It's an online strategy game, and if you say this isn't strategy then you should go rethink that, just because it's low does not mean it's not strategy.

Also, OP did get hacked, if you bother researching it a bit, you will find that AK_Iceman admitted to the whole thing.
 

ViolentlyHappy

Guest
Of course it's a tactic, a legit one too. However, the title of this thread is "T*F trustworthy"; clearly the answer is no, they are not. They may be gaining a short term advantage by employing this tactic, but in the long term, i'd be willing to bet the effects are much more harmful :icon_wink:
Why take down a tribe with more losses than needed? We could cancel the NAP, have a full blown fair war with all that honour and stuff, or we could play it sneaky and underhanded, and snipe a few vills, and get prepared for it all.
 

the pink panther

Contributing Poster
LOL, exactly as Spleen says they are underhanded and dirty, so to answer this thread no they can't be trusted as they have proven time and again, Whooker I expected better from a tribe you are in
 

bigbadsanta

Guest
You all say I happily NAPd with them, but in all honesty, I didn't have much of a choice. One of BoS's advisors, Patriot 13 or whatever he's called was right next to me, as well as his 20 or so PAs. Had I refused his NAP offer, then I would have been a very tasty target for him, and with 20 vs 1 isolated guy (surrounded by tribe members under attack who couldn't support) I had to accept the NAP.
So you did it for the best interests of yourself not the tribe. Wow great leader you are. Your scared of a little incoming. Whats wrong is T*F not good enough to support its players?
 

kfollmer

Guest
.Optimus Prime. on 03.02. at 14:34
Any tribes you see marked as Allys and Naps are done for marking purposes. We share no diplomatic relations with any tribes
and yes I have someone feeding me info. It seems your own members think your tactics are underhanded. I hope if nothing else i have ruined your reputation and made people think twice about their diplomatic connection with you. I would.
 

JayDie

Guest
Best thing to do here, T*F, is to delete and donate your resources to me :D.
 

whooker

Guest
LOL, exactly as Spleen says they are underhanded and dirty, so to answer this thread no they can't be trusted as they have proven time and again, Whooker I expected better from a tribe you are in
I never said I stood for it or was in any way happy with the way that diplomacy has been used so far. If it was my choice, NAP's would not be used to avoid conflict and wars would be fought one on one or with a steady ally meant to stay...but it is not my choice.

I was simply trying to point out that the first 3-4 days of the NAP, they were simply a marker due to lack of communication. Happy then posted what he did and at that point we (the tribe) found out it was a NAP not a marker, but was an NAP. At that point, I am not sure if the two nobles were finished as they had started before then or if they were started after that point.

Once again though, I am not a leader in anyway at the moment. I lead by reputation and trying to keep it clean...clearly that has not happened with this tribe as of yet. It is never to late for a turn around however.
 

bigbadsanta

Guest
I was simply trying to point out that the first 3-4 days of the NAP, they were simply a marker due to lack of communication
If that is the case then what is this post from your forums about

Happy Cliffjumper on 31.01. at 00:56 Quote
BoS - They are a temporary NAP. If you want to noble one of their members, please contact me first, so I can spin up a story to tell them. If you are already in the process, please continue.

This clearly states that BoS are an NAP. So how come you all thought it was not an NAP?

Do your players not read the forums? In which case the tribe is doomed anyway. Since the communication cant be great from a tribe who doesnt actively read there forums.
 

B.M.A

Guest
You are reeeaally not in a position to be preaching about "clean and tidy" forums :icon_neutral:
erm....actuelly yes i am! :icon_rolleyes:

anyway, lets not start this arguement again, since you seem to be very good at makeing things up.
 

spleen mage

Contributing Poster
You all say I happily NAPd with them, but in all honesty, I didn't have much of a choice. One of BoS's advisors, Patriot 13 or whatever he's called was right next to me, as well as his 20 or so PAs. Had I refused his NAP offer, then I would have been a very tasty target for him, and with 20 vs 1 isolated guy (surrounded by tribe members under attack who couldn't support) I had to accept the NAP.
Nice to know your personal needs comes before your tribes. You'd hamper your tribes expansion for your benefit? I see it's not only other tribes you reserve your underhand tactics for :icon_wink:

Now end of story. See it from my point of view and stop calling me an idiot.
Did I call you an idiot? I don't remember doing so...

It's an online strategy game, and if you say this isn't strategy then you should go rethink that, just because it's low does not mean it's not strategy.
So, you're agreeing with what I'm saying that it is a low tactic? Therefore, I am right in saying that T*F aren't trustworthy? Again, (as pinkpanther said) I'm not arguing about whether the tactic is valid or not, simply that T*F would be the last tribe I would have any kind of relations with.

Also, OP did get hacked, if you bother researching it a bit, you will find that AK_Iceman admitted to the whole thing.
I never said he didn't get hacked, I don't know why you bothered mentioning that. Guilty conscience maybe? :icon_biggrin:

Why take down a tribe with more losses than needed? We could cancel the NAP, have a full blown fair war with all that honour and stuff, or we could play it sneaky and underhanded, and snipe a few vills, and get prepared for it all.
And lose any scrap of integrity in the proccess :)
 
Last edited:

Atraeus

Guest
Wow.

Amidst all the glorious lobbying I find myself witness to a very intriguing turn of events. Debate as you all will - I personally feel this thread has gone as far as it will before descending into fits of bickering - but know those of us not directly involved will tally this information. I for one believe it is reason enough to not trust the tribe in question.

Kfollmer, it was a wise tactic to bring this to the public scene, as history shows a damaged reputation is contagion to a tribe.

Spleen Mage: very solid presentment. You have proven the most lucid and acute in your debates.
 

kfollmer

Guest
Spleen Mage I always liked you on 17. Glad to see you here.

and this kebabe/OP guy sounds like a really good guy yeah? :icon_rolleyes:

[8/31/2008 7:19:15 PM] Kebabe8: I feel so bad
[8/31/2008 7:19:19 PM] Pulsar - Kissing: why?
[8/31/2008 7:19:24 PM] Killa: u should ask mohua
[8/31/2008 7:19:28 PM] Kebabe8: Im using someone for support and i will noble him soon
If I were a tribe that is supporting T*F, I would seriously reconsider this about right now.

Granted it was on another world, and a few months ago, but the persons behavior hasnt changed.
 

MrMacMan

Guest
Moral of the story:
Be wary of other tribes, even those that have a temporary NAP with you.
 

Bellerion

Guest
temporary NAP means they intend attacking you anyway, so not being wary is just plain silly
 

MrMacMan

Guest
Being cautious isn't silly in a war game.

It isn't like being allies is a guarantee that you can't be attacked either.
The game could prevent allies from attacking each other like they do when a player is banned, but that isn't how the game was setup, ergo you need to be on alert even from all possible attackers.

edit:
That whoosh sound you heard was me misreading Bellerion.
 
Last edited by a moderator: