Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 
And to that end, I can concede that  by coming in for Kush, at the very least, whether by design or not, we are tacitly endorsing their entry into the war. As you radiate out from that point, such support dilutes quickly -- to extrapolate that I am supporting DoDs hit on Sandstorm because I countered Legion's counter of Kashmir seems a stretch -- sort of like saying that candy bar you bought at the gas station supports terrorism because some small percentage of the money ended up in their hands via oil company profits.  While true in a binary sense, the amount is actuarial dust.

It's gratifying to see someone get the first part. Tip of the hat to you for that.

As for radiating out from there, I'd argue that all the ability to confidently initiate a global war hinges on the ability to leverage the global sum of actuarial dust on your side's favor. "Suppose they gave a war and nobody came?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Schatt is just a more verbose Tywin.

 

Vukland you still salty over the one-way NPL/Kashmir rivalry you guys had a couple years ago? I bet you couldn't even tell me what started it, or why it existed.

You are right sir I don't. I was just stating a lot of things have changed on Bob in my absences.  Also few of you besides Walsh would know that I was the second member of SRA. 

 

All that aside I reforming NPL, first act of business is signing a treaty with the Goons.  :mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's gratifying to see someone get the first part. Tip of the hat to you for that.

As for radiating out from there, I'd argue that all the ability to confidently initiate a global war hinges on the ability to leverage the global sum of actuarial dust on your side's favor. "Suppose they gave a war and nobody came?"

 

Fair point -- however, that is where the coalition is formed and pencils such things out.  The planners of this war had no concept we would end up as their actuarial dust -- it is actually possible that Legion government got more warning that some Kashmir members of our entry, much less whoever is leading the "Lulzists."

 

Examining both SRA's treaties and the greater web, the Red Asses could still end up being part of Polar's dust if the right conditions occur.  If that happens, will Polar consider us part of the coalition, welcome us into the coalition planning channels and give us a seat at the negotiating table, or will you consider us a minor case of serendipity?  If the former, I plan on negotiating very favorable terms for a certain donkey themed alliance should Polar's coalition prevail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And to that end, I can concede that  by coming in for Kush, at the very least, whether by design or not, we are tacitly endorsing their entry into the war. As you radiate out from that point, such support dilutes quickly -- to extrapolate that I am supporting DoDs hit on Sandstorm because I countered Legion's counter of Kashmir seems a stretch -- sort of like saying that candy bar you bought at the gas station supports terrorism because some small percentage of the money ended up in their hands via oil company profits.  While true in a binary sense, the amount is actuarial dust.

 

I think I've been fluid in the definition of the word 'coalition' or at the very least inconsistent in respect to your definition. I would consider your coalition to be your side in this war, which you may consider a front. That is to say I consider tJL/Kashmir hitting SUN, the Legion hitting them back and you guys hitting the Legion (for these purposes) separate.

 

So by this distinction I wouldn't argue that you support DoD's hit on Sandstorm, but you do support Kashmirs hit on a neutral alliance because they did not honor their MDP (REF: SUN-Invicta MDP). 

 

I feel as though this implies that I am against Kashmir/tJLs hit, I would just like to point out that I am not, just stating that SRA is defacto supporting Kashmirs hit. Which I also support (the pre-empt that is). I just like playing devils advocate sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All that aside I reforming NPL, first act of business is signing a treaty with the Goons.  :mellow:

 

You reform NPL and I'll follow you anywhere, sir.  Even to a Goons treaty :( :unsure: :o :wacko: :facepalm: :gag: :mellow: Even to a Goons treaty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vukland you still salty over the one-way NPL/Kashmir rivalry you guys had a couple years ago? I bet you couldn't even tell me what started it, or why it existed.


Pretty much boiled down to Rey the Great if memory serves me correct. Started when he was in GOONS and it migrated with him to Kashmir. There was some silly rivalry that brewed afterward but I think that was how it began in honesty. In hindsight it was all pretty stupid, he was but one AA hopper with a loud mouth, of which many exist and really don't reflect the AA of the day they reside in. I ... ehh know this well... it can happen to any AA ... trust me. Edited by King Wally
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think I've been fluid in the definition of the word 'coalition' or at the very least inconsistent in respect to your definition. I would consider your coalition to be your side in this war, which you may consider a front. That is to say I consider tJL/Kashmir hitting SUN, the Legion hitting them back and you guys hitting the Legion (for these purposes) separate.

 

So by this distinction I wouldn't argue that you support DoD's hit on Sandstorm, but you do support Kashmirs hit on a neutral alliance because they did not honor their MDP (REF: SUN-Invicta MDP). 

 

I feel as though this implies that I am against Kashmir/tJLs hit, I would just like to point out that I am not, just stating that SRA is defacto supporting Kashmirs hit. Which I also support (the pre-empt that is). I just like playing devils advocate sometimes.

 

I would agree with that analysis totally.  If that is what Schatt was saying all along and I was too dense to see it, I am in fact an insensate lump.

 

Pretty much boiled down to Rey the Great if memory serves me correct. 

 

Everything in CN boils down to Rey the Great.  Accept it before it destroys you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much boiled down to Rey the Great if memory serves me correct. Started when he was in GOONS and it migrated with him to Kashmir. There was some silly rivalry that brewed afterward but I think that was how it began in honesty. In hindsight it was all pretty stupid, he was but one AA hopper with a loud mouth, of which many exist and really don't reflect the AA of the day they reside in. I ... ehh know this well... it can happen to any AA ... trust me.


Rey was never on the Kashmir AA. But yes, the whole NPL-Kashmir business was silly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would agree with that analysis totally.  If that is what Schatt was saying all along and I was too dense to see it, I am in fact an insensate lump.

 

 

That was my reading of it, though if that is not what he was saying, one could argue that makes me an "insensate lump." Either way, I'm glad we're on the same page (as usual). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rey was never on the Kashmir AA. But yes, the whole NPL-Kashmir business was silly.


Oh I may be recalling another stupid feud we had with that Europa reincarnation... the Chicken thingy AA? Los Polos Hermanos something or other. My apologies! Sure it was another equally small reason anyway. !@#$ happens. Edited by King Wally
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I may be recalling another stupid feud we had with that Europa reincarnation... the Chicken thingy AA? Los Polos Hermanos something or other. My apologies! Sure it was another equally small reason anyway. !@#$ happens.


Kashmir was protected by chax's BFF when we were known as Prototype. After BFF basically became LPH we were aligned with them via our Co-prosperity deal. After Chax left LPH and Rey was leading LPH we remained aligned with them although the relationship was in flux. It's very likely the whole deal was still associated with Rey.
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.


×
×
  • Create New...