shahenshah Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyE_4ZguchI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Stuart Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Samus' timestamp='1325571643' post='2891327'] Someone remind me how this thread went from praising the 'IRON age' to irrelevant arguements about NPO/DH? [/quote] Maybe the end of the MHA age will cause a return to the age when every topic somehow became about NPO. Edited January 3, 2012 by Charles Stuart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 Maybe it'll be IRON age and not MK age 3.0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Stuart Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325590152' post='2891411'] Maybe it'll be IRON age and not MK age 3.0. [/quote] That is if you really think the MHA age was appropriately named and wasn't in reality the M[s]k[/s]HA age. Edited January 3, 2012 by Charles Stuart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Black Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 [quote name='Charles Stuart' timestamp='1325590987' post='2891414'] That is if you really think the MHA age was appropriately named and wasn't in reality the M[s]k[/s]HA age. [/quote] That really depends on how you define Mostly Harmless, I can't think of anything of truly noteworthy that came out of it, unless you want to include the NpPO beat downs, but judging from CN history its just common practice to see a few beat downs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baltus Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 IRON may become more a important player than MHA, but they can't do it on their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewie Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 Everyone knows that Non Grata are the real puppetmasters of this new age... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baltus Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 [quote name='Stewie' timestamp='1325604258' post='2891497'] Everyone knows that Non Grata are the real puppetmasters of this new age... [/quote] My liege, I thought we were waiting until after the war to announce your victory over the infidels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325575366' post='2891358'] I should have just told MK to suck it and hit Polar when they declared on TOP. I hate to say it, but Nizzle was right. [/quote] Should have listened to me. Its okay though, I forgave you a long time ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RePePe Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 [quote name='Timeline' timestamp='1325549644' post='2891013']I have to ask how many of IRON's so called allies would be willing to support IRON, if IRON found themselves on the losing end of a war such as when IRON, TOP & Co attacked C&G ?[/quote] I'm assuming you were around for the BiPolar War, so I'm just wondering if you had your head up your #$% for the conflict? Let's just say that Valhalla was far from the only ally of IRON to support them in what we knew would be a losing war by the time ^&*( actually hit the fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardonic Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Krack' timestamp='1325551238' post='2891032'] (and it's vassal, GOONS) [/quote] Aren't you just the cutest thing. You're really approaching timeline levels of always-wrong these days, keep it up, it amuses me greatly. Also @ the OP: having the most NS does not make somebody a hegemony. Having a large coalition of alliances and projecting your will on other alliances through military means makes you a hegemony. [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325575366' post='2891358'] I, for one, agree with Krack's point and will apply it to the CAMTIN DoW which was more about a killing machine rather than a preemptive strike against CSN, TTK, and CRAP. I mean, it said it in topic that they were just being used as a "Military testing center." Certainly had nothing to do with the other stuff going on that stemmed from TOP/IRON's dec. [/quote] Just because the DoW had a theme does not mean it had anything to do with the reasons we attacked them. We attacked them mistakenly because we were under the mistaken impression they would enter to defend their allies. We peaced out after we quickly discovered this was not the case. It was a preemptive tactical strike, not some grudge war or 'boredom' war. Edited January 3, 2012 by Sardonic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercoolyellow Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325575366' post='2891358'] It's not even NPO-lite. It is literally NPO. [/quote] What did you mean by this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1325615720' post='2891567'] Aren't you just the cutest thing. You're really approaching timeline levels of always-wrong these days, keep it up, it amuses me greatly. Also @ the OP: having the most NS does not make somebody a hegemony. Having a large coalition of alliances and projecting your will on other alliances through military means makes you a hegemony. Just because the DoW had a theme does not mean it had anything to do with the reasons we attacked them. We attacked them mistakenly because we were under the mistaken impression they would enter to defend their allies. We peaced out after we quickly discovered this was not the case. It was a preemptive tactical strike, not some grudge war or 'boredom' war. [/quote] That was my point, Sardonic. That just because the DoW says something, it doesn't fully explain its intent. [quote='SCY'] What did you mean by this?[/quote] One of the reasons people were willing to turn on NPO was because the NPO had a long history of destroying its previous allies or trying to impose their will on them. I mean that's the reason Delta gave me for the SF defection to begin with, and the rest is history. Edited January 3, 2012 by Roquentin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krack Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325620220' post='2891602']Also Krack, who cares about moral clarity or being fit to hold the high ground? [/quote] Me. I don't like hypocrites. [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325620220' post='2891602'] The issue is these guys haven't had competent opposition in the last 3 years. Where better for it to come from? [/quote] Someone who isn't principally responsible for them having the power they wield; that leaves you out. You leveraged your reputation to make it happen. Don't feel bad about it, there are still plenty of people who think you're swell even though you are the reason they are getting destroyed right now (and we call these people [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=108031&view=findpost&p=2891389"]SF members[/url]). [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325620220' post='2891602'] I should have just told MK to suck it and hit Polar when they declared on TOP. I hate to say it, but Nizzle was right. It's not even NPO-lite. It is literally NPO. [/quote] TRANSLATION: "Boo Hoo. I created a monster and now I can't control it. *sad face*" [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325620220' post='2891602'] One of the reasons people were willing to turn on NPO was because the NPO had a long history of destroying its previous allies or trying to impose their will on them. I mean that's the reason Delta gave me for the SF defection to begin with, and the rest is history. [/quote] Defection? Some SF alliances (like FARK) spent their entire existences trying to prevent NPO from attacking them again. Don't try to lump them in with the enabler alliances (Polar, IRON, TOP, MCXA, TPF, Valhalla, NATO, Echelon, Old Guard, MHA, Invicta, etc) - FARK signed a treaty with NPO and it's membership (which is perpetually sleepwalking) found it so distasteful that it threw its entire leadership out of power (most of who quit and went elsewhere over it) and immediately started working behind the scenes on what became Karma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schmoo Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 This thread is ridiculous. We will continue to quietly succeed at doing things our way like we have for the last half decade. It matters very little to us what the peanut gallery thinks is really happening. We know we will still be big players years from now when a new (or the same tired posters) crop of IRON haters are spewing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denial Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 [quote name='Krack' timestamp='1325569516' post='2891295'] I don't know how I could be any clearer. A year ago, when you attacked NPO again (unprovoked and with no reason other than Doomhouse was bored) - I had a conversation with you where I said (paraphrase) "I'm a little surprised these other idiots would do this, but I'm shocked you'd participate in it and not try to talk them out of it." And your response was (paraphrase) "Talk them out of it? It was my idea. I suggested it and made it happen! Hahaha!" So ... for you, a year later, to chastise the rest of them with a statement like, "More MK, but it's addressed to everyone who enjoyed playing NPO-lite when it was a dick move" is comical. [/quote] You're incorrect about the reasoning behind that war. You are, however, correct about Roquentin having his grubby little hands all over the planning stages of the conflict and making an absolute mess of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Denial' timestamp='1325637241' post='2891789'] You're incorrect about the reasoning behind that war. You are, however, correct about Roquentin having his grubby little hands all over the planning stages of the conflict and making an absolute mess of it. [/quote] Ah yes, it had nothing to do with you making people paranoid and unwilling to help us out. You could have easily vetoed any plan if you wanted to. I love to be criticized by a guy who's mostly inactive and out of touch. Edited January 4, 2012 by Roquentin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denial Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325640072' post='2891818'] Ah yes, it had nothing to do with you making people paranoid and unwilling to help us out. You could have easily vetoed any plan if you wanted to. I love to be criticized by a guy who's mostly inactive and out of touch. [/quote] Wait, so I was simultaneously making people paranoid [i]and[/i] inactive? That's quite a talent. You were more than willing to step up and take credit for orchestrating it as the conflict broke - as Krack has mentioned in this thread already - but as it became clearer that it was ill-conceived and poorly executed, you began attempting to wash your hands of some rather serious responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Denial' timestamp='1325640784' post='2891828'] Wait, so I was simultaneously making people paranoid [i]and[/i] inactive? That's quite a talent. You were more than willing to step up and take credit for orchestrating it as the conflict broke - as Krack has mentioned in this thread already - but as it became clearer that it was ill-conceived and poorly executed, you began attempting to wash your hands of some rather serious responsibility. [/quote] I didn't wash my hands of anything. I was posting on these forums for months about it. Does OsRavan who was actually there agree with your account? I don't think so. Who should people trust more? Your third hand accounts or his? I am referring to your alliance as a whole who had to keep the "we attacked for the hell of it" narrative, which was something you all wanted to do a week before any conflict erupted. It was pretty well-executed and if you would have preferred the entire Polar coalition remaining at war for the duration, then ha. You're an armchair quarterback who hasn't done anything in years and I am blamed for your lack of communication with your external allies on the subject leading to worsened relations. It's not like this war has been planned any better, the only saving grace of your coalition planning is the NS advantage. You've also gotten lucky that SF and XX weren't even on the same page. Want to know the reason some people didn't want to come onto the front? It's because they wanted nothing to do with you, so they screwed me to screw you. Want to know the reason Archon posted in addition to what I've already disclosed? Sardonic wanted to do it and I preferred Archon posting it rather than it being a GOONS thing. Honestly, Denial, even though you've been scummy as possible for the past six or so months, I will give you credit for vetoing any C&G plans to treaty NPO in early 2009. Edited January 4, 2012 by Roquentin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Black Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 I think I could use either one of your posts as a perfect example of spin and I wasn't even there, but its becoming very entertaining, any chance you'll do a podcast? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) Maybe if it has something to do with IRON. Edited January 4, 2012 by Roquentin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denial Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325640993' post='2891830'] I didn't wash my hands of anything. I was posting on these forums for months about it. Does OsRavan who was actually there agree with your account? I don't think so. Who should people trust more? Your third hand accounts or his? I am referring to your alliance as a whole who had to keep the "we attacked for the hell of it" narrative, which was something you all wanted to do a week before any conflict erupted.[/quote] For the past couple of months, this thread included, you have consistently attempted to shift responsibility from yourself and on to Mushroom Kingdom for the planning and execution of the DH-NPO war. A stark contrast from the onset and peak of that war, where you'd tell anyone who would listen about your plotting and scheming in order to bring about the conflict. Krack is a hit-and-miss kind of poster, but his rather probing questions aimed at you in this topic have revealed some of the truth of the situation. [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325640993' post='2891830'] It was pretty well-executed and if you would have preferred the entire Polar coalition remaining at war for the duration, then ha.[/quote] In your eyes, a war that cost Doomhouse, collectively, more strength and political clout than it bequeathed strategic benefit is well-executed? I sure hope your posturing and rhetoric regarding bringing down Mushroom Kingdom and some of its allies isn't all bluster - I am sure we would enjoy having an opponent whose criteria for a well-executed war is so pitifully low. Maybe you should send Unknown Smurf a message; you guys seem to be equal in goals and talent. [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325640993' post='2891830'] You're an armchair quarterback who hasn't done anything in years and I am blamed for your lack of communication with your external allies on the subject leading to worsened relations.[/quote] Better an armchair quarterback than a pariah who is kicked from the alliance he once led for his inane and nonsensical conspiracy theories. [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325640993' post='2891830'] It's not like this war has been planned any better, the only saving grace of your coalition planning is the NS advantage. You've also gotten lucky that SF and XX weren't even on the same page.[/quote] A war where minimal damage has been taken by TOP/IRON, Doomhouse, and blocs we consider friends (C&G, PB, Mjolnir, PF), whilst all opponents are thoroughly defeated and in ruins? Not to mention that targets were assigned so well as to allow many alliances to finally settle long-term grudges. Not planned any better? Oh, please. This current effort was like the Gallic Wars; your effort was a little more like Vietnam. [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325640993' post='2891830'] Want to know the reason some people didn't want to come onto the front? It's because they wanted nothing to do with you, so they screwed me to screw you.[/quote] We certainly must have had such a dramatic turn around in political clout in the past few months. I mean, going from an alliance so hated that they'd screw innocent Roquentin to get to us, to an alliance that can play a lead role in rallying a successful coalition in this current conflict, is quite a feat! [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325640993' post='2891830'] Want to know the reason Archon posted in addition to what I've already disclosed? Sardonic wanted to do it and I preferred Archon posting it rather than it being a GOONS thing. [/quote] Sardonic is a little like potato - can't be trusted with announcements. Edited January 4, 2012 by Denial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Denial' timestamp='1325642951' post='2891860'] For the past couple of months, this thread included, you have consistently attempted to shift responsibility from yourself and on to Mushroom Kingdom for the planning and execution of the DH-NPO war. A stark contrast from the onset and peak of that war, where you'd tell anyone who would listen about your plotting and scheming in order to bring about the conflict. Krack is a hit-and-miss kind of poster, but his rather probing questions aimed at you in this topic have revealed some of the truth of the situation. [/quote] How exactly? All I've said is MK wanted to attack NPO out of the blue for months before it actually happened. [quote] In your eyes, a war that cost Doomhouse, collectively, more strength and political clout than it bequeathed strategic benefit is well-executed? I sure hope your posturing and rhetoric regarding bringing down Mushroom Kingdom and some of its allies isn't all bluster - I am sure we would enjoy having an opponent whose criteria for a well-executed war is so pitifully low. Maybe you should send Unknown Smurf a message; you guys seem to be equal in goals and talent.[/quote] You do realize a number of things that were out of my control occurred that complicated the war? A few things that could have been avoided if you had listened to my advice in the months before any war broke out. [quote] Better an armchair quarterback than a pariah who is kicked from the alliance he once led for his inane and nonsensical conspiracy theories. [/quote] I didn't even get kicked. I volunteered to be demasked if they couldn't handle the fact that I was going to be attacking you in the embassy. edit: Hell, I could have probably gotten remasked if I was willing to give up that freedom. [quote] A war where minimal damage has been taken by TOP/IRON, Doomhouse, and blocs we consider friends (C&G, PB, Mjolnir, PF), whilst all opponents are thoroughly defeated and in ruins? Not to mention that targets were assigned so well as to allow many alliances to finally settle long-term grudges. Not planned any better? Oh, please. This current effort was like the Gallic Wars; your effort was a little more like Vietnam. [/quote] That's really easy when you have a 1.8m:1m ns advantage to work with which was always the case and you attempted to undersell in the run up to the war. You literally pushed an Mjolnir ally to the other side by preempting MHA. How's Asgaard doing? You consider Mjolnir a friend? Haha. 1MNS+ of your alliance deleted during the last war. [quote]We certainly must have had such a dramatic turn around in political clout in the past few months. I mean, going from an alliance so hated that they'd screw innocent Roquentin, to an alliance that can play a lead role in rallying a successful coalition in this current conflict, is quite a feat! [/quote] I've even said most of the things you actually did were injurious to your cause and encouraged resistance. You just picked a target that had a lot of stigma attached to them. That's it. A target you were treatied to. The same people who pushed for that treaty are the ones leading the charge when people have much older grudges against it. The only reason it's worked out for you is that SF and XX adopted vastly different plans and didn't work together. If you're categorizing me with Smurf and don't want to take me seriously, it will be your undoing because I have cards to play and you don't want them to come out. I would step off entirely. Like I said ask someone who was one of the main planners in your ally, ODN, if your account of things is accurate. I don't think the Denial account of history is very good and you are an ill-informed hack. You wanted to make an enemy out of me and you have done it with your revisionism. Again, the best thing to do would have been to shut up. You think your political capital is in tact? Just wait for this to wrap up. Edited January 4, 2012 by Roquentin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Now the fun starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yevgeni Luchenkov Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325640993' post='2891830']It's not like this war has been planned any better, the only saving grace of your coalition planning is the NS advantage. You've also gotten lucky that SF and XX weren't even on the same page.[/quote] Given the constraints we operated under, I am pretty satisfied with how this was planned. And even more satisfied with how it went. The NS advantage, given our constraints, was never more than 1.2 to 1. The difference isn't in the NS. It's in the experience behind that NS. And in the will to fight. We have it, they don't. I am willing to hear what you'd have done differently, however. As for the Asgaard shot, given your alliance, I'll just laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts