Jump to content
  • entries
    36
  • comments
    511
  • views
    2,543

The Techraid War: An Overview (International Newsweek, 23rd-30th Jan)


Bob Janova

166 views

As the week comes to a close, so does the core conflict that has shaped it. The war is not over, as it has spawned a new front, but the story seems clearer now than it has for many days. So what exactly is the story?

The incident that triggered the chain of events leading up to the war starts with an alliance-wide tech raid on the alliance FoA by Poison Clan, GOONS and \m/. This incident was brought into the public eye by Alterego. Very rapidly, before most of the commentators had even seen the incident, FoA were given a temporary (though not retroactive, i.e. no reparations were sought) protectorate from The Corporation, and the immediate conflict was over before it began.

However, there was significant moral outrage over the tech raiding of a large alliance, particularly its proximity to the very similar raid on the Knights of Ni by Athens only two months earlier. That incident resulted in strong diplomatic pressure on Athens, an apology and reparations (donations for Ni nations.

One man in particular whose moral outrage was important is AlmightyGrub, Emperor of the New Polar Order. He had the power to act upon his outrage, and proceeded to enter diplomatic talks with his allies, GOONS, to encourage them not to raid alliances in future – which they agreed to. The next stop was \m/, with the intent of pressuring them into accepting the same thing. What he met there was racist epithets, some directed at him directly, and an attitude (also visible in other public threads) of 'do something about it'.

On the update of 20th-21st, this resulted in Polaris declaring war on \m/ 'to preserve the standards of our community', referring both to the tech raiding of alliances and to the attitude shown by \m/ to him and others. Poison Clan counter-declared at the next update (21st-22nd) in accordance with their MDP.

The war expanded into a global affair with the entrance of FOK on the 24th. (The thread is on the 25th because these forums were down for most of the 24th.) After that, and the counter-declarations by Polar's allies NSO, many alliances jumped in on both sides. A complete breakdown of declarations and sides can be found on the public record; by and large the war was Superfriends and LEO against the Polar and ex-Hegemony power spheres, but many alliances had not yet engaged.

On the update of the 28th-29th, two very important events occurred. First, TOP declared war on C&G – followed shortly afterwards by IRON, DAWN and TORN, and countered by Sparta and others. C&G were at this point not directly involved in the war, although widely expected to be assigned as counter-attackers against the major powers, and this declaration opened up a whole new front. Half an hour later, the initial combatants declared peace, followed later on the 29th by the rest of the fronts, leaving an entirely new picture of the war: TOP, IRON and a few others against the massive might of C&G and their treaty partners.

Since then, many more alliances have piled onto TOP and IRON, including Härmlins (betraying TOP?). What was intended to be a part of a coalition war has turned into the war, and it's currently keeping GRL high.

10 Comments


Recommended Comments

I decided not to clutter up the VE DoW or just about every other DoW thread by replying to a lot of your posts. You've really shown a bias against MK in your posts recently and are not holding anyone else accountable. Shame on you. You used to call it like it was regardless of like or dislike.

Let's have some fun and hope that those on other fronts peace out quickly so we can stop fighting other people's wars.

Isn't it almost always someone else's war for 95% of the participants? In this case though, I'd like to know whose war it is? I know somehow you are going to say CnG's and probably actually believe it, so with a strong does of sarcasm I'd like to apologize for us declaring on non-combatants to escalate this entire conflict. We wouldn't have done it but we knew they wanted to hit us eventually and it was a great opportunity for us to attack now with some of their allies already engaged and stretch the truth a bit in our DoW to gain some support from others. Divide and conquer.

Seriously, it's almost shaped up to be like Karma 2.0 with TOP on the side they wanted to support the first time around.

Link to comment

That's not really relevant to this entry. But yes, it is now C&G's war. Whether by accident or design, they got everyone else to peace out when they heard that TOP and IRON were going to pre-emptively declare on them, and they are talking about making TOP fight for months. NpO's re-entry to the war (and therefore our entrance) is entirely because that front will not peace out.

TOP and IRON are being held accountable for their actions by everybody else. C&G are not. Both sides are using a small dispute by other alliances to attack old enemies.

The fact that you think I'm not calling it as I see it because I see MK in a negative light does not make it true. I see your alliance being disgustingly opportunist in prosecuting a war against an alliance that you have always wanted a piece of but never were able to challenge. Certainly, TOP helped you out with that, but the sophistry of claiming it is a different war (even though TOP explicitly mentioned the 'NpO side' in their DoW) and therefore pushing for a long, damaging war on TOP does not look good. Pulling STA onto the other side of the war and making them fight against their best allies is a particularly low move.

Link to comment

TOP helped you out with that, but the sophistry of claiming it is a different war (even though TOP explicitly mentioned the 'NpO side' in their DoW) and therefore pushing for a long, damaging war on TOP does not look good.

This is the part that baffles me. Just because TOP mentioned they were joining a war to support NpO doesn't mean they were really joining a war to support NpO. Nobody they attacked was involved in that war and two of the people they attacked were MDP partners of NpO. MK was working behind the scene to get peace in this war the whole time, not just when we heard TOP and crew were going to use this opportunity to create a partially false DoW and attack.

Pulling STA onto the other side of the war and making them fight against their best allies is a particularly low move.

This is showing your bias 100%. Grub should have never made flippant comments to TOP leadership about attacking his MDP partners and was one of several mistakes he's made during these evolving conflicts. Heck, if this is one war then NpO just re-entered the same conflict citing defensive obligations to NSO in an agressive war NpO started and NSO's only reason for being in the war was when they came to NpO's defense. Yes, I am discounting Ivan's grandstanding counter-declaration. STA is our treaty partner as well, so I have no idea how it could be a low move when we expected both NpO and STA to come to our defense. NpO remaining out of the war was certainly the second option considered, but they are the ones who chose to go to the other side. You choose to not hold NpO accountable because you feel like TOP's DoW somehow supported the NpO war efforts. STA did the correct thing honoring their treaty, just as every other alliance who honored their treaty and came to our defense.

Link to comment

I think it's funny that you're accusing me of bias when I am in a peripherally involved alliance and you are in a core alliance, so your bias is almost certainly stronger.

Just because TOP mentioned they were joining a war to support NpO doesn't mean they were really joining a war to support NpO

So basically you're just calling TOP liars?

Nobody they attacked was involved in that war and two of the people they attacked were MDP partners of NpO.

Incorrect. MK at the very least was extremely involved in coalition planning and coordination. Those two MDP partners of NpO had chosen their side as could clearly be seen by their total non-response to the non-mandated attacks on NpO by alliances like FOK, Stickmen and SF.

Referring back to the previous point, TOP and IRON saw how the sides broke down, made an (admittedly poor) strategic decision to pre-empt your counterstrike and attacked you. It was entirely down to military strategy within the wider war – they entered to help the Polar side win the war.

Heck, if this is one war then NpO just re-entered the same conflict citing defensive obligations to NSO in an agressive war NpO started and NSO's only reason for being in the war was when they came to NpO's defense.

NpO re-entered because they saw that the peace agreement was a sham in order to isolate and destroy some of the alliances which had entered to help them.

You choose to not hold NpO accountable because you feel like TOP's DoW somehow supported the NpO war efforts.

Because it did. That was the sole purpose of the TOP/IRON/etc declaration!

Link to comment

I think it's funny that you're accusing me of bias when I am in a peripherally involved alliance and you are in a core alliance, so your bias is almost certainly stronger.

I am calling you biased because the only alliances you seem to be calling out are the CnG alliances. Our side of this war is not the aggressors. I am not trying to say that CnG vs TOP and company wasn't eventually going to happen or that both sides didn't want it to happen, but CnG didn't choose it to happen right here. If you continue to argue that somehow it is CnG's fault that this whole thing blew up right here and now, then please let's just agree to disagree and both move on.

So basically you're just calling TOP liars?

I think I made that very clear. If you want to support an alliance at war, how about hitting someone they are fighting? TOP and company didn't relieve any war pressure on NpO. All they managed to do was bring in most alliances in the game and turn it into a global war. Some help. Just because every Polar ally didn't jump into the stupid war that had begun, don't think most weren't trying to provide support by getting it to end. Something I expect TOP could have tried to assist with instead of going all cowboy.

Referring back to the previous point, TOP and IRON saw how the sides broke down, made an (admittedly poor) strategic decision to pre-empt your counterstrike and attacked you. It was entirely down to military strategy within the wider war – they entered to help the Polar side win the war.

There wasn't a CnG side at that point. TOP and company created that side by declaring. Had they never joined this war it would have ended. I would also say that TOP and crew, using this opportunity to join a war and "say they are on the Polar side" was merely a sham to try and isolate CnG from Polar and allies who would lean towards Polar over CnG.

NpO re-entered because they saw that the peace agreement was a sham in order to isolate and destroy some of the alliances which had entered to help them.

Now you are just making stuff up. Polar stated their sole purpose for rejoining was to not leave a fallen comrade (NSO) behind. If I was going to speculate, I'd add they were and still are pretty pissed at the amount of crap MK has given them over this entire affair so that didn't hurt in their decision making. But NpO was the ones who put peace on the table and who accepted that peace. Their decision to join, how they exited, where they rejoined...mistake, after mistake, after mistake...

Because it did. That was the sole purpose of the TOP/IRON/etc declaration!

Well there we go. That doesn't even agree with everything you've posted in this blog let alone their war own declaration. If you are going to read between the lines on the motivations of CnG, maybe you can try and do the same for TOP.

Link to comment
To our opponents: We agree with the New Polar Order's reasons for war against \m/, and we consider ourselves part of that particular side of the war. For our part, however, much our reason to enter this war lies in our desire to defeat those who have shown time and time again, in public and in private, that doing harm to us is high on their agenda---and that, indeed, they would take advantage of any advantageous opportunity to do so. This is a war they have brought upon themselves.

I pasted that from the TOP Dow for you to reference. I find it highly hypocritical that they would take advantage of an advantageous opportunity to attack CnG while accusing CnG of possibly doing the same. The Bob Janova I was an alliance mate with for a year and a half would have too.

Link to comment

If you can show me where I said TOP and IRON acted correctly, you might have a point ;). Clearly both sides are taking advantage of the war in order to damage a perceived enemy. I am primarily criticising C&G for it because the idiocy of TOP/IRON's move is self-evident and there are plenty of people banging that drum already, whereas most people seem to be accepting the C&G spin unquestioningly.

It's funny that in the same reply you accuse TOP of lying in their DoW and then claim that NpO's DoW invalidates my point. If you read the TOP DoW thread you'll see a post from Grub saying that he's sorry things turned out that way (after the peace) and he will do what he can for those alliances too. Sure, they are primarily there for NSO, but NSO are there for IRON anyway, so it comes to the same thing.

There wasn't a CnG side at that point.

Keeping saying this won't make it true.

Link to comment

If you can show me where I said TOP and IRON acted correctly, you might have a point ;). Clearly both sides are taking advantage of the war in order to damage a perceived enemy. I am primarily criticising C&G for it because the idiocy of TOP/IRON's move is self-evident and there are plenty of people banging that drum already, whereas most people seem to be accepting the C&G spin unquestioningly.

Fair enough. Truthfully, I haven't see many peripherally involved individuals be critical of NpO (since their re-entry into this war) or of the aggressive side on this front (TOP and Crew).

It's funny that in the same reply you accuse TOP of lying in their DoW and then claim that NpO's DoW invalidates my point. If you read the TOP DoW thread you'll see a post from Grub saying that he's sorry things turned out that way (after the peace) and he will do what he can for those alliances too. Sure, they are primarily there for NSO, but NSO are there for IRON anyway, so it comes to the same thing.

I wasn't saying that NpO's DoW invalidated your point. I really was pointing out the absurdity of it all. You're a smart dude so I certainly enjoy engaging your brain a bit.

Link to comment
Guest
Add a comment...

×   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...