Hero's Soapbox

As it stands, this war was began over, literally, nothing.

Stopped reading here. Melodrama is not the answer to everything.

This is the part where Roq shows up and talks about how this was a preemptive attack to ensure NPO did not intervene in the VE-Polaris dispute.

But given that goal has already been achieved, we of course have to move on to what DoomHouse's real objective is.

This is the part where Roq shows up and talks about how this was a preemptive attack to ensure NPO did not intervene in the VE-Polaris dispute.

But given that goal has already been achieved, we of course have to move on to what DoomHouse's real objective is.

People literally cannot want two things at the same time.

People literally cannot want two things at the same time.

Yeah I've noticed the DH doublethink as well. They can't seem to agree on what the objective of all this is.* Roq seemed to believe pretty strongly in the preemption thing.

*Other than the ~terms~ of course.

Yeah I've noticed the DH doublethink as well. They can't seem to agree on what the objective of all this is.* Roq seemed to believe pretty strongly in the preemption thing.

*Other than the ~terms~ of course.

You know, it's almost as if Doom House isn't comprised of several multifaceted organizations with hundreds of individual members run by a couple dozen of those individual members who all might happen to have their own opinions on the objectives and motives of this war. You know, instead of the hive-mind that we all know it certainly is.

I mean, given that I didn't play a small part in actually doing it, my account is correct. I still hold to the assertion that the NPO would have to enter the war at some point. Why did we attack? To preempt NPO's entry. That's why I made it happen. That doesn't mean people didn't dislike NPO or want to attack them before that, but that was the purpose of it. So while, the preemption part was an objective, it's not necessarily the only one, because the issue of the PM stuff came up.

It has been a facepalm fest when I see people say "we attacked them for !@#$% and giggles," for no real reason despite knowing the truth, but meh.

The smallest dogs bark the most.

And misuse the hell out of "we/us"

You know, it's almost as if Doom House isn't comprised of several multifaceted organizations with hundreds of individual members run by a couple dozen of those individual members who all might happen to have their own opinions on the objectives and motives of this war. You know, instead of the hive-mind that we all know it certainly is.

Oh pardon me. Here I was thinking that the purpose of alliances and blocs was to put forth a coherent messages.

I understand that individual members have different views, but DH's own myriad governments can't seem to get their story straight. Roq was running around like a chicken with its head cut off for weeks trying to prove that it was a preemptive attack and that alone was sufficient justification. Now we're getting the whole "NPO provoked this months beforehand" and "NPO wouldn't been in this position if their FA didn't suck" treatment.

So while, the preemption part was an objective, it's not necessarily the only one, because the issue of the PM stuff came up.

Then please, tell us all what the rest of Doom House's objectives in this war are. You would know.

Like clockwork, the discussion starts with snide drivel from Doomhouse and then takes a turn far away from the topic at hand.

"Defeat NPO" is what it comes down to. In addition, to what you've said, I've never seen another DH government say anything to the contrary of what I've said. It's mostly been members saying stuff that contradicts it for reasons I can't fathom. I did show the logs of me asking MT why people were doing that after all. I don't enjoy people posting stupid crap and that was what was happening.

"Defeat NPO" is what it comes down to. In addition, to what you've said, I've never seen another DH government say anything to the contrary of what I've said. It's mostly been members saying stuff that contradicts it for reasons I can't fathom.

"Defeat NPO" is really...general. If you keep up with the preemption argument, we've already been defeated. The NS losses say DH "won", albeit MK and GOONS lost a lot too. Foreign policy wise, you still have all the cards. Given those limited objectives, the war should be over.

Instead, you've opted for completely destroying our ability to make war in the upper tier for months and crippling our rebuilding procedures. Then you turn around, claim those terms are light and announce it on the OWF, resulting in a 150 page topic. I'm not sure if you just wanted to avoid the standard NPO historical revisionism that would have come with giving us white peace. Given the objectives you could have cited, before this war was extended past the NpO front's end, you're argument that you had won would have been strong. But no, you decided to press so now there's no way you could back down from the original terms offered without being seen as "losing", at least in a PR sense. The end result is this war which is probably going to last for months and kill off lots of bored players, primarily on our side, but I expect it will have a toll on yours as well. That is my problem with DH's stance.

And now NPO lies in defeat. So if that's all it comes down to, then why are we still here?

The motive is to crush NPO to dust, not merely defeat them. That's why. And that motive will not disappear no matter what we give you. So, I ask again, why should we give you anything? You're just going to smash NPO again at the next convenient opportunity, citing pre-Karma nonsense and a holier-than-thou need to "end the NPO forever," just like this war. And that comes straight from DH government, from your DoW on Pacifica no less.

"Defeat NPO" is really...general. If you keep up with the preemption argument, we've already been defeated. The NS loses say DH "won", albeit MK and GOONS lost a lot too. Foreign policy wise, you still have all the cards. Given those limited objectives, the war should be over.

Instead, you've opted for completely destroying our ability to make war in the upper tier for months and crippling our rebuilding procedures. Then you turn around, claim those terms are light and announce it on the OWF, resulting in a 150 page topic. I'm not sure if you just want to avoid the standard NPO historical revisionism that will come with giving us white peace. Given the objectives you could have cited, before this war was extended past the NpO front's end, you're argument that you had won would have been strong. But no, you decided to press so now there's no way you could back down from the original terms offered without being seen as "losing", at least in a PR sense. The end result is this war which is probably going to last for months and kill off lots of bored players, primarily on our side, but I expect it will have a toll on yours as well. And that is my problem with DH's stance.

NPO compared to other alliances has been damaged substantially less and the fact that they have been able to keep much of their NS in pm for the entirety of the war makes it hard to say that they've been definitively defeated.

The revisionism is definitely a concern, especially with people on your side saying they will win by making DH bored and getting white peace, so it wouldn't have been strong before the extension. The line existed before.

The original terms can be negotiated but white peace is highly unlikely.

I mean, given that I didn't play a small part in actually doing it, my account is correct. I still hold to the assertion that the NPO would have to enter the war at some point.

Oh were they now, darlin'?

Given the imminent involvement of their allies, I'd say yes. I don't think anyone from NPO has said that they were going to be neutral. It would make no sense for them not to enter.

NPO compared to other alliances has been damaged substantially less and the fact that they have been able to keep much of their NS in pm for the entirety of the war makes it hard to say that they've been definitively defeated.

The revisionism is definitely a concern, especially with people on your side saying they will win by making DH bored and getting white peace, so it wouldn't have been strong before the extension. The line existed before.

The original terms can be negotiated but white peace is highly unlikely.

Which alliances were hurt more?

NPO's NS before the war was over 16 million. It is now under 8 million.

MK's NS before the war was 11 million. It is now 6.5 million.

Source: http://uevil.maybe.net/new/2011-01-24_R.png

Plenty of NPO's uppertier were hit. They weren't all in peacemode.

As far as the revisionism go, you're going to get that anyway. Hell the MK wiki calls the Unjust War a tactical victory. And I will be flabbergasted if the terms change on your end, barring this going on for a few more months.

Preemption is moot, the war you "preempted" us for is over.

Take a look at NpO and STA.

MK's "tactical victory" is ironic and a take on NPO's revisionism.

The terms can change and have been negotiable since they were given. A counteroffer has not been presented aside from white peace, which was rejected.

Stopped reading here. Melodrama is not the answer to everything.

Hey, I did that too.

Given the imminent involvement of their allies, I'd say yes. I don't think anyone from NPO has said that they were going to be neutral. It would make no sense for them not to enter.

And round and round we go. Over a month removed from your initial arguments on this point and you are still asking people to disprove an assertion you are making without providing any proof yourself for the claims made.

It didn't work then, still does not work now.

Take a look at NpO and STA.

MK's "tactical victory" is ironic and a take on NPO's revisionism.

The terms can change and have been negotiable since they were given. A counteroffer has not been presented aside from white peace, which was rejected.

NpO is a separate war. If it was one and the same, this war would be over for reasons already mentioned.

I find hilarious that we're still running with "Hopeless Coalition hasn't fought" when almost everyone on the NPO sector has suffered roughly 50% causalities. Save Umbrella of course. What's next? For the good of the game, NPO must lose 75% of it's NS so we can't have another war for a year?

So basically what your side is saying is that you give up and that we win the game?

Awesome.

And round and round we go. Over a month removed from your initial arguments on this point and you are still asking people to disprove an assertion you are making without providing any proof yourself for the claims made.

It didn't work then, still does not work now.

The thing is, you're not denying it. You're saying I can't prove it. I think the things that leaked about NSO before the preempt but didn't come out until fairly recently, coupled with later admissions that they were going to enter on the AZTEC front is enough. I'm not saying I have logs of Cortath saying X. I'm saying NPO was going to have to enter once their allies got involved and attacked. You said it wasn't a question of TPF entering, as well. So TCK, are you going to say you were going to keep NPO out? The way you put it was that "NPO would not enter unless one of its allies was hit," meaning you weren't going with the strong "NPO was not going to enter." Is it too much to say "NPO was going to have to enter, but I don't think you should have attacked them like that?"

In any case, the point isn't to prove "NPO was going to enter", it's me saying "we attacked NPO because we thought they were going to enter" as opposed to "out of the blue attack"

NpO is a separate war. If it was one and the same, this war would be over for reasons already mentioned.

I find hilarious that we're still running with "Hopeless Coalition hasn't fought" when almost everyone on the NPO sector has suffered roughly 50% causalities. Save Umbrella of course. What's next? For the good of the game, NPO must lose 75% of it's NS so we can't have another war for a year?

Let's look at it another way, Ragnarok-PC wasn't a separate war from Polar, but it continued because terms couldn't be agreed upon. That is how I see this.

The thing is, you're not denying it. You're saying I can't prove it. I think the things that leaked about NSO before the preempt but didn't come out until fairly recently, coupled with later admissions that they were going to enter on the AZTEC front is enough. I'm not saying I have logs of Cortath saying X. I'm saying NPO was going to have to enter once their allies got involved and attacked. You said it wasn't a question of TPF entering, as well. So TCK, are you going to say you were going to keep NPO out? The way you put it was that "NPO would not enter unless one of its allies was hit," meaning you weren't going with the strong "NPO was not going to enter." Is it too much to say "NPO was going to have to enter, but I don't think you should have attacked them like that?"

In any case, the point isn't to prove "NPO was going to enter", it's me saying "we attacked NPO because we thought they were going to enter" as opposed to "out of the blue attack"

If you entered to preempt Pacifica and thereby assist VE, then why is this war still going? How does grinding Pacifica into dust help VE win the Polar war now that it's over? They won, and you won over here.

No, it's clear that the Polar war was nothing more than the long-awaited excuse to roll NPO. That's the only rationale behind the terms you offered for Pacifica; You're upset that you weren't able to smash into dust every single last one of their nations. So you literally wrote it in as a prerequisite for peace.