Dochartaigh
-
Posts
6,937 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Blog Comments posted by Dochartaigh
-
-
So I'm lying because you only value activating a couple of treaties on your side? I'm not lying at all. You have more treaties on OUR side than YOUR side, yet you activated on the side against us. This is a FACT and it can not be disputed. Period. It's in stone. Not debatable.
actually, i already gave the breakdown of the treaties that you continue to ignore. so no, it is quite debatable. what you are stating is not fact as there was no treaties on your side for us to activate. LoSS and NV were the only alliances that did not go in aggressively, nor attack an ally of DT's and got hit in return. Most of our allies were not involved or about to leave the war. NV was hit by 2 NOIR alliances which means DT could not enter. Umbrella entered aggressively. Brigade had no one who hit them. so again, you are lying and omitting key FACTS in order to smear DT's name. we had absolutely no reason to enter the war on DH/PB's side.
Actually, they didn't refuse them! They never gave a refusal OR acceptance of the terms, but CSN did not intend to accept them initially, you ARE right on that. Please show me where the terms were officially removed from the table, or where CSN officially refused the terms. If you can prove that they were officially refused then I'll admit that you're right on this. As it is, they just took a long time getting back with accepting the terms (and by 'a long time' I mean like, a day.)Still no 'lies'.
even Goose stated that by walking out of the talks, CSN had refused the terms. so again, you are lying and omitting a key FACT in order to smear DT's name.
This is EXTREMELY unreasonable. Seriously, if you're negotiating the price of something and they're asking $40,000 and you respond with "I'll pay you zero dollars and you apologize to me!" the seller is just going to walk away. Period. That's not negotiating. At all.it is as much negotiation as you claim CSN is doing. actually, it is more considering the PR disaster this has turned into for CSN. Then there is the fact that CSN is taking far more damage than DT is. DT was willing to accept the term of 40k tech, just not as CSN wanted. CSN then refused (as confirmed by Goose no matter the lies you attempt to spread on this) but later, after pressure from other alliances CSN accepts. by this time, DT no longer views said term as acceptable. twas CSN's loss. they should have accepted from the get go or stated they needed to discuss the matter. not expect DT to just sit and wait for them. sorry, CSN is not the master of DT no matter how much they or Xiph and others try to assert they are. currently, CSN has 287,603 tech. i wonder how much they will lose before they decide to peace out of this front.
Uhh actually CSN literally changed the terms around for DT. They weren't 'stubbornly sticking to them'. This, too, is factual and can not be debated. You're wrong. CSN CLEARLY worked with DT and changed terms around. You're so far from reality it's hilarious. And now you're just making !@#$ up.wow, now we can get into how you can't even read. either that or how you ignore key elements of what is stated. reread my post, then get back to me as it is only you who continue to make !@#$ up. here, i will help you as i am figuring that you truly need it:
his is of course completely contrary to how CSN does it, which is obviously reasonable, by making a demand, then stubbornly sticking to it for a while, then negotiating a bit,
the bolded is the part you need to reread over and over until the meaning of those words actually stick in your head. so no, i am not wrong as i stated exactly what you did. you are just too stupid to realize it. then you go on to make !@#$ up about what was actually said and hope no one notices how stupid you are. CSN did not work with DT, CSN was pressured by outside alliances into giving in.
CSN accepted comments from all concerned parties, but in the end it was up to CSN. And that's why they negotiated. And now, CSN has stopped negotiations. If they were so scared of other alliances, would they just shut down negotiations the other day? And frankly, this, too, is a factual statement: CSN has been willing to negotiate. They clearly have since they've been, you know, negotiating. Quite a bit.None of my arguments have been 'trashed' by you, because my arguments are factual in nature.
CSN did not negotiate, they accepted (after refusing) terms offered by DT. DT negotiated, CSN (after being pressured by outside parties) accepted the terms after they had been withdrawn from the table.
so, CSN has only been willing to negotiate after being pressured though i should state that it is not only outside pressure but pressure from within.
so yes, all of your arguments have been trashed by myself, myworld, Goose, and others over and over again. your arguments are either lies or omit key facts in order to have some sort of leg to stand on. but once those lies and key facts are shown, your arguments are trashed. you simply refuse to see it because you are an idiot.
FACT: CSN has been negotiating. PERIOD.FACT: CSN has been making concessions to help along terms. PERIOD.
FACT: CSN accepted the counter-terms ONE DAY after they were offered. The terms had not been officially taken off the table, and CSN had not officially rejected the terms. In fact, the ONLY official response to DT's counter terms was to accept them. PERIOD.
FACT: DT had more allies on this side, but chose to active an ODP on the other side. PERIOD.
These are FACTS, and cannot be 'trashed' or 'disputed'. They're simply the truth. It's really that simple.
The terms were off the table the moment CSN walked out of the talks, which Goose even stated was them refusing. FACT. PERIOD. NOTHING YOU CAN DO CAN CHANGE THIS. so that is one of your "facts" that is trashed by Goose himself and yet you continue to not see it.
having allies on one side does not mean that DT is obligated to enter that side. you do realize how many alliances have treaties on both sides right? and how many of them fought on both sides? 1. RIA. also, trashed this as most of DT's allies were not involved or getting ready to peace out of the war. NV (an ally of DT) was hit by Sparta/Darkfall (2 NOIR allies of DT), Umbrella entered aggressively (and since you bring it up Umbrella is also an ODP
which given what you are defending, DT would have in fact been wrong to enter using an ODP to defend Umbrella, Sparta, or Darkfall, or any other NOIR ally on your side which is the majority of alliances on your side), and Brigade has yet to be hit. so, if entering to defend LoSS utilizing an ODP is so wrong, as CSN and you are defending, then obviously most of the allies on your side were ODPs. which means it would have been wrong to enter. unless of course, you are stating that it is okay to enter via an ODP and that CSN had no right to attempt to extort 40k tech from DT for entering via an ODP. which means you are defending them why? Brigade is the only ally of MD+ level on your side. NoR and NV were on the opposite side.
also, as for CSN negotiating, meh. they have accepted some changes that were offered by DT. one change though was too late as they had refused it (aka walked out without accepting it and Goose stated that they had refused them.) but after pressure from outside sources, accepted the now defunct offer.
GR was not on your side when DT entered. they also entered aggressively to attack TPF. so again, you are an idiot. but please keep it up. all you are doing now is trashing what little bit of credibility you may have had.
(the bolded part) is a lie. They had refused and that is what is usually meant when you walk out instead of responding. but of course, yours is "factual" despite again refusing to acknowledge the truth of the matter. and there is no spin despite you revising what actually happened.
^^Provide logs and I'll retract my statement. Otherwise I'm right and you're wrong. Period. End of discussion.
P.S. Read the rest of my post where I tear apart your arguments with LOGIC and FACTS.
read the logs posted by Myworld. there you will see Goose state once (if not twice) that CSN had refused the counter offer initially.
as for the rest, please, there is no logic and only distorted facts or lies in the rest of your post. you keep stating that we have more allies on the other side, yet never respond to my posts stating that none needed DT to defend them and that those in NOIR on your side entered aggressively or hit an ally of DT.
-
yeah no spin except not acknowledging that Goose himself stated that this:
Ours:
B. 30k by anyone, 10k purchased by anyone in DT and sent to CSN over 6 months.
Theirs:
3. 30k by anyone, 10k from DT by 2k+ tech nations.
Ours:
C: Back to B
Theirs:
4. No answer initially.
Theirs 30 hours later:
5. We accept your counter-offer.
(the bolded part) is a lie. They had refused and that is what is usually meant when you walk out instead of responding. but of course, yours is "factual" despite again refusing to acknowledge the truth of the matter. and there is no spin despite you revising what actually happened.
-
That is not nearly the sole reason. It's not even the main reason. The main reason is that DT attacked during peace negotiations (and in case you're curious no, LoSS was not asked to pay reps). Next you have that they attacked Legacy looking for an easy fight, then tried to back out after we made it clear we wouldn't let them do that. Then of course there's the complete refusal to negotiate in good faith (which is admittedly a new issue).
The ODP is more of a capstone on all that.
actually Goose has already stated (in the RnR DoW thread) that there were no peace talks going on between LoSS and CSN when DT hit. so can we please stop spreading this falsity around.
DT has been the only one actually attempting to negotiate in good faith. have you not read the logs? it is CSN who were the ones that at first refused to negotiate and then after 30 hours of refusing a counter-offer, accepted said offer and then threw a temper tantrum when DT stated that once the counter offer was refused initially, it was taken off the table.
you are even funnier than PenkLOLa.
Oh PLEASE. It was QUITE clear that GR would be on our side. The point is, there are more of DT's allies on our side, and DT knew it. They chose to *disregard this* and join the war not to defend allies (which would have landed them on OUR side of the war) but to take a pot shot at our side of the war.
Anyone who thought GR would remain neutral is not worthy of discussing this topic with me and should exit my blog immediately.
considering what you believe is true, that last sentence is a whoot. all i read in that statement you quoted was GR was not involved in the war prior to DT entering. and i am glad to see you failed to reply to my post where i already destroyed your "DT did not enter to defend allies" !@#$%^&*. considering our allies were either not involved (Valhalla, GR, Symphony), NV was hit by Sparta/Darkfall (who themselves are part of NOIR), at peace or getting peace (NoR), aggressively attacked other alliances (Umbrella), or was not attacked themselves (Brigade); then LoSS is clearly the only ally involved that was fighting a true defensive war. So yes, we went in to defend allies regardless of what you state. what you state is just such utter !@#$%^&* that i am surprised you don't taste crap every time you swallow.
I've proven a lot, actually. That CSN was willing to negotiate. That CSN was willing to accept your counter term. And that you were being unreasonable in counter-offers.
And you realize that I'm not in CSN, right?
Also, I haven't omitted any relevant info. Not one piece of it. Nor am I lying. In fact, the only lies thus far have come from DT. In this blog they still refuse to accept that CSN accepted the terms, even though the logs clearly show that they did. Also, there are the obvious lies of omission. You were keeping CN updated daily. Until your last update, which was that CSN turned down 40k tech in reps. You never bothered to correct that, because that public perception helped you out. I'm not ignoring anything, and if by 'spinning' you mean 'presenting the facts, which happen to favor CSN', then sure, I'm 'spinning'. Nobody has destroyed any of my arguments, much less my main arguments: That DT has purposely not let the world know where the negotiations stand for the PR benefit, That DT is refusing to negotiate in good faith, AND that CSN accepted terms proposed *by DT* a day after they were proposed, only to be turned down.
actually you have proven little, just refuse to see that. take the "DT did not enter to defend allies" !@#$%^&* argument that has been trashed repeatedly and you still refuse to acknowledge the fact. instead you continue to repeat your !@#$%^&* as if it is true when it is an utter lie. i have laid it out for you twice the breakdown with our allies. most were uninvolved, the ones on your side either hit aggressively or were not attacked (including Sparta, Darkfall, Umbrella who were the aggressors in their war and Sparta/Darkfall hit NV- an ally so why the hell should we defend them? and Brigade was never attacked after they entered on your side) so in fact the only two allies of DT that warranted us defending them was NV and LoSS both on the opposite side of the war. so please take your crap elsewhere. so, now that i have proven you are lying with this argument, can you please stop stating you are not lying.
CSN refused to budge for days and you talk of DT not negotiating in good faith. hahahahahahahaha seriously, that right there just shows how stupid you are and how much you are attempting to lie for CSN. you are also omitting the fact that CSN at first refused those terms offered by DT. thus, with the refusal, the terms were removed from the table. Then after the terms were removed, CSN finally decided to accept said terms. DT said that those terms were no longer on the table since they were refused. that is how negotiations go. if terms are refused, they are taken off the table. go figure right. so now we have figured out you are flat out lying with one of your arguments, lying/omitting with another argument. let us go on shall we?
ahhh DT is being unreasonable? hahahahahahaha CSN was unreasonable asking for 40k tech from our nations with 2k+ tech only. CSN was unreasonable to continue demanding tech solely from our 2k+ tech nations. DT countered and obviously after a while DT's offer was not unreasonable since after refusing it initially, CSN finally accepted. (too bad that since they had refused it, it was taken off the table) DT then countered with white peace (yes how unreasonable is that...) and an apology which when CSN refused to apologize was (zomg wait for it people, this is DT being completely unreasonable now) taken out.
yes, you heard it, DT was so unreasonable that they removed the apology because CSN refused to do it. this is of course completely contrary to how CSN does it, which is obviously reasonable, by making a demand, then stubbornly sticking to it for a while, then negotiating a bit, then throwing temper tantrums and so on and so forth. wow penkLOLa, you truly are stupid.
P.S. I love you all telling me to stop talking. You know I'll never do that. Regardless, if you don't like my arguments, just look at the facts I've brought in via the OP. That's all that really needs to be said. DT wanted everyone to think that they were offering CSN 40k tech, but CSN was refusing. The simple fact is that CSN's willing to negotiate, DT is not, so DT burns.
wait- i thought one of your arguments dealt with DT removing one of their counter-offers from the table? so you are trying to state that DT is refusing to negotiate while stating that DT was attempting to negotiate by CSN refused their counter offer, so it was removed because CSN again refused to accept it, and only later on did CSN decide to take the counter-offer.
so again, we have caught you in a lie. the simple fact is CSN was the first to refuse to negotiate. then CSN finally got to negotiating when a bunch of alliances started tapping their shoulders. (so it appears to not be CSN's idea to actually negotiate) and CSN only accepted DT's counter-offer again because of other alliances (they had refused it initially and was going to continue to refuse it had it not been for other alliances and shamedmonkey it appears). so please get off the "CSN is willing to negotiate" !@#$%^&* argument as it is quite apparent that CSN is completely unwilling to negotiate and is only doing so because other alliances and allies of theirs are going "wtf you think you doing?"
DT has attempted to negotiate several times without the need of other alliances prodding us to do so.
so now that you have been caught in another lie, can you seriously actually shut up. Your arguments HAVE been trashed several times over, the only reason you don't think they have been trashed is you actually are stupid and delusional enough to buy into your own propaganda and trash.
-
Why? DT's in the wrong here, and I'm not supporting them.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahaha. you have yet to prove !@#$. just stop. you are the one that is now smearing CSN's name through the mud. and to boot, all you are doing is omitting information, lying, spinning, and ignoring. it is blatantly obvious to everyone that this is what you are doing as your arguments have been destroyed by many. yet you continue in your ignorance to spout the same !@#$ over and over cuz you somehow think that by repeating it over and over, it makes it true.
frankly, given your kind of support i am glad you don't support us. otherwise, you would be doing to us what you are doing to CSN. please keep it up cuz with you, DT does not need to say a thing about CSN. you are doing a wonderful job of smearing CSN's reputation even further than they have already done so on their own.
-
Yes, NOIR ties. Also, your treaty with GR. You've only ever sought to active treaties on the opposite side of this war despite being tied about the same amount in both directions. You have this war because you hate the people on our side, not because you want to 'defend an ally' (whose only treaty with you is a color treaty.
This is false. The TALKS happened two days later, but CSN informed DT after 30 hours that they would accept the terms proposed by DT. Fact is, ONE (1) update passed which basically means ONE (1) day had passed. "By that time" -- one day later -- you no longer wanted to negotiate.
GR was not even in the war until recently and was involved via an aggression clause. Brigade was never attacked but went in aggressively. Sparta and Darkfall hit an ally of DT. Valhalla and Symphony are not involved in this war. NoR was involved but received peace.
so not sure what treaties we have ignored?
oh wait, much like the rest of your argument, it holds no water whatsoever.
as for CSN informing DT 30 hours later... and? you do realize that talks still need to take place because DT had to still discuss whether they accept this deal or not. at least we told CSN that it would be posted on the gov forums. so the talks took place after 2 days and DT felt the offer was no longer acceptable and counter-offered not once but twice. first time being the white peace and apology, second time being just white peace.
you also realized that nothing you said refuted my point. talks took place 2 days or 2 updates later. they may have queried a gov member that they found the deal acceptable, but DT still had to discuss and talks still needed to take place. neither did you refute the fact that CSN walked out and initially refused the offer.
Exactly. You didn't activate a treaty to defend an ally, you activated it to bandwagon on a war and hit a side you didn't like. Thanks for finally admitting it. ..And there's nothing wrong with that. But don't pretend that you're "just defending an ally" so you should get white peace. Look at the facts. It makes you smarter.
who was hit on your side? i already refuted everything you stated about why we should have entered on your side. if you include Umbrella- Umbrella declared an aggressive war without any sort of CB whatsoever and got hit for it. LoSS entered to defend an ally and got hit. Sparta/Darkfall hit an ally of DT. GR was not in until recently and to my knowledge have yet to be attacked and they entered aggressively as well. Valhalla/Symphony are not involved at all. NoR entered to defend an ally. NV entered to defend an ally but was hit by Sparta/Darkfall to negate DT/others from defending NV.
also, we entered via a treaty. glad to see you are trying to redefine bandwagon. not to mention Legacy aggressively hit LoSS alongside CSN and The Brain while LoSS was at war with Hydra. who was actually bandwagoning in? seriously, you have no clue what you speak of and then call someone else dumb. hahahahahahahahaha wow. you truly are an idiot.
-
Yes. You posted the full logs. Which tell exactly the same story I just provided with like 2 dozen lines: You made a counter offer. Later, they accepted it. Then you demanded CSN surrender to you, and they told you to shove it.
no they don't tell the same exact story. your story is so full of spin, propaganda, and fail that it is your usual style of posting which means it is far from the truth.
No... they didn't. CSN turned down the counter-offer, then, a day later, reconsidered and decided that it would be acceptable.
you do realize that talks were conducted on the 9th and then the 11th. fact is, 2 updates passed which means that basically 2 days had passed since CSN walked out. Goose then states that they were going to refuse our counter-offer until some of their allies talked to them. Then they went back to DT and were like "we accept" and by that time, we said "accept what? those terms are no longer on the table as you walked away".
I'd care more if DT didn't go out of its way to make itself an enemy. How's that military bloc coming along?
and whose fault is that? i would suspect it is CSN's. Instead of just giving us the peace that every other peripheral alliance had gotten, they demanded reps for a bs reason. and then continue to do so. they want their egos to be stroked by us and we refuse.
prior to that, DT had very little against CSN and many on your side. the fact that your side thinks CSN is okay in demanding these reps and that DT should basically get on our knees and show CSN how grateful we are that they are demanding 40k tech from us, is really ridiculous. CSN has gone out of their way to make an enemy, not the other way around. but nice attempt at spinning what is actually happening. well, actually, not that good of an attempt really.
-
I agree with Xiph really. White peace should be reserved for peripheral wars or to be used for strategic purposes. Terms though should be kept light and should not be for a long duration as that will encourage more wars. Keeping even a couple of alliances under heavy and long (4+ months) terms would most likely detract from wars since the ones that are kept under those terms would most likely be the ones that would be the center of any upcoming opposition.
-
I was in the NPO in GW3 and spent two weeks fighting against a high-ranking NAAC government member, so I can say with a high degree of accuracy that you're incorrect.
i apologize. NPO fought NAAC to a limited degree as did FAN and i think 1 other alliance though i could be wrong.
Uh...Hi. I just agreed with you. two posts above yours. Can we not make this about DT's terms?
uh...hi. you discussed the portion on disbandment which is only part of what i posted. I am also not trying to turn this into a discussion on DT's terms and only used them as a very recent example of GOD's "kiss our ass or die" attitude which was the main point of the rest of my post.
also, since you posted first, i technically agreed with you not the other way around. and your discussion of disbandment is very different than what i posted on disbandment, so not really sure what this post is about at all since i really did not agree with you nor did you agree with me. since you discussed forced disbandment as if another alliance was actually capable of forcing another alliance to disband. I on the other hand discussed forced disbandment as a myth in and of itself by basically stating that no outside force is capable of disbanding an alliance. the only people capable of disbanding an alliance are those within that alliance.
so again, not entirely sure what this post was since you did not agree with me as our posts were two completely different views on disbandments and your post only discussed disbandment whereas mine also discussed the "kiss our ass or die" attitude.
but umm.... thanks for uh... replying?
-
oh and another myth that should be put in there- CN is Multi-Polar.
-
iirc NAAC disbanded by their own decision. Pacifica never fought NAAC in GWIII and Polaris (iirc) actually had terms. NAAC just hated Polaris so much they would rather disband than submit to Polaris.
as for forced disbandment, i have always been of the opinion that you can't force anything on CN, much less force an alliance to disband. Those who disband do so because they do not wish to submit to the enemy and would essentially rather die than surrender, or do not give much of a damn about their alliance at that point and would rather pack it in sooner rather than later.
now onto the "kiss ass or die" culture. that appears to be standing true today. hell, your own alliance is guilty of that charge by essentially telling DT we should get on our knees and take it in the face by CSN for no damn reason other than CSN is on the winning side. If you find this kiss ass or die culture is so bad then why the hell are you personally cultivating it? (not stating that you are the sole cause/pusher but you are personally involved in continuing it instead of attempting to stop it)
why are so many in GOD of the attitude of "kiss our ass or we kill you"? it appears that you cannot honestly think it is that bad if you and your alliance are a main pusher of this attitude and culture.
-
Azaghul, the problem with your argument is you deny the reality that CnG has more ties to DH/PB and SF to PB as shown by this war. Sure other poles exist but the fact that they are so weak that even combined (synergy/RoK/Aztec with Polaris and essentially Pacifica along with Remnants) still are incapable of balancing the combined power of PB/DH/SF/CnG.
What you and others need to realize that the situation is similar to Wal-mart and mom n pop shops. Wal-mart comes into a town and usually destroys the competition and while some mom-n-pop shops continue to exist after, to state that they are true competition to Wal-mart is ridiculous. simple existence means nothing because if said pole only exerts very limited political or military power they cannot be truly considered a pole.
it is much like stating that GPA, WTF, or TDO are also poles simply because they are there. No one would even remotely consider any of those alliances a pole unless they wielded political power.
so i will give you that in theory the world is "multi-polar" but in practice, practicality, and reason it is by far uni-polar.
-
heh. all i see is a decent point in the OP made completely laughable as Smooth attempts to label all attackers (except TPF) as bandwagoners, right before he attempts to complain over the fact that ML decided to label all MK/Umb attackers on TPF as rogues.
how about you stop attempting to switch meanings of words, when you attempt to complain about others doing the same. you may come off sounding like you have an actual point instead of just looking like a jack-ass.
other than that- ML can call them whatever they want to call them. does it make them right? who knows. who honestly cares. it is the same with Smooth labeling alliances as bandwagoners considering VE has ghost declared on quite a few alliances in order to allow their allies to aggressively attack.
i doubt VE, nor Smooth, would be like "yo, our allies are bandwagoners and we enabled it". instead, they would post something about holding treaties and activating proper clauses and so on and so forth.
-
Honestly yea I think so. The war was/is tight already if it was Pacifica and co./Duckroll/TOP and Argent/Polar/Synergy/RoK vs. SF/CnG/Doomhouse/PB. I think the Polar side has a statistical advantage.
TOP would never fight for Polaris particularly given their tie to MK. Argent is far more tied to PB/CnG/DH/SF than Polar/Pacifica side. Even if this were true, the stats would still favor DH/PB/SF/CnG at least in the upper ranks. the lower and possibly mid-ranks would favor Polar/Pacifican side but only so much can be done there. Unless all alliances on Polar/Pacifican side were willing to do what DAWN/IRON did against Gremlins, then there is only so much that could be done.
-
I have to agree with Schatt. A hegemon does not need to be a "single" entity in as much as it needs to be a group with a clearly defined relationship. As Schatt showed, CnG/DH/PB/SF are pretty much locked into one another through various treaties. While there are some outlying treaties they are minor in global importance. In fact, those outlying treaties could easily pull minor "poles"/blocs/alliances one way or the other. Take Synergy for instance, had this war gone down just slightly different, Synergy could easily have fought on PB/DH side, same with Aztec.
to claim that just because other blocs exist, they somehow justify calling the world multi-polar is misleading. If PB/DH were to say, attempt to roll Synergy, given the ties of CnG to both PB/DH as well as Synergy, they would most likely sit neutral. which means Synergy could easily be rolled unless Polaris/et al take another curbstomp.
Duckroll is of no real importance as IRON is allied to TOP who is allied to MK taking out the largest member of DR. Valhalla, TORN, ML, BAPS would basically get curbstomped quite easily given that most have ties to alliances not on the PB/DH/CnG/SF side (which means once DR's allies show up, the 4 Hegemonic blocs can call in their other friends).
Unless a miracle happens in which Synergy/Aztec/DR/Polaris(et al)/Pacifica (et al) reconcile, make with the hugging, and drop all treaties with PB/DH/SF/CnG; you won't be seeing anything that can truly be considered a multi-polar world in any real sense.
you also claim that a multi-polar world does not have to be equal in strength, while this is slightly true, again it is misleading. Take this war in which, PB/DH/CnG/SF are basically stomping the crap out of any significant opponents. Given that, you stated "those who have not aligned itself to the Hegemon are under constant threat and may even face the possibility of being exterminated." well, do you honestly not see that that very line is happening now. Duckroll (cept maybe IRON) knows they are under constant threat, Polaris/Pacific and many others also know that even should this war finally get over with and after who knows how many months of reps, they are still under threat unless they decide to allow PB/DH/SF/CnG to bend them over and tell them what to do (i mean who needs sovereignty anyways amirite????). Hell, that is the very reason Pacifica got hit, because they dared to not bend over and take it from MK.
while this was a decent attempt, it is as much propaganda as everything else that states this world can remotely be called multi-polar. This war is the prime example of how much of a lie that is. This world is a uni-polarity and will remain as such until PB/DH/CnG/SF have a civil war.
-
As I said CN was down :;shrugs::
You clearly didnt pick up the sarcasm/joking manner of my comment to Mhawk.
Let me spell the point out here. Anyway you slice it, if an alliance comes in via an MDP or a MA they are acting in the correct manner. To accuse them of doing otherwise when there are no Ghost DOW, no optional treaties being used... just straight forward MDP/MA.... and you are saying they acted wrongly? Then I say it is you who are wrong.
If that is the case and you are accusing them of shady dealings you have a double standard or an Agenda to push.
Short and simple. And on that note i'll leave you to your debate about poles or whatever else.
i never stated anything remotely close to what you are talking about here. if that is what you meant to say to Mhawk, aiight. but that has nothing to do with what i said.
Realistically, I think the only way for this to be overcome would be by mutual venture. The other poles would have to agree to fight the DH/PB/CnG-dominant world, then agree to go their separate ways afterward. Of course, this wouldn't have to be as obvious, it could really just happen by proxy if all the poles would be roped into a curbstomp together. For instance, if Duckroll joined the current war on the Pacific/Polar sides, DH would be overwhelmed, and the splitup of themega-pole could occur through careful moves by the multi-poles.
well for that to happen sufficiently, IRON would have to go on the opposite side of TOP. and even then, if DR joined in against DH, they may be larger than DH but you still have CnG to worry about. there won't be much of a split as it would just cause CnG to saddle up against DR as well as DH being against DR.
If I recall correctly, Citadel where mostly uninvolved in politics, 1V had four members, and Q could have taken probably the rest of the world alone.
And the theory was Schattenmann's, not mine. Although I agree.
TOP was very much involved in politics and Gre was as well. Argent, OG, and Umbrella were to an extent. Q could not have taken on the world by itself which is why it died when it faced the rest of the world (minus TOP who did not join on Q's side). so your hypothesis there was already proven wrong by Karma.
1V had 4 members, DH has 3 that is not much of a difference. 3 members of 1V were part of Q (after Polaris was booted) while 1 (GGA) was not. the theory may have been Schatt's but you disagreed. and somehow agree with me when i state that PB/DH/SF/CnG constitute a single pole.
We gave our support to Poison Clan within the first 24 hours of the initial declaration of war. Burn for Polaris? hahahahaa. No.
oh i get that mate. but IAA, GATO, and TIO are not Polaris.
anyways, i have no real issues with what CnG did as i already figured ya'll to be on PB's side. my posts were just about OsRavan calling Mhawk on optional treaties. -
Why do you insist on making this about how things were in the past? I'm sick and tired of nearly every debate on this subject getting pigeon holed into one about Karma.
you do realize that Karma was only in 2008 and not 2006 or 2007 where we heard everyone whining about the amount of wars conducted by WUT and then by Q including many who are now all about warring...
if you don't want this to be about the past, then you should ensure that a complete reversal of attitude does not occur once ya'll are in power. When it was ya'll on the receiving end of curbstomps, it was all "zomg war is bad!!! NPO is ebil for attacking aggressively!!! blah blah blah blah blah!!!!" and now that ya'll are in power it is "We are aggressively attacking to ensure security of our alliance (a favorite for NPO)" and "War is good" and so on and so forth.
if you think you can completely switch your attitude after demonizing NPO, Polaris, and many other alliances for doing the same thing you want to do now, and not receive criticism- then you are stupid. and i doubt you are stupid Azaghul. so face it, it will happen.
Being a successful aggressor is nearly impossible in this game. Everyone loves activating defense treaties to join in on a winning war (see: C&G side in BiPolar), but very few people like joining in on aggression into a potential losing aggressive side (see: CoC in Karma, TOP side in BiPolar).
This stems entirely from what Tromp addresses. The same people who are warmongers in peacetime become pacifists in war. Just look at RV, who was going around saying how awful PB/SF/C&G/etc were, because they weren't doing anything, and how that was what was killing the game. Well, here we are, doing something, and now he is saying how awful PB/SF/C&G/etc are, because by doing this aggressive action we are what is killing the game.
People love getting up on their high horse when people get aggressive, it is the nature that people like Schatt who prey on underdogs by building sympathy and PR for them when they're faced under tyranny of the ruling power. Yet these are the same people who tried to engineer a war in which people rolled GOONS, by roping them into a situation where they would escalate a war or be declared on.
The word 'hypocrisy' is getting thrown around a lot lately, in regards to the VE/DH reasons for war. That goes right out the window, when you realize that aggressive, defensive, however, we appreciate what war does for the game and look forward to it, whereas the true hypocrisy is when people like Schatt decide that certain alliances are evil for 'manufacturing wars' or for using 'faux CBs' and certain alliances are not. This game would be a lot more fun if people just jumped down off of the pedestal and stopped trying to label people hypocrites for the same things that they themselves do.
There are two aspects of this game for me. Warring, and preparing to war. Everything I do is in regards for the next war. There is no other reason to play this game other than to prepare yourself for when the next war comes, be that politically, economically, or militarily. And that is why the game is always fun for me. If people started appreciating the warring aspect of the game more, people would have a lot more fun. Appreciate those who start wars, because without them, you would have an incredibly boring game. Stop blaming the people making things complicated and fun for ruining the game, when if anything, they're saving it.
i would actually have to say that this stems more from the fact that alliances like VE cried over any CB they did not feel was perfect (See what they did to Polaris because of the FIST-Polar war and yes i know FIST was allied to VE so it partially makes sense but fact is, according to new VE standards, SCM was totally attempting to spy which is legit CB for VE) or MK who cried over TOP/Co aggressively attacking them or NPO/co and the NoCB war.
so again, had ya'll acted better back then and not demonized those who committed similar or the same actions as you are now, then you would not be demonized now. that is the problem that i see.
Why don't you prove to me how I ever objected to war, or thought of it as "ebil"?
Please don't return in this topic before you do, because you're not really contributing to the debate.
i was not directing that solely towards you Tromp but mostly towards the attitude altogether that as i stated is prevalent among your side. i was part of WUT and called "ebil" for contributing to aggressive wars or condoning them since i never left Polaris nor did Polaris leave WUT until a while later. I watched (and contributed) to Q being demonized for their wars, though even then i did try to stay consistent (i condemned the Viricide war as well as the TPF-NoV war, and the GPA war).
and your post is just another "war is good" post and is solely a propaganda attempt to justify the actions of your alliance and your allies. you personally may not have objected to war, but this post is not about you specifically. while it is your thoughts and you do use I, you are addressing a larger crowd and justifying the actions of a larger crowd. thus, in order to address your points one must address the larger crowd on your side. while i did not address it as others have, my point stands. While you may not be guilty of hypocrisy, those who would agree with you or the alliances whose actions you are justifying could very well be and thus, my point on this new attitude from those currently in power. it is a complete reversal for most of their previous attitude when they were not in power.
in fact, i doubt any of them would state that NPO warring GPA was ever a good thing, nor would VE state that the Viricide was a completely justifiable war or that NoCB was legit because there is no need for a CB anymore. if they did, then they would be hypocrites since most stated the complete opposite back then.
-
;:snorts:: Maybe you should talk to GATO before you start throwing accusations around. If GATO had actually wanted us to roll with them we would have had their back. And vice versa. Not to mention... I can not double check as CN is down but I beleive you are IAA? How come you did not hit ODN to defend MCXA TCU? I'm going to go out on a limb here (correct me if i'm wrong) and guess that your allies saw you were occupied fighting on a different front of the war and thus did not call you in to help them. If they *had* called you, i'm sure you would have activated your treaty. Same with us.
no, i am Dark Templar. but nice try. i am just commenting on the fact that you told someone else that they had "optional treaty" viewpoint while ODN sat out on defending GATO. sure, GATO did not ask you to come in, but that means you have an optional viewpoint of the treaty. most treaties don't have a "oh if you are busy, don't worry about the mandatory defense clause" bit. that is a common courtesy sure, but turns the mandatory to an optional.
most have an optional viewpoint unless it suits them otherwise. i have seen alliances in this war declare war on many other alliances regardless of already being at war. so don't tell me it can't be done.
right now, DT is at war with Legacy and CSN to help out LoSS. also, you should change that from different front of the war to the other side of the war.
-
I agree with just about everything Shantamantan said
However, I disagree that the other "side" of DH-PB-CnG is simply a shamble. To the contrary, in the disjunction of the Pacific, Polar, and Duckroll alliance groups, I see a microcosm of the multipolarity that could exist in the future. Right now, NPO and Polaris have relations that are faulty at best, and neither alliance hopes to fix that, and Duckroll wants no part of either of them. Even though the three of them are surrounded and outmanned in war, they simply refuse to unite because they do not see themselves as the "other side." Rather, they value their independence as micro-poles in a world that was once unipolar. Imagine if the current "mega-pole" fractured, and the world fell into a multipolar society. I highly doubt any poles would be much larger than Duckroll or Polaris' immediate group of friends.
PB or SF would be larger since Polaris/Polaris's friends are kind of getting crushed right now and unless Polaris does not get crushing terms (which would be surprising) they won't be able to catch up that much.
right now, it is a bunch of micro-poles who are basically gonna be waiting for PB/DH to manufacture a CB or just roll without one and CnG/SF to basically ride along for the free tech.
sure there is independence in that but there is also basically a bunch of mini-curbstomps for months to come.
-
Are you really making the argument, in the middle of the most even war in recent memory, that the world is not multi-polar? With your candidate for single ruling power being a mash-up of four different blocs with little membership overlap, one of which can't decide which side to fight on? Interesting theory.
considering during Q's time, Q/Cit/SF/1V was basically the dominant force (4 different blocs) and in fact, considering Cit did not much like Q except for TOP, SF had no membership in Q, and 1V had like 3 members in Q (DH has 2 members in PB), i would say it is quite similar to a singular pole as it in the past it was called such.
yours is not even an interesting theory really.
-
You seem to have an oddly... dare I say it? Optional... view of treaties. Are you honestly telling me, that you approve of alliances going "You know, that CB doesn't seem coherent. I'm not going to honor my treaty or defend my friends."
Even leaving aside the fact that ive never seen one side approve of the others CB *ever* in CN. That claims of 'that cb is weak' seems like war dodging to me. Even leaving that aside. Are you honestly implying to me that a MDP can and should be treated like trash because of the CB?
If so, then i'm sorry to say our views on Treaties, Friendship, and Honor are simply not compatible.
wait, you are going to say someone else has an optional view of treaties when ODN did not do a damn thing to help GATO out? seriously... that is friggin amazing. you should probably skip out on telling others that their view of a treaty is optional... kettle meet pot...
-
"And tonight, with C&G's magnificent acrobatics to join Doomhouse's aggressive war, let now all lies of multipolarity be put to rest."
Heh... stretching much? That's a pretty ridiculous statement, even coming from you.
Acrobatics? There were no ghost dow involved in our coming in. No optional clauses. The chaining was as straight forward as you will find in CN.
LOST's MDP with goons was activated. LOST activated their MA with the rest of CnG.
That's as straight forward a way to enter a war as you will see... ever.
heh. GR and Athens are allied to IAA, where is CnG? oh that is right, helping the other side. ODN/Athens are allied to GATO, where was CnG? again, helping the other side. Athens is allied to TIO, where is CnG? again, helping the other side.
it appears that helping the allies that are on the winning side is clearly the maneuver best suited for CnG.
i would say that given all of that, sure, it is not exactly acrobatics but ya'll simply ignoring any treaty that will put CnG on the losing side.
-
I agree 100%. Sums up my thoughts on the game and how war interacts with it well.
Some morality is OK, but when it gets to the point where it smothering wars politically it is a problem.
where was this attitude in 2006 or 2007 or 2008?
-
i am quite amused at the sudden "war is good" attitude that is prevalent from the same people who while NPO was top dog was all about "war is ebil".
-
honestly, both the NPO hegemon and the PB/DH hegemon are similar. The multi-Polar world exists slightly under both, though we saw BLEU get crushed in order to stop the world from being multi-polar much like these two wars are solely meant to crush any opposition. Look at the fact that PB/SF/CnG are on the Polar front and PB/DH are on the Pacifican front.
Both have used flimsy CBs though NPO's hegemon at least put some effort into their CBs, unlike PB/DH did with Pacifica. The VE CB is worthless as there is no "blatant attempt at spying" especially since Impero set up the entire spy operation (heh, Impero was more the spymaster than Dajobo).
frankly, i only foresee the world becoming more and more like it was under the NPO hegemon but then again, within a few months of Karma i saw the world going down that path with the retarded TPF/Blue Balls War CB amongst other reasons.
slightly different terms were used with slightly different tactics but all in all the world started becoming diet NPO hegemon within a few months of Karma and has continued to gain weight as the new hegemon (first CnG/SF and now PB/DH) continues to progress. Once these wars are finished, well, unless you wish to suck PB/DH's $@, you will be screwed over and most likely waiting for an attack by PB/DH. so either after these wars are done, we either bow and scrape our knees for the new hegemon, or wait to have our teeth kicked in by the new hegemon for no reason other than "we are a threat to their security". (gee that sounds familiar)
the only true difference other than some slight modifications, between the two hegemons are that the jackboots on the necks of the weaker alliances have a mushroom, umbrella, grenade, lion, or whatever other symbols used by the alliances in PB/DH on them rather than Pacifica's symbol.
which given what you are defending, DT would have in fact been wrong to enter using an ODP to defend Umbrella, Sparta, or Darkfall, or any other NOIR ally on your side which is the majority of alliances on your side), and Brigade has yet to be hit. 
anyways, i have no real issues with what CnG did as i already figured ya'll to be on PB's side. my posts were just about OsRavan calling Mhawk on optional treaties.
On the DT situation
in Notes from Baghdad Bob
A blog by Penkala in General
Posted
it has been proven time and again that you tell mostly lies that you have deluded yourself into thinking is truth and fact. the fact that logs show Goose stating that they had refused DT's counter offer prove this. the fact that you ignore the fact that no alliance on your side warranted us activating an ODP for (Umbrella entered aggressively, Sparta/Darkfall hit NV) and Brigade, the only alliance at MD+ level with DT on your side has yet to be hit. GR entered after DT did and also has not been attacked. NV, NoR, and LoSS on the other hand entered to defend friends and got hit. NV though got hit by NOIR alliances (Sparta and Darkfall) and thus DT was unable to defend them. NoR was getting ready to leave the war. that left LoSS.
yep, truth and facts. you sure don't have them.
they did not negotiate in good faith and only accepted any counter offers due to outside pressure. that is not negotiating in good faith.
CSN refused at first and the offer was taken off the table. CSN then accepted after having external pressure placed on them. it has and always will be CSN's greediness that is the cause of the continuation of this war. no matter how you spin it. peace could have been had days ago, if CSN had not been greedy.
CSN was never flexible, otherwise the amount could have been negotiated down from 40k. nor would it have taken outside pressure to force them to even accept an altered variation of the payment of the 40k tech. so please stop stating CSN is flexible and willing to negotiate. it is obvious from looking at the logs they have never been either one. if not for outside pressure, i guarantee the terms would still be the original set of 40k tech in 3 months from certain members of DT.
also, we are enjoying the war.