Fireandthepassion

[quote name='Bob Ilyani' date='25 March 2010 - 05:02 PM' timestamp='1269554538' post='2236630'] This is not the ARES that signed a protectorate with Rok last year. Times have changed and so have both these alliances. Many of ARES's treaty partners a evaluating their positions and I am not surprised. Many of ARES's founding members (myself being one of them) have moved on to other things, and it is a very different alliance indeed. Good move Rok. [/quote] Try 2 years ago. I spent practically all of 2009 in Polaris. I was in ARES in 2008 into 2009. But still sad to see.

Guys peace out! Wont you think of the GRL!? Your war will destroy Planet Bob! In seriousness, good luck to both parties. @Flag critics: Why don't you guys offer to make them a new one if you don't like it? Not everyone is a [ooc]Photoshop[/ooc] expert.

[quote name='Kevin McDonald' date='09 March 2010 - 05:47 PM' timestamp='1268178745' post='2219878'] I'll settle this. Corp will offer SBA a protectorate, in our experience that is enough to stop raids. Ensuring your wiki is up to date (it wasn't), and ensuring your protectorate actually KNOWS they are being protected is a much more efficient and less time consuming way to overcome this than your suggestions. [/quote] Did you miss where PC asked a former member of SBA and not a current member?

[quote name='Shadow Slayer' date='03 March 2010 - 11:08 PM' timestamp='1267679546' post='2213408'] They got us with SMF too guys. SMF isn't much safer [/quote] Which means your root might want to scan for keyloggers, or not use the same password.

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='28 February 2010 - 04:01 PM' timestamp='1267394718' post='2208860'] Perhaps to you, but I've seen them shutout others (no names) who were allies. And I've seen them act high and mighty simply because of their alliance's position versus others. Point is, no one is perfect but I don't see how LM/TOP can claim the high road over Sparta in terms of whose the better ally without either exposing their flaws. LM, you are speaking with TOP in the back of your mind I'd assume, right? Either way, far too many large alliances treat smaller alliances as their [b]means towards tech and a future merger[/b] unless it's their own protectorate. Even though sometimes those small alliances do grow up and they wonder why some have a chip on their shoulders... [/quote] Tech yes, but those deals are beneficial for both parties. Just ask the people selling that tech and the people buying. Mergers? For Sparta maybe. Polaris, Paradoxia, and Pacifica are 3 alliances that I can think of off the top of my head that hasn't benefited from a merger in recent history, if ever.

Was expecting to see Ivan's sig there. Congrats Nuke Order you have some fine protectors there.

What the hell is the point of hacking this game besides using larger nations to go nuke rogue? There's no market for RMT on here. It's absolutely the most pointless thing ever and only retarded script butthurt script kiddies would hack anything related to CN.

No joke about Yak's FARK account number being 1? Although his brew sounds really, really good.

[quote name='TBRaiders' date='24 February 2010 - 12:26 AM' timestamp='1266992982' post='2200827'] Can't NSO get peace right now by agreeing to do a beer review and not re-enter the conflict? Hasn't that offer been on the table for weeks? If not, my bad. Just something I thought I read somewhere. I ask because I see a lot of people deflecting blame for NSO still fighting, but it sounds to me like it's due to choice and not because any allies are holding a gun to your head. We've seen a dozen or so alliances leave this war with similar terms. I personally think NSO's involvement, with ties to both IRON and NpO, as one of the things keeping this war escalated. [/quote] It has been on the table for weeks with Polaris offering to do the beer review and FARK doing a review as well in return. Of course Ivan wont mention that because it will make NSO look bad for cancelling the treaty.

[quote name='Opethian' date='23 February 2010 - 04:45 PM' timestamp='1266965321' post='2199862'] I'm not sure how I'm supposed to be so venomous towards a guy I've never even heard of, but if you [i]insist[/i] I suppose I'll make an effort. Booo! I don't care for your manner of behavior! [/quote] Opethian has done my job for me. He read my mind word for word, and just won as he always does.

Welcome back Tyga, and I hope you enjoyed your time off during these oh so confusing times.

With a proper warchest you can easily rebuild in peace mode and come back and pwn with your superior wonders. You can say that aid is prolonging the inevitable, but if you aren't staggered there's no point in surrendering. Edit: Just checked his nation. You peeked at 16,000. You were a small nation when things are still cheap for you. It wouldn't have been any effort to have you rebuilt with aid.

[quote name='Jesse End' date='16 February 2010 - 01:34 AM' timestamp='1266305696' post='2185198'] All with the exception of GOD. Validated his argument of what now? With the exception of GOD, all other alliances that hold us under terms have agreed to a suspension of reps and minimums. /me spins on the record player [/quote] You can not suspend something that does not exist. FOK, ROK and a few others are not owed reps. How can you meet requirements that no longer exist? Why would you approach someone that you don't owe reps and have to meet any sort of minimal payments to?

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='16 February 2010 - 01:31 AM' timestamp='1266305510' post='2185188'] Like I said, I look forward to seeing polaris recognizing a state of war with pacifica. Well yeah, I meant specifically which alliances. I don't believe that's actually mentioned here at all. [/quote] NPO has already recognized that their actions are acts of war; why would Polaris have to recognize a state of war that already exists through the war acts that the NPO tried to prevent by asking for a temporary suspension?

[quote name='Jesse End' date='16 February 2010 - 01:29 AM' timestamp='1266305366' post='2185181'] If you actually read this thread, you must have a really short memory. Everyone that we owe reps to, except for GOD, suspended their reps. [/quote] You do realize you just defeated your argument and validated everything WC has been saying about those not having reps have nothing to suspend right? It also kind of validates Xiphosis' (Legion NoFISH maybe) about how this is a PR attempt to make GOD look bad by saying 14/15 have agreed to suspended parts of the surrender when obligations of payments had ended. edit: for GRAMMAR!

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='16 February 2010 - 01:28 AM' timestamp='1266305315' post='2185177'] That's almost like a tech raid [/quote] Except it has a valid casus belli for war so it's nothing like a tech raid!

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='16 February 2010 - 01:24 AM' timestamp='1266305072' post='2185162'] Polar is going to recognize a declaration of war by Pacifica on her? That will be fun to see. [/quote] I can't tell because no one knows what Grub is thinking anymore. I mean if we really want to talk about something that would be an advantage it would be getting money and tech from declaring on NPO because of the limitations on their military.

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='16 February 2010 - 01:15 AM' timestamp='1266304510' post='2185137'] The people attacking Pacifica would be the same people GOD are fighting anyway. Well yes, they agreed that GOD didn't have enough slots to meet the minimum, not that reps should be waved just because of a war or whatever [/quote] Uhhh... except there are few Polaris allies engaged at the moment that I'm sure wouldn't mind defending Polaris from the evils of the Pacifican war machine.

[quote name='Leigon' date='16 February 2010 - 01:12 AM' timestamp='1266304333' post='2185134'] Hm that might have come out differently than i meant it anyway. Of course pacifica had more hidden enemies. But we've had our fair bit of open hostility. Polar was actually pretty good in that. [/quote] Are you going to act the dislike isn't mutual and GOD didn't do the same hating in public? Xiphosis hates Grub. Grub hates Xiphosis. If Xiphosis would have let the grudge go, unlikely if we consider the EZI of KM, I'm sure we in Polaris would have been more than happy to forget how unimportant GOD really is.

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='16 February 2010 - 12:08 AM' timestamp='1266300511' post='2184959'] Asking an alliance to hold its end of surrender terms it agreed to in order to get an edge in a war? You're somehow calling that a [i]bad[/i] thing? [/quote] It's not an edge when it opens GOD up to more attacks when they have to defend Pacifica from the people attacking Pacifica as GOD is one of the protectors of Pacifica under the surrender terms. Of course you'll say its ok for GOD to not fight those fronts because they're so heavily engaged in battles.

I really like the one for Polaris. I'm pleased that =LOST= has gotten some satisfaction.

[quote name='ChairmanHal' date='07 February 2010 - 12:06 PM' timestamp='1265565987' post='2167012'] I think you are implying that all Polaris has accomplished with this war is to create a whole new set of enemies that will one day extract a pound of flesh...and then another. You are also probably right. Also, treaty obligated participation aside (and not all those who have declared war and claimed treaty obligations were necessarily obligated to declare war on those they did), was there ever [i]anything[/i] about this war that was actually [u]necessary[/u]? Glad you are having fun though. [/quote] No none of this escalation was necessary had \m/ taken the peace offer right away that was given to them on day 1. Also we can't betray TOP. Polaris has no obligation to TOP at all. TOP came to Polaris. Polaris did not ask for assistance from TOP. If Polaris did then why would TOP declare on an uninvolved group? Oh right... because Crymson has said this war presented the best opportunity for TOP to fight c&g. That alone should tell you TOP declaring on c&g is inevitable, and Grub saying no wouldn't have stopped TOP from fulfilling their agenda. If everyone here actually stopped to think about what they were reading this wouldn't have to be repeated hundreds of times a day because this is making me miss the old way of things because at least then all the sheep here would be sheep and not trying to be the wolf.

[quote name='Boondock' date='05 February 2010 - 11:50 PM' timestamp='1265435454' post='2163275'] I can't believe NpO would follow through on such a request, after TOP came in to help them. [/quote] TOP didn't come to help Polaris. TOP declared on a not yet involved c&g. If TOP came to our help they'd have had waited until IRON declared in support of NSO, and then you could make that argument. Also TOP came to us and told us what they planned. We didn't ask for assistance. Would them declaring on our side be unwelcome? No. Did we ask? No. Do we have any obligations to TOP? Nope. I also really don't understand why we're assisting GR at all since they blatantly told us they had no plans of helping us. Yes we're canceling the treaty, but GR did exactly what ODN has done numerous times in the past.

[quote name='Sakura' date='02 February 2010 - 02:50 AM' timestamp='1265100629' post='2152854'] If he's trying to make people opinion-sick (think "seasick", but caused by rapidly changing opinions), I imagine he's having some success. I think my facepalm started... looking at Grub's DOW. On \m/ & PC. (Yes, I say *and*, he only specifically listed \m/, but, PC is not the sort of alliance to watch our friends burn, and Grub knew this -- expected this even.) How many nations are in, and how powerful is GOD? And how many, and how powerful is Fark? I think NpO's DOW on \m/ made it clear enough. ... How? I seem to recall the first DOW in this war came from... NpO. Not \m/. Would "a certain ally of an ally" be "FOK"? If so, reread the FOK DOW on Polar. PC honouring a mutual defense treaty we have.... How strange. For a moment, I thought you were talking about some other alliance. Based on what I've seen of Grub's diplomacy with the \m/ situation... I would suggest locking Grub out of whatever room you're negotiating in. It will improve your chances of gaining peace without *too much* destruction. Um... what alliance are you talking about? The Poison Clan *I* know isn't the sort to abandon allies because the odds are against us. I can't blame Ivan for not wanting to sign unacceptable terms, that's part of why the first part of the war escalated -- NpO was giving unacceptable terms (that were thinly disguised as "white peace".) FOK only joined in (on the MD, oA, and spirit of the treaty) *after* NpO (Grub) made unreasonable demands of \m/ to 'end' the conflict. And, about the OP.... While I can see honour in coming to your friend's defense, I do have to wonder... why GOD only, and not GOD+Fark+however many others were left in the war? Also, did you even *try* communicating with GOD/Fark/etc? [/quote] So much crap. If \m/ had not tossed a racial slur at Grub diplomacy wouldn't have failed. You can't always be cordial with diplomacy; sometimes you have to apply pressure. Grub did the right thing in regards to how he handled the \m/ situation. Grub made no unreasonable demands. \m/ charter had already had a clause recognizing the standard of the CN community and was only changed after \m/ heard the peace terms so Polar could look evil for trying to force \m/ to change their charter.

[quote name='Louis Balfour' date='02 February 2010 - 12:18 AM' timestamp='1265091494' post='2152470'] What is this I don't even Glad not to have a treaty obligation to this guy and his swollen head... People of NpO, please... Take your alliance back. [/quote] I'm so tired of seeing this argument about treaty obligations to the point that it's time for it to be debunked. Why didn't Rok cancel their treaty when \m/ threw a racial slur at Grub that killed all attempts at diplomacy? We should all know well enough that you can't talk to or yell at \m/ they wont change their ways; which is why no one in Polaris or Polaris' allies believed that \m/ apology. Where was MK when FOK escalated, props to FOK I hold nothing against FOK for them declaring on Polaris, on an oA clause? Was MK ever in the military organization channel established for the war effort on \m/, pc, and FOK? No. I can't say if MK ever offered assistance as I don't know if they did or did not, but considering how the general membership of MK treats their allies in Polaris; I'm going with no they didn't. Had MK been anywhere near Polaris on this side TOP would be no where near Polar and telling Polar that TOP was specifically aimed at c&g. No matter what Grub would have said TOP would have still fought c&g preemptive strike or declaring in defense of someone on c&g alliances. So please stop ignoring all the points because whats done is done. Now just move on because the posts berating Polaris as bad allies add nothing because there's a lot more that could be said about certain alliances that are allied to Polaris.