Yevgeni Luchenkov
-
Posts
1,468 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Yevgeni Luchenkov
-
-
If this whole time they did nothing but plot their strategy, then why were they discussing peace to begin with?
I'm not in the knows but I'd guess that they were planning because, while the talks were going on, they were still getting attacked.
Which seems pretty logical.
-
Seems like Athens and VE aren't the only ones who can sign well timed treaties.
Interesting to say the least.
-
I guess the amusing thought is that, instead of attacking who you know will be your enemies, everyone is waiting and giving their opponents all the time they need to do whatever they want. This looks more and more like a carefully planned waltz, where each step counts.
It would be interesting to see preemptive strikes on some of TPF's allies, to force their hand. At least, that's probably what I would do, on an ally or two.
-
Indeed, so attacking on New Years Eve makes perfect sense.
It could, depending on the level of activity of their members. That said, I doubt any alliance will have enough active on Dec 31st to declare, much less to blitz. On the other hand, considering who is in right now, if IRON and then TOP want to declare AND draw people to them, they only need a handful of targets and fighters since they will most likely declare on a single alliance (my guess is Athens) Ball will be in their court to call reinforcments on NYE, which means their own counter-attack will take at least a day or two.
-
TPF's allies are refuting the CB, so from their point of view TPF is the defender in this battle and have a responsibility to defend TPF.
It's not the Athens side that doubts the CB, they are just expecting from TPF's allies what they would do for their own allies in this situation.
Aside from ADI - who adopted a rather ambiguous position - TPF's allies have been silent. Don't confuse official positions with a few OWF posts.
Also, I was mostly speaking from a theoretical point of view.
-
I agree with you, Ejay. That said, any winning side (I'm not pointing you out, but others) is always all too willing to point out that the other camp is dishonourable scum, reneging on treaties and what not.
Yet, at the same time, they are also quick to point out that, should those same allies join in the fray, they are supporting the actions of their colleagues.
Also, it is rather ironic to see people faulting TPF's allies for not honoring the "mutual defense" part of their treaties while, at the same time, lambasting them for following the "anti espionage" clause (which voids the MD part, most of the time) of those same treaties. You either believe in your CB or you don't.
In this case, if you accuse TPF of espionage and TPF's allies (with a no espionage clause) accept your accusations as the truth, faulting them for not defending TPF is the high of hypocrisy.
That said, treaties are the problem. They were designed to be political tools; stalwart friends don't need paper to express their loyalty to each other.
-
Was a light and amusing read. Well done for a first issue (well, redux).
-
What I find the most amusing, aside from Jack's sig, is that TPF's enemies seem to be more worried about TPF's allies than TPF itself. I mean, we have yet to see any complaining from TPF about the lack of help they've been getting, while we've already seen a dozen threads (made by TPF's enemies) imploring TPF's allies to join in the fray.
Also, obviously, it is the calm before the storm. Just look at the peace moded nations.
-
Some pretty good propaganda, Jack, Jericho and Lam.
-
Congrats on the short-lived take of the #1 spot. You'll probably have it for a tad longer soon.
Also, RV, keep open aid slots next time.
-
At least, nobody is wasting time trying to spin this as some sort of "long coming friendship".
Good luck on your strategical move, VE and Athens.
-
I laughed. Good luck out there, NEW. You've shown times and times again that you were unafraid to join the (nuclear) fray.
-
We don't officially have one but I suppose it could be "House of a Thousand Corpses" by Rob Zombie.
Also, I really like Voltaire.
-
Problem with "nuclear retaliation policy", for small alliances, is that when it is known, it becomes a "lure and bait" for people who enjoy curbstomps rather than tech raids.
In many cases, nowadays, tech raiders are in it mostly for the fun of warring and not precisely for profit. In more trigger-happy alliances, it keeps the membership satisfied. If they can attack a small alliance and they know it will escalate in a full scale war (where you'll be, say, 150 vs 10), they will do it.
-
Met some friends from other games. We're still RL friends and the game is dead.
That said, the main problem is mostly distance for me. I'm an open guy and I love to meet new faces. That said, if they live 1000kms away, I might go there once a year, top. They'd be "good acquintances". People that could probably be my friends if we lived near each other.
Same goes for a couple people in CN for me: I'd probably share a brew once a week with Khyber if we didn't live on the opposite sides of the continent. I'd have met others too, no doubt about it.
So yeah, "friend" is probably overused but there's no harm in using it when you're speaking to good acquintances, really.
-
Small misunderstanding there.
Believland (BEazy) was there for most of the peace talks of that day, except the very last ones.
The last ones included Brother Kane (ZDP), Mhawk (TPF), Crymson (TOP), gantaX (NEW) and myself. They were very quick, to just about everyone's surprise. Hence why BE might have gotten the impression that there were no new discussions.
I would probably have included Chimaera but I think he was away or absent at that moment. We, in ZDP, asked TOP to be there; they were a force for peace and they are good friends of us.
-
Hem. Happy to see it pleased you. Thought it was simple courtesy to salute you in your language.
Other than that, good luck in the future. We had many good exchanges with your members.
-
And ZDP's mistakes??
We believe the fact that, considering everything, we are still paying reparations to one of their nations speaks for itself.
Not exactly sure what you are trying to stir here.
-
We, Zombies, would like to give our thanks to the Random Insanity Alliance (Penkala), The Order of the Sword (BEazy), The Order of the Paradox (Feanor and Crymson) and the Imperial Assault Alliance (Chimaera) for their support and help. We will remember it.
To peace!
-
ZDP: an alliance that does not believe in treaties, that does not recognize tech raiding as anything but war, and yet choose to exist as a federation of 8 nations at the time of these raids. I would say an 8 nation alliance with no treaties would fall into the majority of tech raiding guidelines in alliances that practice the stuff (The Resistance included).
Demanding reps? Yeah that can be reasonable in some cases. You'll probably get reps from us, for example. Demanding reps, or else?
That's not wise.
Actually, Matt, you should definitely know better. We do not take raids as nothing "but war". Two of your members raided one of ours. Did we DoW you en masse? Did we escalate the matter? We came to you, seeking a peaceful resolution, even if one of those raiders had used bombing runs and cruise missiles.
Fortunately, your alliance has some good level-headed government people and peace was settled.
Also, we probably could start recruiting the day we will be at peace. It's not our fault if people started raiding us while we still were at war (in a ceasefire, by that time) with the GOONS!
We're probably going to enjoy our first days of peace of our existence. Expect us to quickly make an official DoE and reach the 20 members cap, to avoid raids. Also, we have taken a lesson out of all these wars and adapted our position to better protect ourselves while not betraying our ideals.
Expect that DoE to come with something else.
-
That language with addition of a timetable and multiple alliances coming to me with warnings of war, made such an announcement necessary.
A timetable, such as giving them 24 hours to think about our offer and give us a response?
Oh, what monsters.
-
ZDP contributed to that escalation by attacking NEW nations that were not involved in the raid or the counter to your counter.
Ridiculous.
Timeline, once again:
1)NEW raids us.
2)NEW guarantees us this will remain a 1v1 war between BK and yoyoabc.
3)NEW breaks their promise in 30 minutes flat. Another guy attacks BK. He also does two spy operations to destroy BK's monetary reserves. By that point, it was evident that this wasn't a raid anymore.
4)NEW adds yet another guy to the fray, on BK.
5)ZDP retaliates on the three attackers.
6)NEW adds more attackers, outside of the first three.
7)ZDP acknowledges those attacks and retaliates.
I can't see how you can spin this. It's crystal clear that, every time, our moves were limited reactions to NEW's escalations and repeated offensives.
Also, we have offered peace to NEW (white peace to all, 18m$ paid to BK for the spy ops) and given them 24 hours to give us their official response. Why did you feel the need to make this public, save for PR !@#$%^&*, by trying to preemptively shift the blame from NEW to IAA?
-
Can we lay the "language barrier" to rest already? Logs prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that they understood full well what was meant. They reneged on their word, for a reason or another (I suspect it is because Sangar didn't warn his alliance that an agreement had been reached). Twice, they escalated this affair. Now, Mhawk, representing TPF, goes public to further escalate it.
If NEW's diplomatic envoy had felt threatened during this morning's peace negotiations, he had the right to leave the room. He didn't. In fact, the conversation started with more people on NEW's side than we had in the room and in NS and members, we were always outnumbered.
So much for threatening.
-
He went rogue. Personally, I see it as a sign of strength and courage. I won't profess to understand anything of roguery from this situation other than the fact that ZDP was originally a rogue alliance that no longer should bear that title.
We have been perceived as rogues but we never were. It never was our intention to go out with a bang, otherwise we would have chosen our targets and stayed in war mode all along.
Instead, we peaced out with GOONS, MK and Polaris and are currently paying reparations to the former. If drama seems to follow us, it is probably because certain people (namely NEW in this scenario) seems to think everything is permitted as long as the enemy is small and appears defenseless.
How we were treated would have provoked a massive war should they have done it on a bigger alliance. They know it.
When did you join CN?
in Open World RP
Posted
End of March 06. Deleted later on and then came back. Remember most of the GWs.