Yevgeni Luchenkov
-
Posts
1,468 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Yevgeni Luchenkov
-
-
Just an outsiders observation. I am sure they were onboard going in but I dare say they became pissed because they were doing all the fighting towards the end while you sat back and dragged your feet with negotiations. That sort of thing leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
I don't want to further derail this thread into TOP-IRON's Grudge politics but I'm the one who initiated most of the contacts between Polaris and our coalition. I talked with Polaris repeatedly. We didn't drag our feet, at all. When IRON notified us that they wanted the war to cease, we severely reduced our demands (that they had agreed upon previously) and negotiated peace with Polaris in less than 72 hours. What took several more days was the gathering of signatures, especially with Random being very hard to find at the time. There are many logs about that.
We also didn't sit back. We provided aid, we covered all of the nations we could cover and all of our smaller nations - surely not a large number by any means - fought. IRON knew our alliance's tiers from Day one. They knew what we could provide and what we could not. We went above and beyond.
-
Nice try, but there are logs of IRON stating specifically otherwise. I don't have them but I know they still exist in some thread in government sections of NpO forums.
Do provide them. I'll be happy to finally see the proverbial logs. It's a common thing we often hear about when it comes to TOP's history. [i]Logs[/i] would exist of our eternal malevolance, they are exchanged far from our evil watch but when it comes to producing them, they are suddenly very hard to find.
In this case, timing is the key.
-
Mompson, we didn't force IRON's hand during the Grudge War. We had also been clear from the get-go (actually, for more than two years) that we wanted revenge. IRON was fully on board. A few weeks before, they told us that they wouldn't take reps because they actually favored taking them "on the battlefield", in "blood". Let's not rewrite history. When IRON started talking about going for peace, we said we would try to speed things up. We simply weren't going to give it all up and go from a previously-agreed position to pure white peace just because they suddenly felt it needed to happen now. It would have been ridiculous.
I see a little bit of that attitude in the cancellation: IRON seems to enter coalitions and then experience an afterthought: they knew full well who NPO's allies were and where they would be. Given IRON's past, they should fully sympathize with that kind of position, not lambast the NPO for honoring their treaty agreements.
But hey, bold move, I'll give you that.
-
Oh, so you finally realized what their theme was. Good on you.
Your alliance informed us in our embassy on day one, mate. ;) It was part of our advices to them: change your theme. We dared to hope that there might be something salvageable from that group of rulers; after all, it is not everyday that Digiterra gets over seventy new nations.
-
Don't understand the flack you were getting for offering the protection in the first place, but I suppose you have your reasons for cancelling now. It would be a shame if it were purely due to social pressures.
btw, why do you always ignore me on irc Yev? IHSV?
If it had been due to social pressures, we would have cancelled on day one. No, it has to do with the fact that our first protection was a temporary measure to give them the time to organize themselves. We sent them a few messages with tips as to what they needed to be recognized as a legitimate alliance around here. We gave them a full week of protection.
They have failed to do it. We hope that being on their own will give them an incentive to work harder or, else, seek new homes.
-
[center]
[/center]This is simply to inform the world that "The Six Million" alliance affiliation is no longer under our protection.
You can return to your scheduled talks about PZI (what is this, 2008?).
-
Brings the question should there be a TTK perma ZI for the whole alliance?
Seriously perma zi of anything is to harsh for anyone. Take him to ZI once and move on.
I'd agree with you in the case of a well established nation. However, when a very small nation commits treason, I believe he should be kept at ZI for a while, so he cannot simply lose 100 infra and then walk free. Simply put: if he's rich, strip him of his riches. If he's not, keep him in jail for a while.
-
PZI is often nothing more than "ZI for the time being", it rarely is [i]permanent[/i]. Given that the has betrayed their trust on several levels, it seems an appropriate measure.
-
Fair point. I didn't necessarily mean for my point to come across that way.
It was, however, to counter Yev's point that R&R hasn't ever done anything.
It's still my point.
You made the argument that R&R had helped the creation of the SF-XX superbloc. However, I had already said as much. Treaties and blocs are not an end: they are means to an end. The problem with R&R and so many alliances is that they think that the goal in this game is to get treaties: it's not. Treaties are tools to achieve goals.
Your argument is exactly what I reproach to R&R: you've spent years in one of the most powerful political position one could hope for. Yet, you did nothing [i]with[/i] it. Alliances like MK, NPO, TOP, Umbrella, Polaris and GOD (to name a handful) experience the ups and downs of this game because they use their political capital to accomplish things (less for GOD these days). That's why they also end up getting their comeuppance sooner or later (and global wars are centered on that objective).Your alliance is simply content to exist and sign treaties.
-
For blocs that are apathetic and irrelevant, Yevgeni and Rush sure base a significant amount of their political agendas on them. I really don't understand what your guys obsession is with them. I don't think anyone on that side gives two shits about either of you or your alliances.
I don't think the word "base" is the one you're looking for, mate. TOP has had absolutely nothing to do with SF-XX in the past oh three to four years.
But let's be honest here, listening to FA advice from anyone from C&G or TOP is essentially like attending "Become a Satellite/Serf 101." I find it incredibly ironic that anyone from C&G would dare criticize how another alliance or sphere handles its own FA when in reality, the FA policy of C&G has been "Attach Ourselves to the Winners."
Remind me of those years when R&R has ever led anything? You've spent close to two years with an absurdly politically powerful position (bridging two influential blocs) and your alliance has never accomplished anything of note. I'm not trying to be mean there: I sincerely can't pinpoint any event initiated by R&R.
As for the serf comment, we do hear it from time to time about our relationship with MK. So far, into the relationship, we've started one war and they have started one war. I'd call it a pretty even deal. Not that you'd know much about getting things done anyway.
We can trace that back to C&G and SuperFriends back in 2009, from Karma forward, until C&G decided to hop off and leech onto PB/DH. Now it would seem that NPO's making its rise again, and guess who's hopping on the NPO bandwagon? That's right - C&G. Now I'm not going to be critical of playing politics that way - if you all are content jumping ship to ship, that's entirely your call, I have no say nor do I care to have any say in what C&G elects to do FA-wise. But for the love of God, don't be the call girl of every rising power sphere and then go tell others that they need to step up. That's plain hypocrisy.
You spent those years riding fences, signing idiotic treaties left and right, which shielded you for a long time as there was always someone in the opposite coalition to object to your rolling.
But honestly, it shouldn't come as shocking that you guys would suggest such things - that's been your doctrine for a while now. "Get in bed with every new power, jump ship before everyone turns on you."
Again, given your list of treaties at convenient times in history, I wouldn't be throwing stones.
Yev, you're welcome to read that entire post over again, but replace "C&G" with "TOP." It should serve the same purpose. The only difference being that TOP never had the foresight to jump ship before getting rolled with all of its butt-buddies.
We got rolled once, during BiPolar. We lost another war (which I wouldn't call a rolling by any means). You think we didn't have the foresight to see this last war was coming? Unlike your kind, we don't spend most of our time doing jokes about dicks and bacon. We knew full well the war was coming and we would be outnumbered. It took three years for that to happen. We stuck to our guns because it was the smartest thing to do. All you were able to achieve was an unconvincing white peace, scrambled hastily before your coalition collapsed because of infighting.
When you are at the top, one day or another, you are bound to get killed. What is truly astonishing is that your mega bloc (SFXX) has spent the past three years being terrible in every possible way. You should bring back Xiphosis from the dead, at least when he was around, you had someone to give you a bit of leadership.
-
I suppose they could try and make friends with the cool kids if allowed to, then circle jerk into the abyss.
Or maybe better themselves, cut their loose ties and either form a decent opposition (one less likely to be rolled) and be more likely to attract new friends or create a different powersphere. It's not like they're not currently circle jerking already.
Anything is better than their current apathy.
-
The reality is this:
1)If you base your treaties on friendship before politics, your alliance is worthless. People can be friends without being treaty partners but treaty partners should always align politically or give each other some sort of political benefit.
2)We are losing nations daily. In the past few years, we have went from over 35,000 nations to a little less than 12,000. That means less alliances, less blocs, less poles.
3)There simply isn't a lot of real leaders. Most alliances are led by people who shouldn't be in leadership positions because they're either too incompetent to occupy such a spot or lack any form of ambition or project.
The problem with #3 is that we currently have two blocs and a half without any semblance of capable leadership. Worse, they seem to be happy to wallow in that state of apathy, doing nothing to better their situation, waiting for the next beatdown to happen. They remind me of broken prisoners who, after too much torture or a prolonged jailtime, end up accepting their fate and stop fighting.
We used to think viceroys were horrible things; right now, it would be merciful to impose viceroys on that collection of beaten down states. Sparta, my hand is still extended. We can help you.
-
Aside from the "herp derp lol trollolol" idiocy (OOC: hint: this isn't Reddit and we're not in 2009 anymore), I found the thread humorous.
-
Raiding is immoral. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
-
Disappointed about this one TOP..
I'm surprised. I thought you'd still honor your old anti-raiding stance, Polar. We have that much in common, after all.
-
Just a rectification for some people:
We will provide the help they need if they seek us out. However, they are not our protectorate as per common Digiterran standards. We are simply extending our protection to them to give them a chance to organize themselves without having to fear organized raiders*. If they decide to use that protection to launch offensive wars, they will have to deal with the repercussions. We know it can be hard for a new alliance (OOC: coming from another world) to quickly organize their 70+ members into a cohesive unit.
-
[center]
[/center]This is simply to inform the world that "The Six Million" alliance affiliation is under our protection for the time being.
You can return to your scheduled micro drama.
-
Fine treaty between two fine alliances. Hearty congratulations.
-
Long live our ideals.
-
Liked fighting you both. A fine treaty between two fine alliances.
-
No opposition from me.
-
Good luck with this, Chax.
-
You've been a formidable emperor for Pacifica. I wish the best of luck to Farrin.
Also, no, you won't get rid of me that easily, Brehon.
-
It was a long time coming.
Fine treaty. It was either that or war, after so much poaching.
IRON Announcement
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted · Edited by Yevgeni Luchenkov
They were not pushed aside during peace talks. We were told to negotiate it. They were more than welcome to be present; most of the time their own government was either not present or told us we were good to go.
As far as the position goes, you understand the concept of negotiating. Let's not insult each other's intelligence. We had agreed with them on a high demand in order to get something we wanted. All of a sudden, they came to us and told us the war needed to stop. I'm sorry if their position evolved rapidly. We did what we could to adjust the demands. The fact that we achieved peace in a few days is a testament to our efforts in that case, not something that should be held against us. It would have been foolish to simply give up our entire position simply to spare a few days of fighting. You don't plan a war for a year and then spend two months fighting it only to completly abandon your political position in the last three days because your ally has a change of heart.