Yevgeni Luchenkov
-
Posts
1,468 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Yevgeni Luchenkov
-
-
The longest and most storied one is probably TOP-NpO.
-
Yea, damn EQ members coming on here congratulating an alliance on peace....heaven forbid an enemy congratulate an alliance on a well fought war, and well deserved peace.
If you still congratulate them on their fighting prowess in three to four months from now, it will be something. For now, saluting those who surrendered is polite, yet often done with ulterior motives, especially by the victors.
-
That looks pretty severe to me too.
Our worst losses are a year of tech (6k). We'll live. They're heavy, though, it was by no means easy fighting. We fought good nations all the way. I think he's more refering to people who lost 10-12k tech.
-
So the coalition that UCON was a part of doesn't like this, and UCON, their friends, and the coalition they surrendered to are busy defending it as a perfectly acceptable action. Yawn.
Hereno, good friend, you're not reading this properly.
Most leaders, on our side of the fence, are congratulating UCON (UCoN?) on a fight well fought as well. They went in, gave all they could. TBRaiders perfectly sums up what most of us think. However, a few disagree. Let's not take the opinions of a few and make a "your coalition" statement. That would lead to really bad threads (and this place is already a cesspool of idiocy). -
Onwards to another 10 billion more!
-
It is the first. Now others that had that as an argument can let it go.
We are pleased to accept Pacifica's surrender.
-
It is a global war and an attack on one is an attack on all, this is most true on the front EvU decided to enter on.
When EvU entered they declared war on all of the alliances that signed that DOW, all those nations in those alliances have the right to declare war on EvU.
EvU wanting to sanction this nation was either due them being malicious or ignorant of what is going on.
Honestly, you're quickly moving up the shit posting ladder. You're not HoT or Mogar yet but you're definitely aiming for the stars. You'd do your alliance an immense service by not posting.
-
So now TOP thinks they were 'born' into a [ooc]role playing game[/ooc] better then other folks.......and you call ME delusional? LMAO oh the total hypocrisy vomiting out of your pie hole is as pathetic as it is humorous, as you are seemingly sure all of TOP were 'born' with superior genetics, sounds to me like TOP is/has developed the kind of outlook a certain IRL dictator from Germany's past. Whats next for you all? Interbreeding to keep the bloodlines pure?
L
O
L
Man I havent seen such full on kool aid drinking BS in many a year, but im glad to know TOP internally thinks such things you spew relevant for w/e reason......hmmm have you been screened for syphilis lately as the last person thinking they were born better then everyone else sadly went insane from such a disease and it would be a shame for you to keep suffering from what is now a curable condition. ;)
You're delirious. Your leadership ought to bring you back into your cage.
-
So your guys off AA are cowards?
Took the words out of my mouth. I've already fought one TOP government member who has been hopping AAs regularly. But, I'm sure they'll have some explanation of why it's ok for them to do it.
As others have stated, TOP has been participating in this very act mate. Unless Genland is no longer part of TOP and would not be allowed back into TOP after the war (that usually happens to nations who leave an alliance in the midst of a war). Considering I doubt that will happen, you stating this is rather amusing considering what TOP itself is doing.
No.
What I wrote isn't that being off your AA is an act of cowardice. You might want to go back and read again. What I wrote is this:
1)If you declare a war while being off your regular AA but your government insists you are still a full member, then they should either acknowledge the alliance they are at war with (so, if I leave my AA to attack a member of, say, TTK, I'm saying TOP should acknowledge its state of war with TTK) OR they should label me as rogue.
What I then said is that this new double standard where an alliance doesn't recognize (or announce) its wars is one that reeks of cowardice. People using fake AAs, in themselves, aren't cowards. It's a valid war tactic to escape staggers, one that has proven to be effective to some extent. The cowardice is at the government level for not assuming wars, not at the individual level for declaring them. Notice the difference?
The difference is that, for example, MK recognizes itself at war with GLoF. I have no problem if they (MK) send members to the "lol.AA" and "dbdc" and "allarchon" AAs and DoW on GLoF: MK recognize them as full members AND recognize war with GLoF. What I have a problem with is HoT DoW'ing on EvU from his AA, his AA insisting he's still a member but acting like that war never happened and they're not at war with EvU.
Now, Doch pointed out a good example. We indeed have a member of TOP who did that very thing by attacking a member of IRON. I wish that he didn't do it and now I wish that we would assume that war but I'm afraid I am not a member of TOP's executive government.
I'm against it for the bad precedent it sets. I'm against it because it will definitely be abused in the future. I'm against it because it was a good tradition to have alliances acknowledge and declare their wars publicly.
-
Since you are requesting that I check only your own posts to the exclusion of what the rest of your alliance has stated, am I to assume that you are then disavowing the two arguments that your side has been repeatedly saying in this thread, namely that 1) This DoW is an alleged statement of "mistrust in our coalition" and 2) That this side allegedly requested help because they were getting hammered?
I think the former isn't a stretch of the imagination. There is mistrust in your coalition. You will not publicly admit it, however. I wouldn't argue to make you admit it, it is a pointless endeavour.
The second is probably too heavy a word. We are not hammering the enemy as we do not have any offensive capability. On the other hand, we are dishing enough damage for them to wish a new alliance by their side. I do not represent my own government at this point but you have my blessing to correct people on that misconception. -
Regardless of who sanctioned first and for what reason, I personally feel no sympathy for either HoT or MK. The possibility that sanctions would be used in war is both entirely foreseeable (OOC: as of nations being able to chose resources, thus altering the need for team color cooperation between alliances) and also relatively easy with some coordination and education to guard against.
Thus, if a nation and/or alliance doesn't plan for this type of attack, that's their own fault.
Like it or not, relying on any other alliance to hold off on the use of some potential attack just because it doesn't fit within one's sense of ethics or even what (at the time of the war) is considered "community standard" has time and time again been shown in CN history to be a bad strategic move. Community standards change and there is always a first time.
I'm not saying I like it, I am saying it is what it is.
Amen.
To be honest, the non-declarations of war have blurred lines. On both ends you have people declaring wars off AAs, alliances not assuming the wars they are declaring in-game yet demanding their members be considered as full members and not rogues, etc.
It's nonsensical. Either form new alliances for the sake of warfare, alliances that should be fully recognized and taken to task or assume your war declarations. This new trend of affairs reeks of cowardice.
-
Actually, what you are twisting is "our allies aren't alone in negotiations" into "OMG NPO doesn't trust its allies to do anything, and this is all a massive statement of mistrust and an NPO attempt to control everything!".
And you are also twisting "NPO we want help" into "NPO we are about to collapse here if you don't help us TOP's amazing armies will overwhelm us!"
I'm happy to see you backtrack from your alliance's earlier extremist statements, but let's not sweep it all under a rug and pretend it never happened.Actually, you might want to check out my initial posts. They are mostly timetables of events, where I said: "TORN requested help" so "your coalition must need help" and "Brehon said he didn't want his coalition allies alone at the peace table" so "the NPO wants a seat at the peace table".
We then got progressively attacked by people on your side of the aisle who didn't want to admit that they either needed help OR that they had made a mistake by not bringing an AI representant to the peace talks. It culminated in chefjoe's delirious rants, painting us as mind controllers.
-
Actually, you're the ones twisting the truth, you're the ones derp- terpreting Brehon's quote to suit your agenda, you're the ones misquoting loggs of Ted and Brehon. Dude, don't paint your propaganda as reality. First of all, it is not even good propaganda, anyone with any reading comprehension can see what you are trying to do and insisting on it even after people have thoroughly rebuffed you is getting a bit sad.
Pacifica was brought in for one reason, to help smash you into submission and relieve some of the false hope your alliance has when it comes to this war. You are getting out of this one way, if it takes additional pressure in the form of Pacifian might to have you see the light, that is exactly what will happen.So we're twisting:
"Hey, we want to make sure our allies aren't alone in negotiations" with "we want a seat at the peace table". Gotcha, terrible twist to take the next logical step.In the same vein, next time I tell you I'm coming to your house because I don't want you to dine alone, I hope you will not twist that into "he's coming to eat with us", that'd be very evil of you.
We're also twisting:
"Hey Pacifica, we need help to cover their lower to middle tier" into "hey, Pacifica, we need help to cover their lower to middle tier". Again, how dare we.
I know logs from your own coalition paint an inconvenient truth but it's not a reason to argue against them. NPO DoWed because:
1)You didn't bother to invite AI to the peace table and they want to make sure that doesn't happen again;
2)You needed help to cover us AKA some of your allies are tired of being used as punching bags for our nations.
--------
What you are hoping to achieve is a surrender from us. That won't happen.
-
Sincerely, either the guy is a rogue or you recognize a state of war with said alliance. This vague "no declaration" idiocy is an extremly bad precedent, no matter which side you're on.
-
If we're going to talk about what "truly" happened, then lets have at it: "Ole' daddy" actually entered to relieve some slots, slots which they've already managed to fill, slots which would have been filled either way, regardless of whether or not Pacifica joined the war. They were asked to join to relieve slots and in a way to spread the damage even more. This gives enough time for those alliances who've been in constant war a chance to recoup themselves. To say that Pacifica joined the war to have a seat in negotiations is amusing and couldn't be further from the truth. Especially when three of twelve alliances on this front are in Duckroll and hold individual treaties with AI (Argent/TORN/ML); especially when the remaining alliances (except for GLOF/AB/UE/Neb-X) all hold treaties with AI. The fact of the matter is that Brehon's words have been twisted to accomplish a certain goal (still unclear to me tbqh, this won't sway anyone's opinion).
Once again, you're speaking under the false pretense that we would've accepted a peace agreement that didn't include something which we considered justifiable. They were asked to join, and so they did.
[b][size=18][16:00] <&Brehon[NPO]> Giving you a heads up on two things:
[16:00] <&Brehon[NPO]> We are putting an official DoW up against TOP today.[16:01] <&Brehon[NPO]> Clerical clean up and to be sure, quite frankly those fighting on your front aren't alone when it comes to negotiations[16:02] <&Brehon[NPO]> Interesting set of logs I read about the peace talks[/size][/b]I'm not sure how clearer it can get. They clearly spell: [i]"hey, we DoWed partly because we want to be sure we have a seat at the peace table so those fighting on your front aren't alone when it comes to negotiations".[/i]I don't know how we can twist the plain and simple.As far as peace goes, again, I'm surprised you're trying to dispute the timetable. We were approached by your coalition to discuss peace. You even made the initial offer. Not the other way around.No claims were made that TORN is the dominating force in this war; we've only been able to sustain around 15 wars give or take a few throughout these past few rounds. Most of the wars have come from DT/GLOF (due to their size and general awesomeness), which is why you've been trying to get them out of the war. Again, we completely understand. But really, it's been a coalition effort and everyone has chipped in, even the real coalition leaders in UE.
Actually, GLoF and DT were both smaller than TPF. You're claiming it's been a coalition effort and everyone has chipped in? What about Nebula-X who did a grand total of two wars on us? What about AI who had not waged a war on us in over a month before this thread was opened? Is that why your coalition leaders forgot to invite both to the peace talks?No one has claimed that TORN is the dominating force in any way, shape or form. But your leader/spokesman sure is throwing threats like he is.You took that and turned it into TORN thinks they're the main hitters in this front, which is laughable. Everything that was said holds true though. You are in no position to deal terms, and your offer was rejected. Why you continue to beat on a dead horse is beyond me, but I guess this is what happens when you're on the receiving end of a beat down.
We turned that into: "TORN is making threats". There was nothing about main hitters. But when you make threats about putting people's necks under jackboots and ten minutes later turn around and call your big bad friend to do it for you, you end up looking like what TORN looks like right now: a lighter version of GGA. Remember them? Yeah, they had an habit of running their mouth too. And then calling in their big friends when the going got too rough.The other part is: we were asked for a peace offer. We didn't "deal terms". We gave what your coalition asked: a set of terms. If your coalition didn't want any, they simply had not to ask.Other than that, I agree. The writing is on the wall and everyone can see it. I can see it, you can see it. Three of the four AAs on your front have been turned into a pile of shit and TOP will join them soon.
We've heard that in the past. What more can you do, really? We have the warchests to last a year or two. We've already been covered with anywhere between 2 to 3 wars per nation. Yet, in the past two weeks, we actually [i]grew[/i].On February 24th, we had 4,183,971 NS.On March 6th, we have 4,196,725 NS.In two weeks of warfare, we actually [i]grew[/i] 13k NS. What are you gonna do? Make us raid you into oblivion? -
An official explanation is given for an announcement, but it doesn't help our political agendas. Lets make up another that does and repeatedly throw it in people's faces so maybe they'll eventually believe us.
Darn, TOP and friends beat me to it.
Next time.Actually, we're the ones who are following the official explanation given for the announcement. We're the ones who are quoting Brehon's logs, where he clearly explained his justification for this DoW. We're also the ones quoting the logs between Brehon and Ted.
It's Pacifica's allies who seem to want it both ways: receiving military help but refusing to admit you needed any. Accusing us of manipulating and dividing your coalition with our supreme mind control powers (right, chefjoe? I mean, it's either evil TOP supremely manipulating everybody or having to admit that ten of your coalition partners didn't think you needed to be at the peace table?) yet refusing to acknowledge problems at the peace talks. Even though multiple sets of logs, from your own coalition, prove you clearly wrong.
So instead, we're left with disgracious posts accusing us of whining and something about tears (even if there isn't a single whiny post from TOP posted in this thread because we couldn't care less about who fills our war slots). Also, some hints at atrocities we would have committed and how we're getting a much deserved beatdown, despite an inability to point to any crime in specific.
-
So...almost 2 days & 19 pages later....NPO is still at war with TOP, and anyone just tuning in can get the gist of the last 19 pages in the first 2 or 3...as this topic is more a like a record skipping and no one willing to just skip to the next song. The same arguments have been brought up literally every page, mixed in with a few individual disses and people stroking their fighting ability ego.
NPO declared on TOP, they're at war now, move on
Throwing missiles and commanding soldiers to their death take roughly ten minutes of my daily schedule. I need something else.
@Otter: I take it that you do not dispute the other 13 points?
I'm happy to see that we have finally agreed on the timetable of events.
-
Can't say we've ever been any close but your four years on this planet were interesting times. Happy anniversary.
-
That's what happened according to TOP. Then again, they presume to know way much than they do. For example, read the post directly above yours.
Then do tell us where we are wrong.
Assuming we're not the mind controllers your side paints us to be, this happened.
1)Some of your coalition partners approached us to see if peace was reachable.
2)That night, some of your coalition partners delivered to us an offer that was supposed to represent your entire front.
3)We rejected that offer.
4)The next day, more talking occured on both sides, in queries.
5)A real round of talks was thought necessary as we had tailored a peace offer of our own.
6)We told your coalition allies to contact everybody on your side.
7)We were told to proceed with "2 or 3 alliances missing".
8)We made our offer.
9)Your side got together, took about 15 minutes to think/discuss it.
10)Offer was rejected.
11)A joke counter-offer was made. Threats were also thrown by Ted from TORN.
12)Ted sought Brehon, explained to him that talks had occured and that you guys needed help in the lower to middle tier (see logs).
13)Brehon then gave us a courtesy notice about how they were about to DoW on us and why. In the why, he outlined specifically that he didn't tolerate not seeing either AI or NPO at the peace table and wanted to make sure that didn't happen again. It's explicit.
14)This DoW occured.
Is that timetable wrong? If so, where is it and why?
-
I do find it funny how the "lesser beings" have the excess capacity laying around to call in another alliance when the guys who kicked this front off haven't had more than half a dozen offensive wars since they declared. I've had fun with most of my TOP opponents, but man, you guys should just quit while you're ahead. The last time you said you were winning you got another AA dropped on you. LOL
We offered you guys a merciful way out. Well, you weren't there. Oh shi... that means you're about to call another AA in and blame us for manipulating others into not calling you to the talks. Damned hell.
Increasing the advantage to 9 to 1 would allow all of us to do one week at war, two weeks off. That lets us collect and restock nukes. All while you do not have that advantage.
Just sayin'.
For all that talk from Anarchy Inc., we haven't fought any of yours since a good month. Did we agree to a ceasefire or what?
-
Human beings tend to have this tendency where they want things they don't really *need*. Usually those things are shiny or make life easier for people. Sort of like how it's so much easier and faster to curbstomp someone with extra troops rather than try and drag it out by limiting your resources.
It might actually work if you weren't arguing against clear cut logs coming from your own coalition, where your allies said outright that they needed help to cover us in a tier where they have us outnumbered 7 to 1.
Just sayin'.
-
Man, so we got NPO and AI saying we're mind controlling their allies, Chefjoe saying we're evil masterminds and trying to rewrite history, old school Polaris saying they were right for BiPolar and all of AI's allies saying they didn't actually need any help, even though there are logs of them directly asking Brehon for military help.
This thread delivers.
@RnR: Aren't you busy riding three fences? Go back to irrelevance.
-
Its mostly just TOP declaring they are winning so NPO has to come defeat them, TOP declaring they are defeated and NPO are just bandwaggoning in to claim part of the victory and then lots of stuff about how TOP wants peace but they do not want to surrender. And in return everyone else is saying fight or surrender just stop crying.
Save for the part where your coalition approached us for peace and offered terms first. Twice.
But hey, sure, whatever floats your boat.
The actual question we should all be asking is, why hasn't Pacifica's Clique allies wished them luck? Pretty sure they gave you guys some recognition in your ventures. It would only be common curiosity to reciprocate.
GATO did. In general, it's poor form to start hailing your allies when they enter against your coalition partners. If anything, you wish them luck in private embassies or shared channels.
-
I/we know exactly whom 'they' were, AND why 'they' approached you. It also doesnt surprise me Ted from TORN saw immediately what was going on and put a stop to proceedings thru his actions of basically telling you to shove it up your collective ass. DR stands together, always has, always will and be their for our allies in their times of need also. Brehon called it right on the money to you all and the simple fact that you didnt question why certain parties werent around to 'discuss' your leaving and peace negotiations just proves even more that you were trying something shady. ie:Trying to Sideline multiple alliances(Including DR bloc mates) to abandon their own Bloc partners answers readily enough what you were 'trying' to do and why you got told to piss off(your losing and you still have the hubris to try and dictate your own terms which were to include people from our side having to exit the war and not redeploy elsewhere, when they have zero reason to exit said coalition war and you have every reason to want to exit). If TOP wants to surrender its on YOU to get all parties involved in peace talks. That includes the ones whom DoW'd you AND the ones YOU DoW'd that started the chain of destruction upon you. Instead TOP thought they saw a weak link and tried to exploit it(typical for TOP and your Modus Operendi), sadly for you some people realized what you were upto and why you were told no and then received lulz in return .
Now please continue on whining and crying about how evil NPO is and how 'fractionated' the coalition is when the reality is far from that. You reap what you sow, and you have planted many acres that need attending to as you seem to have learned nothing from most of CN disliking you and your buddies to the extent that even alliances whom arent normally best of friends stand together against you. TBH its laughable that you felt you could get your way and get DR allies to abandon the field without AI having a say in your exit(which had you approached us professionally may have gotten you the exit you so want).
We didn't want to surrender. Actually, your coalition partners should know that because that was their first offer and we refused it before those talks even took place. Those talks took place because there was a renewed desire to seek peace [i]coming from[/i] some of your coalition partners.
We made an offer. Again, you paint us like master puppeters as if your entire coalition had no free will whatsoever. We didn't prevent them from calling you to the peace talks. We asked them to bring at least one person per AA. We didn't mind control them into forgetting that you exist, as you seem to imply.
As far as scheming goes, we offered a general peace that included your AA. I don't know for you but I've seen a lot more evil things.
Are you trying your best to be the Bob Sanders of this war, or what?
Greatest Rivalries
in Open World RP
Posted
NoV/NoR Vs the government of Norway