Monster

That's your personal stance. I think a pure DoN early on would not have been well-received by your side. It would have been better, yeah, but that doesn't make this the worst thing since they didn't know most likely about the counters. If escalation hadn't been stalled by your side on the basis of trying to acquire Valhalla's support, then this wouldn't have happened.

The war was only possible because of Val and IRON's decision to pick a side. That was the only reason the war Polar launched achieved success. Valhalla made a mistake by not first striking, but their support was crucial even if they weren't able to contribute much militarily on the front. Polar in this instance wanted Valhalla to commit ahead of its blocmates despite having more ties to people on FTW's side and it being a non-chaining treaty. MI6 and Polar have continually tried to use Valhalla as a mere chess piece in spite of their ties to our side and are upset it didn't work out. It would have been easier for Valhalla to just hit someone who hit IRON instead of taking this stance.

Clarified my worst diplomatic move nomination since it was unclear.

Non-chaining clause. :P

I mean, I'd rather not get into this since I've wasted a lot words in the past on this topic, but that's a common misinterpretation. There is a reason NPO was claimed to be the flagship alliance of the Polar coalition in terms of the cushioning provided and it's not because NPO was going to stay out forever. It just says that Polar was positioning people ahead of NPO's entry to provide the most NS possible ahead of them due to a lot of alliances on Polar's side not being fond of NPO. There was intel that NPO and its allies were coming in and we got tired of waiting as more alliances continued to join in for Polar and we wanted to make the war about the NPO since rolling Polar was a divisive issue within the traditional SuperGrievances/PB/proto-XX coalition. It would also give us potential additional alliances that would not consider entry into a purely Polar rolling or would be on the Polar side otherwise. Many people who had misgivings about rolling Polar did not believe NPO would enter and thought it would just be a rolling of sphere they had some ties with ie. Ragnarok entering but Legion not was a huge wedge especially when considering how Ragnarok had to be handled. Similar to how a lot of people felt x alliance they don't like or alliance x they do like wouldn't enter this war. Keeping certain alliances out until the right time even if it's an extended delay is a strategy Polar seems to have continued to employ. About a year or so after, Dajobo said the plan on Polar's end was to call Legion in last out of their allies if DH hadn't declared on NPO, similar to how Fark and MHA have come out last in terms of XX, and hit FOK(I believe), and I believe NPO would likely have chained from there once Legion was countered. edit: clarified

We can argue the first two points all day and not get anywhere. On the last one, there was obviously a need perceived to state an official stance at this point due to certain things being asked of them behind the scenes .

Valhalla has more our allies on our side and several alliances they don't have historically good relations with attacked their oldest treaty partner, IRON. I'm not sure why you or others would expect Valhalla to forsake 4 of its allies. It would be far easier for Valhalla to throw in on either side and not look back. This is a more difficult path to take presently.

Have fun, MHA and NEW.

No one should have doubted you guys. Good luck since this wasn't probably easy, but a lot more good luck to ODN.

Reasonable stance from our allies in Valhalla.

Most Powerful Alliance - DBDC Best Military - NPO Best Rookie Alliance - FTW Most Powerful Bloc - AZTEC Best Flag - Sengoku Most Active Alliance - Doom Squad Most Honorable Alliance - RIA Best Diplomatic Team - NPO Best Economic System - ABLS Best Recruiting Staff - VE Best Propagandist - Auctor Scariest Alliance - DBDC Best Alliance Growth - IRON Best War Flag - FTW Best Forums - NPO Alliance Most Likely to Succeed in 2015 - DS Most Immoral Alliance - MI6 Most Controversial Alliance - TOP(This isn't a knock on TOP btw, just a lot of people have strong feelings for different reasons) Player of the Year - Dajobo Most Powerful Player - l0c0 Best Alliance Leader - The Warrior Most Controversial Player - Yerushalayim Best Player Sig - Umb-NPO Best Player Avatar - Auctor Best Poster - saxasm Nicest Player - musmahuu Funniest Player - hartfw Most Active Player - Hakora Kiyanto Player Most Likely to Achieve Greatness in 2015 - Lord Hershey Best New Addition to the Community - Musmahhu Most Hated Poster - Tywin Best Declaration of War (Alliance Topic) - DS on invicta Best Declaration of War (in-game war screen) Best Wall of Text Best OWF Topic - Wartime Comics Biggest Controversy - MI6 Funniest Event - MI6 Video Most Entertaining IRC Channel - Best Treaty Announcement - Sengoku-Gre Worst Diplomatic Move - Yeru's interactions with IRON/AZTEC Best Player Quote Best IRC Log Largest E-Peen - Sweeeeet Ronny D Best Villain - Chimaera Most Missed Player (Player that has gone inactive/quit) - sighet Best WaterCooler Thread Worst Alliance - USN Worst Sphere - Worst Poster - Most Annoying Poster - Mogar Biggest Mouth - Tywin Biggest !@#$ - Rey Quietest Power Player - TBRaiders

Good fight, Sandstorm.

I wouldn't know when it was first posted, but I have my doubts that's the first time anyone saw it there or something similar given the atmosphere. It's not really hugely relevant to now aside from Steve's callout resulting in Josh's response.

Um, what? I don't think W_D was referring to the terms from the last war. Oddly enough, what he mentions in this case is more reflective of what our actual desires were at the time as opposed to what actually happened. Keep pretending we came up with the terms that were implemented though when you know it's not the case. Anyway have fun everyone with this.

Good luck to both.

Again, that's not how it actually went down and there was no plot by any of our newer allies to go after some of the others. Incidents occurred which significantly changed the situation and the involved parties are aware of them. That's not what I was referring to, actually. I was referring to the TPF war, where we pledged support to TOP(funny enough), which resulted in a treaty cancellation even though it didn't happen and there were potentially several more that could have happened if the war had fully escalated. That cancellation in particular had some long-term consequences. I'm not going to get into the specifics on the situation, but there wouldn't have been as viable of a counter for MI6 without Umb/VE participation. Re: Citadel combined with its participation in the Continuum, yes. NPO/IRON/Gre/TOP were the owners of the upper tiers before Karma.

He probably meant NpO, which is a treaty they do have.

Again, this makes a lot of big assumptions as to the sides being set when the treaties were signed or that there wasn't a possibility of us having allies on different sides before that. You'll probably disagree on this point, so I don't want to get into it further, but I'd rather address a general theme I'm detecting. Going out of your way to end up on the opposite side of most of your allies due to one ending up being an underdog isn't really the best way to make a decision. It was a hard lesson I learned at one point years ago when there was a particular war scenario where I had committed to support an ally on the basis of them needing it more and needing to "repay a debt." Needless to say, a good portion of our allies at the time weren't very receptive to the reasoning and it carried some real consequences and could have carried more if it had come to fruition(it certainly came close) and they weren't statistical ones that I was worried about. It's not a matter of simply "going to bat for x" because there are other variables involved including how we get to the point where "going to bat for x" is a possibility. Plenty of alliances involved have allies on the other side. One of your suggestions actually involves losing less NS than we are now. It all kind of plays into theme of honor soaking or that of an underdog mentality, which is one people try to force others to have. People don't find underdog mentalities all too sympathetic a lot of the time as I said in the previous paragraph except when it comes to OWF PR and deliberately going out of your way to lose for its own sake isn't always the best way to help people. That's another really dubious claim because the idea of alliances with concentrations in the same tier allying each other has always existed. The Citadel existed long before I was able to get near a leadership position anywhere. I appreciate you giving a relatively civil and reasoned response. I was thinking about shifting the bolds around and I started without finishing and forgot to revert it back to its original form, which is why the people who checked the DoW didn't detect it until it was posted. :( edited: fixed some mistakes in post

Yeah, screw those slimy Umbrella bastards for signing that treaty they had been planning on for over year, since you could only be referring to one. The rest had plenty of approval from MI6 when they were signed. Unfortunately, the timeline doesn't really fit your narrative for the most part. I'm sure he's going to enjoy the charge you've leveled against him in part, as the head of our military in that conflict. Keep repeating dubious claims from almost 4 years ago, though!

Good luck NSO.

He said all but forced us to act. We've never pretended this wasn't our decision, but they pretty much asked for it with their active antagonism until they realized it could actually happen. We had other political and military reasons doing this that aren't directly related to the grudge between us as I said in the opening post. It's clear you are biased here and have shown that throughout the war, Steve. The conduct of upstanding fellows such as Charles in private has made this all the more a great decision.

Pretty sure he was referring to MI6's membership composition there.

No. You're thinking Grudge. They fought VE in Dave.

Are you sure you're not missing one of the bolds? talking point will differ Cordial either

I actually had monty slotted for you, but it got taken.