Banedon

[quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1318020894' post='2820059'] While you started the war, they did declare on you. Now this is a case of chaining, so NpO and NADC are within rights to say "Sorry no not entering" since they have the chaining clause. They might be dicks for doing so if they did so when you really desperately needed them (which may not be now, but could happen down the line, especially as more of your members hit bill lock, which we both know is happening pretty quickly regardless of your OWF posturing), but they would be within their rights per your treaty. Invicta and TLR however have no such clause, so if you ask, even though you started with an act of aggression, they are required to enter to defend you from those who attacked you. (So against anyone currently involved except Tetris). Unless there actually is a non-chaining clause involved in those two treaties I didn't see when checking earlier (which is possible, I have been known to miss details in the past, and will admit I'm wrong if you can point one out to me). Okay, this is a case of a misunderstanding of what chaining is. You're saying the activation itself is a chain. That's not true. In the case of all of your treaties, all of them require a direct request to activate. What the chaining clause is, is that clause in the polar treaty that says if you start with an act of aggression, Polar is within rights to deny to defend you for your aggression. So since you attacked Tetris, even though you're being attacked, if you requested help, Polar could say no, per that clause. Invicta and TLR don't have that clause though, so even though you started it aggressively, if you ask for help, they have to come. That's the difference. Hope that makes it clearer. [/quote] I can see what you're asking about, but just as people will dither, hem and haw about offensive vs. defensive wars and declarations, people can and will hem and haw about whether Tetris posting screenshots constitutes aggression. We say yes, and our allies agree. Tetris and their allies somehow disagree, though if Legion and Tetris were reversed we'd be on the wrong end of a huge dogpile right now. If NpO thought it wasn't an aggressive act they wouldn't have to support us I suppose. But I believe that clause is a hold over from Bi-Polar and the switch-a-roo they did then.

I was responding since you were asking about the chaining clauses. They don't "chain" unless we make a formal request. There is no automatic activation so therefore, no chaining. At least, as I understand chaining. If I've misunderstood the main point of your question then my mistake. There is nothing in any treaty specifically barring our allies from helping us. But at the same token, we're telling our allies not to jump in, and it would be pretty silly to ignore your ally's desires.

[quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1318019886' post='2820038'] That post is totally irrelevant to anything I'm saying, since I haven't said that Polar or your allies are breaking treaties by not entering, just pointing out that if they did it would be via defensive clauses. Seriously I think you're taking my explaining the basics of how treaties work, and confusing that with someone else's "I want to roll Polar, Polar won't let me, so they are BAD!" arguments. As to treaty chaining, please point me to the non-chaining clauses in your treaties. NADC and Polar treaties have a mention that the treaty becomes optional when chained, but not that it is forbidden. Invicta and TLR have no chaining clause at all that I see, so if you asked their help they'd still have to come in (TLR may not if they have a conflicting treaty). [/quote] If you have not, please look at Leet Guy's post. It's all there, nicely bolded for you. In summary: In order for the defensive component of the treaties to activate, we have to formally ask the other side to join us. Until then, they can want to join us all they want, there is nothing requiring them to do so. If we do ask for help, they don't have a choice, they must come in. Currently we have not asked them to assist us, in fact we've asked them to stay out at this time.

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1318015224' post='2819959'] Also what I was wondering if you, Legion, asked all your allies to stay out why did Invicta and Europa tend to go in? [/quote] I'm assuming it was a case of they really wanted to join in the fun and our gov had to sit on them to call them back. But I'm just guessing since I'm an ambassador, not the Grand Poobah. And I'm sure we could spin it around and ask what NSO and RoK were cooking up? We had a RoK nation declare on us, however it was just one as far as I know.

[quote name='Lanore' timestamp='1318011513' post='2819900'] Think the analogy works like this: A snowstorm buries your yard in 5 feet of snow. In order to get through it you have to shovel out. The Snow is far more passive and unprepared for this compared to you, but its mass is still several times your own. Due to the fact you can only shovel so much, you are gonna need hours and hours to shovel it all. Similarly, due to the fact that you can only destroy so much infra/cash/tech within a given time frame, no matter how much Legion sucks, their sheer size will act as a buffer. [/quote] If I was inclinded to see things from your point of view, I would agree this is a great analogy. However from my point of view, we're holding our own. NSO's given us a bloody nose for sure, but we've bloodied theirs as well. Tetris is a wreck. NsO is capable, competent, but not large enough to decide the issue. BTA and IAA aren't pushing to hard. I think we're doing okay. I won't guarentee victory, but I don't see us losing either. Time will tell, there's still a lot of fighting left to be done in this war.

[quote name='mrwuss' timestamp='1317892739' post='2818272'] I'm the spy. I was waiting for this to come to light on its own but everyone 'investigating' is inept. I have access to the majority of FA boards across the planet. I am the Mittani of CN. I would suggest you direct all future threats to GOONS. now dance puppets. [/quote] You know how I know that you know Eve?

Tetris published spied information on the public boards, that is a fact. That has gotten alliances rolled in the past. We didn't approve, and we're doing something about it. You're twisting yourself into a very strange pretzel trying to justify Tetris' actions. I didn't think a human body could bend that way. At least not bend that way and live.

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1317761561' post='2816377'] But your info was already public on CNtel. Will you be seeking out all those who read it there, for accepting information? What about all the people who read the screenshots here? What about people who linked others to the thread? They spread it to a wider audience. Where do you draw the line? Calling accepting and disseminating information already in the public domain an act of war is a pretty big stretch. [/quote] Ideally, I'd like to find out the person/people/alliance that put our information out there in the first place and smash them. Tetris decided to post it here, and that was where we drew the line. If not having a clearly drawn line between what's allowed and what's not when dealing with spied information gives you problems, I'd suggest avoiding spied information entirely. We drew the line here, other alliances might draw it elsewhere.

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1317759710' post='2816351'] We're in the war, so I'd say we are acting like what he quoted second. And if you want to get down to the nitty gritty of the CB, Legion attacked because Tetris disseminated the information. Tetris weren't the ones who actually collected the information, so there's no damage to Legion from Tetris there. The information was apparently circulated on CNtel before Tetris disseminated it, so there's no damage to Legion from Tetris there either. Now, sure Legion can define the dissemination of their private information as an act of war, but if the info was already public, does that really hold true in this case? I would argue it's a lot more shaky than some of you are trying to portray. [/quote] Funny. As I recall NpO in Doomhouse were rolled because they were accused of accepted stolen information. Tetris not only accepted it, they spread it around to a wider audience. Spying and screenshots are also what got Karma going and NPO rolled. The sudden rally to defend Tetris and it's actions is very entertaining to watch. I was not aware that some of their defenders were quite so flexible, both physically and morally. As to why NSO got a pass a few weeks/months ago and Tetris didn't, I have a theory. A few of our younger, more implusive, hotter tempered, and simpler minded members got into a flamewar contest with NSO on these boards. NSO responded, did it better, and then upped the ante. As much as we hated it, there was a school of thought that said we brought it on ourselves. Tetris has no such excuse and therefore they get no repreive.

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1317759710' post='2816351'] We're in the war, so I'd say we are acting like what he quoted second. And if you want to get down to the nitty gritty of the CB, Legion attacked because Tetris disseminated the information. Tetris weren't the ones who actually collected the information, so there's no damage to Legion from Tetris there. The information was apparently circulated on CNtel before Tetris disseminated it, so there's no damage to Legion from Tetris there either. Now, sure Legion can define the dissemination of their private information as an act of war, but if the info was already public, does that really hold true in this case? I would argue it's a lot more shaky than some of you are trying to portray. [/quote] Funny. As I recall NpO in Doomhouse were rolled because they were accused of accepted stolen information. Tetris not only accepted it, they spread it around to a wider audience. Spying and screenshots are also what got Karma going and NPO rolled. The sudden rally to defend Tetris and it's actions is very entertaining to watch. I was not aware that some of their defenders were quite so flexible, both physically and morally. As to why NSO got a pass a few weeks/months ago and Tetris didn't, I have a theory. A few of our younger, more implusive, hotter tempered, and simpler minded members got into a flamewar contest with NSO on these boards. NSO responded, did it better, and then upped the ante. As much as we hated it, there was a school of thought that said we brought it on ourselves. Tetris has no such excuse and therefore they get no repreive.

Now if only anyone in the Legion cared about a sanction at this point. We had it for a while, lost it ages ago, got it back, lost it again, and we just about got it a 3rd time. Honestly, it's not our priority at the moment.

We were sanctioned again? *shrugs* Oh well, wasn't anything we were really interested in at the moment. We'll get it back, just have a few more important things to worry about first.

[quote name='xR1 Fatal Instinct' timestamp='1317702396' post='2815619'] I'm unable to agree with your means to get this war, but I must admire your persistence. Hopefully after this scuffling match you all can move on from this and improve relations with each other. [/quote] I'm fairly certain that neither side is interested in improving relations with the other.

Congrats on your erection Fark! The second picture is jaw-droppingly beautiful. /Ave!

/Ave NPO! Good luck to you all in the future.

Grats! /Ave Legio! /Ave The Last Republic

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1309519240' post='2745870'] Going off the Sanction Race, for the 1st Month after each alliance left the conflict (which means different starting points for each): NPO: 22.04 -> 30.74 (+8.70) Nordreich: 19.14 -> 21.94 (+2.80) MK: 18.81 -> 21.57 (+2.76) Legion: 16.66 -> 19.30 (+2.64) Umbrella: 28.78 -> 30.84 (+2.06) VE: 25.33 -> 26.39 (+1.06) FAN: 14.95 -> 15.88 (+0.93) FOK: 22.79 -> 23.20 (+0.41) ODN: 38.70 -> 38.99 (+0.29) TOP: 29.38 -> 28.52 (-0.86) This only counts people in the race when their wars ended of course, so a lot of smaller alliances aren't on it. [/quote] Thanks for posting this. Useful and interesting stats.

[quote name='Cataduanes' timestamp='1309511376' post='2745823'] Yet they won the war comprehensively in both tactical and strategic terms, and are rebuilding at a rate exponentially superior to that of the alliances who were defeated. I would contend that war is always painful but it is the post-war situation that really shows whether such a victory is pyrrhic or not. [/quote] Is there a rebuilding summary in the Sanction Race thread that I've missed? I know lots of people are rebuilding, and I thought Legion was coming along rather nicely. I don't have time to jot down numbers and compare them regularly, I have to rely on a cursory glace and the every so imperfect grey matter.

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1309504114' post='2745780'] The biggest fallacy in any of this is saying or thinking that it would have made one whit of difference if Legion had all came out and fought at the same time. Or if everyone on this side had all came out and fought at the same time. The DH/PB/CnG/TOP conglomeration had this one well dominated before the first shot was fired. Otherwise it would have never been fired at all. As it is it was a protracted guerrilla type war. GOONs was wiped out from a NS perspective essentially from top to bottom, pretty much pounded into dust. MK's bottom 100 or so nations were beaten pretty badly to the point of wide spread PM, turtling if they couldn't get to PM and quite a few deletions. That's really about all we were capable of from a coalition stand point. 2 of the 3 initial aggressors took beatings that were likely far worse than they initially thought they would have to face. We were extremely overmatched in the upper tier as this side has never been able to recover the tech that was lost over the past 3-4 wars in comparison to the alliances who have mostly avoided major war losses or gotten massive tech reparations over the past 2+ years. [/quote] This is pretty much my thinking as well, no one wanted to tangle with Umbrella. I'm not sure that anyone in our coalition actually could with a realistic chance of victory. Until that changes we were already defeated from day 1, it was just a amtter of how badly did we hurt our opponents on the way down. GOONS and MK took heavy hits, but I'm sure several other alliances in the DH/PB side got a good beating as well. Legion, NPO, and the rest of our allies all got wrecked pretty good, but it wasn't a completely one-sided slaughter. However, you are quite correct that our generally lower tech levels and years of being on the losing side aren't helping.

Carry on NPO. It's sad to see NSO willing to turn on their former allies for the illusion of safety and/or military supremacy.

[quote name='KainIIIC' timestamp='1309473539' post='2745362'] NSO wasn't supposed to fight GOONS at first (we were to counter anyone who hit TPF initially, but when no one came..), but we did once it became clear that the group of alliances that piled onto GOONS would not be enough to clearly keep 'em back. A couple days into the fight, I ran up some fun numbers: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=98006&view=findpost&p=2619105 , and as SirWilliam pointed out, NSO had more wars than Legion despite being a fraction of its size. I remember one Legioner telling one of our members that you didn't need to Ground Attack after you anarchied your opponent . I also remember wondering why the coalition didn't push upwards, and instead seeing all of Legion flee into PM. We were then assured for days that Legion was "supposed to come out of PM and make a push", which never materialized. What did materialize was a push against MK spearheaded by NADC against their lower-mid tier, something which the NSO participated on (though our resources were limited by that point, as were MK nations in that upper range, heh), but absolutely no Legion because their War Council couldn't be found on IRC. NADC, by the way, has my props for being a stand-up alliance. Legion? Who the heck knew what was going on in their minds. They acted literally like a chicken with its head cut off. [/quote] As I said earlier, we had a goal of dragging this war out as long as we could. I didn't agree with how we were fighting the war but I'm not in the War Department. I thought the constant back and forth between war and peace was annoying and I couldn't understand why we came out in waves either. That said, for all the blame laid at our feet about when we would be coming out, we were not the only one. NPO was in PM as well, and from what I've heard no on in the coalition really seemed to know what was going on. No one was listening to each other, so one one co-ordinated. So we lost. Simple as that really. Our lower tier was giving the GOONS a good working over since the beginning from what I could tell. I wasn't in the lower-tier and I had other things on my mind. But that was my impression, and yes since we're a lot larger then you it makes us look bad. Our upper tier was well beyond fashionably late to the party, but when we did show up we were pointed at MK and no one else. Which is why C&G got off pretty much scott free when they declared on us. I can only speak for myself but I was fighting mostly MK the entire war. Had a few ODN as well, and two others from an alliance that I forget right now. I was not invovled with alliance co-ordination or negotiations but I agree, we didn't come out looking like we were a well-oiled machine. However we were active, fully engaged, and we stayed that way for over a month. I know the first few weeks has set the tone of these conversations but all things change. We came out of peace mode and fought hard. Dragged DH and their friends through the mud with us for a month or more. They kept shaking AA's loose to hit us with and we kept fighting. DH, C&G, SF, TOP, maybe a few more that I forget since I'm tired. We were fighting half the world and we didn't care. We fought, we bled, we still have our Legion of adoring fans. No one can fight half the world and win. But we weren't crushed under their weight either. If you want to think we're soft, useless, and utterly pathetic at fighting that's your perrogative. I can't stop you, but do take a moment to examine the entire war, not just the beginning.

[quote name='2burnt2eat' timestamp='1309464455' post='2745280'] You barely fought GOONS. Only a small fraction of wars was covered by you. When NSO and ASU entered, we had no trouble finding war slots. And then when C&G entered, you just cowered down and didn't declare any at all, almost literally. You couldn't of "lost" due to Umbrella's cash when you weren't even fighting them, and don't !@#$%^&* anyone like you bled anything with the rest of us. As for your top tier, you only took a part of that out too. The only time you started fighting and bringing people out of peace marginally was when you thought by doing so you could improve the rep amount. Funny. [/quote] I'm aware that you have to pucker up nicely for your new masters, so I can see where this vitrol comes from. But at least inject a modicum of sense, it makes your screaming seem a lot more coherent. The coalition declared on GOONS enmasse because GOONS were the weakest link in the DH coalition. Taking out the weakest target in a group is simply sound strategy. DH and their allies were doing that to the NPO side of things, and it caused NSO to surrender early because you couldn't handle it. When all of C&G declared on just the Legion, we didn't have a lot of aggressives wars back on C&G for several reasons. Some of us were in peace mode, some of us had already maxed out their offensive slots, some of us were in anarchy, but most of all... C&G wasn't Legion's primary target. Sorry if that disrupts your story. You're right, we didn't lose to Umbrella. We lost to a large coalition, of which Umbrella was a member. GOONS received between 10-13 billion in aid (depending on who you ask) during the war. I'm not sure that's a statistic I'd be proud of, but Umbrella was certainly a large contributor of funds that kept GOONS functioning and fighting. We bled during the war. We bled a lot. We're still rebuilding. If we hadn't bled so much then we wouldn't have lost sanction, we would have jumped higher in the standings. I'm sorry your alliance was not as well prepared as Legion, but perhaps instead spreading lies, and screaming hate at the top of your lungs, you might consider asking how we were able to handle half the world attacking us for 3 months straight? I dunno. I can tell you that I personally, and many others, were not a big fan of how the Legion came out and fought in the last war. I agreed with the goals, I thought the execution of policy to achieve that goal was terrible. But that was then, this is now. Lessons have been learned and changes have been made. In short, I hope your new masters treat you kindly. /Ave Legio!

[quote name='Voodoo Nova' timestamp='1309456054' post='2745158'] That doesn't help your case at all. It just shows how much effort you guys put in to not fighting with your upper tier. [/quote] Did you come from an alternate dimension where the NPO-DH war never happened? Did the radiation poisoning mess up your memory? That war ended just about 2 months ago. The NPO-DH war went on for just over 3 months, Legion fought in that war, we lost, and a lot of our top-tier is no longer in the top-tier. We're paying a pittance compared to what was originally demanded of us. The only reason our opponents didn't fold like origami was an aid casade of unimaginable scale. Kudos to Umbrella for funding it, and who ever organized it. But don't think for a second that you're better then us. A lot of people in DH were (and apparently still are) pissed about how we fought that war. Oh well, maybe I'll care one of these days. Today is not that day.

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1308343353' post='2733216'] Of course I'm sure in many people's minds, they'd rather have no allies than Legion as an ally. [/quote] We love you too. Are all four bloc connected? Yes. Are they one super bloc? No. Will they all fight as one? As with most things, that depends on the situation.

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1308331690' post='2733123'] What kind of in-home nurse would put glue in a kid's feeding tube? [/quote] A really mean one? Say, Nurse Ratchet?