amad123

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='04 May 2010 - 03:33 PM' timestamp='1273001600' post='2286616'] In fact, the highest ANS on the planet was just a coincidence. [/quote] Using the past tense was correct, but it's no coincidence that it is falling. On a side note only someone that really valued their pixels and stats would know that. We learn a little more about what Matt deems to be important.

[quote name='The Big Bad' date='04 May 2010 - 12:27 PM' timestamp='1272990451' post='2286463'] I think its pretty clear even bothering to speak with Matthew PK is a waste of time. He has no idea what Grams plans are and just kind of makes things up as he goes. Not his fault, its not like his pathetic alliance is giving him anything to work with. I know a lot of people have said that the elections are Gramlins chance to get back on track. They have delayed action because they think that Gramlins is mostly full of nations trapped by loyalty to an alliance they know is doing wrong and when given the chance they will change that. I myself am curious to see if they do. If they do not, then they get what is coming to them and no one can claim they are innocent or were not given the chance to change. [/quote] I agree that Matt is a lost cause but there are others in his alliance that hopefully see the folly of their actions. As for Gramlins plan, I would have to disagree with you there. Everyone knows Gramlins plan, they are going to have IRON and DAWN "Unconditionally Surrender". What they don't seem to have is a backup plan in case that one fails.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='04 May 2010 - 11:42 AM' timestamp='1272987754' post='2286423'] What are your terms? [/quote] Send over a qualified Government official if your alliance is really interested. As for your question about how long does 4 billion dongs last. Not nearly as long as our resolve. So give up now while you have something to salvage.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='04 May 2010 - 02:13 AM' timestamp='1272953616' post='2286176'] They tried to surrender on their own terms and paying us off with tech. Yes, we're interested in something more than reps. That should be obvious. We are resolute and they are unreasonably cowardly in this circumstance. [/quote] More than reps? Man leave your altered reality and join the real world. Not only will you never get reps, you'd be extremely lucky to get "White Peace" at the moment. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='04 May 2010 - 02:13 AM' timestamp='1272953616' post='2286176'] We'll see how this plays out. I contend that no IRON nation wants to grow into range and no in-range IRON nation wants to come out of PM. [/quote] No IRON nations needs to grow into range. We can hit every single Gramlin nation right now if we so choose, we control the battlefield all you guys can do is react. Nothing happens on the battlefield that we don't orchestrate, we are the conductors, Gramlins dance to our tune in battle. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='04 May 2010 - 02:13 AM' timestamp='1272953616' post='2286176'] By my calculation, I am the third oldest Gramlin in the alliance. I joined in November 2007. None of you have convinced me that what I'm doing is wrong (most haven't even tried, actually). [/quote] Of course you don't understand that you're doing it all wrong. If you did you'd have to be insane to keep doing it. Wait, one of those sentences is correct maybe both. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='04 May 2010 - 02:13 AM' timestamp='1272953616' post='2286176'] I am prepared to get attacked. I've already been near ZI and back once in this war and I can afford to do it again; and if somebody intends to keep me there they had better have some volunteers ready to sell their infra down to my ZI range because I can afford to stay there a loooooong time. [/quote] Yeah, going to ZI is not a real issue when you can easily recover. IRON and DAWN are getting real good at it. We have over 300 nations ready and willing to keep you all at ZI. All we need is 17 to do the job and I suspect by the time we get all of you down to ZI it will only take a dozen or so nations to keep you there. So the question is can 330+ nations keep 50 or less nations at ZI long enough to run out their war chests and bill lock them. Assume the 50 nations at ZI remain in permanent nuclear anarchy and of the 300 nations only 17 at any one time are in nuclear anarchy for 10 days, but are able to collect out of anarchy every 20 days. By my calculations you guys will run out of money while we will have a never ending supply. I said this war would last 12-18 months, it could last longer. The only problem I see is that eventually we would not have anyone small enough to keep you all in nuclear anarchy. That would allow you to rebuild and come up into range and the problem would be solved. So your loooooong time isn't going to be long enough. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='04 May 2010 - 02:13 AM' timestamp='1272953616' post='2286176'] Don't overlook how long they've been in PM, how long some have waited to pay bills, and the resulting effects on tax revenue. [/quote] Yeah but there are only 13 of them above 50k NS. We can fill their aid slots if needed. All they have to do is fight for a week and then they will be safe from attack. The 3 Gramlin nations they attack and the 3 that attack them however will now be at war and in nuclear anarchy for the remainder. I do however doubt any offensive declarations will be made. Gramlins like their pixels too much. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='04 May 2010 - 02:13 AM' timestamp='1272953616' post='2286176'] You're too smart to ignore reality [OOC]game mechanics[/OOC] like this. If our top tier nations get pulled down, I suspect they will just hang onto their warchests and wait for other IRON nations to enter their range for a nuclear war. [/quote] Once your top tier get pulled down they will never be out of nuclear anarchy and they will never be able to declare on anyone. So even if one of us is within range there is not a darn thing you can do. So I guess you don't quite understand the game mechanics all that well, but that's okay it works to our advantage. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='04 May 2010 - 02:13 AM' timestamp='1272953616' post='2286176'] Do you actually believe that Torino can't afford to rebuild his infra? Do you think that any of us can't? [/quote] I think Torino can afford to rebuild. The question is will he while he is at war? I doubt it. Will he still have money enough to rebuild when the war is over? That depends on when Gramlins surrenders. If they surrender soon enough "yes", if they wait for 12-18 months. "No" his money will be gone by then and if he's the best you got then we will bill lock each and every one of you. This war is lost to you in every manner. The fact that you don't realize it makes your alliance a real asset to have in the next major war. An asset for us for it wouldn't surprise me if the alliance you enter the next war to support attacks you because no alliance could ever afford to have you on their side when it comes to negotiating terms. You guys are done on planet Bob. Let me put it another way, the options open to IRON and DAWN are "Unconditional Surrender" then start paying reps. Or continue to wage war on Gramlins, have about 5% of our combined forces engaged at any one time and put off paying reps until Gramlins surrenders. Meanwhile, none of the alliances we surrendered to can attack us as per the Easter Sunday Accords. So we can fight your nations more or less at our leisure. Every other month I can choose three Gramlin nations to nuke for a week. When not fighting I can build my warchest, aid the nations fighting you if needed and in general enjoy playing the game without needing to pay reps. So you see I am not highly motivated to consider "Unconditional Surrender" in fact for me "White Peace" has lost its appeal. The only thing that would motivate me to consider peace with Gramlins is if all the other alliances on the Planet started to feel sorry for you and public opinion started to support an end to the conflict. You see we do care about public relations and what others think of us. The question is how long will it be before we are motivated enough to accept your surrender.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='03 May 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1272911321' post='2285157'] I apologize if my phrasing lead to a lack of clarity.That quote is from a long line of dialogue and not some delineated list of terms, which (as I stated many times even before the post you have quotes) I would have no authority to give.Again, here's the reality:GRE is demanding unconditional surrender.As everybody in this thread has stated many, many times, unconditional surrender means they surrender and we tell them what to do.I suspect they will be told to demilitarize.If they won't comply, I suspect that hostilities would resume.If you see a hole there, please let me know. [/quote] So just to clarify, all IRON and DAWN have to do is say they "Surrender" and Gramlins will then advise them of all of the rest of the peace terms and if we don't like them we can resume hostilities? We did say we "Surrendered" previously and you withdrew the terms. Why the sudden change of heart?

[quote name='Alekhine' date='03 May 2010 - 01:44 PM' timestamp='1272908668' post='2285127'] Well, at the moment, I consider running against Ramirus in the current elections to be sufficient action. We'll see how it moves on from there. [/quote] I assume you will have no problem winning. As much as I'd like to see what terms Ramirus had in mind when you oust him I would destroy all evidence of those terms. If the rest of CN ever found out what all this is about then we will never hear the end of it. On the other hand I hope Ram does win, without him we may have surrendered to Gramlins way back when on Easter Sunday, with him in charge we can actually salvage a win. We owe him a lot.

Unless you have been following this thread closely some of you may not have noticed the softening of Gramlins position. At first they were calling for "Unconditional Surrender" then they would tell us their terms. Lately it has just been "Surrender" and we will show you the terms. I've also seen "Surrender and if you don't like the terms you can resume attacks" which by anyone else's definition is a "Cease Fire" So they have progressed from "Unconditional Surrender" to "Surrender" to let's have a "Cease Fire". While it may all sound well and good none of these offers are official, even their official offers get rescinded after you accept them. There is no point in even talking to them until they post their terms in the OWF for all to see. How else could anyone trust them, they have lost all credibility. What this apparent softening does indicate is that there are some members within Gramlins that understand they need a way out of this war and they are starting to blurr the lines between "Unconditional Surrender", "Surrender" and "Cease Fire". Those of you that have been following this thread will know Gamlins typically use their own interpretation of terms, not necessarily the conventional definition. Therefore by starting to mix terms and definitions they hope to save some face. Of course if the "Cease Fire" lasts long enough it evolves into "White Peace". Which is where I think the Gramlins would like to be right now, however, by the time they get there that offer may be withdrawn in favour of something more appealing to IRON and DAWN. It is clear however that changes are happening within Gramlins and new members are beginning to post and previous active members seem to have been muzzled. They talk of elections and I would assume a new government would form, as they'd have to be insane to re-elect the old one. That would lead me to believe they are setting the stage for a "new government" to try and get them out of this war. I predict that no progress will be made until Gramlins members posting in this thread start to discuss what their interpretation of "White Peace" is. That's the only option open to them at the moment and that could be withdrawn (with proper notice I'm sure) at any time.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='01 May 2010 - 05:38 PM' timestamp='1272749918' post='2283024'] The codex is quite clear on the sort of terms we can offer; and I think we've made it clear that we view IRON as an initial aggressor not a bandwagoner.[/quote] Well there you go again proving my point about how Gramlins use there own interpretation over the correct one. Gramlins declared on IRON after IRON was already at war and outnumbered, so it it quite clear Gramlins showed the intial agrresion towrads IRON and they did so after the war was well along. Gramlins did jump on the "Bandwagon" and attack IRON wihtout any treaties to use as a CB. Gramlins issued peace terms and then when we accepted they withdrew them. Did they withdraw them before we accpeted. "No" they waited until after. Very classy move. Not only once but twice. Does Gramlins really believe that a handful of large nations with huge warchest can out last hundreds of nations that collect in war mode and out of nuclear anarchy. All any of IRON's large nations need, to fight your top nations, is enough money for a week of war and then someone new will take over.

[quote name='Iamrecognized' date='01 May 2010 - 04:00 AM' timestamp='1272700826' post='2282487'] If it means anything, and I'm sure it doesn't, they do tell us they will follow the codex. They also seem to think that this should be obvious to everyone that they will. [/quote] [quote name='Aeternos Astramora' date='01 May 2010 - 04:20 AM' timestamp='1272701984' post='2282504'] They'll follow the Codex, but what they'll interpret the Codex to mean whatever they want it to mean. "Unconditional surrender" is a peace term, and Gre would not accept it.Plus that whole Lux breaking they did. [/quote] Gramlins has already offered peace twice and both times they have withdrawn their offer after we accepted. They don't use standard defintions for terms like "Unconditional Surrender" but tend to make up their own interpretations of what it means along with their own interpretations of many other terms, so I completely agree that they could do anything they wanted and say they are "Following their codex as they interpret it." It has become a meaningless document. Even if we agreed to a "White Peace" today (which I would vote against in DAWN) I would not be surprised to see Gramlins wait until all of IRON's large nations come out of peace mode and they then attack. They've gone back on their word twice allready, why not a third time? Unfortunately they seem to have left us only one way to deal with them. It is sad that a once reputable and honourable alliance has lost all credibility to the point where they can't even be trusted to keep a "White Peace" agreement. I'm sure they would say "We're paperless and therefore could never have signed such an agreement, and by our Codex we need to attack you to protect ourselves, but don't worry it's nothing we wouldn't expect ourselves."

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='29 April 2010 - 07:33 PM' timestamp='1272583989' post='2280484'] We're not really at all concerned with PR. [/quote] The only way to succeed in CN (and in life) is to care a great deal about PR. PR is the key to having allies and friends that you can count on. If you don't care about public relations, having allies and friends, then delete your nation and go play "Civilization IV" against your computer, you'd have a better chance at winning. Right now you're just wasting hundreds of player's time. However, I do enjoy your posts. I think I've tripled my post count since Gramlins started this. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='29 April 2010 - 07:33 PM' timestamp='1272583989' post='2280484'] In reality, the situation changes every day. You may think it changes more and more against GRE; but you must admit it changes nonetheless. [/quote] The situation is getting worse for Gramlins every day I will grant you that, but I'm going to go with Newtons first law of motion and say that the downward trend Gramlin's is experiencing is a motion that will continue unless acted upon by an outside force. Therefore in the absence of an outside force and since your alliance continues to deteriorate daily I'm thinking there is no real day to day change. Therefore, your alliance is by definition insane in expecting a different outcome to your demand of "Unconditional Surrender"

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='29 April 2010 - 05:11 PM' timestamp='1272575474' post='2280283'] I was being sarcastic. [/quote] You do know that sarcasm is a sign of contempt. The more you post the clearer, the picture becomes of the "New Gramlins". What I see so far is arrogance and contempt for not only IRON and DAWN but for all alliances on the planet. You keep stating over and over again that you want “Unconditional Surrender”. The definition of “Insane” is repeating the same action over and over again and expecting a different outcome. So you are making it very clear that your alliance is inherently “Insane”. I’m sure others that are following this thread could identify numerous adjectives that could be used to describe Gramlin’s behaviour. I would like to see some posted, it may help me to form a clearer picture of the Gramlin alliance. [quote name='Matthew PK' date='29 April 2010 - 06:41 PM' timestamp='1272580889' post='2280391'] A surrender implies admission of defeat; a cease-fire does not. [/quote] Okay then, you don't have to agree to a cease fire, Gramlins can just surrender. Note: That is not sarcasm, I'm being totally serious.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='29 April 2010 - 04:53 PM' timestamp='1272574401' post='2280258'] Obviously, bad PR is the biggest of GRE and my concerns. [/quote] It shouldn't be. It should be the fact that your alliance is slowly being destroyed because you think you can achieve your goal. At one time there were 71 of you who thought that. Now there are only 51 of you left. You've dug yourself a really big hole and all you need to do to get out of it is place acceptable "Peace Terms" on the table. Yet you seem to be unable to grasp a concept so simple that every other alliance on the Planet understands it. Perhaps you should ask for a Viceroy to come in and help you out.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='29 April 2010 - 04:17 PM' timestamp='1272572215' post='2280220'] Whatever's "hidden behind door number 3" will need to be something that we, ourselves, would be willing to accept.It's not my problems that people are afraid to open doors. [/quote] Go ahead open the door and show the world what is behind it or are you too afraid it will bring Gramlins even more bad PR. (As if that was even possible.)

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='28 April 2010 - 11:01 PM' timestamp='1272510060' post='2279271'] Neither. I am clearly accepting consequences of my actions.I'm simply highlighting Hal's desire to get us all ZI'd and perma-PM'd because he thinks we're being "too harsh" [/quote] Now I don't think Chairman Hal's objective was to ZI all of you or have you in perma PM. I understood him to want to bring this conflict to a conclusion as quickly as possible with the only method that Gramlins might understand. As for being "too harsh" how would anyone know that? You have yet to present all your terms for peace.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='28 April 2010 - 10:46 PM' timestamp='1272509174' post='2279255'] A "cease fire" is implied in a surrender. But a "surrender" is not implied in a cease fire.A surrender is effectively an admission of defeat, while a cease fire is not. [/quote] If your saying it is okay to resume hostilities if the terms are unacceptable it's a "Cease Fire". To resume hostilities after "Surrendering" would be dishonourable.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='28 April 2010 - 10:37 PM' timestamp='1272508659' post='2279243'] And, after the surrender, if the stipulated terms are unacceptable hostilities resume. Any claim to the contrary is idiocy. [/quote] When you stop fighting and start to discuss "Peace Terms" that's called a "Cease Fire" not "Unconditional Surrender and if you don't like the terms go back to fighting." Edit: Hey are you saying that all this time all Gramlins really wanted was a "Cease Fire" but they didn't know the correct term?

[quote name='ChairmanHal' date='28 April 2010 - 09:57 PM' timestamp='1272506239' post='2279184'] You know, it'd be a darn shame if a group of high NS nations...say...50-60 or so, decided to leave their current alliances and formed a new one, made a few treaties to guarantee their safety from raiders and such, then started ZIing you one at a time. Then once you've all been forced into bill lock or permanent PM, disbanded the alliance and went back to wince they came.Not that I'm trying to give anyone any ideas mind you...but let's just say I would look upon such an endeavor favorably. [/quote] Actually Hal I don't even think those nations would need to form a "New Alliance" they could join IRON and/or DAWN. We already have treaties to protect us from raiders and more specifically we have signed a peace agreement with everyone from the last war except Gramlins. So unless I am mistaken if they joined IRON and/or DAWN and anyone attacks us other than Gramlins that would be the start of a new war and all our treaty partners would be free to counter if we asked them too. Not sure IRON or DAWN would be ready to take in 60 or so new members just yet as we are still building up our strength below 20k, which is where most Gramlins end up after a round or two of war, but that would certainly speed up the conclusion of this war and we could all go back to doing whatever it was we did before the war started. I think that was just paying bills and collecting taxes. Edit: Oh and after a week or two of war if those nations found they didn't really fit in I suppose they could go back to their old alliance. I know DAWN has no issue with members leaving during war we don't go all apecrap over it like some alliances do and call them deserters. DAWN members respect freedom of choice and voice. IRON may or may not take a similar stance. Perhaps they will comment.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='28 April 2010 - 05:50 PM' timestamp='1272491410' post='2278843'] I don't know what will happen after IRON/DAWN surrenders. However, that's the first required step in the process. Anything else is opinion and/or the rumor mill. [/quote] The odds of IRON/DAWN surrendering are about equal to that of Ramirus coming to his senses.

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='27 April 2010 - 08:46 PM' timestamp='1272415560' post='2277894'] Ok. Can you give me a hint as to when you're all coming out of PM? [/quote] Nations will come out of PM when needed. Do you think we would actually all come out at once?

Well done IAA, you were classy on the battlefield and continue that tradition. DAWN members will remember your action and hold your alliance in high regard.

[quote name='Cormalek' date='23 April 2010 - 03:38 PM' timestamp='1272051492' post='2272238'] That was really great read, amad123![/quote] Thanks, it was a little long winded but it's pretty basically common sense. That opinion was mine and not that of DAWN's or IRON. While I personally have no desire to end the war quickly. (And do what? Pay bills, collect taxes and pay reps) I'd rather beat up on Gramlin's for the next year or so and then retire from the game with feeling like I accomplished something. I do realize that saner heads (not mine that's for sure) may prevail and a white peace could be declared at any time. Sucks sometimes to be in a democratic alliance and have to go along with the majority. But anyone who thinks that I would consider surrender when we can kick the crap out of Gre instead is not thinking clearly. Beating the crap out of Gre is way more appealing than surrendering. If anyone thinks otherwise have I got an alliance for you to join, pm me for details.

[quote name='Shamshir' date='23 April 2010 - 07:42 AM' timestamp='1272022946' post='2271925'] If they coordinated well I'm sure they could bring the Gre's entire top end below that threshold and allow them to be pummled nicly in an IRON sandwich. It's happening to me right now and then hopefully we could end this war sooner rather than later . [/quote] Sorry not interested in ending this quickly. Your fate is just the beginning and what all Gramlin's nations will face if the war goes on long enough. [quote name='SynthFG' date='22 April 2010 - 04:54 PM' timestamp='1271969648' post='2271055'] Does your remaining top end have the balls to come out of peace mode and try to finish the job tho, Being as most of them (Bar Matt who despite everything has my utmost respect for his conduct on the field of battle) didn't emerge once in the recent conflict I doubt it [/quote] I think the above quote tends to show a common trait among the many younger players in the game. [b]Patience, brothers. Patience.[/b] IRON & DAWN are not going to defeat Gramlins in a week or two of rushed and crazy warfare. No, the defeat of Gramlins, assuming no other outside alliances become involved will take between 12 - 18 months. That's assuming neither side surrenders to the other. IRON & DAWN control the battlefield. We fight the nations we want to and leave the ones that we are not ready to take on for another day. Once you have control of the battlefield the war is basically won. Now it's just a matter of time. We have already created a safe zone by hitting and keeping all the Gramlin nations under 40k in war. IRON has had a long war and even her smaller nations need some time to recover so I see no point in subjecting these nations to continued warfare without a break. Let us clear out this bottom tier fully and completely, give everyone a rest and a few good 20 day collections and then raise the bar a little. I wouldn't want too many Gramlin nations dragged down too quickly one might get overlooked and slip into pm and that just wouldn't do. Once the bottom end have been ZI'd and preferably bill locked we can have one of the lower end IRON PM nations come out and engage 3 Gramlin's nations. After a week of nukes they all will be considerably smaller and we can hit them with another nation and keep them at war and dropping in NS. The beauty of this plan is there is no need to set three IRON nations on each Gramlin nation. One nation with nukes (especially with a WRC and tech) can quickly drop a Gramlin nation 20kNS or more in a week. So it won’t take us long to clear out up to 50k or 60k. You see we have no need to hit all the Gramlin nations at once. Three at time is plenty to keep us happy. While we are at war we don't pay reps. So having a dozen nations fighting while over 300 rebuild is not a real hardship for us. You might be worried about the top strength nations in IRON. Well if they ever get tired of staying in PM they are free to leave and join another alliance. There I assume they could rebuild in peace and gain strength. In fact since everyone seems to be okay with doing tech deals with alliances at war they could send aid to small IRON nations and be sent tech to help them grow. I was thinking that if they did that for a year or 18 months they would be large enough that should they choose to come back to IRON they would be powerful enough to take on the largest Gramlin nations and drag them down to where we could hit them and keep them in anarchy until they surrendered. So one has to have patience to achieve one's goal. The defeat of Gramlins is all but assured. I'm sure IRON will bring the nations in PM out when the time is right. Doing it now would provide the Gramlins with a small battlefield advantage and why on earth should they do that. While I'm at it I will also say that I have no problem personally (Can't speak for DAWN or IRON) on nations doing tech deals with Gramlins. They are going to lose it all if the war goes on long enough so the only ones that benefit are the tech sellers. However, as IRON & DAWN engage more and more nations and remove their infra the upper level Gramlin's nations will have to send more and more aid to the bottom end if they want to support them. Thus since your aid slots are limited at some point Gramlins will need to send so much aid to their lower end that they will have no slots left over to do tech deals. So the problem will take care of itself eventually. Of course Gramlins could abandon their smaller nations and stop sending them aid so they could continue doing tech deals but what kind of alliance would do that? Sorry, I thought we were talking about alliances with honour and integrity, Gramlins might leave their small alliances to fend for themselves. In which case after a few months of being at ZI and with no help in sight and no end to the war in sight I suspect most of these alliances will delete or go POW. How sure am I that IRON and DAWN will win this war? If neither side surrenders or agrees to a white peace I am positive that 333 nations can win against 59 nations (soon to be less as several are over 20 days inactive and will be deleting). To keep all nations under 40k at war all we need is 8 nations to keep them in anarchy. If you see more that 8 fighting then they are just doing it for fun. So to keep half of Gramlins in anarchy requires about 2.5% of our total nations to be at war. I think we can sustain that for a rather long period of time without even breaking a sweat. Once we get all 59 in anarchy all it will take will be 20 nations and you all know that we will never be required to keep all 59 at anarchy at once. By the time we get to the largest nations they will be lucky to have 20 nations left in their alliance. We actually consider them more like a bad bunch of rogues then a problem alliance. In fact, to my knowledge, we aren't even interested in talking to Ramirus and we will wait until he comes to us. He must be getting close as I have seen confidential logs where he has discussed the terms he is considering and they pretty much support those that were posted on pastebin recently. I think he leaked those documents on purpose as he really would like to save face somehow and end this war. But frankly I'm not interested. I've been playing this game for over three years and I have no desire to pay reps to anyone. If the war lasts a year or longer I see two things happening when we defeat Gramlins. A lot of nations that would have paid reps will have moved on to other alliances, some alliances that were owed reps will be no more. Yes I would be surprised to see anyone get reps due from this last war if it takes us 18 months to defeat the Gramlins. Now we could defeat them quicker if we wanted too, but I see no point. There is and will be no lack of volunteer nations that want to join DAWN or IRON for a week or more to take a crack at Gramlins and to hone their battle skills. I know for a fact that we are suggesting to those that want to join and help out that now is not the time. This is our war and we control the battlefield, so we will fight at our leisure everyone just needs to have patience this will be settled eventually, there is no need to rush it along.

[quote name='Shamshir' date='23 April 2010 - 07:45 AM' timestamp='1272023105' post='2271926'] I don't reallyu think he was complaining more commenting on the hypocrisy. Thankfully the RnR dude sending cash to his orange brothers in now in custody. By that i mean anarchy. [/quote] Oh now I think someone has opened a can of worms. So here we have the first instance of a nation providing aid to nations belonging to an alliance at war. Since the alliance at war is IRON you and/or the attacking nations assume that this is a perfectly acceptable action to take. Well before I suggest that all nations sending aid to Gramlins are open for attack lets wait a few days and see what develops. Unlike Gramlins, nations in DAWN and IRON are free to come and go as they please. So anyone assuming a nations that leaves IRON/DAWN is a deserter had better check with the alliance they joined and left. Attacking a suspected ghost who isn't a ghost may not be the brightest move, but then again one has to consider if these events are random or are they some sort of PR campaign. Only those that are invited into the back rooms are privy to what's really going on in CN. Ninety eight percent of the players are just pawns being played for the amusement of others. DAWN has no back room on our forums, all our members are treated equally and all know exactly what is happening. I look forward to an interesting potentially eventful weekend.

[quote name='ironchef' date='21 April 2010 - 04:07 AM' timestamp='1271837210' post='2268993'] No really, I truly want to know what is going to be done to them. Will they be on a ZI list? Will they be called bad names? Is he going to make them kick a puppy? What? Come on just spill it. What is gRAMlins going to do to these members that leave without asking? [/quote] I think its pretty clear what while happen to them. First they must unconditionally surrender, then they must solve three riddles, then Gramlin's will ZI them, or maybe not.

Gramlins has this misguided idea that DAWN declared war on them and didn’t issue a DoW. Well sorry if you live in your own paperless world. DAWN and IRON have an MDoAP treaty. It clearly states that any attack on either is considered an attack on both, so when Gramlin’s DoW’d IRON and attacked them we came to IRON’s defence as if we’d been attacked directly. So you can take your idiotic request for a DoW before defending oneself or one’s treatied partners and shred it in your paperless paper shredder. Before you DoW an alliance at least read up on their treaties and if you can’t be bothered, suffer the consequences. I’m proud that our defence of IRON rattled you so. You will notice we are still defending IRON and aiding them too, oh, and enjoying it immensely.