The Crimson King
-
Posts
256 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by The Crimson King
-
-
[quote name='Lamuella' timestamp='1297009770' post='2622197']
so, if you're accepting the Doom House conceit of a declaration on one being a declaration on all...
doesn't that mean that your optional defense pact doesn't apply?
After all, TPF attacked Doom House, rather than the other way round, if you're accepting this conceit.
[/quote]
And if they agree with that stance then they also agree that the 3 of you hitting NPO is the same as hitting TPF because of our MADP with them.
See how you lose this argument no matter how many times you try it
Welcome to the war Avalon. Glad to have you by our sides once again
Edit: Syn was one minute faster than I it appears. -
[quote name='Derwood1' timestamp='1296974477' post='2621714']
You guys have more guts then the folks you are defending.
[/quote]
2010 called, it is still waiting for you to honor your NEW treaty -
[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1296975709' post='2621762']
[url="http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display_charts.asp?Nation_ID=418916"]Gotta do something to keep morale up.[/url]
[/quote]
I suppose this is just as relevant then?
http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance_stats_custom.asp?View=Charts&Alliance=Goon%20Order%20Of%20Oppression%20Negligence%20And%20Sadism
Or we could get back to the point that the damage dealt in this war is not equally divided by the number of aa's you are at war with. This has nothing to do with any graphs charts or any other witty link you plan on posting but rather simple common sense which is what seemed to be missing in the original post I quoted.
Edit: bad link -
[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1296971996' post='2621598']
As we're fighting 12 alliances we'll allow you to take credit for 1/12th of that 2m damage.
2,000,000 / 12 = 166,666.67
Man, we're kicking your butt.
[/quote]
So by this logic, HoT has also managed to Dish out 167k NS of damage to GOONS
Congrats to 64D slayer of giants -
Thank you guys
Happy Hunting -
[quote name='Tequila Mockingbird' timestamp='1296970110' post='2621426']
tpf declared on goons a member of doomhouse, thus entered a state of warfare with all member alliances
tl;dr tpf declared on us but have fun all the same!
[/quote]
You declared on NPO who TPF has an MADP with, therefore you declared on us.....see how this works...
Nice try though -
We will attempt to keep this as short and to the point as possible.
The undersigned alliances recognize that the signatories of Doomhouse accords have expanded their aggression via military attacks against member nations of our alliances and providing copious amounts of financial aid to the enemies we have chosen to fight. Though we have tried to tolerate their feinting swipes, we will brook no further aggression and will immediately begin to defend ourselves.
[b]Signed:
For The Phoenix Federation:
The Crimson King: Evil Overlord, Peddler of Death
For Olympus:
Titan Council.
The Pansy
Buffalo Niagara
President SO
Grendel
queenhailee
Mississippigurlie
For Invicta:
Dan2680, President of Invicta, Emperor of the Ice Cream Cabinet, Master of Right Turns and Long Straight Aways
Nascar8FanGA, President of Invicta. Master of Left Turns
For The Cult of Justitia:
Schattenmann, Presbyter
Yawoo, Strategos[/b] -
[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1296798043' post='2618942']
Certainly.
It's real simple. NPO and their meatshields, having not been ravaged by the wars, would be in a much more powerful position. NPO is one of the few alliances able to rally support and provide a credible threat to the power structure. It's not a giant leap of faith to think that they might use this new-found relative power to cause problems. Even if their FA policy is terrible, they may gradually grow in power to become a real threat again.
[/quote]
SO lets see, they have a terrible FA policy, and have the same friends they always had, yet eventually somewhere down the line they may at some point possibly come back looking for us.
It's real simple, the boogeyman is under the bed and he is coming for me...Grab your torches and pitchforks
[quote]
I fail to see how I am "delusional" for recognizing that NPO can't be allowed to rise again. You might not like the reasoning but it is what it is. NPO is a deeply violent alliance that has shown no signs of changing their ways, they merely have not had the power to enforce their will as before. We don't intend to even give them the slightest hint of a chance to do so. Had they atoned properly, things would be different. And no, reps are not atonement, that's merely fulfilling their end of the surrender terms, true atonement should have come with proper diplomacy, apologies to those they had wronged, and a dramatic shift in attitude. Quite frankly, they still seem like the aloof bunch of cretins that I recall from the days of yore.
[/quote]
So the alliance who just started a war with no cb and attacked an uninvolved alliance who had no ties to an ongoing war is also trying to decry the alliance they attacked as too aggressive? And please drop the Christ complex. Just cause your alliance has died and risen again it does not give you the sole authority to pass judgment on other aa's or decide what penance they must participate in to atone properly for their past sins. The threat an AA posts to your security is not inversely related to how much of MK's ass they kiss regardless of how much you may think it.
[quote]
That's not what I said. They would probably not be able to take us out even if we had left them be. That does not mean we should eliminate the chance of a more grievous injury at a later date. Also you forget, it's not just NPO, it's their entire sphere of influence which had almost escaped the war.
[/quote]
No, see that is exactly what you said. If you go back to your original sermon you tried to present a case that we would have been a threat post war if we were not rolled. Now perhaps I am wrong trying to interpret "threat" as the clear ability to take down you and your friends militarily in the near future, since, as we already covered, this would certainly not be the case. I suppose that leaves them being a threat because they may "think" differently than you or hold dissenting opinions. Clearly this would be a direct attack on the established groupthink and anyone not getting their daily news from Big Brother should immediately be put down.
[quote]
Nope, we just need to beat them until they are no longer a threat to us. We do not intend to charge NPO a dime.
[/quote]
Oh so now it is only until they are no longer a threat to you. What happened to the righteous crusade to save all of the inhabitants of this realm from the degradations that will surely be beset upon them once Big Red comes back into power. Why does it stop at GOONs? Or are you trying to say that yours is the sole guiding light and moral compass that will lead us all forward throughout all eternity........
[quote]
I think you need to put down your tea, it's a might bitter. I suppose I should not be surprised to see such a defense of NPO coming from one of the alliances so dependent on them.
[/quote]
OK I will bite, Please give me the inside scoop of how my relations with NPO work on a leadership level and how TPF is dependent on them. Clearly you will have a much better grasp on this that I would
EDIT:
[quote]
Heh, you NPO are all the same, stuck in the past.
[/quote]
Given the content of your posts I find it highly amusing that you are accusing someone else of living in the past.
In regards to the present, welcome again to OSA to the front -
[quote name='Commisar Gaunt' timestamp='1296801313' post='2619027']
If you actually understood my post, I wasn't calling ML cowards but mocking the absurdity that throughout this whole war your side has tried to affix that label to everything that MK and friends do. I didn't really expect someone who thinks TPF is a good alliance to get it though.
[/quote]
If you actually understood either the post you responded to or the one I followed up with you would see that the point was being made that calling either ML or MK cowards for not posting DoW's is basically ridiculous. This was in direct response to MK members calling out ML for being cowards for doing the exact same thing that MK did. Thus why we are having this stimulating conversation. Luckily you did at least once again save a deft and skillful wielding of the deadly NO U for the end of your post, so we do have that to be thankful for. -
[quote name='Commisar Gaunt' timestamp='1296800206' post='2618995']
We don't consider the pathetic assortment of refuse you claim is an alliance as actually being one. I assume you're having difficulty understanding the simplicity of that.
[/quote]
When all other arguments break down, the mighty NO U shall surely sweep in and save the day.... -
[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1296798869' post='2618966']
What about, MK declaring some wars without bothering with a DoW because they don't feel the need, while ML does the same thing except makes up ridiculous stories as to why they're doing it instead of just explaining what they're doing plainly? I believe your post covered that their actions were about the same (declaring some wars to defend an ally without posting an official DoW), but did you factor in that MK/Umb were just doing straightforward business while ML tried to decide that the people they're hitting are rogues and that they're technically not engaging in an alliance war?
[/quote]
I was responding to the poor attempts being made at labeling ML cowards. Both aa's may have had their reasons for doing what they did but neither had anything to do with cowardice. And if you think ML would try to hide from someone's tough friends, then clearly you do not know the first thing about them.
Now in regards to what you are saying here, the primary issue here MK/Umb were not "going about straightforward business". In fact had they done that, they would have posted a DoW when they decided to declare war on TPF, and guess what...this thread would not exist.
So if MK gets to rewrite what is a pretty agreed upon and standard rule (actually posting a DoW when you go to war) and make a new definition of what is required for this to happen that apparently applies only to them, how is it that they also get to dictate how another AA is then able to view the actions and responses of this new trail they have decided to blaze?
If MK can decide what they feel constitutes a reason for a DoW (and if i am understanding you correctly you feel they have every right to do so), then ML can surely have the same right to decide what they consider as a rogue action, especially given that this is "new ground" we are treading here. If you are going to argue that MK has the right to dictate the final say on ML's definition of a rogue, they you also must agree that TPF would therefore have the final say on what definition and standards MK must use to declare war. Again this is not much different than the coward/no coward argument above.
Once again I will point out that the disconnect from standard procedure here did not start with ML. Had it been followed from the beginning we would not be having this conversation. -
[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1296798485' post='2618953']
No, it has everything to do with the necessity of the formal DoW. This has been pointed out ad nauseum so I can only assume you are being intentionally dense.
[/quote]
And I specifically asked you for the requirements that must be met to have a formal DoW posted by MK when they decide to declare on someone. You have said such things as our pm count caused us to not meet these requirements, so therefore such requirements clearly exist (or you are making !@#$ up as you go which surely cannot be the case). I can only assume you are having difficulty understanding the simplicity of my request for information. -
[quote name='Commisar Gaunt' timestamp='1296797306' post='2618931']
MK and friends attacking NPO with a public DoW = cowards
ML trying to sneak a couple wars in without a DoW = not cowards
Please Dochartaigh, your [buzzword about cowardice] and [buzzword about hypocrisy] and [more buzzwords] are really getting bad! Maybe you should stop [something tears] you [something about a baby] and [something about doing something about it]!
[/quote]
You also seem to be having some difficulty with this so lets take this slowly:
MK and friends attacking NPO with a public DoW = something not even mentioned in the post you quoted. But way to reach.
Now to the point being made here if:
ML trying to sneak a couple wars in without a DoW = cowards
Then:
MK trying to sneak a couple wars in without a DoW = cowards
OR:
ML trying to sneak a couple wars in without a DoW = not cowards
Then:
MK trying to sneak a couple wars in without a DoW = not cowards
What cannot possibly equate is:
ML trying to sneak a couple wars in without a DoW = cowards
and:
MK trying to sneak a couple wars in without a DoW = not cowards -
[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1296793940' post='2618861']
I'm sorry, I thought the fact that our nations were in anarchy or otherwise engaged was too obvious to bring up. I would certainly declare more than 3 wars if it were possible, or attack during anarchy, but I can't.
[/quote]
I would also think that you being unable to declare wars on nations in PM was too obvious to bring up, but you managed to do it about 5 times in this thread already.
[quote]
Because there were only two nations, not our entire upper tier. You were at war with our ally and I guess we thought it was pretty obvious what was going on. If you needed your hand held, you could have checked with us in #mushroom.
[/quote]
I think the disconnect here revolves around the exact requirements MK has outlined for when they post a DoW and when they don't. Apparently it has something to do with there being only a certain number of nations in range above 50k NS out of peace mode while also factoring into account how many of their sub 50k nations are in anarchy and what day of the week it is and if the groundhog saw his shadow or not.
Perhaps you can just save us all the trouble of tracking you down and outline these exact requirements so that everyone is aware in the future. -
[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1296792916' post='2618815']
We don't have nations in range [b]as our nations in range are in anarchy, fighting the NPO or[/b] their potential TPF opponents are in PM. This is feeling very circular.
[/quote]
You see how you kept leaving the bolded part out of your initial argument as to why you could not post a DoW, thus why we are in this conversation in the first place.
What any of the reasons above have to do with not posting a DoW is still escaping me however. -
[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1296792642' post='2618799']
The problem wasn't that ML didn't post a formal declaration of war, it was that they refused to acknowledge in private that it was in fact a war and tried to keep to pretend that our members attacking TPF were rogues despite our saying, in private, otherwise.
[/quote]
And their problem with doing so was that you did not provide TPF with that which has been standard on this planet since time immemorial, a deceleration of war when you decided to go to war with our nations. See where the initial disconnect comes from here and who caused it? -
[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1296792234' post='2618783']
*and are in anarchy so they can't engage.
I don't know if you've heard, but there are quite a few NPO nations we're preoccupied with in that range too.
Because we have a surplus of slots in that range.
I'm not too sure what you were trying to prove there.
[/quote]
You are claiming in numerous posts that the reason you did not post a DoW was because you had no nations in range because of TPF being in pm. I was simply pointing out that this argument you were making held no merit whatsoever. -
[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1296791556' post='2618752']
Peacemode is relevant because we can't attack them, so there's no point in posting anything.
[/quote]
Except for the fact that over 2/3's ov your AA is in range of the nations TPF has out of peace mode.
The issue has nothing to do with you being unable to attack, it is simply that you [b]chose[/b] to only engage the select few higher ns nations that TPF left out of peacemode. -
[quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1296790764' post='2618710']
ML insisting they have the right to declare members of other alliances rogues and prosecute them as such, and further insisting that any retaliation by those alliances is illegal. It's a ridiculous argument - and since I'm sure it's been done before, I'll simply say it was wrong then as well. It's !@#$%^&*, no matter who does it.
[/quote]
It also appears the Umb ad MK are insisting that they have the right to declare war on any alliance they feel like without providing said alliance with a formal declaration of war, and further insist that any treaty partner of that AA who takes issue with this and strikes back in defense in turn provides them the courtesy of the same formal declaration they denied the original aa they were attacking. It's a ridiculous argument. -
[quote name='Natan' timestamp='1296788254' post='2618567']
[center][img]http://f.cl.ly/items/2g083U111J3T0o0f2B2L/mkumbdual.jpg[/img][/center]
Molon Labe nations have been attacking nations within Umbrella and Mushroom Kingdom who were engaging The Phoenix Federation. [b]Over the last day, they have branched out into attacking non-engaged nations as well.[/b]
[/quote]
They hit one nation who was not attacking (or had attacked) a member of TPF, immediately realized their mistake, and offered peace on that war. That is really "branching out" there.... -
[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1296777569' post='2618367']
I wouldn't have said it if I didn't believe it.
[/quote]
Great, since you so firmly believe it then you should have no problem expanding on it and explaining how you came to these conclusions.
Like for starters, exactly how was NPO on the cusp of presenting a threat again? Hell you have said yourself they were doing nothing to build foreign relations, and they certainly were not amassing and large number of treaties. Now I know you like to point out the fact that Legion and TPF just acquired new treaty partners but let me ask you something here. Even if your magic tinfoil 8 ball responded with "signs point to yes" when you asked it if the orders were getting back together, you are claiming that NPO would still be a threat unless they got rolled along with Polar in this war. But that would mean that you would have to believe that in a post war landscape where Polar was rolled and under terms, Pacifica and her 5 allies would pose a clear and present danger to the DH/PB/C&G et al portion of the web over there. So I am really interested in understanding how all of the sudden the same political dynamic we have been living in for the past 2 years would magically see Pacifia "empowered" post-war unless they got rolled.
Cause when you break it all down the only way you come up with that post is either you are full of !@#$ and making a miserable attempt at PR (which is the most logical conclusion one would come to after reading it, and the one you refuted with your reply) or you are both delusional and frankly frightened of your own shadow.
The bag of goods you are trying to pass of as your moral crusade for "good of all the cyberverse" (where apparently somewhere along the line by means of a secret ballot all other alliance leaders anointed you their lord protector) comes down to:
1) Unless NPO is rolled right now they will be able to single-handidly take down the combined forces of PB/DH/C&G and allies post war.
2) This cannot be allowed because everyone remembers how they used to roll alliances with no cb's and hand out crippling reps just to stay in power
3) So in order to prevent this we must attack them with no cb and hand out crippling reps so that we stay in power.
4) Wait, yes I know that sounds a lot like what they used to do, but sleep easy, we do not believe in installing viceroys.
Now you may have sold yourself on this, and the kool-aid is strong over there by all accounts, but anyone who steps back for more than 2 seconds and actually looks at what you are trying to pass off as reasoning will see it for the pile of BS that it is. For those unable to do so, I must also recommend leaving your lights on tonight, because the boogeyman is real kids, and he is coming for you.
Also in regards to the OP, my sincerest congrats to OSA and their 2 wars. -
[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1296773734' post='2618299']
Maybe not by the conventional definition. What we're doing, while it may seem distasteful, is for the good of us all. If NPO (and their thane alliances)were left unscathed by the VE/NpO conflict, the consequences might be dire. Maybe you forget what the world was like under their thumb, but we don't. They have shown no remorse for their actions in public or private, they have not shown any indication of changing. All alliances deserve second chances, this is a core tenant of my moral philosophy, but NPO has not even shown an inking of wanting to take that chance. They could have apologized to MK and others for their actions in the past, and truly argued that they have changed, but they did not.
The risks of an empowered NPO are not worth suffering. We have the power to prevent it, so we are using it.
[/quote]
I can understand trying to use PR in a war, and even overstretching a bit to make a situation conform to suit your purposes, but you really do believe the !@#$ you write don't you. -
[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1296599858' post='2615121']
Would you agree with shattenmann that you are being curbstomped in a 4 v 1 but GOONSin 12 v 1 is only being "countered"?
[/quote]
How much time did you actually spend looking at the stats of the force GOONs is being countered by? My guess is your incessant need to keep bringing up 12 vs 1 shows that is about as far as you have dug into this before labeling it a curbstomp
Now lets put aside the fact that they attacked an alliance not involved in any way with the Polar war, using a cb that amounted to "we bored", and would therefore basically deserve anything that came their way regardless of how it is labeled, and take a quick look at the numbers.
At the time GOONs was countered by the first wave they had 287 nations and approx 270 of those were under 45k ns. Out of the 810 defensive war slots on those nations NPO had managed to fill 7. Basically there were 260 nations that accounted for 45% of the active wars on pacifica, and no counters on any of these nations.
Now before we get any further into specific numbers I will point out 2 things. First off, whoever countered them was not going to be utilizing all of their NS to counter but rather a partial and specific segment of their membership, and this segment was gong to consist of lower range nations where activity levels are normally not as high as in larger areas.
Any aa countering would also logically have to assume they in turn would be countered as well, and should certainly not have its nations targeting or taking on 3 offensive wars before they saw what counter they would get. These aa's would also have to account for PM cycles in these lower ranges as well.
So given that information how may nations do you think one would need to pool together in order to feel that it could adequately cover the open slots on the 260 nations mentioned above? -
[quote name='rrkilledme' timestamp='1296546166' post='2614440']
Sure takes a crazy amount of bravery to post something on OWF. Medal for this^ guy please?
[/quote]
Oh I am quite sure STA is backing up their words in this war
We Have a Grievance...
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1297010466' post='2622211']
Please do not be putting the words in my mouth. That was an entirely different situation.
Also you and all the others criticizing C&G's view on their treaties should just stop. [b]There is nothing quite as pathetic as somebody trying to tell two alliances why their view of their treaty is wrong.[/b]
[/quote]
Wait....what is this exactly....
[quote name='TheNeverender' timestamp='1295928088' post='2597854']
[center][img]http://imgur.com/iVphG.jpg[/img][/center]
The New Polar Order and her myriad allies have gone to great lengths to protect a single alliance from damage in this latest global calamity. Rather than putting forth a maximal effort in what was perceived to be a losing effort from the onset, these alliances have conspired to take the beating so that their flagship alliance can remain strong and resolute. [b]Of particular note is the valorious Legion, whose mutual defense pact with the New Polar Order remains untapped........ [/b]
For the Goon Order of Oppression, Negligence and Sadism:
Sardonic, GOONS Pilot
[/quote]
Seems you had no problem not only telling Legion and Polar exactly how their treaty should have been viewed, you went a declared war over it as well.