Chasmic Descent
-
Posts
61 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Chasmic Descent
-
-
Sending TOP tech to compensate them for their own errors and dishonesty seems a bit much even if it were the case that Kronos' actions didn't merit recompense, which it is not.
Fair enough. I was thinking more along the lines of returning it because it was reperations paid on behalf of Kronos, and Kronos has now made clear they never wanted this to happen, rather than compensating TOP. But prehaps TOP deserve a little 300 tech spank for their actions
(which does sound like an accident from what I've heard, albeit a big one.) -
Considering that the evidence was circumstantial, and that Kronos has since been able to cast doubt on some of your concerns, do you guys in STA believe that a symbolic gesture of returning the tech to TOP could be more benifical than keeping the token symbol of 300 tech, if it helped in keeping a better relationship with TOP/Kronos; considering as Masterof9puppets said in this thread, that the mistake on Kronos' behalf may not have merited any reperations?
-
edited: Pezstar answered this, thanks.
-
This is absolutely a mischaracterization of our stance. At no time did we attempt to hold Kronos responsible for the actions of rogues. Our complaint was that we believed Kronos to be actively aiding the rogues.
Much of our reason to hold that belief is and was circumstantial, and Kronos has since been able to alleviate, explain, or cast doubt on some of our concerns on that front, which is why we happy to settle for a lesser sum than was originally agreed. As the OP outlines, both sides agree that peacing out on Heracles on day 6 and immediately refilling his slots (after we had made it clear that we wanted opportunity to defend our member) was a poor move, although there may not be complete agreement on why that was. In any case, we have reached a mutually agreeable solution and I hope that Kronos-STA relations will cool off.
Hi there Bzelger,
If Kronos were able to cast further doubt, or go so far as to disprove that they were aiding the rogues in the manner that STA suggested, would STA return the reps that TOP had paid for?
-
Kronos you guys are legends and you know it
-
-
To the guys in the RIA if your reading this
my take on it,
Alot of ppl in this thread are against what Penkala did (before he decided to quit) not because of some agenda or loyalty to athens, or even for drama, but because its funny to see a hypocrite squirm.
Nuking some nation that you have tech raided is fine by me, I dont care, its your risk to take. But the fact that Penkala came down so hard on Athens for their actions and then refused to answer for his own was amusing. Tech raiding is still about the guy with the bigger stick hitting the littler guy. The case with Athens was just an even bigger divide between the raider and the victim.
The fact of the matter is though, when you tech raid you are attacking someone who cant fight back without losing badly (even if Penkala wouldnt have had his mates gang up 3v1 if the victim put up a fight, the potential for Penkala to do so must have been very real for the victim).
tldr, Tech raiding is fun, but tech raiders cant go around telling off other tech raiders for "doing it wrong" without looking like idiots.
-
This topic pretty much shows that we're not in much of a position to judge anyway.
lol, Well actually I didn't judge Athens harshly for their recent actions, I'm in favour of tech raiding, and in my eyes raiding a 5 nation alliance which has no treaties (which alot of alliances do including my own) is similar to raiding a 40 strong alliance without treaties (putting aside the whole Mash thing, Imean even mash didnt know they had a treaty so how was Athens suppose to). It's just that Athens took a bigger risk than most tech raiding alliances, but thats just my view on it.
-
I'm cautiously optimistic about Valhalla.
It doesn't really make sense to assume you haven't changed in the past 6 months, let alone the last year.
no problem, things take time. Maybe in another six months our continued actions may cement you optimism
-
"Sorry I attacked you guys without any reason at all, it was wrong of me, I'm really really sorry, I'm being all humble and !@#$, did I say I was sorry already? Oh reps, what reps? Lalalala I am forgiven."
Is that what Valhallans call class? Wait, no need to answer.
You sound out of touch with what Valhalla is about.
-
Prove it.
You prove that they dont.
(oh god I sound like some religious nut D:)
-
We're pretty happy with our current list of allies, and aren't close enough with anyone else to consider any new treaties at this time. Should we make friends with an alliance that we aren't currently allied with, we're certainly willing to consider it.
Siberian Tigers live up in Siberia, far away from the reach of those horrible horrible dragons. *Insert obligatory reference to the dragons on the Valhallan flag here.*
Everyone knows who would win if a dragon and a tiger crossed swords. Valhallan dragons' sword skills are second to none.Q. Has anyone in the STA ever read "The Life of Pi"? Its about a 16 yr old kid shipwrecked, in a lifeboat in the pacific ocean. Oh yeah and the other survivor on board this tiny lifeboat is a tiger...
-
Londo indicated that there is a treaty between MASH and KoN, in a post just made in the other thread.
Well that will be interesting if its still active
Please Osafune, don't bring your thought process into this. Last rumor I heard about Kronus is that they are slot filling a rogues war slots. So please let me know when an article is brought up about this so I can "insert" your alliance.Dude, you have to spell it as "Kronos", not "Kronus", otherwise the acronym doesnt work
-
I was under the impression that they didn't have protectors o.O
I was being presumptious that they did have protectors, but i havent been able to find out much about them, they dont even have a cyber wiki page (that or I cant find it)
But, if a 40 strong alliance has no treaties, well... that's quite irresponsible of them. The alliance leaders have left their members unprotected. Like it or not you cant remain out of the treaty web and hope that your alliance wont be tech raided.
I guess o7 to Athens for having chosen a great alliance to tech raid
-
There's no way I'm going to read all of these 60+ pages, but I feel like throwing in my 2 cents, even if my particular thoughts have already been covered somewhere in this topic.
My first cent: Anybody who are raiders themselves but are against what Athens is doing are hypocrites. All raids are fueled by greed, the only thing differing this raid from "normal" ones is how they all decided to target one single alliance. What exactly makes spreading the love around to other insignificant alliances better?
My second cent: Screw Athens, I pray to Gawd that somebody rolls them.
yeah exactly. Athens can go raid anyone they want. If they want to raid bigger targets though the risk is on their shoulders. There is no moral dilemma here, its just a case of an alliance which may have bitten off more than they can chew.
What would be wrong is if the Knights of Mi!'s protectors did nothing.
-
Interestingly, TOP is the only alliance that is 3 times or larger than Athens.
I would be interested to hear if Athens is open to TOP techraiding them
-
There is nothing wrong with what Athens have done, even if they have changed their stance. However this is a big alliance that has been targeted and there might be some interesting consequences from those who protect the Knights of Ni!
Its refreshing to see people chase bigger and more risky targets.
Oh and the whole "I should be able to join a 40 man alliance without the fear of being tech raided" doesnt wash with me. If your in alliance that has 40 members you should have the treaties to protect yourself, otherwise its your own alliance's fault for not chosing your friends carefully enough, or losing contact with them.
-
bump
can I have some plundertime now? ;_;
-
This reply is laughable considering your thoughts on us being on your forums. I came there sincerely and was laughed at by you and some of my own and then to be called an arse licker to boot was just the final straw. I refused to apologize at the time because I was not in the posistion to make a formal apology as I was not .gov so rather than insult you I continued to dig at the issues. So I guess well just agree to disagree on this one Tyga which is still a shame in my book because I came there with high hopes but alas you and I both know even with an apology some of your .gov would still spit on me. So it is what it is.If the specific issues were listed and apologised for then yes on all three. I'm not saying we will be best friends or even friends but if Valhalla acknowledges the causes of the rift and apologises sincerely for those wrongs then I would consider the past the past and move on.
We have conveyed this to Valhalla a number of times but they seem unwilling to do so. Instead preferring we just forget it all happened and become friends based on no common ground or even respect. It was fairly transparent that the move to repair relations was just designed to get the treaty with Polar back and we found that and the refusal to acknowledge the past and apologise for it to be insulting.
Perhaps this is true. Perhaps you were going to come to our forums anyway. Perhaps Valhalla was going to take steps to try and address issues from the past. But do put yourselves in our shoes for a second: your long-standing treaty with Polaris is canceled and within a week (or less, I can't remember exactly) you show up on our forums to try and diplomatically patch up stuff (at least, that's what it appeared to be). Maybe it's coincidental, but considering that the only reason Valhalla let STA off of peace terms early from the noCB war was to fast-track a treaty with Polaris it seemed to us to be a case of you only caring about the STA in so much as it has affected your treaty situation with NpO and not out of any sort of genuine desire to improve relations. Heck, you even said that you gained respect for us in the Karma war and that's why you came over, but we didn't really do terribly much in that war aside from a small conflict with Molon Labe. It just seemed fake; if you truly wanted to do something you had many many months to do it. You even could've used our common ally in Polaris for mediation of some sort, but as far as I know you didn't care. And all of a sudden you want to improve relations? Again, maybe we were wrong and it really was sincere, but can you hardly blame us for being skeptical?And the response you got on our forums wasn't rude or anything, it was just blunt. It only got heated when you and Bud seemed completely oblivious to why we were angry with you and you tried to portray Valhalla as having done nothing wrong. If you truly felt that way and didn't want to own up to your past actions, then there wasn't really much more to discuss at that point. We wanted to make sure you understood how we felt about the situation and that relations would not improve until STA felt that Valhalla had owned up to it's past and apologized.
To be honest, a simple public announcement acknowledging all of what you did to us would go a long way if not outright remove the issue entirely.
And yes, I suppose we should not derail this thread anymore.
Like Kry has already said this would best be discussed in another thread, or privately from gvt to gvt because I am enjoying this thread.
But I ask you to put yourself in my shoes for a second. When I joined Valhalla it was december 08 and as we all know within a few months time karma came along, and this changed things for Valhalla, they had to take a good long look at themselves.
My point is that this is the only Valhalla that I know. My time in this alliance has been the duration when they were actively seeking reconciliation, to make up for the mistakes they made in their past. So when I hear that all alliances but one were receptive to Valhalla's attempts to rebuild bridges, it makes new nations in Valhalla like me (one's who didnt exist during the feud) take an interest in the alliance which is being hostile, and become wary of them. Acting hostile towards diplomats will only sustain the feud, and if this sustained any longer you are going to find yourself with a grudge against an alliance whose majority nations were born after the incident.
Im not arguing whether there should be an apology or there shouldnt be, but acting immediately hostile towards diplomats who just arrived on your forums is not the best approach in getting one. I hope that this is still something that can be worked out, and I have had the appotunity to talk to one or two of your members privately about the incident to get their side of it, and when discussing their anger with my alliance they never went as far to wanting to see us disbanded and leave the game but like you said, resolving it by apologising.
tldr; Even if you feel you are right to ask for an apology, dont show the valhallan diplomats the door as quick as you can, but talk to them see what can worked out, or this will drag on and you will be holding a grudge against those who dont even know why you hate them.
-
TOP- 3
MHA- 5
Sparta- 4
NpO- 6
IRON- 10
ODN- 3
FARK- 5
GPA- 5
NPO- 3
FOK- 4
MK- 4
WTF- 5
TOOL- 5
TDO- 5
VE- 4
Legion- 7
RoK- 5
GATO- 5
CSN- 5
Athens- 5
Gremlins- 5
MCXA- 5
UPN- 6
RIA- 5
STA- 2
Invicta- 8
RnR- 5
MASH- 5
NADC- 5
WAPA- 5
NV- 5
NSO- 6
NEW- 5
MA- 5
Umbrella- 8
FAN- 5
LoSS- 5
TSO- 5
NATO- 5
Nordreich- 5
GR- 5
Vanguard- 5
GOD- 5
FoB- 5
PC- 6
Valhalla- (biased)
GGA- 5
TPF- 6
that was fun
-
stumpy saves our sphere again!
o/ Stumpy
-
get away with it? :S They have disbanded and have run away. They have looked like utter fools, far worse than losing infrastructure
-
And then merge into one mega-purple alliance.
With Michiel de Ruyter as leader?
-
All of purple should disband.. valhalla, invicta, legion, ... those are the only purple alliances I know, but the rest of them should go too.
You want to disband alliances you dont even know? You probably dont know the purple alliances you listed that well either.
Ill make sure to ignore anything you say here in the future
(which does sound like an accident from what I've heard, albeit a big one.)
Monthly STA Press Conference
in Open World RP
Posted
Didn't that come up last time?