Rush Sykes
-
Posts
3,329 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Rush Sykes
-
-
But after all those treaty cancellations, Polar was in no position to threaten TOP/Citadel, no? There was no need for use of force when Polar had been diplomatically isolated and left toothless. I really think you should have stopped there. The war itself only brought the Coalition from negative PR.
This man is a GENIUS...and I mean that sincerely. Foresight FTW!
-
I approve of this announcement. My guess is this will be a huge success.
-
Because you only attack when the odds are in your favor, or your opponents are smaller. Got it.
You would know nothing of this of course.
-
Ignoring the fact that we are only 3 months old, you are right. You guys are mighty and we suck completely.
However, I would like to thank you in your understanding of the contract Sileath agreed to.
I think a couple points are being missed, or misunderstood. When I read Youwish's 1st statement about the Athenian military, I took it as a laugh at the fact that such a small incident would even begin to necessitate the threat of a military response. Other viewed it as a disparaging jab against the Athenian military. One of the 2 are correct, only Youwish knows for sure which is. I can see how it could be interpreted both ways, and responses thereafter reflect that. Im glad we can all move on from this. I have friends within NSO, and have a decent amount of respect for their alliance. We need not bicker over things.
-
Congrats on the growth MHA. Sorry it didnt work AHEAD, but you guys have a seriously awesome home now.
-
You could perhaps tell the whole story Khyber, but that wouldn't fit your agenda would it?
Sure, I was heavyhanded in a lot of my dealings. I was also very congenial to those that showed me the same respect.
Congenial, seriously? I had exactly one FA dealing with you in the past, it was prior to this reroll. When I was acting president of FINAL, following the Atlantic Empire debacle. As public support against AE began to erode, myself and FINALs acting VP met with 2/3 of the triumvirate of AE, as well as 2 former FINAL then serving as diplomats for AE. The meeting was also mediated by Cairna from Carpe Diem, and I forget who, for Eheclon. A deal was reached...agreed upon by all sides. FINAL left the table thinking that the war was finally behind us. Two days later, after your glorious announcement that you were given dual citizenship in AE and Echelon, and the authority to act in an advisory role for AE in the FA department, I came home from work, only to find an IRC query from you. Seems you wanted to unilaterally re-write the entire agreement that not only we had reached with the actual AE government, but you wanted to do so based on the fact that the Echelon representative at the talks, was inexperienced. Throughout the conversation, you became insistent that, what we and AE both called a PEACE AGREEMENT, was in actuality a surrender by FINAL. You stated to me on several occasions that if I did not succumb to your rewriting of the "terms", that FINAL would still find itself at war with an alliance that we had already agreed on peace with. Heavyhanded? Absolutely. One iota of respect for an innocent alliance facing what the WHOLE world saw was a ******* sham of a war, no. None. Zero. Claim honor through all the lies you want, the vast majority know the truth. I know im off topic, and if Im warned , so be it. Grudge? Yep, I hold it...guilty.
-
Okay look, we have tried to explain this on several occasions. Tela's old nation is gone. When she quit, she also gave up any power she had in Echelon. You have a diplomat floating around. Send the guy over, get a copy of the damned Constitution. While you are at it feel free to check her mask on our boards, and Caffine's for that matter. They are in no way, shape, or form involved with us. To continually use this old guilt by association chestnut after a year or better makes you sound like someone who can't let go of a personal grudge. That is just sad.
Ahhh... guilt by past association....horrible thing....Someone should ask Grub and Polaris about this.
-
You must be right. It is in no way like this thread.
The irony of someone from STA posting a private channels FTW message in this situation is... remarkable. (Note that I still think that thread was a good idea on STA's part.)
That aside, GOD needs to get its people on message. Are the reps demands just normal reps demands because NPO attacked OV, GOD's winning the war, and GOD likes reps, or are they because Echelon has a desire to seek revenge on GOD over the Aurora Borealis incident and GOD needs to protect themselves in the future from Echelon's evil? Really, I'm not clear.
Oooh, I know the answer....Who cares? The losers pay reps. Whether its for revenge or for reducing a threat is irrelevant. Why did Athens have to pay almost all of their tech to NPO? Were we a threat? No, we were the losers. We accepted the fate. Paid, rebuilt, and are bigger and better than ever. Reasons for reps are unimportant.
-
You could have made medium-sized, fixed-cost peace-mode "pre-terms" and NPO would still have refused them. Instead, these pre-terms will rise as NPO's ability to pay them falls. Had you given them fixed pre-terms like "all nations need to fight for at least two war cycles before peace terms will be negotiated", I imagine NPO would still have refused. However, fixed-cost terms would be easier to justify to an increasingly sympathetic public and an increasingly bored coalition even six months to a year from now. Instead, you offered uncapped terms and will be required to justify an ever increasing cost or else reverse your rhetoric on holding alliances in eternal wars. At some point the pre-terms will become too high to convince the public that NPO deserves to pay them and you'll be forced to present a more publicly acceptable number.
If I understand the situation correctly, you should want to bid just over the value that NPO would be willing to pay to maximize the amount of time your policy can be supported by the public and the Karma coalition without increasing the likelihood that NPO accepts light enough terms to come out of the war in a position to get revenge. I think this was an overbid, but time will tell us all.
You mean the same public that roundly hailed the threat of EZI to GATO nations in peace mode? Funny and fickle thing, that public opinion is, when you face different edges of the blade.
-
I don't think it's going to come as a huge shock that I have said many meaningless things in this game. I'm quite good at saying meaningless things when the need arises. Especially in meaningless announcements.
None of that changes that the only foreseeable outcome of this path is an extended war or the reps being threatened here being ignored out of necessity. This threat is meaningless and no rational alliance would respond to it by actually jumping out of peace mode immediately. I'm not sure if that was understood by those who gave it and they are just now !@#$%^&*ting, or they are truly that mistaken.
Really, I do think I get what you mean. I think, not just you, but for MANY people, that the meaningless hails to simply tow the party line are the reasons that so much animosity exists, not only on both sides of any war, but even within the allies on both sides, and in many cases, the individual nations within an alliance. It makes me wonder why people consider treaty partners to be "friends." It seems that in too many cases, the friend isnt able to tell their friend that something they are doing is probably a bad idea, because it would be being a bad treaty partner. The cycle repeats itself, and nobody learns.... which is a good thing, lest we would be deprived of all this political intrigue. Anyhow, before I get a warn for going off topic, let me just reiterate, that it wasnt a personal attack, it was just something I had recalled. Carry on good sir.
-
It is not a pre-term for an entire alliance, only for individual nations. It also had a very clear resolution (it may have been a cruel and unnecessarily harsh resolution, but it was pretty clear). Also, and I could honestly be wrong here, but how effectively was that ever even enforced? Honestly, the idea was bad then, even in that form, and now Karma has managed to use a bad idea to justify an worse idea. These pre-terms are doomed to failure, and that is that.
Understand, I am not here to start trouble. But I find your statement that it was a bad idea then, even in that form, to be puzzling to me....As this.....
Are Pacifican banks under threat of Perma-ZI?
A wise and benevolent (and very passionate) announcement, as always.
Was your post in the thread announcing the ultimatum to GATO. I will assume that you have changed your mind about that, but still...puzzling.
-
It is not a pre-term for an entire alliance, only for individual nations. It also had a very clear resolution (it may have been a cruel and unnecessarily harsh resolution, but it was pretty clear). Also, and I could honestly be wrong here, but how effectively was that ever even enforced? Honestly, the idea was bad then, even in that form, and now Karma has managed to use a bad idea to justify an worse idea. These pre-terms are doomed to failure, and that is that.
Funny thing about the idea being bad then....it was hailed as a wonderful move by Pacifica and her allies....They all joked and luled about how much they loved the new move. We are just showing some love in return....so to speak. Personally, the dollar figures on these peace mode reps mean nothing to me, I prefer to see themselves paint themselves with the broad strokes of the hypocrisy brush.
-
There is a reason that the hegemony never tried using "pre-terms" like this before, at least not explicitly. Saying "If you don't come out then peace will be worse" or "peace mode nations will get extra war" or whatever are actually workable solutions to the problem, if you perceive it as such. However, it is rather obvious that this will lead to some utterly ridiculous amount of additional reps that no one would ever actually try and take from anyone and which no alliance would ever accept. So you either have to cut back on it, ignore it completely, or continue fighting unto perpetuity. The last isn't likely to happen, so it's one of the first two. Couple that with the lack of concrete terms to start from, and you're left with this threat meaning absolutely nothing.
Maybe Im wrong, but "any GATO nations still in peace mode will know only eternal war"....sure is a pre-term of sorts. And the worst kind. They were threatened with an eternal war, and allowed ZERO allowance for "rotating banker and fighter nations." The bar was set. If they cant clear the bar, you will see many of us with little sympathy.
-
You know what I've figured out? We're all hypocrites. All of us. Myself included. I'm speaking out against these terms, but I didn't speak out when this was done to GATO. I didn't like it, I thought it was wrong, but I said nothing. I wish I had had the balls to say something, but I didn't. For that, I am a hypocrite. I freely admit it. But I'm speaking up now. Call me a hypocrite, but I see an injustice, and I'm speaking up. I have as much right to do that as anyone. I'm not a fan of everything NPO does or has done. Heck, if you ask me, the CB for this war was crap. NPO is gonna get some harsh terms. Okay. I get that. Fine. But you're as hypocritical as I am, because if NPO did this to anyone, even someone who "deserved it", you would hate it. I mean, come on, pre-terms? We are all hypocrites. But he who does not hold himself to the standards to which he holds others is the worst kind of hypocrite. Take that as you will.
-Bama
The perspective, and the ache to speak up against an injustice, is much greater when you are on the losing side of the perceived injustice. I dont hold that against you, it is hypocritical, but it is also 95% human nature. I view all of your posts as being in defense of your friends and allies, and have respect for THAT. You have proven(you and TPF as a whole) to be a valuable and loyal ally. Respect that I did not have for you guys pre-war, has now become respect I DO have for you. Dont get me wrong, your past transgressions outweigh that respect, but the snowball at the top of the hill is very small before it becomes an avalanche. Carry on good sir.
-
So you speak for Karma as a whole then right? Also, how long after members leave PM would we get terms? I'd rather be zied for a year and have no reps to pay, then have to pay rediculous reps with no nations still capable of making said payments.
Is this an admission of the vaunted Pacifican banks failing?
-
I do believe, contrary to "Karma's" intentions, that is what NPO is trying to do now. If anything, the actions of "Karma" have done nothing but encourage the NPO to seek revenge in whatever way possible.
Also, if they come out of peace mode....they will just get attacked. That's some pretty fail strategy.
Whoah, nations at war exiting peace mode will be attacked???? THE HORROR! Ebil Ebil Karma!
-
I have seen this show before an d I already know the ending. Here are the facts guys, this tactic does not work as has already been proven via FAN, what you are actually doing with this is discouraging NPO to seek peace. Yeah I get that they are being hypocrites but they also have a tight enough community and enough invested into the game to do the same thing FAN did.
Before you know it a whole new breed of player will be here that only knows NPO as the defeated alliance held in a state of eternal war and that will be used against you to take you down.
If you do not want to rethink this strategy because of morality then I would implore you to rethink it because of its long term tactical implications.
This logic kinda fails. I dont think there is ANYONE left in this game, after this war, that actually thinks that if they stick around long enough, they will not be on a side that gets owned in a war. I know it will happen to us. Its simply the nature of the game and the treaty web. So, I personally, and Im sure Athens as a whole, does not fear the fall of the future that is imminent. We have paid attention to the world around us as we played this game.
-
This is the fundamental problem, and why NPO isn't surrendering. They are in the position of negotiating based on no information, as nobody is responsible for presenting them with terms, other than the preterms which are non-negotiable (supposedly) and give the NPO no actual benefit if they're complied with.
Now they know the feeling that they have given so many in the past.
-
I was just wondering from NPO PoV...why should I come out? 1. Get !@#$ beaten out of me. 2. Offered harshest terms ever.
Basically, they have nothing to loose if thats your best offer.
One who has nothing to loose has everything to gain..so they might as well take a chance with peace mode.
-
Just providing different opinion for sake of discussion.
After the ultimatum they "decreed" to GATO concerning peace mode....maybe....just maybe....they could salvage some measure of honour?
-
Since I was expecting all the LOLGGA stuff, the part below is what really stuck out at me...
I'm really glad none of my allies talk down to me in that fashion. I wouldn't put up with that.
With FRIENDS like that.....
-
Good to know I wasn't the only one.
Im glad I wasnt alone too.
-
Im not familiar with the treaty, but why would they need to manufacture a reason to drop a treaty? They have a new government, just got massacred in a war, the reason exists there...."We feel like we are incapable of being good allies to anyone, and we need this time to gain some introspect of ourselves, and will therefore consider this announcement as every allied alliances notice of treaty cancellation. We cannot move on with you, or anyone else, until we move on with ourselves." I rather think that announcement would have worked nicely, and is truly what many feel they need to do.
-
I think this needs to be comended for its sense. NPO dont want GGA back what benefit does that actually bring to NPO. Moo has made some bad decisions recently but he isnt inept like GGA. ( sorry for the GGA bashing but really how many times can you Coup your own government.)
Cheers
SunTzu
The funny thing about coups, when your allies support the couping side, then couping is good! When they support the losing side, couping is bad. Charters be damned, its really all about who the allies feel safer with. As for DeScepter, I do not know her, have never met her, but something tells me that in so far as her lying to Mhawk, I believe her when she says she is afraid to cross the line between what she should tell her allies in good faith, and what she thinks she should protect for the privacy and sovereignty of the alliance, I once had to tread that fine line, and it is not an easy task. It is my personal belief, though not relevant to anyone, that Mhawk and Pansy were sort of condescending towards her from the get go. If it was because they were concerned about the legality of the government change, then I can understand to a certain extent, but it became clear to me 15 lines into the 1st chat, that nothing any of them said would save their treaties. Like I said, just my opinion.
-
Hmmm...Single Most Important Ever....interesting.... Eras change so much, I will go wth Doitzel.
Biggest alliance mess up of all time?
in Open World RP
Posted
Difference between the two situations are a great many, not the least of which, is the fact that Pacifica declared an offensive war thereby igniting a cascade of defensive wars from OV allies.