Jump to content

FOK Announcement


ArneS

Recommended Posts

Guest avenger218

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1301007041' post='2675189']
*Yawn*

We're here to support those we are friends with and allied to. It's nothing different from what other alliances do.

If white peace was initially offered, why didn't NADC and TSI take it?
Now we're going to have to use force to get them off our allies. Unfortunate, but I guess that's what the leadership of NADC and TSI should have realized earlier.


Well, I for one don't consider white peace to be a bad proposition...
[/quote]
no it isn't, I hold no ill toward FOK, you guys entered honorably, your acting honorably on OWF but if you did give us white peace, would that entail peace with TOP/MK/Umbrella and GOONS aswell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 404
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Roadie' timestamp='1301007124' post='2675193']
Oh sure. The one time I get sigg'd and I messed up the spelling.

Enjoy the war. Hopefully we'll be seeing you on the battlefield very soon.
[/quote]
Oh, I can correct that if you want to.

Also, I'm sure we'll enjoy it. Not sure if we'll be fighting you guys, I guess that's really up to you. ;)

[quote name='Kajdav' timestamp='1301007140' post='2675194']
What people fail to realize here is loyalty and honor. You might think it's ok, but I for one wouldn't feel right about abandoning our allies, whom we entered the war with and for. As soon as our allies get out, we can talk.
[/quote]
I can respect such a position. Very idealistic and such.
We're not so much different in that respect, it just seems to me that it might be better for both your allies and yourself to leave sooner then later. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest avenger218

[quote name='Arthur Blair' timestamp='1301007441' post='2675197']
So... No money down, only terms being no re-entry... That is hegemony era reps?

I think I see how people claim we are so terrible now. I just couldn't believe it before.
[/quote]
no no no no no Arthur, GOONS wanted to hammer us with Reps. money, tech the works,
that's why this is continuing.
GOONS is why this theater hasn't concluded yet, they're offering people murderous reps that surpass resources in many cases. Like I said how is it bad to hold our ground until they bring us a better offer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='avenger218' timestamp='1301007285' post='2675196']
How are ya Tromp?
anyway as I said GOONS is hanging this up.
what self deserving alliance is going to subject themselves
to Hegemony era Reps when it would be less costly to fight on until
a better proposition is brought to the table?
[/quote]
I'm fine, thank you. Would have been better if we could have avoided this though.
Do answer, what's exactly hegemonic about white peace? (Seriously, there was a time when people begged for reps...)

[quote name='avenger218' timestamp='1301007460' post='2675200']
no it isn't, I hold no ill toward FOK, you guys entered honorably, your acting honorably on OWF but if you did give us white peace, would that entail peace with TOP/MK/Umbrella and GOONS aswell?
[/quote]
I can't answer that question, I'm out of the loop as I'm not in government these days anymore. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The Crimson King' timestamp='1301005480' post='2675148']
I believe they knew fairly well that refusing to agree to terms they considered unreasonable would come with the price tag of incurring (and dealing) further damage and found that to be more palatable than the other option available to them.
[/quote]

Well, as long as nobodies gonna claim its a surprise or anything, that'd just be silly >_>.

But we went over the same crap with CSN and DT. Despite lots of posturing the losing side tends to still pay up anyway, no matter how much they dislike the idea, eventually they dislike continued war even more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Timberland' timestamp='1301004224' post='2675115']
Who else is going to come in ? Unless they breach their surrender terms
[/quote]

NATO/Aurora Borealis are allowed to reenter as per term 2 of the peace agreement.

[quote]2. The parties of NV, GLOF, WAPA, Colossus, Quantum, AB, CD, TFD, NATO, TNG, TPC, and DDM agree to not re-enter on any point in the current conflict surrounding NpO or NPO. [b]These parties may defend against an alliance who DoWs (or equivalent) against their treatied allies after these terms are posted.[/b][/quote]

Rubber Ducky Division haven't fought yet and nither have Echelon.

So I count 4 alliances that could enter, I've not looked at the individual treties for non-chaining clauses and such, nor would I know if they are being asked to.

You should probably sack your coalitions opsec though if they thought no one could enter to counter this :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The Crimson King' timestamp='1301002816' post='2675065']
Keep asking what exactly? You said that GOONS has lowered their terms for Legion since they released top end. I simply stated that is not the case since we requested updated figures post release and they numbers given were the same. The only point I was making was that if goons chose to lower the reps figure to Legion since that time the top end release was not the impetus for such a move.

As far as not seeing the reps as bad, naturally you don't. I think it is a foregone conclusion that those individuals asking for reps do not see them in a negative light. Furthermore White peace was not on the table for some of the alliances being asked tech reps at any point. As you said, some of them never tried to broker terms prior to being offered what they were.

The 7+ thing was simply to make a generic point that these alliances are not even remotely close to the center of a conflict in which the centralized alliance is already at peace with no cash or tech reps demanded of them. It was not supposed to be a triple checked hard fact stat but rather a means to make an overall point. I am glad we could ignore the point made and instead argue the semantics.




Initial tech terms you requested:

TOOL: 30k

NADC 36k

CD: 30k (amongst other things)

TSI: 12k

Now far be it from me to do simple math, but I am pretty damn sure that adds up to 108k tech.

Source = you







See above. I never claimed that Legion could not negotiate the terms, but was rather dismissing the claim that Roq made that the 2 billion figure had already decreased or had been lowered due to release of top end. This was not the case.


Edit: spelling
[/quote]

Having been NADC's ally for quite some time, I can tell you that they are truly evil and deserve to pay all those reps. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LittleRena' timestamp='1301008144' post='2675218']
You should probably sack your coalitions opsec though if they thought no one could enter to counter this :unsure:
[/quote]
Damn, how could they have missed that?!

...

Yeah, you don't really believe it either. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LittleRena' timestamp='1301008144' post='2675218']
NATO/Aurora Borealis are allowed to reenter as per term 2 of the peace agreement.
[/quote]

Interesting view. Personally, I'd call that breaking terms, but that's just me reading term 1.

Anyways...

heya FOK - not much left up top for you to knock down, but have fun putting the lock on what's out of PM :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1301007041' post='2675189']
*Yawn*

We're here to support those we are friends with and allied to. It's nothing different from what other alliances do.

[/quote]


Sorry but at the very minimum you are lending your political and military strength to preemptive aggressive war and imposing large reps on people defending several fronts away from the original triggering mechanism for the whole conflict.

Since FOK never had to pay the toll for these same type of acts as part of tC I guess it was never driven into your skull that you are just as guilty as the people demanding reps if you are lending your strength to taking them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='avenger218' timestamp='1301007678' post='2675207']
no no no no no Arthur, GOONS wanted to hammer us with Reps. money, tech the works,
that's why this is continuing.
GOONS is why this theater hasn't concluded yet, they're offering people murderous reps that surpass resources in many cases. Like I said how is it bad to hold our ground until they bring us a better offer?
[/quote]

Are GOONS and NADC even fighting?

Perhaps I've missed something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1301009584' post='2675241']
Sorry but at the very minimum you are lending your political and military strength to preemptive aggressive war [...speculation...]
[/quote]
If that's the minimum, I'm fine with it. We're helping to get this front closed sooner, and I'm sure that in the end it'll have a satisfactory end for all those who are involved. Which you are not, by the way. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Kajdav' timestamp='1301000471' post='2675014']
Unless you were referring to us waffling? In which case, my point is proven. I was actually the one that organized the meeting, and from the second I started organizing it, we had decided to reject the terms. You assumed since we wanted to talk about your peace offer, we would be accepting it.

Poor assumption.
[/quote]

I know that I'm TOP.gov, but I would like to set that hat aside for a moment. I would like to address you as one ruler to another. Mano a mano, one man to another.

Okay?

This seriously must be the most retarded thing I've ever seen. I fought the Rebbillon, but you are making those colossal morons look like brain-gods. Asking for peace terms only so that you can summarily reject them can only result in harder feelings and higher terms. And that's the best case scenario. I mean let's be realistic. You're the one asking *us* for terms. Things can't be going that well.

If you're already on the ropes, why go out of your way to piss us off?

Edited by WalkerNinja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1301010189' post='2675250']
If that's the minimum, I'm fine with it. We're helping to get this front closed sooner, and I'm sure that in the end it'll have a satisfactory end for all those who are involved. Which you are not, by the way. :)
[/quote]


Someday your bill will come due, unless you are allowed to flop sides again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Myzebedeeistaken' timestamp='1301009539' post='2675240']
Interesting view. Personally, I'd call that breaking terms, but that's just me reading term 1.
[/quote]

It would if there was no DoW after the terms, the idea was for signitors to reenter if there was a fresh DoW on an ally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='AndrewHG' timestamp='1300997417' post='2674933']
I'd say the MK nation at war with me with 44 aid cycles was grasping at straws. But hey.
http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=396465
[/quote]

So is your point that you're beating him so bad that your allies are now sending him aid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1301010189' post='2675250']
If that's the minimum, I'm fine with it. We're helping to get this front closed sooner, and I'm sure that in the end it'll have a satisfactory end for all those who are involved. Which you are not, by the way. :)
[/quote]
You did just hit a treaty partner of ours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LittleRena' timestamp='1301010401' post='2675254']
It would if there was no DoW after the terms, the idea was for signitors to reenter if there was a fresh DoW on an ally.
[/quote]
Thats one viewpoint. I believe these terms were made so that that they can defend when their allies get attacked in a new war unrelated to the NPO or NpO war. This war is part of the current conflict surrounding the NPO conflict.

[quote]
2. The parties of NV, GLOF, WAPA, Colossus, Quantum, AB, CD, TFD, NATO, TNG, TPC, and DDM agree to not re-enter on any point in the current conflict surrounding NpO or NPO.[/quote]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...