Announcement from The Order of the Paradox

[Aeros]

Ouch, won't be much left of The Legion by the time this is done.

[Letum]

[quote name='trance addict' timestamp='1303136090' post='2692629']
I'll have to wait for my MK handler to answer that question for me.

Woof, woof!
[/quote]

It's too bad your handler isn't LUE, because then we would already know their stance on breaking surrender terms.

[trance addict]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1303136527' post='2692635']
It's too bad your handler isn't LUE, because then we would already know their stance on breaking surrender terms.
[/quote]


Why don't we just ask Carpe Diem?

[Branimir]

Although already explained, issue from our side is of trust as terms to which we must submit are specific. Moves like these, put to question possibility of giving basic trust for this to work specially after the nature of unprovoked original attack on us.

That is why response to this DoW are what they are, for you, the slower crew out there who dont/or dont wish to understand our concerns.

Attacking during the closure of peace negotiations after the most stickiest of terms were agreed on, is as such so delicate for us because to agree to the stickiest terms we managed to agree to give basic trust to our opportunistic attackers which now trust is rocked. Additionally for the victorious party, this move in large is unnecessary, rather just a gross overkill for some statistical gain of spreading damage. While they are entitled to call all their little figurines on the board which they control, it all of the sudden puts a rather done deal of peace negotiation into an all of a sudden more complicated position.

As somebody said how this will speed up negotiations, what a missed notion, this only complicates additionally a done deal.

DoWing during the finish phase of peace negotiations. You can put a check on that now, top.
Man, m I glad I dont have to deal with the opportunistic rabble from the opposite side. Much respect to the all governing peeps on my side of this war.

Edited April 18, 2011 by Branimir

[speakerwire]

[quote name='Aeros' timestamp='1303136459' post='2692634']
Ouch, won't be much left of The Legion by the time this is done.
[/quote]

there wasn't much to the legion in the first place.

[The Pansy]

[quote name='the rebel' timestamp='1303135893' post='2692627']
Ummm yes they went from "fighting" peripheral alliances to hitting an alliance in the main front of the conflict at the coming closure of the conflict.

MK brought SNAFU up on themselves through attacking TPF, so they are fighting for TPF if they went in with TPF using the oA part of the the treaty then you could say they're fighting for NPO, but they didnt...simple
[/quote]
If that is how you view it, then there is no changing your mind, I however view it very differently.
The fact still remains, MK activated its treaty with TOP and asked for assistance with Legion, if you like it or not, TOP was honour bound to grant that request, they did.

I can tell you TOP are very easy to deal with, and will, most likely not be looking for any financial gain out of this.
So the only issue with dragging out these peace negotiations is your dislike for them redeploying forces that are in play in the whole conflict.

Personally, I have dealt with numerous Ghost decs, and long chains to redeploy military onto my alliance before, it is part of war here, and has been used by both sides numerous times, If Top had brought IRON in with them, I could understand the outrage, but for a simple redeploy, you people are crazy.

[trance addict]

[quote name='Branimir' timestamp='1303136932' post='2692638']
Although already explained, issue from our side is of thrust as terms to which we must submit are specific. Moves like these, put to question possibility of giving basic thrust for this to work specially after the nature of unprovoked original attack on us.

That is why response to this DoW are what they are, for you, [b]the slower crew out there who dont/or dont wish to understand our concerns[/b].

Attacking during the closure of peace negotiations after the most stickiest of terms were agreed on, is as such so delicate for us because to agree to the stickiest terms we managed to agree to give basic thrust to our opportunistic attackers which now thrust is rocked. Additionally for the victorious party, this move in large is unnecessary, rather just a gross overkill for some statistical gain of spreading damage. While they are entitled to call all their little figurines on the board which they control, it all of the sudden puts a rather done deal of peace negotiation into an all of a sudden more complicated position.

As somebody said how this will speed up negotiations, what a missed notion, this only complicates additionally a done deal.

DoWing during the finish phase of peace negotiations. You can put a check on that now, top.
Man, m I glad I dont have to deal with the opportunistic rabble from the opposite side. Much respect to the all governing peeps on my side of this war.
[/quote]


The slower crew has a question. Why are you so concerned thrust?

[Branimir]

[quote name='The Pansy' timestamp='1303137173' post='2692641']I can tell you TOP are very easy to deal with, and will, most likely not be looking for any financial gain out of this.[/quote]
The problem or focus of it, is not on top attitudes, but rather of the ones that pulled the leash to call them in. They are the ones important here, also leading the brunt of talks of peace as I take it.

While this may seem like a simple "redeploy" or whatever to you, it is done in such a moment and manner that it raises concern among those that need to submit to some rather interesting terms and which were originally only attacked, opportunistically in a power play. So, as already said, a done deal of peace negotiations finishing after hump has been passed, put into a different momentum.

After 14 pages though, our concerns though have been made clear. Those that wish to understand them will, those that wish not to, will not. I dont want to spend my time in trying to convince people of anything, everybody can take from this all what they wish. Just wanted to express my p.o.v. of this, in addition to what was already said.

So yeah, good day all. Leaders, foot soldiers, and puppies.

[quote name='trance addict' timestamp='1303137392' post='2692643']
The slower crew has a question. Why are you so concerned thrust?
[/quote]
First of all I apologies for the misspell, English sometimes not good for I

Problem of trust, rather then thrust, is that will everything go as negotiated or will there be some "issues" that could put the negotiated deal into changed parameters post fact, against which the defeated party, namely us, are defenseless against once things are put into motion.

Edited April 18, 2011 by Branimir

[MitchellBade]

Another day, another lolDoW.

But in all seriousness, I don't know why people keep complaining about Doomhouse's actions, its quite clear that there is no rationale behind their motives rather than 'burn baby burn'. This attention being given is just more pleasure for these folks to feast upon. So let them keep pushing their new Hegemony, eventually Karma will take its course

oh yeah and obligatory lolTOPlapdogstoolspuppetsetc

Edited April 18, 2011 by MitchellBade

[tamerlane]

[quote name='Branimir' timestamp='1303137902' post='2692644']

Problem of trust, rather then thrust, is that will everything go as negotiated or will there be some "issues" that could put the negotiated deal into changed parameters against which once the terms are expected the defeated party, namely us, are defenseless against.
[/quote]

What kind of sick alliance would do such a monstrous thing?!

Edited April 18, 2011 by tamerlane

[Letum]

[quote name='tamerlane' timestamp='1303138626' post='2692647']
What kind of sick alliance would do such a monstrous thing?!
[/quote]

There are all kinds of alliances out there. I heard there's one that eats [i]babies[/i].

[tamerlane]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1303138779' post='2692648']
There are all kinds of alliances out there. I heard there's one that eats [i]babies[/i].
[/quote]

I don't want my kids growing up in world as sick and demented as this one.

[Daimos]

This DOW is a win for both sides who favored continued warfare.

[Vladimir Stukov II]

This is hilarious. We owe nothing to your side, Legion. Our allies requested us to come in and we obliged. To even compare this to starting a new war against our allies direct wishes shows how truly idiotic most of you are.

[Louis Balfour]

TOP, I like you more and more!

[Beefspari]

I like how the coalition has been goofing off and tweaking peace terms and generally not accepting stuff for months. Making fun of our side, making public announcements about how you won't accept our terms, and trying to talk down any terms we offer. Then as soon as TOP declares it's all [i]"What the hell, we were right on the verge of peace you monsters!"[/i]
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisfffL6.jpg[/img]

[Ryan Greenberg]

[quote name='Vladimir Stukov II' timestamp='1303140605' post='2692653']
This is hilarious. We owe nothing to your side, Legion. Our allies requested us to come in and we obliged. To even compare this to starting a new war against our allies direct wishes shows how truly idiotic most of you are.
[/quote]
Why people are even criticizing MK requesting help from a MDoAP partner is ludacris. It doesn't matter that this alliance is fighting all of CnG already, MK needed help with this alliance and their allies gave it to them.

Edited April 18, 2011 by Ryan Greenberg

[xoindotnler]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1303140911' post='2692655']
I like how the coalition has been goofing off and tweaking peace terms and generally not accepting stuff for months.
[/quote]
I like how it needs to be told over and over again, WE GET IT AFTER 10 FREAKING PAGES.

Edited April 18, 2011 by xoindotnler

[Sarmatian Empire]

Meh it happens. Did it really take all of CnG to smash TCU, tLW, FAR, and UINE?(i think thats it right?) Smaller alliances up against powers like Athens, it probably wasnt needed, but it ensured the victory didnt? MK is simply bringing more numbers on their side in a game that is based around numbers. Timing sucks and all with peace talks going on(I guess?) But here is a pro-tip, if you havent signed off on the peace deal...your still at war.

[Blue Lightning]

I don't understand the big fuss. If you want to sign off on the peace deal that is apparently so close to being done then do so. I expect TOP'll be happy to offer Legion white-peace, as we have done with all our opponents throughout the war. Then we can all go home and dry our tears.

[feardaram]

I really don't see the issue. No matter how close we really were/are to peace, the war is still going on. TOP's DOW just fills a few empty slots at lower levels and slightly eases the burden on lower level nations. Stop making this out to be some huge DOW that will instantly put Legion's already horrendous army in ruins. Although I see the benefit in us getting peace, I have to believe the other side wants/needs it more. If anything, this gives you all additional incentive to agree to terms, actually sign, and get this over with. The impact this DOW has is largely in Legion's hands.

[Vladimir Stukov II]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' timestamp='1303142231' post='2692662']
I don't understand the big fuss. If you want to sign off on the peace deal that is apparently so close to being done then do so. I expect TOP'll be happy to offer Legion white-peace, as we have done with all our opponents throughout the war. Then we can all go home and dry our tears.
[/quote]

Stop making so much sense.

[Drai]

[quote name='xoindotnler' timestamp='1303141204' post='2692657']
I like how it needs to be told over and over again, WE GET IT AFTER 10 FREAKING PAGES.
[/quote]
You can't say that and then expect that the continued responses we've been getting have been completely justified. If one side's going to bring up the same argument, the other will bring up the same response. Personally I think both sides should just stop the banter and get some terms signed or keep slugging it out on the battlefield.

Edited April 18, 2011 by Drai

[Buds The Man]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1303098038' post='2692335']
By all means, defend your ally.
[/quote]

I LOLED


[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1303102648' post='2692440']
Perhaps you should all work in a faster manner.
[/quote]
I loled again considering TOP SPEED and all

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1303106024' post='2692467']
Oh, you mean refused the absurd offers your side has been coming forth with? The offers they themselves admit were never meant to be accepted in the first place? Yes, shame on them!

Our coalition has been timely in all of our responses and counter-offers to proposed terms, it is YOUR side that is directly responsible for the length of time this so-called "peace" process has been dragged out.


On a related note, this goes for all of you idiots setting up straw-men, saying that "this is totally nothing like NPO, we don't have to stop fighting because of talks!!!1."

This is exactly like NPO in Karma. There was no fighting between Legion and TOP, the talks were being finalized, and you just weren't cool with the prospect of peace so you jumped in and opened up a new war. Legion and TOP were not at war, now they are, ergo, new war. Not a terribly difficult concept.
[/quote]
I think this has been covered a couple of times but i still want to throw my .02 at it. Attacking when there is no war going on AT ALL /= attacking and honoring a request from an ally whom you have allready rolled to war with. The situations are totally different. This is nothing but a cheap attempt to hammer TOP and really falls way short.

[quote name='SADeki' timestamp='1303107199' post='2692483']
I'm amazed at how fast the Hopeless coalition is able to shift gears. Were you not just saying, mere days ago, that you were content to let these wars drag on forever and that we'd never be able to get you to quit short of white peace? Now that ToP is joining in on the fun, we're big, mean, and evil for hitting you just as you were about to agree with our terms?

Besides, I don't see why, if you were really going to declare peace with terms agreeable to both sides as soon as you were capable, why this matters at all. All this means is that your lapdog Legion is going to take a few more hits if you keep waffling.



You want to know the difference between Your AA and mine is?

[b]Goons actually fought the dogpile, oh and we won too.[/b]



It's projection. I'm laughing at the fact that Legion and Invitica of all alliances are calling you guys lapdogs.
[/quote]
GOONS didnt win crap with out DH support Goons would be a smoking ruin. Dont claim victory solely in GOONS name as that so far from the truth its pathetic. The only way goons recovers from this is by that stupid amount of reps comming in and by the grace and good will of their allies.

[quote name='mythicknight' timestamp='1303119672' post='2692549']
I approve.
[/quote]
SHHHHH opsec dammit
I say DR QUACK QUACK QUACK i repeat QUACK QUACK QUACK

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1303121337' post='2692553']
I'm not sure why you guys wrote into the treaty that if either alliance starts a war, the other doesn't need to defend them from wars resulting from it if you planned to treat it like a MDAP regardless and act like you have a treaty forcing you to assist MK in every way possible this war. You guys are fighting this war because you want to, all the requests you're filing for MK on who to declare on you're doing optionally to help the side who already has a huge advantage. Even though some allies you've had longer than MK, such IRON are still in Duck Roll who has a member alliance who was attacked by MK this war.

Nice choice of sides, I'm sure if you didn't assist the side who already has had a huge advantage this entire war by declaring on the alliances on the losing side who are barely hanging in you would be called cowards.

Never thought I would say this, but I miss Crymson being in charge of TOP. He was a good leader.
[/quote]
IF IRON would have come in to the war you may have had a point but they didnt, neither did any other DR signatory. Please read that document as well, as you will find no clause what so ever that obligates any signatory to fight for the other. Not only that but your talking about minimum one chain removed AA where MK is directly tied to TOP so once again your argument holds little water. TOP has been more than considerate in the handling of this war to all allies so those who say they are with out honor are way off.

[quote name='the rebel' timestamp='1303135893' post='2692627']
Ummm yes they went from "fighting" peripheral alliances to hitting an alliance in the main front of the conflict at the coming closure of the conflict.

MK brought SNAFU up on themselves through attacking TPF, so they are fighting for TPF if they went in with TPF using the oA part of the the treaty then you could say they're fighting for NPO, but they didnt...simple
[/quote]
Really i would disagree SNAFU is shedding NS FROM TOP TO bottom for the last couple of months while most MAIN allies TOP tiers sat in pm. Your appreciation of my allies sacrifice on your behalf id duely noted. Your arguement is one of the reasons why Valhalla no longer signs MADPs as it basically takes away our allies choice of entering a war or not. An attack on NPO is the same as an attack on TPF due to the MADP they hold so yes they are defending NPO in this case as that treaty makes it so. Good to see the BR still as arrogant as ever thumbing there nose at those who have come to their aid.

How about this both sides get to the table tonight sign the damn agreement then this stupidity will be over as it should have been long ago.

Edited April 18, 2011 by Buds The Man

[SADeki]

[quote name='Branimir' timestamp='1303136932' post='2692638']
Although already explained, issue from our side is of trust as terms to which we must submit are specific. Moves like these, put to question possibility of giving basic trust for this to work specially after the nature of unprovoked original attack on us.
[/quote]

I still don't get why you are claiming that we are untrustworthy because of this. We may have agreed on the base terms of peace, but as long as the agreement isn't signed, we're still at war and will act as such.

The worst you can even attempt to argue is that we're putting the boots to legion to give an incentive to stop holding up the peace process. Honestly though, who [i]wouldn't[/i] want to hit legion?