Open Invitation from the SuperFriends

[Gibsonator21]

[quote name='commander thrawn' timestamp='1312438601' post='2771595']
What do you all think about Asgaard as an alliance?
[/quote]
We don't talk about Asgaard, really, so all I can give is my personal opinion. And I rather like you guys.

[quote name='King Xander the Only' timestamp='1312439110' post='2771598']
Which alliance would you most like to see removed from PB?
[/quote]

Non Grata.

[quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1312439589' post='2771604']
The common perception is that last war didn't turn out to well for SF. Is there anything about that war that you, as a bloc, would have done differently?
[/quote]
This is more my opinion, but I wouldn't change anything that was done. It's all a learning experience, and it's something we'll keep with us forever. If the situation were to arise again, I'm sure things would be done differently. How CSN handled negotiations this past war, for instance, I would absolutely do those differently if that situation ever happens again.

So change? No. Do differently in the future? Yeah.

[Alterego]

[quote name='Mixoux' timestamp='1312441961' post='2771640']
I don't believe [i]any[/i] alliance can disband against its will. You either choose to keep fighting/die off from inactivity or disband, nobody forces your AA to delete. Alliances folded under much shorter wars in 2007 than today, but the principle is the same.
[/quote]

You can tell an alliance unless they disband there will be no peace for its members or as Xiphosis said no terms are offered. Blaming an alliance for disbanding under those conditions and not the ones making the demand is silly. It is possible to put someone is a position where disbandment is the only realistic choice. In that case the alliance who made the demand forced disbandment upon them.

Edited August 4, 2011 by Alterego

[Xiphosis]

[quote name='Salmia' timestamp='1312442155' post='2771643']
Why do you dislike TOP? [/quote]

Aside from the sheer vitriol they aim our way in every thread and have done for months on end now? It goes back to Karma. TOP stymied the Karma coalition itself as much as possible, their involvement was grudging, and it showed. Beyond that, the Gremlins Conclave [Tri] and Crymson made an agreement that IRON would receive white peace. A member of that conclave - LiquidMercury - then assigned FARK and RoK to fight IRON and strong-armed them when they refused to honor that deal - which they were never included in.

Excuse me if I never want those individuals covering my back in another war. Karma was a while ago, but Crymson will be intimately involved with TOP so long as there is a TOP and he plays. Jenko, much as he was a good guy, involved him in the last war as well organizing TOP's efforts, so I feel the caution is warranted.

[quote]To be less serious - pie or cake?[/quote]

Personally? Ice cream.

[quote]Pirates or ninjas? [/quote]

Pirates. Cutlass' and cannons.

[quote]Also to give a tougher question - what do you think this thread will do? Do you think it will change people's minds if they're fabricating things as you say they are?[/quote]

With any luck it demolishes some of the outright lies and makes more clear on a massive scale why we did what we did, when we did. Never know, though.

[Mixoux]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1312441950' post='2771638']
I have some questions, first being:

The facts described in OP frequently happen in all alliances since, well, ever. So why SF decided to create this thread just now?[/quote]

Because there's been quite a bit of false stories floating around lately that happen to involve us. I've always been a fan of transparency - no use beating around the bush, I'd rather the truth be out there, for good and bad.


[quote]
SF leaders believe that the reason that VE used as a [i]casus belli[/i] against NpO were enough to cause a global war or that the problems could had been fixed if VE had tried diplomacy and that they chose not to because PB were looking for a excuse to hit NpO? [/quote]

We believed VE's evidence was solid, what happened after was their business to pursue. Personally I'd have preferred it didn't turn into what it did, but given the multitude of slip-ups that Polar had made in the months beforehand it was going to happen one way or another.

[quote]
What's SF opinion about the fixation that TOP has toward Polaris?[/quote]

Personally? I like it. The world needs its core grudges, even if they can feel a bit antiquated.

[quote]
I think is common sense that SF/Mj see each other as enemies, do you believe that a war between those to blocs is inevitable? [/quote]

Given the propaganda on both sides since Mj's inception, yes.

[quote]
Based on Xiphosis posts in this thread, SF believes that Ardus is actively searching a way to attack and destroy SF?[/quote]

Who isn't by now?

[Xiphosis]

Some of the ones I missed.

[quote name='Left_Behind' timestamp='1312438697' post='2771596']
Would SF survive a curb stomp?
[/quote]

Hard to say. A curb stomp? Probably. An eternal war? Don't know till it happens.

[quote]For Xiph:
If you had to choose between TOP and NPO to defend in a war, who would you choose and why?[/quote]

Eh. Frankly, I'd go join GPA. Screw both of those options.

[quote]You hold the belief that disbanding should be an option of inter-alliance conflicts because it rises the bar in alliances and prevents '!@#$%*' alliances to exist because it makes people be more careful and mindful of their nation building and kills laziness. My question is thus the following, do you believe that you have people supporting that belief and if so, would you implement it if possible or would be it a position that you wouldn't force on people?[/quote]

You mean would I push disbandment without any support for the idea anywhere? No, I think that's pretty obvious. The principle isn't worth sacrificing every ally you have. Still think it's a solid concept and position, though.

[quote]What is SF's common perception of NPO as an alliance these days?[/quote]

Again not something we talk about. Personally, I think their tactic is to have Mary seat fill and be nonthreatening while Brehon manipulates them into a better position. A good tactic, doesn't make me like them more though.

[quote]What is SF's general opinion on the current political landscape? [/quote]

"Messy."

[Saniiro Matsudaira]

Seeing as the alliance was treatied to half of SF at the time, what was GOD's general reaction when they found out that SOS was going to war against NsO?

[Liz Girard]

[quote name='Rudolph' timestamp='1312440547' post='2771617']
I know you guys will probably get some fairly typical questions, so I'll try to avoid asking the same.


For Liz:
What are your thoughts surrounding the whole DT/CSN fiasco and would you perhaps do or say differently when looking back?
and lastly, how does it feel having a pet as your MoFA?

General:
What is SF's common perception of NPO as an alliance these days?
What is SF's general opinion on the current political landscape?
[/quote]

Surrounding the DT/CSN fiasco, I wish I'd been in more of a position of power and decision making then. Goose, lord love him, was going through an inactive phase at the time and it made decision making brutal. I'd have like there to have been communication between the two alliances, I think that would have solved a lot of issues early on. We always came to the table with a unified decision, it was hard to make compromises and discussion with DT though, Bud was very helpful in that sense and when he mediated for DT, things came together quite swimmingly.
Gibs is the best, and not a pet. He probably gives me the hardest times when I'm making judgement calls and i'm always threatening to fire him

NPO, honestly, I'm personally a fan. They've got their $@#^ together and they're out there talking to people. Brehon's a good guy. Mary - obligatory Roll Tide, Red is always fun. We've had good, positive relations with them at CSN and I value what they bring to the table. It's a new face with some of the old strong ideals.
General opinion on the current political landscape.... hmmm, well. It seems like a power grab lately. It's of course an outsiders perspective but I know that when we make treaties, we make them because we know that alliance and its leadership inside and out, not because we're looking for numbers and meatshields.

[Mixoux]

[quote name='Saniiro Matsudaira' timestamp='1312443114' post='2771652']
Seeing as the alliance was treatied to half of SF at the time, what was GOD's general reaction when they found out that SOS was going to war against NsO?
[/quote]

"I can't believe there is going to be a cluster$%&@ over anime."

Edited August 4, 2011 by Mixoux

[Crymson]

[quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1312438255' post='2771589']
Don't die.
[/quote]

Perhaps you should have learned to look to the long term. This would have been a good skill for you to have developed two years ago.

[quote]
No, there's several leaders I specifically don't like though. TimLee, Chefjoe and Ardus jump to mind. The former two hate me equally, for their own reasons [false and true alike] and the latter for spreading some of the absolute fabrications that lead to this topic.
[/quote]

Ah, an accusation of fabrications from one of the masters of fabricated claims. We're still waiting on that evidence that we threatened your allies in Karma in order to get peace for IRON. We've now been waiting for two years, during which time you and your ambassadors have persistently refused to give us that evidence. Of course, we're aware that said refusal makes perfect sense, because you haven't actually got any. Evidence for an event that never happened is generally hard to come by.

I believe your most recent fabricated claim concerning us is that the Gramlins tried to make the cancellation of our treaty with MK a condition of their agreement to participate in PF. I'd say you're getting rusty, as there's nothing to be gained by making that claim. As with every instance in which you've opened your mouth recently, all it succeeded in doing was reinforcing the already-abundantly obvious fact that you're an incompetent ass.

[quote]
There is no alliance right now that's so full of people I dislike that I'd go so far as to say I hate the entire AA. TOP comes close, I guess.
[/quote]

See above. Thanks for sending us Lionheart as a diplomat, though. He's a nice fellow.

Edited August 4, 2011 by Crymson

[Salmia]

What do you think are the defining qualities of SF?
What principles do you think define each of your alliances?

[Crymson]

[quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1312442643' post='2771649']
Aside from the sheer vitriol they aim our way in every thread and have done for months on end now?[/quote]

You've a deficiency in your ability to accept responsibility for the consequences of your actions, else perhaps you'd understand that harassing us and threatening us for years with no reason at all is likely to generate a certain amount of dislike for you. You ought to join Polar; you'd fit right in.

Please write the following 100 times on the chalkboard: [i]"Ceasing to be a total ass because I've lost all political capital does not entitle me to automatic forgiveness."[/i]

[quote]
It goes back to Karma. TOP stymied the Karma coalition itself as much as possible, their involvement was grudging, and it showed. Beyond that, the Gremlins Conclave [Tri] and Crymson made an agreement that IRON would receive white peace. A member of that conclave - LiquidMercury - then assigned FARK and RoK to fight IRON and strong-armed them when they refused to honor that deal - which they were never included in.
[/quote]

There it is! Also, you've forgotten the aforementioned claim that we threatened your allies. You're losing your touch, it seems!

Please tender proof. Note: "Xiphosis said so" does not apply.

[quote]
Excuse me if I never want those individuals covering my back in another war. Karma was a while ago, but Crymson will be intimately involved with TOP so long as there is a TOP and he plays. Jenko, much as he was a good guy, involved him in the last war as well organizing TOP's efforts, so I feel the caution is warranted.
[/quote]

Don't forget: I also control IRON! Back me up on this one, NAH!

Edited August 4, 2011 by Crymson

[Mixoux]

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1312443328' post='2771657']
Ah, an accusation of fabrications from one of the masters of fabricated claims. We're still waiting on that evidence that we threatened your allies in Karma in order to get peace for IRON. We've now been waiting for two years, during which time you and your ambassadors have persistently refused to give us that evidence. Of course, we're aware that said refusal makes perfect sense, because you haven't actually got any. Evidence for an event that never happened is generally hard to come by.
[/quote]

We posted these in your embassy on our forums a long time ago, and had a fairly good discussion out of it actually with Bodvar and Feanor.

[quote]

12:14am (&SomeGuy[Sleep]) TOP's going to roll anyone who jumps on our freinds.
12:14am (&SomeGuy[Sleep]) So knock it off.
12:17am (&SomeGuy[Sleep]) We have defensive obligations to IRON and MCXA.
12:17am (&SomeGuy[Sleep]) We don't with Sparta.

[2009-04-30 14:47:00] <SomeGuy[TOP]> You guys better start pulling your !@#$ together, or Daddy's going to turn around and take charge of the Playpen, and I don't just mean TOP lads
[/quote]

[Gibsonator21]

[quote name='Salmia' timestamp='1312443531' post='2771659']
What do you think are the defining qualities of SF?
What principles do you think define each of your alliances?
[/quote]
I think it's that we will always stand up for each other, no matter what. We're all here until the end.

For CSN, it's that we speak our minds. We say what we want, when we want. Sometimes that isn't a good thing, but, as Liz says, "we don't sugarcoat !@#$, what you see is what you !@#$@#$ get." We'll stick to what we say.

Edited August 4, 2011 by Gibsonator21

[Xiphosis]

[quote name='Saniiro Matsudaira' timestamp='1312443114' post='2771652']
Seeing as the alliance was treatied to half of SF at the time, what was GOD's general reaction when they found out that SOS was going to war against NsO?
[/quote]

Looking at it without any bias against NsO or SOS for being 'anime themed', I felt like SOS had enough there to be angry with, and war you. The banned members for having multis in SOS [looked a lot like spying], the poaching [although frankly, we initially heard 10 members poached - it was only after the war that it was corrected] and so on. General policy for blocs is to ignore and tell their smaller allies not to do x y and z, even if put in the same situation, GOD would've gone to war over it. But considering we would've, I saw no problem with SOS doing it. Not being a big name or in a big bloc doesn't make your grievances less valid magically.

[quote]Ah, an accusation of fabrications from one of the masters of fabricated claims. We're still waiting on that evidence that we threatened your allies in Karma in order to get peace for IRON. We've now been waiting for two years, during which time you and your ambassadors have persistently refused to give us that evidence. Of course, we're aware that said refusal makes perfect sense, because you haven't actually got any. Evidence for an event that never happened is generally hard to come by.[/quote]

My ambassadors, being rank and file GOD, aren't privy to it. The logs were never posted on SF by FARK and RoK, but the thing of it is? Even if I can't trot logs of you strong arming them out here and show everyone it; I still know it happened. When your blocmates are saying "TOP's threatening to enter against us if we don't get rid of our terms for IRON, they say they had a deal with them" - when in separate arguments since then, BobJanova has confirmed that such a deal was made by Gre, TOP and IRON, I don't need logs. That's multiple first-hand accounts - from allies, and nonallies.

[quote]I believe your most recent fabricated claim concerning us is that the Gramlins tried to make the cancellation of our treaty with MK a condition of their agreement to participate in PF. [/quote]

Really? I would absolutely kill to know who claimed I said that to them, because I never said anything of the sort. Wanna lay down some logs, or are you just throwing that out to throw it out there?

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1312437546' post='2771575']
What would you say are the top three reasons people might dislike your bloc.

What would you say are the top five reasons people might dislike your individual alliance.
[/quote]
Lately? Let's see.

CSN demanding reps from Dark Templar just in general is probably up there. Actually, this is a pretty good example of how information flow can exacerbate an on-going situation until a problem arising from poor decisions can turn into a major fiasco. I'm sure most people know what happened by now, but I'll stick in a summary for interested parties. CSN was fighting LoSS in the previous war, and DT declared war upon Legacy, CSN's partner, in defense of LoSS, citing their ODP. After a relatively short time, DT went to them looking for peace. Now, Goose saw the short fight, use of an ODP and the fact that peace was being sought without LoSS, and interpreted that to mean DT was using the war as an excuse to give them a couple licks and walk away. Whether or not you agree with the validity of this interpretation, that is how he saw things and what lead to the next step. Wanting to make sure that DT either stuck around to defend the alliance they declared in defense of, or was punished for taking actions he viewed as opportunistic, Goose set a fairly stringent set of reparations as a requirement for early peace.

Now, here's the major reason this isn't a great idea: Once anyone has been placed in that position, the first thing they do is try to get some support to get terms removed. As soon as allies and the general public are involved, though, things flip around, because now any slack in the terms is not because that's what CSN wanted or planned, it's "because they were forced." So what has effectively happened by this point is that they've placed themselves in a situation where they cannot gain any credit for lowering the terms, and will be perceived as weak for caving to pressure if they do, even if they had previously intended to. This lead to digging in behind terms they hadn't initially planned on digging in behind. This combined with poor handling of a terrible situation lead to it becoming the utter disaster that whole mess was, and instantly turned CSN from an unassuming, quiet alliance into a boogeyman in public opinion.

Second, though these aren't in any particular order, is Xiph, just in general. He has very specific beliefs regarding what is and isn't good for global politics, and they run counter to a lot of popular thinking. He's also fairly uncompromising in his beliefs, which is considered a virtue until you meet someone who actually behaves this way and doesn't agree with you. Then it becomes about the worst sin you can commit. This isn't to say that a fair number of people are "wrong" to dislike Xiphosis. In the few cases where I genuinely dislike someone, their beliefs and actions are generally the major contributors, and Xiph's managed to upset a large number of people with his history.

That said, I need to be fair to him and point out that his widespread unpopularity has resulted in him getting blamed for a lot of things he didn't actually do. The aforementioned DT issue, for instance, resulted in a widespread meme that CSN was GOD's puppet despite Xiph having very minimal input in that entire situation. He even gets blamed for things he worked against. He's mentioned the SOS-NsO incident already, and I've even seen him get pinned for part of this past war despite the fact that he actually worked harder than anyone I'm currently aware of to prevent it from happening for months in advance.

I'd finally put SF's handling of Mjolnir's formation down. The parting with Ragnarok was not exactly a pleasant one in most respects, and as has been pointed out above, DT doesn't have a very favorable opinion of us. I'm sure it's also apparent from the thread by now that NoR doesn't contain our biggest fans either. Overall, we were reacting to a former brother in arms hanging out with people who didn't especially like us, and it was painful. We certainly didn't have our best moment there. I did go on Ragnarok's forum fairly soon after and offer my apologies, but I don't think that excuses the behavior in the first place.


Ok, five reasons to dislike my alliance. This will be interesting, and probably harder since I have to work with a quarter of the possible material.

Well, we're allied to SOS Brigade, who a lot of people dislike. As far as I can tell, this is a combination of people bumping heads with SOS and it just being trendy to hate on them. Anyway, I've seen myself getting blamed for the SOS-NsO thing, which is probably a reason. I suppose I should address what I did and did not actually do during that. First, I didn't personally work very hard toward getting things resolved. Usually, I'm a go-to person for negotiations, but a combination of RL (minor contributor) and the fact that I was feeling rather burned by a lot of old friends at the time and was staying away from dealing with too much conflict in CN meant that I let other people do most of the heavy lifting with regard to finding a resolution. Second, I told SOS that, for a fairly wide variety of reasons, we wouldn't be able to go in offensively with them if they declared war. Finally, I told them that in the event of a war, we [i]would[/I] defend them if they got hit.

I imagine I could take some flak for that. There are a fairly large number of people who believe that you shouldn't support your allies under various circumstances. I disagree with these people. When I make a commitment to a defensive relationship, I take that seriously. If the people in question gave support when other people were treating us like dicks, it majorly amplifies that commitment. I won't let people who have committed to defending me out to dry because they are unpopular. It's cowardly and breaks the trust those people place in you. For those who really know me, that is a Big Deal(tm).

Next, we have a long history with MK. It goes back a few years and covers a number of incidents. I wouldn't label us as enemies, simply because I don't think either side cares [I]that[/I] much, but at a membership level we do not get a long. And I'd probably say largely on a gov level. MK is fairly popular alliance most of the time, and they're good at expressing their opinions. I'd say that probably doesn't do us any favors.

Then we have the Tilton mess. After our forums were hacked, it took a while to make any diplomatic progress. We believed we had strong evidence regarding the identity of the hacker, but were blocked from acting on it for a number of months. The people blocking us were very well intentioned, but some of our members didn't react well to it. I'd say that's probably a source of dislike.

Fourth, we have a number of allies besides SOS that aren't popular. I'd elaborate but I sort of already did and this post is already getting long.

Finally, a number of people were upset when we canceled our VE treaty. That was largely born out of issues with the war as a whole, and while I think those issues were all valid, I'm a bit of the opinion that canceling may have been premature, and we should have at least put some more distance between us and events before making the decision. VE was always a good ally, and while I certainly don't think we were hanging them out to dry in any sense that would make sense regarding their position, it does bother me a bit in retrospect, so I can understand them being upset. Can't do much about that now, though.


Edit: It's 4 am and I wrote the wrong alliance

Edited August 4, 2011 by Delta1212

[WorldConqueror]

Excuse me but I believe you missed my questions.

[Xiphosis]

[quote name='Salmia' timestamp='1312443531' post='2771659']
What do you think are the defining qualities of SF?[/quote]

Probably being fairly open and comfortable with one another [not that uncommon for blocs not to be, actually] and not wavering away from principles for convenience sake.

[quote]What principles do you think define each of your alliances?[/quote]

GOD? Hell I can sum that up pretty easily; we do what we think is right, at the time, regardless of how it'll 'play' - conscious of the fact that it makes us enemies, but preferring to play in that way rather than to plod along like survivalist sheep.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Mixoux' timestamp='1312443915' post='2771662']
We posted these in your embassy on our forums a long time ago, and had a fairly good discussion out of it actually with Bodvar and Feanor.
[/quote]

You also posted them on the OWF in December, and you got an explanation from SomeGuy as to how they were completely irrelevant to your accusations. I'll go over this in detail for the benefit of others; you won't learn anything new, because it's already been told to you.

[quote]
12:14am (&SomeGuy[Sleep]) TOP's going to roll anyone who jumps on our freinds.
12:14am (&SomeGuy[Sleep]) So knock it off.
12:17am (&SomeGuy[Sleep]) We have defensive obligations to IRON and MCXA.
12:17am (&SomeGuy[Sleep]) We don't with Sparta.
[/quote]

... meant that anyone further who attacks IRON or MCXA may need to answer to TOP. This was said well after IRON had been attacked.

[quote]
[2009-04-30 14:47:00] <SomeGuy[TOP]> You guys better start pulling your !@#$ together, or Daddy's going to turn around and take charge of the Playpen, and I don't just mean TOP lads[/quote]

... a comment for which SomeGuy publicly apologized the next day in the Karma gov IRC channel, and which, as well, did not pertain to ending the war with IRON.

F for effort, Mixoux.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1312444205' post='2771665']
My ambassadors, being rank and file GOD, aren't privy to it. The logs were never posted on SF by FARK and RoK, but the thing of it is? Even if I can't trot logs of you strong arming them out here and show everyone it; I still know it happened. When your blocmates are saying "TOP's threatening to enter against us if we don't get rid of our terms for IRON, they say they had a deal with them" - when in separate arguments since then, BobJanova has confirmed that such a deal was made by Gre, TOP and IRON, I don't need logs. That's multiple first-hand accounts - from allies, and nonallies.[/quote]

"I still know it happened." Well, from you, Xiphosis, that golly sure means everything! Woohoo!

As for your claims about Bob, I'd sure love to hear him confirm them here. Unfortunately, that won't happen. Instead, he'll give the real story, and you'll accuse him of lacking credibility. The wind shall go on blowing, children being born and the elderly dying, the sun setting and rising, and hell will freeze over before you muster up the manhood to admit that you don't actually have any hard evidence at all.

Edited August 4, 2011 by Crymson

[Delta1212]

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1312444404' post='2771667']
Excuse me but I believe you missed my questions.
[/quote]
I'll edit them into this post as I find them, assuming there are multiple ones.

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1312441977' post='2771641']
Whose idea was this?

Doesn't an attempt like this contradict CSN's oft-repeated mantra that if you don't like them, you obviously just haven't taken the time to [i]really[/i] get to know them and thus they don't care?

Do you feel like the SF alliances individual bad qualities have combined to create a perfect storm of hate directed at the bloc as a whole?
[/quote]
I think it was Xiph's.

It's an opportunity to really get to know them. :lol:

I feel like a variety of things, including the fact that most of us feel like we got burned by events in the last war caused us, certainly me, to drop the ball on the political game. This lead to actions that didn't help us, and opened up a good opportunity for various people who don't want to be isolated to paint a nice big target on our backs. I'd say most hate is our own fault at this point, but it is interesting to see who is casting the stones, all things considered. That is, incidentally, not a call back to "as bad as us" so much as it is an observation that I really [I]do[/I] find the identities of some of the people casting stones to be interesting for all sorts of reasons.

Edited August 4, 2011 by Delta1212

[erikz]

To all leaders: what are your thoughs on NG? Just be frank and open about it.
Also, where do you see PB going? There's a lot of speculations about PB as a unified entity and I'm wondering what you guys think about it.

[Denial]

[quote name='ShadowDragon' timestamp='1312437202' post='2771572']
As information gets passed around, it gets twisted and spun by small degrees. Each person conveys it with their own emphasis, their own interpretations and colored by their own set of personal beliefs.
[/quote]
That's probably the best summation of Super Friends' foreign policy I've seen in a while.

[Xiphosis]

[quote]"I still know it happened." Well, from you, Xiphosis, that golly sure means everything! Woohoo!

As for your claims about Bob, I'd sure love to hear him confirm them here. Unfortunately, that won't happen. Instead, he'll give the real story, and you'll accuse him of lacking credibility. The wind shall go on blowing, children being born and the elderly dying, the sun setting and rising, and hell will freeze over before you muster up the manhood to admit that you don't actually have any hard evidence at all.[/quote]

[quote]Session Start: Fri Apr 24 10:28:01 2009
Session Ident: BobJanova{away}
01[10:28] <away_srqt[ria]> you there?
[10:31] <BobJanova{away}> Yeah
01[10:31] <away_srqt[ria]> cool
01[10:31] <away_srqt[ria]> so whats up with cutting a deal with IRON and not talking to RoK or FARK about it first?
[10:32] <BobJanova{away}> Talk to Chill
[10:32] <BobJanova{away}> >.>
01[10:32] <away_srqt[ria]> :v
01[10:32] <away_srqt[ria]> I like you better
[10:32] <BobJanova{away}> I assumed he'd talked to Fark about it tbh
01[10:33] <away_srqt[ria]> nope they didn't find out till after the fact
01[10:33] <away_srqt[ria]> RoK is slightly less than ahppy about it
[10:33] <BobJanova{away}> What we did is we agreed on the plan in the afternoon (euro time) yesterday, I assumed that Chill would check it out with at least Fark before going to Iron
[10:34] <BobJanova{away}> RoK we didn't know would be the target so i can understand how he didn't talk to them
01[10:34] <away_srqt[ria]> yeah but if he talked to at least FRAK RoK would have known and it wouldnt be an issue
01[10:35] <away_srqt[ria]> if one SF alliance knows we all do is pretty much how we work
[10:35] <BobJanova{away}> asdf
06[10:35] * BobJanova{away} resigns and goes to kronos
[10:35] <BobJanova{away}> <.<
01[10:35] <away_srqt[ria]> XD
[10:35] <BobJanova{away}> we really $%&@ed this up last night
[10:35] <BobJanova{away}> and i can never be on around update to get it right -.-
01[10:36] <away_srqt[ria]> I understand teh need to keep TOP out but now RoK is fighting on 3 fronts and their biggest opponent already has a white peace in two weeks
[10:38] <BobJanova{away}> <Chill> tell him basically we are trying to get IRON out of the war as quickly as possible
[10:39] <BobJanova{away}> [15:38] <Chill> so our side is assure vicotry
[10:39] <BobJanova{away}> bah this is all so !@#$[/quote]

That confirms, at minimum, the deal was made.
[quote]
(21:23:18) (@Lee) Chill: i have to talk to you in detail about this
(21:23:18) (@Lee) [12:51am] Chill: just give me time
(21:23:19) (@Lee) [12:51am] Chill: ill explain everything
(21:23:19) (@Lee) [12:52am] Gen_Lee: k
(21:23:19) (@Lee) [12:54am] Gen_Lee: is there a channel i should join
(21:23:20) (@Lee) [12:59am] Chill: you there
(21:23:21) (@Lee) [01:00am] Gen_Lee: yes
(21:23:23) (@Lee) [01:00am] Chill: ok here is the deal
(21:23:25) (@Lee) [01:00am] Chill: you might not like it but we had no choice
(21:23:27) (@Lee) [01:00am] Chill: we didnt know who IRON was gonna hit
(21:23:29) (@Lee) [01:00am] Chill: so we had to plan quickly based of what we had already
(21:23:31) (@Lee) [01:01am] Gen_Lee: ?
(21:23:32) (@Lee) [01:02am] Chill: so here is the deal with IRON
(21:23:34) (@Lee) [01:02am] Chill: as you know TOP have declared that they will defend IRON against offensive attacks
(21:23:36) (@Lee) [01:03am] Gen_Lee: from non mdp treatied alliances
(21:23:38) (@Lee) [01:03am] Gen_Lee: amirite
(21:23:40) (@Lee) [01:04am] Chill: yea
(21:23:41) (@Lee) [01:04am] Chill: at the same time we had a lack of upper tier nations that could effectively cover IRON
(21:23:43) (@Lee) [01:04am] Chill: (do you have Teamspeak by any chance?)
(21:23:45) (@Lee) [01:05am] Gen_Lee: no
(21:23:47) (@Lee) [01:06am] Chill: moreover IRON are insanly strong
(21:23:48) (@Lee) [01:06am] Chill: and they by themselves have the power to fark up the entire Karma effort
(21:23:50) (@Lee) [01:06am] Gen_Lee: well TOP is null here
(21:23:52) (@Lee) [01:06am] Gen_Lee: bc its all mdp alliances
(21:23:53) (@Lee) [01:06am] Chill: but they are not too happy about having to fight for NBPO
(21:23:55) (@Lee) [01:07am] Chill: i know TOP is null
(21:23:57) (@Lee) [01:07am] Chill: at least now they are
(21:23:59) (@Lee) [01:07am] Chill: so the following agreement was reached
(21:24:00) (@Lee) [01:08am] Chill: IRON honors their treaty to make an effort for NPO's sake
(21:24:02) (@Lee) [01:09am] Chill: but to avoid them tearing up Karma and to satify TOP that IRON would not be destroyed.....
(21:24:03) (@Lee) [01:09am] Chill: loose loose situation.....
(21:24:05) (@Lee) [01:09am] Chill: we agreeed that IRON would grant Gre the TOA cancelation and we would come in with Fark to back you up
(21:24:07) (@Lee) [01:10am] Chill: so now we will have Gre, Fark and Rok covering IRON which should be enough to contain them and mitigate damage to all while still allowing us to win the war
(21:24:08) (@Lee) [01:11am] Gen_Lee: whoa whoa whoa
(21:24:10) (@Lee) [01:11am] Gen_Lee: you already made a deal
(21:24:11) (@Lee) [01:11am] Chill: yea we had to
(21:24:13) (@Lee) [01:11am] Chill: and we had to do it quickly once we knew who they were gonna hit
(21:24:15) (@Lee) [01:12am] Chill: we had no time to talk to you
(21:24:16) (@Lee) [01:12am] Gen_Lee: they were hitting us
(21:24:18) (@Lee) [01:12am] Gen_Lee: its vital you talk to us
(21:24:19) (@Lee) [01:12am] Chill: i know but this happened within 30 minutes of update
(21:24:21) (@Lee) [01:12am] Chill: but let me finish
(21:24:22) (@Lee) [01:13am] Chill: the 3 of us will fight IRON for 1-2 rounds
(21:24:24) (@Lee) [01:13am] Chill: at which point they will exit having fulfilled their obligation to NPO
(21:24:25) (@Lee) [01:13am] Chill: leaving Karma free to finish the job against NPO and its strongest supporters
(21:24:27) (@Lee) [01:14am] Gen_Lee: exit how
(21:24:28) (@Lee) [01:14am] Gen_Lee: surrendering
(21:24:30) (@Lee) [01:14am] Chill: white peace
(21:24:31) (@Lee) [01:14am] Chill: yea
(21:24:33) (@Lee) [01:14am] Gen_Lee: thats bull****
(21:24:34) (@Lee) [01:14am] Gen_Lee: you signed Rok up to be royally farked
(21:24:36) (@Lee) [01:14am] Gen_Lee: we are on 3 god damn fronts
(21:24:37) (@Lee) [01:14am] Chill: how so?
(21:24:38) (@Lee) [01:14am] Gen_Lee: we dont cover Iron at all
(21:24:40) (@Lee) [01:15am] Chill: yea we are gonna pick up most of the hits
(21:24:41) (@Lee) [01:15am] Gen_Lee: as you said earlier
(21:24:43) (@Lee) [01:15am] Chill: we came in exactly to keep IRON from hurting anyone else too hard
(21:24:44) (@Lee) [01:16am] Gen_Lee: why not bring in MHA/sparta
(21:24:45) (@Lee) [01:16am] Gen_Lee: what is the point
(21:24:47) (@Lee) [01:16am] Chill: Sparta have conflicting treaties
(21:24:48) (@Lee) [01:16am] Gen_Lee: then MHA
(21:24:49) (@Lee) [01:16am] Gen_Lee: i see no reason my alliance should take that damage so they can get white peace
(21:24:51) (@Lee) [01:16am] Chill: the point is TOP wont allow IRON to be destoryed so a balance had to be stuck
(21:24:52) (@Lee) [01:17am] Chill: they will get damage too
(21:24:53) (@Lee) [01:17am] Chill: so will we and Fark
(21:24:55) (@Lee) [01:17am] Chill: in fact we are pikcing up most of the upper tier
(21:24:56) (@Lee) [01:17am] Chill: which was the biggest issue for Karma
(21:24:57) (@Lee) [01:17am] Gen_Lee: of course you are, you are loaded with top 10% nations
(21:24:58) (@Lee) [01:17am] Chill: i know
(21:25:00) (@Lee) [01:17am] Chill: but for that to happen
(21:25:01) (@Lee) [01:17am] Chill: we had to make a deal for them to waive our TOA
(21:25:02) (@Lee) [01:18am] Chill: and TOP be cool with it
(21:25:04) (@Lee) [01:18am] Chill: otherwise their top tier would have wreacked people
(21:25:05) (@Lee) [01:18am] Chill: my plan was actually to have Fark and Gre only pick up IRON
(21:25:06) (@Lee) [01:18am] Chill: but we didnt manage to organize that in time
(21:25:07) (@Lee) [01:19am] Chill: so we had to settle for a 2nd best approach
(21:25:08) (@Lee) [01:19am] Chill: fact is IRON was gonna come on you no matter what
(21:25:09) (@Lee) [01:19am] Chill: this way you pick up less damage and its over sooner
(21:25:11) (@Lee) [01:19am] Chill: TOP stays out
(21:25:12) (@Lee) [01:19am] Chill: and Karma is assured victory
(21:25:13) (@Lee) [01:20am] Gen_Lee: i doubt we pick up less damage them having MHA come to our assistance
(21:25:14) (@Lee) [01:21am] Chill: well if that becomes an issue we will discuss bringin in MHA
(21:25:15) (@Lee) [01:21am] Gen_Lee: this is a major issue
(21:25:16) (@Lee) [01:21am] Gen_Lee: i was not consulted
(21:25:17) (@Lee) [01:21am] Chill: i know
(21:25:19) (@Lee) [01:21am] Gen_Lee: and my alliance gets crushed in this
(21:25:20) (@Lee) [01:22am] Chill: no you dont man
(21:25:21) (@Lee) [01:22am] Chill: Sparta couldnt come in anyway
(21:25:22) (@Lee) [01:22am] Chill: it would have been you MHA and Fark with thier top tier free to rain hell
(21:25:23) (@Lee) [01:23am] Gen_Lee: and GRE would have gone where?
(21:25:24) (@Lee) [01:23am] Chill: probably Valhalla
(21:25:25) (@Lee) [01:23am] Chill: where we would be redundant
(21:25:26) (@Lee) [01:23am] Chill: we have been trying to arrange this all day to pick up IRON
(21:25:27) (@Lee) [01:23am] Chill: but we had to go through TOP first
(21:25:28) (@Lee) [01:23am] Gen_Lee: well valhalla just hit one of my treaty partners
(21:25:29) (@Lee) [01:23am] Chill: thats why everything was last minutes
(21:25:30) (@Lee) [01:23am] Gen_Lee: who has no backup at all
(21:25:31) (@Lee) [01:24am] Chill: who?
(21:25:32) (@Lee) [01:24am] Gen_Lee: be VE and Rok are in deep
(21:25:33) (@Lee) [01:24am] Gen_Lee: syndicate
(21:25:34) (@Lee) [01:24am] Chill: hmm
(21:25:35) (@Lee) [01:24am] Chill: we can maybe direct MHA of FCC htere
(21:25:36) (@Lee) [01:24am] Chill: we can work that out
(21:25:37) (@Lee) [01:24am] Chill: bottom line is though
(21:25:38) (@Lee) [01:24am] Chill: IRON are contained
(21:25:39) (@Lee) [01:24am] Chill: so Karma wins
(21:25:40) (@Lee) [01:25am] Chill: if i could have limited all of IRONs damamge to Gre i would have
(21:25:41) (@Lee) [01:25am] Chill: but we just didnt have time to do that
(21:25:41) (@Lee) [01:25am] Chill: but right now you got the full military and financial back up of Gre
(21:25:43) (@Lee) [01:26am] Gen_Lee: white peace is unacceptable
(21:25:44) (@Lee) [01:26am] Chill: well thats the condition for their exit
(21:25:44) (@Lee) [01:26am] Chill: what would be your condition?
(21:25:46) (@Lee) [01:26am] Gen_Lee: essentially they get to save face nuking my our nations and rly fark up mine and walk off scott free
(21:25:48) (@Lee) [01:27am] Chill: they get nuked too
(21:25:49) (@Lee) [01:27am] Chill: and keep in mind the big picture
(21:25:50) (@Lee) [01:27am] Chill: IRON dont tear up Karma
(21:25:51) (@Lee) [01:28am] Chill: and we win
(21:25:51) (@Lee) [01:28am] Gen_Lee: we can win this without making that concession
(21:25:54) (@Lee) [01:28am] Gen_Lee: there side is in shambles
(21:25:54) (@Lee) [01:28am] Gen_Lee: example proven staging fake entries
(21:25:54) (@Lee) [01:28am] Chill: no its not
(21:25:55) (@Lee) [01:28am] Chill: and dont forget
(21:25:57) (@Lee) [01:28am] Chill: TOP will not allow IRON to be cratered
(21:25:59) (@Lee) [01:29am] Chill: you add TOP to that side, NSO come in as well
(21:25:59) (@Lee) [01:29am] Chill: not they have a solid front
(21:26:00) (@Lee) [01:29am] Chill: and no one really wins
(21:26:00) (@Lee) [01:29am] Gen_Lee: i wont allow Rok to be cratered for TOP or IRONs benefit
(21:26:02) (@Lee) [01:29am] Chill: you wont
(21:26:04) (@Lee) [01:29am] Chill: as i said we are picking up the upper tier
(21:26:05) (@Lee) [01:30am] Chill: and in max 2 weeks this is over
(21:26:05) (@Lee) [01:31am] Chill: look its not ideal i know
(21:26:06) (@Lee) [01:31am] Chill: but its better than facing IRON with Fark and MHA alone without any upper tier support
(21:26:08) (@Lee) [01:31am] Chill: and its better than IRON and TOP fully committing to the other side
(21:26:10) (@Lee) [01:32am] Chill: IRON are not fully happy with this, and neither are TOP or you
(21:26:12) (@Lee) [01:32am] Chill: and neither am i
(21:26:14) (@Lee) [01:32am] Chill: but show me a better compromise and ill say we farked up in doing this
(21:26:15) (@Lee) [01:33am] Gen_Lee: better compromise is they take licks from MHA/FCC then bow out
(21:26:17) (@Lee) [01:33am] Chill: hows that gonna happen? FCC cant fight them witout a way in
(21:26:21) (@Lee) [01:34am] Chill: MHA can but whos gonna cover the upper tier in that scenario
(21:26:22) (@Lee) [01:34am] Gen_Lee: you are already in
(21:26:23) (@Lee) [01:34am] Chill: well we would have never been able to come in had this not been agreed with TOP and IRON
(21:26:25) (@Lee) [01:34am] Chill: it would be you fark and MHA
(21:26:25) (@Lee) [01:35am] Gen_Lee: i was never consulted, it is imperative im involved in any deals with Rok
(21:26:29) (@Lee) [01:35am] Chill: i told you man
(21:26:29) (@Lee) [01:35am] Chill: this was all done in the last 30 min
(21:26:29) (@Lee) [01:35am] Gen_Lee: i could have possibly pulled polar
(21:26:31) (@Lee) [01:35am] Chill: had there been time of course you would hve
(21:26:32) (@Lee) [01:35am] Chill: nah
(21:26:33) (@Lee) [01:35am] Chill: Polar come in TOP destroys them
(21:26:34) (@Lee) [01:36am] Chill: to win this war we need IRON out
(21:26:35) (@Lee) [01:36am] Chill: to have IRON out we need to assure TOP they wont get destroyed
(21:26:37) (@Lee) [01:36am] Gen_Lee: then they surrender with terms
(21:26:37) (@Lee) [01:36am] Chill: why would they?
(21:26:39) (@Lee) [01:36am] Chill: they could very well give us all hell
(21:26:40) (@Lee) [01:36am] Gen_Lee: they want out
(21:26:41) (@Lee) [01:36am] Chill: that would not be in anyones interest
(21:26:42) (@Lee) [01:36am] Chill: they want out but they dont have to go out
(21:26:42) (@Lee) [01:37am] Gen_Lee: this is not in my interest
(21:26:44) (@Lee) [01:37am] Chill: who so?
(21:26:45) (@Lee) [01:37am] Chill: you wanna have thier upper tier on you?
(21:26:45) (@Lee) [01:37am] Gen_Lee: bc we are on 3 fronts
(21:26:46) (@Lee) [01:37am] Gen_Lee: and weve been fighting since day 1
(21:26:48) (@Lee) [01:37am] Chill: i get it but we never arragned for them to hit Rok
(21:26:50) (@Lee) [01:38am] Chill: as i said fi we could we would have kept this to Gre and Fark
(21:26:52) (@Lee) [01:38am] Chill: we just didnt have time to
(21:26:53) (@Lee) [01:38am] Chill: they were gonna hit you no matter what
[/quote]

And there's the strong-arming. Bob can indeed add more to the situation.

Edited August 4, 2011 by Xiphosis

[Natan]

To Xiph, one of your main criticisms is the way you treat alliances, often allies of allies, and then expect them to just fall into line when it comes to war, putting their nations on the line for you just because they are allied to one of your allies. What would you say to this?

[quote]Not pushed the UPN issue and entered on the NPO front. The former wasn't warranted considering the work UPN has done since that war to actually not be a terrible alliance, and the latter made it drag on longer than necessary. Besides that, no.[/quote]

You wouldn't have tried to avoid the RoK fiasco (including both RoK and RIA) by keeping the original polaris declaration SF based, as originally planned? Or abiding by actual coalition plans instead of just attacking whoever you wanted?


To all:

Who would you regard as the main concern to the SF defense department is?

In hindsight, would you have done anything differently with the RnR-UINE war (the one before the one where VE declared on polaris) or the NEW war?

Who do you think SF's top three most important OTPs are? Why?

Do you view SF and XX as a single entity? One that can not be broken up (in the next war, not forever) regardless of where the war starts?

What alliance or treaty will come into play most for SF next war?

[Crymson]

[quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1312445055' post='2771675']
That confirms, at minimum, the deal was made.
[/quote]

It confirms absolutely nothing of what you'd said. Chill came to us [b]AFTER[/b] the Gramlins had attacked IRON and said, "Would you be less furious with us if we got IRON out soon and with white peace?" To which we replied, "Yes, that would be nice." That was about the extent of it.

[quote]
And there's the strong-arming. Bob can indeed add more to the situation.
[/quote]

Those are logs of things being said [size=6][b]BY CHILL[/b].[/size] I feel obligated to blow up those two words because we've repeatedly noted that Chill repeatedly used our name in IRON-related discussions without our knowledge or consent. Every time we've been answered by more broken-record accusations from you of (with no evidence), "No, TOP did it."

Edited August 4, 2011 by Crymson