Evangeline Anovilis Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 Honestly, one paragraph of RP that was posted just a few more hours before the PM was sent doesn't give it much more credibility than it already has (or not). Sadly little Jimmy could not question that part, it seems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 (edited) Yep, pathetic is about the only way I'd describe Patrick's move if I haven't ever done the same thing myself. Since I have, meh, it's hard to get to snippy. However, what I haven't done is fully created a military in a one paragraph post just for the purpose of invading another country and notifying the intended invadee 2 hours and 56 minutes after doing all the stressful work of typing up a single paragraph. Like I told PD in private, there are some real issues with this situation that I have, I will be speaking with Melech and Sarah tomorrow as they are the new GMs. Normally, I'd be interested in having Curristan there, but to be honest, after reading over this thread and looking into a few things and remembering Zoot's history with PD, I just don't trust Curristan at the moment. He should have asked way more questioned than it appears that he did. Sorry Curristan, I hope you and I can have the time to speak together so you can tell me what exactly went down, but there is something about this whole situation that screams baloney. Edited September 1, 2012 by Tidy Bowl Man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShammySocialist Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Evangeline Anovilis' timestamp='1346499275' post='3027125'] Honestly, one paragraph of RP that was posted just a few more hours before the PM was sent doesn't give it much more credibility than it already has (or not). Sadly little Jimmy could not question that part, it seems. [/quote] This. Honestly, Patrick, you didn't alleviate any questions that PresidentDavid's post raised, such as that "environment of military expansion" which PD brought up. This entire situation is raising questions in my own mind, as I read over it. The entire "prior knowledge of war coming" is a gray area in CNRP, and continues to bedevil GMs and the community at large. There have been maneuvers I have seen in wars or prior to conflicts by many people, and probably by myself, that could have been challenged but weren't. The issue that PD raised here is still standing, and an outstanding matter that remains unanswered and unreviewed, and deserves further attention, by the new GM team. Edited September 1, 2012 by TheShammySocialist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Padraig Rua Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 (edited) Screw it. Tis not worth it anymore. Too many faults on both sides that I have neither the energy or will to correct. Consider the war defunct David. Edited September 1, 2012 by Chancellor Patrick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 [quote name='TheShammySocialist' timestamp='1346501213' post='3027129'] This. Honestly, Patrick, you didn't alleviate any questions that PresidentDavid's post raised, such as that "environment of military expansion" which PD brought up. This entire situation is raising questions in my own mind, as I read over it. The entire "prior knowledge of war coming" is a gray area in CNRP, and continues to bedevil GMs and the community at large. There have been maneuvers I have seen in wars or prior to conflicts by many people, and probably by myself, that could have been challenged but weren't. The issue that PD raised here is still standing, and an outstanding matter that remains unanswered and unreviewed, and deserves further attention, by the new GM team. [/quote] More so if you look at the bottom of Patrick's post on his war thread he credit's Zoot with allowing him to use Zoot's material. When you look this entire situation over you have a rper creating a military from nothing, 2 hours and 56 minutes later he enters into preplanning, and then the GM team starts ruling against PD when he starts raising highly valid points. My concerns are as follows: 1) I believe there was a bit of cooperation and GM bias going on by Zoot when he favored Patrick. This needs to be examined and addressed. 2) PD is being pulled into a war by a nation that existed for less than 3 hours and appears to have been established to attack him. There is an extremely good case being made by PD that there was no IC history between the two nations justifying a war. The same point that was brushed aside by Zoot, the same Zoot that seems some how has interests that are commingled with Patrick. Now I can't prove much of this, but looking over the entire situation the solution seems pretty obvious to me, though unprovable. I'd solve the problem by allowing PD to post a military fully reflecting the current stats of his nation and make an allowance for role play that he's conducted prior to the entire affair, and then let the RP go on. Further, I'd do an itemized inventory of the equipment being fielded by Patrick. I'm pretty sure 290 tech isn't quite what one needs to field J-10 Fighters. I could be wrong on that point, I'm not a military meathead rper, and I'm not entirely sure when the any of the equipment in general was fielded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantWatcher Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 TBM i am always willing to discuss anything with you as i dont like to have any issues with anyone. I am sorry i havent been up to top form lately but things in RL are distracting me which i sincerely apologise for that. Second i was under the impression that you can have aircraft beyond your tech level as long as the person who sold them helps maintain them. I did sell Patrick the J-10s before the planning started but i didnt rp any engineers coming over to help him service them so that little mistake will inevitably cause a misunderstanding. I just hope that whoever is in the new GM team will work to avoid such situations in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 [quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' timestamp='1346505007' post='3027135'] More so if you look at the bottom of Patrick's post on his war thread he credit's Zoot with allowing him to use Zoot's material. When you look this entire situation over you have a rper creating a military from nothing, 2 hours and 56 minutes later he enters into preplanning, and then the GM team starts ruling against PD when he starts raising highly valid points. My concerns are as follows: 1) I believe there was a bit of cooperation and GM bias going on by Zoot when he favored Patrick. This needs to be examined and addressed. 2) PD is being pulled into a war by a nation that existed for less than 3 hours and appears to have been established to attack him. There is an extremely good case being made by PD that there was no IC history between the two nations justifying a war. The same point that was brushed aside by Zoot, the same Zoot that seems some how has interests that are commingled with Patrick. Now I can't prove much of this, but looking over the entire situation the solution seems pretty obvious to me, though unprovable. I'd solve the problem by allowing PD to post a military fully reflecting the current stats of his nation and make an allowance for role play that he's conducted prior to the entire affair, and then let the RP go on. Further, I'd do an itemized inventory of the equipment being fielded by Patrick. I'm pretty sure 290 tech isn't quite what one needs to field J-10 Fighters. I could be wrong on that point, I'm not a military meathead rper, and I'm not entirely sure when the any of the equipment in general was fielded. [/quote] 1 - an accusation I deny and the main reason the other two GMs were privvy to the discussions, wipe discussions and ruling discussions. That is why they have been posting in regards to the rulings. Curristan has made more rulings than me in this entire debacle, your also failing to take into account that I washed my hands of the buisiness earlier in the week when I didnt want anything further to do with the preplanning bollocks. 2 - His merger had existed for three hours, but Patrick was an established Gaelic nation on the island of Mull. He petitioned to Germany to allow him to take scotland because of its gaelic popultion and he gained it. The natural course of progression in this pattern is the aquisition of Ireland. There doesnt NEED to be any ICly [i]cause[/i] for a justification of a war, thats just one of the options for justifying a war. Patricks actions were the following moves of an established pattern Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 Just for the record, where did Patrick petition Germany for Scotland? Also, natural acquisition? Where did Patrick ever write about some pan-Gaelic sentiments? The fact that you're brushing off IC justification indicates something else. One of the reasons for preplanning to exist is to ensure that the aggressor has some sort of logical reason for a war. It could be diplomatic actions, it could be military actions, it could be ideological goals, but the basics is that any war should have an underlying reason which is more than just "I want that land" or "I hate that player" or "I just want war". Unless Patrick has written anything concrete about some pan-Gaelic sentiments or geopolitical reasoning, I fail to see why this war should have occurred in the first place aside from Patrick's OOC wish to have Ireland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kingswell Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 For crying out loud history has shown that land has been conquered for the purposes of expanding control and acquiring new resources and the like. The roman empire did it, the mongols and many others have. Wanting to gain more land is a valid reason for going to war so stop saying it is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 1. Resources in the no-economy world of CNRP? Heresy! 2. CNRP is set in a slightly more modern world than that. 3. Wanting more land for what reason? As far as I read, there has been no reason at all except "Operation start". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kingswell Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 [quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1346518666' post='3027184'] 1. Resources in the no-economy world of CNRP? Heresy! 2. CNRP is set in a slightly more modern world than that. 3. Wanting more land for what reason? As far as I read, there has been no reason at all except "Operation start". [/quote] 1. Yes resources. It doesn't have to be raw materials either it could be for more people or land to settle current population numbers or it could even be to create a more political standing in Europe. 2. Maybe so but the mind set of most players certainly is not but this doesn't matter it is just the way of things. 3) Well going from what I can see it is more land to expand Scottish control and seeing a show England was appearing too difficult the choice was to go for Ireland. Again invading nations just for the land/pixels is a valid reason for war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 3) No, it is not when there has been nothing RPed out. If Patrick had RPed some sort of population problem, economic crisis, or pan-Gaelic sentiments, I don't see a problem with it, but there has been NOTHING except just "start war" (as far as I can see). This is half the issue as to why some people look upon this (no defunct) war unfavorably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domingo the Honored Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 To say that "I want land" isn't a reason for war is not just ridiculous, it's unbelievably absurd. People want land, and how do they obtain it? War. Take it from somebody else. This is not a hard issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 As in OOC "I want war". If something was written IC-wise, I doubt most people will consider it an issue. For example, if Quebec suddenly invades Siberia without ever saying anything, that is absurd. But if it was RPed so that "Quebec was taken over by Turanian revanchist who wishes to restore Siberia to the Turkic People", then there is an IC justification for the action. What we're looking for here is the IC justification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kingswell Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1346520208' post='3027193'] 3) No, it is not when there has been nothing RPed out. If Patrick had RPed some sort of population problem, economic crisis, or pan-Gaelic sentiments, I don't see a problem with it, but there has been NOTHING except just "start war" (as far as I can see). This is half the issue as to why some people look upon this (no defunct) war unfavorably. [/quote] Maybe Patrick wanted more land for his nation, maybe he wanted more pixels. Either way he doesn't have to make up a population problem or anything before declaring war. He can just decide that he wants more land, chooses for that land to be Ireland and then goes to war for it. It is as plain and simple as that. [quote name='Domingo the Honored' timestamp='1346520787' post='3027197'] To say that "I want land" isn't a reason for war is not just ridiculous, it's unbelievably absurd. People want land, and how do they obtain it? War. Take it from somebody else. This is not a hard issue. [/quote] I am confused are you saying here that war for land is valid or not? As your first comment seems to say no but your later comment says yes. [quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1346521322' post='3027198'] As in OOC "I want war". If something was written IC-wise, I doubt most people will consider it an issue. For example, if Quebec suddenly invades Siberia without ever saying anything, that is absurd. But if it was RPed so that "Quebec was taken over by Turanian revanchist who wishes to restore Siberia to the Turkic People", then there is an IC justification for the action. What we're looking for here is the IC justification. [/quote] Did anyone IC ask why Scotland was invading Ireland? No. maybe if they had they would have been given a reason people don't have to give a reason to make others feel better. If you want one then ask it is not hard. Edited September 1, 2012 by Kevin Kingswell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 Some of us RP resources anyways even if your not required too for the sake of story. I think that everyone here should not be in the habit of throwing stones at glass houses, I doubt one person here is immune from having a CB at one point that others found dubious and OOC based. If you don't think you have (assuming you've actually warred once or twice, you're probably delusional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domingo the Honored Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 [quote name='Kevin Kingswell' timestamp='1346521371' post='3027199']I am confused are you saying here that war for land is valid or not? As your first comment seems to say no but your later comment says yes. [/quote] It's absolutely valid. @Kankou: One of the British Isles wanting to take the land of another one of the British Isles is quite different from Quebec coming into Siberia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 You've missed the point, Triyun: We're talking about a war that had no indication that the aggressor would go to war, even for a highly absurd and OOC-motivated reason. If there was even a single indication that there was any sort of IC reason (even the delusions of grandeur or some Illuminati conspiracy), whatever it was, at least half of the case against Patrick would fall apart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 (edited) Oh, well that [u]is quite simple.[/u] Tianxia ordered him to so we could use our drones and spy satellites to broadcast a live fight on paper view and make fortune on bets in Macau. Edited September 1, 2012 by Triyun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 Was that before the war happened? @ Domingo: Then let's take the example of Grand Papua. If it weren't for the Germanic Party looking at Tianxia as an immoral hypocritical hegemonist, the Zeonist Party considering Jia the bastardization of all that Zeonism originally stood for, and the Japanese "Loyalist" who funded a significant part of the Grand Papuan development, would any of Grand Papua's hostility towards Tianxia make sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 Yeah, it was me, Cent, and Vektor in a dark smoked filled room, its the one where we usually plan to ruin all your would be award winning stories in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 The world doesn't quite revolve around you, sweet honey~ Let's not have jealousy ruin our fun~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 The world no.... the galaxy yes. I am the pole star, I remain in place whilst the rest pay homage to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShammySocialist Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 [quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1346525386' post='3027212'] I am the pole star, I remain in place whilst the rest pay homage to me. [/quote] This sounds a lot like what happens at a strip club... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac MatthewII Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 So wait, ICly nothing just happened? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.