A Joint Ordo Paradoxia / Synergy Announcement

[Confusion]

[quote name='Stelios' timestamp='1321736423' post='2847055']
But I killed G-6, and we are working on Anon I am in no blocs.. that is all
[/quote]



Son, you can't kill G-6 or Anon, for its spirit shall never die, and regardless of what happens, they'll always be back- When you least expect them.

[ADude]

[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1321738704' post='2847070']
To add on to this, PS-TPC is actually the longest standing NAP
[/quote]

Seeing as RE has [u]nothing[/u] that says we can't attack TPC or that TPC has [u]nothing[/u] that says they can't attack RE, I don't count it as a NAP but as TPC being our friends.

[ADude]

[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1321738827' post='2847071']


Son, you can't kill G-6 or Anon, for its spirit shall never die, and regardless of what happens, they'll always be back- When you least expect them.
[/quote]

Sadly...this is the truth

[Confusion]

[quote name='ADude' timestamp='1321738940' post='2847072']
Seeing as RE has [u]nothing[/u] that says we can't attack TPC or that TPC has [u]nothing[/u] that says they can't attack RE, I don't count it as a NAP but as TPC being our friends.
[/quote]

I never mentioned RE boy

[ADude]

[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1321739116' post='2847078']
I never mentioned RE boy
[/quote]

Well it was more trying to point something out then a direct reply to you..


EDIT:

WOOO 900 posts

Edited November 19, 2011 by ADude

[the wompus]

[img]http://www.shallownation.com/images/paul_harvey_1995.jpg[/img]
[size="4"]
In this age of HD radio, Internet radio, ipods and itunes, many folks that play this game probably have never even tuned into an AM radio station.

Paul Harvey was a man who did a 'bit' on the radio daily where he would tell an interesting tale, but then fill you in with '....the rest of the story.'

After checking the most recent posts in this thread, that seemed applicable to this situation.

Here's where things stand as far as OP is concerned.

1. [u]THE DoW[/u] - Who gives a crap the DoW didn't state a length of time for the war. - I have NEVER seen a DoW where time parameters are pre-established (RE declares war on PS....but only for 4 days, for example). It's just silly. Typically wars don't last more than one cycle in TE, but there's nothing saying they can't, particularly in this specific situation. The original intention may not have been to absolutely make this last to the end of the round, but circumstances dictated it may indeed need to go that way.

2. [u]The War[/u] - TPC is [i]hardly[/i] a beaten down AA unable to fight, and whatever extent they are was partiallly accomplished by their own hand. Allow me to explain. As a whole, TPC had enormous war chests going into this war - some around 80 million, most around 50. TPC knew we were coming and if we weren't some else surely was. They were MORE THAN aptly prepared for this war with full compliments of GC's, Barracks, lots of tech (and thus high level airforces) and navies. They also had an enormous ANS advantage, which seems to be the primary guage by which wars are judged.

TPC did not aggressively fight the first round of wars and once nukes started flying there was an awful lot of turtling going on. I know this was not 100% across the board, but it can't be denied that this was the case. I think that TPC was hoping to get peace after the first round of wars, and then they could spend their heavy WC's out of nuke anarchy and be right back in the chase. Speaking for OP, we were not even close to that position, and although we do have war chests, we needed to cut deeply into them to keep in the fight with TPC's larger nations. Our top tier took a pretty good beating in the first cycle of wars.

At this stage in the round, there are two paths for 'end of round fun'. Either you flag run, or you bust flag runners. There's some middle ground I suppose, but most focus on those 2 things. After the first round of wars, we didn't have the resources to flag run (not that we do that anyway) and if peace were accepted, OP would not have been able to build to be viable flag busters either. Except, we were in the interesting position that we could keep TPC's nations in anarchy (nearly all of them by the way) and prevent them from collecting and making the flag runs which they seem so eager to deny. This opened the door for OP's flag busting, albeit only TPC nations.

Many of TPC's nations that appear to be 'out of the fight' are actually STILL sitting on substantial WC's but actually chose (and are still choosing) to just turtle and ride this out. I'm amazed by this, but I'm not going to stick my head in the sand and not acknowledge that it is ongoing.

The way this war 'shook out' is a situation that we have not encountered prior to this. I don't have any regrets with how it has been handled.


3. Just to clear this up, I don't think KJ is arrogant or a bad person. To the contrary, he seems like a nice guy and most of our exchanges have been pleasant over the rounds. The tone in some PM's may be a little tense/frustrated, but I fully understand why. In this instance they have TPC nations that have been ZI'd and STILL can't collect out of nuke Anarchy even though they are sitting on large chunks of cash. That would frustrate me too I guess.


4. [u]PEACE[/u]. Yes, TPC did contact me about peace shortly after the end of the first round of wars. Any other time, I would have easily been inclined to grant it and move on. However, in light of the above (#2), the amount of time remaining in the round and OP's overall state, it wasn't that simple. The decision to continue was not spontaneous and took some time and robust discussion (Surely Confusions spy thread could substantiate this if needed ). There's a difference between agreeing on peace and asking for peace. The writing was on the wall, and I even told KJ we were inclined to continue fighting and why. Agreeing to peace at that time (or even now) would be hugely adventagious to TPC, and basically leave OP wallowing around without much to do for the rest of the round (essentially out of play for any other end of round impact). OP knew this, and I would hope to think that TPC knew it too. Basically, after how things shook out after the first round of wars (and really I guess the whole round to this point), we decided to keep going as best we can. Even still, TPC is not a beaten down, crippled alliance asking for mercy...they're playing a game that is pretty transparent to me, and hopefully to everyone else.

Our war plan was and is solid and is working. TPC either underestimated us or took for granted that we'd agree to peace to let them do whatever they had planned for the rest of the round. I guess they were wrong.

5. [u] OP as 'World Police'[/u] - I don't mind this title, and actually I see it as a compliment. We play fair and we are very straightforward in how we do things. We don't play games with rogues or hiding nations and we consistently play hard and fight hard. If our actions put us in this role, then so be it. As long as I'm GM, expect it to continue.

That about sums it up for me, apologies for the 'wall of text'......so now....you know....the rest of the story.[/size]


EDIT: spelling and # error.

Edited November 20, 2011 by the wompus

[Thomasj_tx]

[quote name='ADude' timestamp='1321736372' post='2847054']
To be honest Thomas you should know by now that I couldn't give two !@#$% about what the TE community consensus is on a subject.
[/quote]

You certainly have the right to your own opinion, even if it is counter to the consensus. But if you are not concerned about the consensus opinion of the TE comunity, why are you trying to [i]revise[/i] it at this point in time?

[ADude]

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1321741057' post='2847107']
You certainly have the right to your own opinion, even if it is counter to the consensus. But if you are not concerned about the consensus opinion of the TE comunity, why are you trying to [i]revise[/i] it at this point in time?
[/quote]

You misunderstand what I am doing, I am not trying to revise anything, I am simply stating my opinion. As you said I am allowed that.

Community**

[the wompus]

[quote name='Wired' timestamp='1321704282' post='2846889']

War with OP is like chocolate, always a fun treat. Eating chocolate for 32 days in total during a 90 day round would sicken anyone.


[/quote]


Oh yeah....I almost forgot.

6. I love chocolate and could easily eat it every day.

[bcortell]

[quote name='Wired' timestamp='1321704282' post='2846889']
The ball is in your court OP, peace was put on the table 6 days ago and the outcome of this conflict rests with you and Synergy. Let's take a look at the current numbers:

TPC:
35 nations (17 still fighting back)
199,056 total NS
5687 ANS
139 nukes

OP + Synergy:
53 nations (50 still ready to fight)
326,49 total NS
6,153 ANS
327 nukes

We never complained about this declare, it looked like a good fight. When Confusion and his rogue showed up on Day 7 it was clear there was more at play here and at that point we'd all had a fun war so TPC opted to end this and move on, OP refused.

This was not portrayed as an "end of round war" in the original DOW, it would have been silly with 4 weeks left to go. Seven days into the war it was equally ridiculous to suggest 3 more weeks of war was the [b]only[/b] available option. Even now there is time to rebuild at least a bit for a few involved and have some war fun with others in the last 7 days. It's pretty clear there is no TPC nation threatening to win a flag, OP and Syn have all the intel they need to know this is true.

It's your move OP and Synergy, you decide if continuing this war for another 2 weeks is reasonable. It may seem like fun now but I've never thought curbstomps were good for the game - it drives people away and this game needs more players, not less.

I know one thing, you can expect lots of turtles, our members aren't serious enough to keep up 27 continuous nights of war. Some have already decided to take a break before the next round begins, few will be fighting back for much longer. I doubt any TPC will even try to wage war for another 2 weeks straight.

War with OP is like chocolate, always a fun treat. Eating chocolate for 32 days in total during a 90 day round would sicken anyone.


[i](Edit: Added actual nation count of those still fighting or ready to fight.)[/i]
[/quote]
My only thoughts are the time frame that they are now in. If they peace out, they really won't have much to hit with their nations. Might as well keep at it for a couple more weeks with TPC.

Personally, I've always been a fan of wars that last longer than five days. Also, after being busy with RL the last couple of weeks (well, I still am, but we already missed our targeted war date, so I have to put some time in here), I'm back.

Finally, I wonder what KJ was thinking trying to get peace and being told no. Is that the first time you haven't successfully negotiated peace, KJ?

[dogbite]

[quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1321167194' post='2844040']
o/ War

Just a quick update--Dogbite has come home to TPC. It is with great pride that we welcome him back.

As noted in his bio, he will remain [u][b]out[/b][/u] of this current war unless he is attacked.

I'm pretty sure he is not flag running.
[/quote]
Wait what? So i got to sit the round out?

[Stelios]

[quote name='the wompus' timestamp='1321740689' post='2847103']

Here's where things stand as far as OP is concerned.

1. [u]THE DoW[/u] - Who gives a crap the DoW didn't state a length of time for the war. - I have NEVER seen a DoW where time parameters are pre-established (RE declares war on PS....but only for 4 days, for example). It's just silly. Typically wars don't last more than one cycle in TE, but there's nothing saying they can't, particularly in this specific situation. The original intention may not have been to absolutely make this last to the end of the round, but circumstances dictated it may indeed need to go that way.


[/quote]
18th-23rd be 5 days. Also it was a damaging war, unlike all the other wars around that time.

[Wired]

I think you folks are missing a couple of the key points I was trying to make.

I never said it was a downdeclare to begin with, I said it has [b]become[/b] a downdeclare now and the intent is to continue in what has [b]become[/b] for all intents and purposes a curbstomp.

The reason I call it a curbstomp is our members really don't have any interest in fighting [b]anyone[/b] for 27 days straight, we simply don't take the game that seriously. So, whatever the intent, the functional outcome is you won't be fighting TPC for 14 more days, that simply won't happen.

I noticed that Thomas doesn't like people questioning the original declare and labels it as revising history. TPC can sympathize with this, it happens with plenty of our declares. In a previous thread I listing our DOWs and pointed out nobody had issue with them at the time but still, here once again, we hear we don't do updeclares when our first OP war certainly looked like it, Devil Dog even pointed out it was a solid declare [b]before[/b] OP built their numbers up.

Yet somehow, once again, we hear many make broad generalizations implying we never updeclare. Even with a clear example clearly visible people will ignore the evidence.

I think the point ADude is trying to make is except for ANS this was a downdeclare in every category. Now add in the fact that OP stated in the leaked logs that they knew a huge part of that ANS was navy and they planned to avoid fighting this NS and the numbers change considerably. They were correct, our large ANS was navy, take it out and this [b]was[/b] a downdeclare. Also, ADude is correct in days out of war - OP and TPC both had the same amount of time to build back and save WCs. All the same, we never complained, we fought for 7 days and expected peace could be gained in the usual way. Apparently what has been normal in the past should not be expected in the future, duly noted.

As far as these "peace offers" go from my understanding it has been normal for TPC/OP peace to largely be an issue of contact, short discussion and it's over. Certainly in the first war this round when OP contacted TPC about wrapping things up we never made anyone [b]ask[/b] for peace. To be honest, splitting this hair seems more than a little childish to me. Should we have said pretty please with sugar on top?

Paul, you really do need to get a sense of humor sir, you didn't like the chocolate comment? Really? I am trying to pay OP a compliment and somehow you spin it as arrogance? I just don't get that. Even when E jokes about having dossiers it just goes right over your head and you take offense at our "arrogance" - do you honestly think we have files on every AA, he was joking around...lighten up.

As far as that rogue being the worst ever, that's true. However, the involvement with others is not quite so clear. E already pointed out the rogue and Wes certainly appeared to be working closely on nuke/air/etc...coincidence? maybe, but highly doubtful. Add in who the rogue is trading with and Con spying and we start to get the idea there's more to this. Either way, it wasn't the only reason we put the idea of peace on the table at day 7. Usually that is enough to get peace and move on, not always but generally speaking that is how it works for most.

Let me address this statement by Paul - [i]"we tried to end a feud with TPC last round with that cease fire. You laughed at us. Now we will end it the only other way we know how...war until the round ends."[/i]

We never laughed at you because of our ceasefire, we laughed at the [b]situation[/b] and we laughed at both OP and Anon a little because both saw the AA numbers and we were sure both felt TPC had to fight the other. The humor was in us knowing the big picture.

Paul, I'm not sure why you would think holding us in a 27 day war would "end" anything, you seem to think you can teach us a lesson - your bravado is misplaced. In the past the tensions built with each subsequent war, ratcheting up each time. In this case you've gone from one notch on the ratchet to 6 notches in a single move.

I don't know what the future holds, it seems to me impossible to fight OP and do well without it turning into some ridiculous grudge match. We've been told this current war is due to a perceived intent to eliminate OP in our first war. We've been told it's because we're flag runners. We're being told it's because we laughed at you. These are just some of the reasons, there seems to be no end to "why" OP feels they have to stomp TPC.

In the end none of this really matters to us, it's just a game to be played for fun. We're not going to get our panties in a bunch over anything anyone does in a game. I've made my case for why wars like this don't help this game, I've tried to be civil and even participate in funny poetry. I don't need to understand why OP is intent on having a grudge with TPC and I have no idea why Synergy would want to continue this war and build a grudge as well. This really doesn't matter, I don't need to know why, and nobody owes us a reason. Do as you like, expect others to do the same - for every action their is an equal and opposite reaction.

If there was one thing I'd like to see change it's the broad generalizations that ignore clear evidence and the repeated double standards I see applied over and over again. PS hasn't been at war in over 30 days and there's no backlash. When LE was out for over 30 days the whole issue was why wasn't TPC hitting them. When we were out for 30 days (as was OP) the issue was TPC were avoiding war. I guess the only solution is to have an active propaganda department out here on the OWF throwing out posts and acting much like the ethics police do. It'd be nice if the self appointed guardians of TE applied their ethics equally and fairly but that doesn't seem to be the case.

In the end I guess OP (and others) want TPC to be an evil that needs to be repeatedly called out, ridiculed, schemed against and any attempts to drive us from the game are justified. As Paul said their plan is to force us to collect in nuke anarchy, have our nations deleted from inactivity or self delete until next round.

This is unfortunate but not of great concern.

We must now decide how to deal with chocolate, apparently it's bad for us. We can ignore it and avoid any chance of an allergic reaction. We could attempt to destroy it and jump on any sign of life from chocolate. We could set hidden traps to contain chocolate and makes it's live miserable. One thing is certain, chocolate is very serious...and it's out to get us.

Edited November 20, 2011 by Wired

[King James XVIII]

Wow, this thread has exploded again. There is so much to digest, apologies if I don't touch all the points.

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1321685742' post='2846797']
Still going strong as it is the only option left for both of us and we ruin tpc flag running aspirations.[/quote]

I [i]sincerely[/i] hope you dismantle whatever flag running aspirations you think we have Paul.

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1321720606' post='2846961']
Secondly, we tried to end a feud with TPC last round with that cease fire. You laughed at us. Now we will end it the only other way we know how...war until the round ends.

Thirdly, hal was open to peace but KJ's replies display a sense of arrogance[/quote]

How can we move forward and co-exist if both sides have to constantly bring up the past? The cease fire we had was a genuine attempt at cooling tensions and moving forward.

I have the PM's, my gov has seen the PM's and I'm sure your gov has seen them too. I assure you I do not attempt to send PM's to [u][b]anyone[/b][/u] with a sense of arrogance. I'm just a guy playing a game trying to do right by my members. Being a prick to anyone in a PM, let alone as the leader of an alliance, is simply an awful way to do business.

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1321725032' post='2846991']
My understanding is that 6 days ago, KJ [b][i]offered[/i][/b] peace to OP and OP declined. However, as recent as 2 days ago, Hal sent this message to KJ....

And as far as I know, KJ has not replied.[/quote]

I did reply actually.

[quote]To: Halushki From: King James XVIII Date: 11/17/2011 7:38:45 AM

Subject: RE: Hey
Message: Yesterday was a long day. I was not able to get on. I'm not indifferent. The peace offer has been on the table for a while now...[/quote]

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1321728615' post='2847016']
is the new norm going to be that the outcome determines if the DoW was an up declare or a down declare?
[/quote]

Unfortunately, I think we are approaching that point.

[quote name='Clash' timestamp='1321733516' post='2847041']
I do have to agree with this.

Please don't make me name wars, I can do so round by round going back a long way.
I really shouldn't have to. I've fought in many of them, and on BOTH sides.

Please note: I'm not saying TPC can't fight an up-declare. TPC is a very well run alliance and there are certain things they do better than any alliance in all CN, much less TE. Imho, truth. You guys have lots of activity, experience, skills, the list goes on and on. I know many members of TPC. I know how good they were when I was there, and they have only gotten better as the rounds have piled up.

I'm sayin' that most usually, y'all DON'T fight up-declares. You fight down.
You really never have, even when I was there, and I left before I could change that culture.

Adude is of course probably arguing for TPC since RE and TPC seem to never war. Even when they are by far the best match-up for each other, no matter what, and you can bet the family fortune on that one. It's the longest running functioning NAP by far in TE history. This is also a huge difference between RE and TPC. RE has gotten good enough they updeclare more often than not these days.

Edit: BTW did G6 or ANON ever fight TPC? If not, that's the second longest NAP in TE, probably again by far. Anyone who knows anything about TE history knows for an iron-clad, steel-shod fact that dogbite was NEVER going to fight TPC - so g6 was never going to. Despite recent wars between ANON and RE, the TPC/RE/G6/ANON bloc (tho perhaps not on epaper, it was FUNCTIONING as a bloc) was the driving factor in TE politics for many recent rounds. Heck, they put OP and LE on the same side at times, and prior to it, those two hated each other lol.
[/quote]

There is a lot here. First, I appreciate that you believe we are a well run alliance. Behind the scenes we put a great deal of time and effort in to see to it that our members are given a fun but challenging round. We have certainly gotten better in many areas, and will continue to improve over time. We're not perfect by any stretch of the imagination but make no mistake, I do not question the wars we fight. Choosing targets isn't an exact science. There are a number of variables that may or may not have a huge impact on the execution of a war. Of course, in every area we always try to get better and there is always room for improvement. I just ask that people look beyond the aggregate stats and look at things on a deeper level before criticizing a government's decision.

Second, we have no NAP's. No formal or informal treaties or protectorates. I reserve the right to make them of course, but in my experience (and it took quite a while to realize this) treaties of any kind limit freedom more than expand it.

[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1321738704' post='2847070']
To add on to this, PS-TPC is actually the longest standing NAP [/quote]

I'm guessing that's a joke? If not...no, just no.

[quote name='ADude' timestamp='1321738940' post='2847072']
Seeing as RE has [u]nothing[/u] that says we can't attack TPC or that TPC has [u]nothing[/u] that says they can't attack RE, I don't count it as a NAP but as TPC being our friends.[/quote]

This. There would be no hard feelings at all if either side pulled the other to the battlefield.

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1321743743' post='2847119']
My only thoughts are the time frame that they are now in. If they peace out, they really won't have much to hit with their nations. Might as well keep at it for a couple more weeks with TPC.

Personally, I've always been a fan of wars that last longer than five days. Also, after being busy with RL the last couple of weeks (well, I still am, but we already missed our targeted war date, so I have to put some time in here), I'm back.

Finally, I wonder what KJ was thinking trying to get peace and being told no. Is that the first time you haven't successfully negotiated peace, KJ?
[/quote]

I have to say that I agree with you. I personally like the idea of wars that last longer than five days, especially if we are continuing the 90 day model. Of course, I can understand negotiating over an initial peace offer. What I don't approve of however is doing something tantamount to rejecting the peace offer of another alliance. That said, my opinion is my opinion and I will neither beg nor force a sovereign alliance to do as I want.

Yes, it was the first time that I haven't successfully negotiated peace but I promise I'm not losing sleep over it.

[Confusion]

[quote name='Wired' timestamp='1321751368' post='2847178']
words
[/quote]

What would I do without The Phoenix Cobras to provide me with a nonstop source of duplicitous ultimata to complain about? One of my objectives for this letter is to give peace a chance. In keeping with all of their inner piteous brutality, The Phoenix Cobras's adulators eat our nation to its bones. If the human race is to survive on this planet, we will have to convert retreat into advance.

Adversarialism doesn't work. So why does The Phoenix Cobras cling to it? Fortunately for us, the key to the answer is obvious: When I hear The Phoenix Cobras say that its opinions represent the opinions of the majority—or even a plurality—I have to wonder about it. Is it absolutely anal-retentive? Is it simply being indelicate? Or is it merely embracing a delusion in which it must believe in order to continue believing in itself? If I'm not horribly mistaken, there's a painfully simple answer. It regards the way that if you ever ask The Phoenix Cobras to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed.

The Phoenix Cobras claims that anyone who dares to rally good-hearted people to the side of our cause can expect to suffer hair loss and tooth decay as a result. I suspect that the absurdities within that claim speak for themselves although I should add that The Phoenix Cobras has a vested interest in maintaining the myths that keep its fanaticism movement loyal to it. Its principal myth is that it has a "special" perspective on ethnocentrism that carries with it a "special" right to extinguish the voices of opposition. The truth is that life is a search for the true, the good, and the beautiful. It is not, as The Phoenix Cobras believes, an excuse to make us too confused, demoralized, and disunited to put up an effective opposition to its cop-outs. The Phoenix Cobras, as usual, you prove yourself to be fickle. I repeat: The Phoenix Cobras's hysteria-producing false-flag operations are sufficient to give pause to the less thoughtful among us. "Oh, oh," such people think. "We'd better help The Phoenix Cobras strip people of their rights to free expression and individuality—just in case." Now that you've heard what I've had to say, I want you to think about it. And I want you to join me and provide people the wherewithal to lift our nation from the quicksand of injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood.

[Wired]

OK, the first thing to do Con is back away from the Thesauras - trying to use big words to look cool is not the same as communicating clearly.

Next, you must realize you of all people have not earned the privledge of standing on moral high ground and criticizing the ethics of others.

As E oftens points out we need to cut you some lack, your young and still have a lot of growing up to do. I agree, and because I find you amusing and overall good for the game I woulnd't want to see your growth and development stop.

To aid is this development let me give you a good life lesson you can learn from.

The diffeeence between an honorable man and a crying child can be seen in many ways, including how one honors his word. Making a bet is largely based on the honor of your word. You bet DM he wouldn't win the flag last round, you should be a man and honor the bet. Instead, you act like a crying child and ignore the loss by making excuses, in fact you make it worse by seeking revenge this round and spying DM's IRS in retaliation.

You need to fix this flaw of youth, it's OK to be wrong. What's important is you try to do the right thing, not makes things worse because of your pride.

Now back to the topic at hand, an issue 99.9% Confusion free.

[King James XVIII]

Goodness, I'm too slow to keep up!

I just wanted to address this post specifically.

[quote name='the wompus' timestamp='1321740689' post='2847103']
Here's where things stand as far as OP is concerned.

1. [u]THE DoW[/u] - Who gives a crap the DoW didn't state a length of time for the war. - I have NEVER seen a DoW where time parameters are pre-established (RE declares war on PS....but only for 4 days, for example). It's just silly. Typically wars don't last more than one cycle in TE, but there's nothing saying they can't, particularly in this specific situation. The original intention may not have been to absolutely make this last to the end of the round, but circumstances dictated it may indeed need to go that way.[/quote]

I didn't see if someone said that but I disagree. No DoW should [b]have[/b] to state a length of time for a war. Now, making a war last nearly one third of a 90 day round is a bit too much. It's your decision however.

[quote name='the wompus' timestamp='1321740689' post='2847103']
2. [u]The War[/u] - TPC is [i]hardly[/i] a beaten down AA unable to fight, and whatever extent they are was partiallly accomplished by their own hand. Allow me to explain. As a whole, TPC had enormous war chests going into this war - some around 80 million, most around 50. TPC knew we were coming and if we weren't some else surely was. They were MORE THAN aptly prepared for this war with full compliments of GC's, Barracks, lots of tech (and thus high level airforces) and navies. They also had an enormous ANS advantage, which seems to be the primary guage by which wars are judged.

TPC did not aggressively fight the first round of wars and once nukes started flying there was an awful lot of turtling going on. I know this was not 100% across the board, but it can't be denied that this was the case. I think that TPC was hoping to get peace after the first round of wars, and then they could spend their heavy WC's out of nuke anarchy and be right back in the chase. Speaking for OP, we were not even close to that position, and although we do have war chests, we needed to cut deeply into them to keep in the fight with TPC's larger nations. Our top tier took a pretty good beating in the first cycle of wars.

At this stage in the round, there are two paths for 'end of round fun'. Either you flag run, or you bust flag runners. There's some middle ground I suppose, but most focus on those 2 things. After the first round of wars, we didn't have the resources to flag run (not that we do that anyway) and if peace were accepted, OP would not have been able to build to be viable flag busters either. Except, we were in the interesting position that we could keep TPC's nations in anarchy (nearly all of them by the way) and prevent them from collecting and making the flag runs which they seem so eager to deny. This opened the door for OP's flag busting, albeit only TPC nations.

Many of TPC's nations that appear to be 'out of the fight' are actually STILL sitting on substantial WC's but actually chose (and are still choosing) to just turtle and ride this out. I'm amazed by this, but I'm not going to stick my head in the sand and not acknowledge that it is ongoing.

The way this war 'shook out' is a situation that we have not encountered prior to this. I don't have any regrets with how it has been handled.[/quote]

There is a lot here. We did have money and we were ready (as evidenced by other posts). I think it is inaccurate to say turtling went on during the first five days of the war yet say that your top tier took a beating in the first days. The war dragged on and nations hit ZI (including my own), essentially being taken out of the fight.

Again, I [b]sincerely[/b] hope you dismantle whatever flag aspirations you think we have. Having a run or bust runners path with weeks left in the round simply isn't correct. Do you mean to tell me other large alliances out there have those two choices right now? I doubt they would agree that they are locked into one of two choices.

[quote name='the wompus' timestamp='1321740689' post='2847103']
3. Just to clear this up, I don't think KJ is arrogant or a bad person. To the contrary, he seems like a nice guy and most of our exchanges have been pleasant over the rounds. The tone in some PM's may be a little tense/frustrated, but I fully understand why. In this instance they have TPC nations that have been ZI'd and STILL can't collect out of nuke Anarchy even though they are sitting on large chunks of cash. That would frustrate me too I guess.[/quote]

Yes, I believe I actually said there was some frustration on my end in a PM or two. I have no problem admitting that because in my experience I have given peace as quickly as possible to anyone that put the offer on the table, and that same thing has applied when TPC put an offer on the table. Every time.

[quote name='the wompus' timestamp='1321740689' post='2847103']
4. [u]PEACE[/u]. Yes, TPC did contact me about peace shortly after the end of the first round of wars. Any other time, I would have easily been inclined to grant it and move on. However, in light of the above (#2), the amount of time remaining in the round and OP's overall state, it wasn't that simple. The decision to continue was not spontaneous and took some time and robust discussion (Surely Confusions spy thread could substantiate this if needed ). There's a difference between agreeing on peace and asking for peace. The writing was on the wall, and I even told KJ we were inclined to continue fighting and why. Agreeing to peace at that time (or even now) would be hugely adventagious to TPC, and basically leave OP wallowing around without much to do for the rest of the round (essentially out of play for any other end of round impact). OP knew this, and I would hope to think that TPC knew it too. Basically, after how things shook out after the first round of wars (and really I guess the whole round to this point), we decided to keep going as best we can. Even still, TPC is not a beaten down, crippled alliance asking for mercy...they're playing a game that is pretty transparent to me, and hopefully to everyone else.

Our war plan was and is solid and is working. TPC either underestimated us or took for granted that we'd agree to peace to let them do whatever they had planeed for the rest of the round. I guess they were wrong.[/quote]

You did say that you were inclined to continue...which would have been fine...if you didn't plan on making this a nearly 1/3 of the round war. As a sovereign alliance it is your call at the end of the day however, our opinion is just that.

I can assure you we do not underestimate [u]anyone[/u] in TE. Given the precedent I have seen, I did expect peace after a full five, six, seven or heck, even ten day war. I was wrong and that is more than ok with me.

[Confusion]

[quote name='Wired' timestamp='1321753051' post='2847194']
OK, the first thing to do Con is back away from the Thesauras - trying to use big words to look cool is not the same as communicating clearly.

Next, you must realize you of all people have not earned the privledge of standing on moral high ground and criticizing the ethics of others.

As E oftens points out we need to cut you some lack, your young and still have a lot of growing up to do. I agree, and because I find you amusing and overall good for the game I woulnd't want to see your growth and development stop.

To aid is this development let me give you a good life lesson you can learn from.

The diffeeence between an honorable man and a crying child can be seen in many ways, including how one honors his word. Making a bet is largely based on the honor of your word. You bet DM he wouldn't win the flag last round, you should be a man and honor the bet. Instead, you act like a crying child and ignore the loss by making excuses, in fact you make it worse by seeking revenge this round and spying DM's IRS in retaliation.

You need to fix this flaw of youth, it's OK to be wrong. What's important is you try to do the right thing, not makes things worse because of your pride.

Now back to the topic at hand, an issue 99.9% Confusion free.
[/quote]

You see, thing is- I told DM the minute he posted that thread deal was off. However, is that truly the only thing you can have against me? [i]Really?[/i] Oh and >Implying that's why I spied DM's IRS. You. You sir [i]get[/i] it.

Regardless, if you truly want my word... I do hereby 'bet' I will slaughter your nation next round at sight. Have fun hiding, buddy.

[Wired]

So easily hurt, so quick to strike back...ah the passion of youth, I don't miss that.

[Confusion]

[quote name='Wired' timestamp='1321754512' post='2847209']
So easily hurt, so quick to strike back...ah the passion of youth, I don't miss that.
[/quote]



You probably thought this was [i]hilarious[/i] & witty.

PS: It's not.

[Wired]

Trust me Con, all of us old farts [b]get it[/b] and it is that funny when we see young fellas like yourself going all eThug and getting bent out of shape so easily. We find it very amusing indeed.

To be clear in response to your earlier question. Yes, that bet is the only issue I really have with you. I don't like welchers and once you make the bet you can't turn around an back out simply because you want to - you made your bed, lie in it.

Like I said I think you are amusing and good for the game. I knew you didn't quit, at least I hoped you didn't - this place would be boring without people like you stirring it up all the time. And yeah, I know the spy op was for this round as much as for pay back, see, I do get it afterall.

As far as you going after me next round good luck with that, I plan on taking a break for the holidays and won't be playing until next year. Either way, enemies today means friends tomorrow when you are involved, that process goes in reverse as well. We'll be best friends for ever someday!

[Owney OSullivan]

No peace for TPC until they stop turtling and actually use their WC's to fight IMO. I've personally fought a handful of people who had plenty of money and didn't fight back, and I've heard similar reports from a lot of OP members. You're at war, what else do you need your tens of millions of dollars for hmm? Are you guys vicious cobras or harmless turtles? I expected better from TPC because I have fought you many times and you always actually FOUGHT, and done it well.

And the way I heard it, TPC was offering peace to us, almost as if it was a gift or they were doing us a favor. So if there was any hint of "arrogance" in any of the peace talks, y'all shouldn't be surprised that we chose to continue fighting.(Especially since we wouldn't have too many options for the rest of the round as Hal already said) But hey, I'm not gov and I'm not in sooper seekrit backroom IRC channels, so I don't know exactly what was said or whom it was said to. But I'd find it hard to believe that TPC wanted to negotiate peace and we immediately said F off and rejected it, OP is not an unreasonable alliance. That would be a slap to the face, and that's not really how we do things. (Slapping nations in the face however is a whole different story )

[the wompus]

[quote name='Wired' timestamp='1321751368' post='2847178']
I never said it was a downdeclare to begin with, I said it has [b]become[/b] a downdeclare now and the intent is to continue in what has [b]become[/b] for all intents and purposes a curbstomp.

The reason I call it a curbstomp is our members really don't have any interest in fighting [b]anyone[/b] for 27 days straight, we simply don't take the game that seriously. So, whatever the intent, the functional outcome is you won't be fighting TPC for 14 more days, that simply won't happen.
[/quote]


I disagree. I think TPC takes this game VERY seriously.

Even if the portfolio/dossier thing was intended as schtick, it's still pretty interesting how much specific information was saved, remembered or logged.


And everybody keeps avoiding (and clearly NOT denying) the issue of how much money TPC still has.

I don't feel compelled to post spy reports on the OWF, but there is plenty of money remaining in the coffers. (Again, this may not be true 100% across the board and some may be broke - but it is noteworthy how many still do have money.)

This was the primary driver to continue fighting these wars. Maybe there is another explanation than flag running, and I hesitate to even go there AGAIN at the risk of beating a dead horse. I'd love to hear another reason to sit on money and not fight with it, though.

[bcortell]

[quote name='Owney OSullivan' timestamp='1321758986' post='2847279']
No peace for TPC until they stop turtling and actually use their WC's to fight IMO. I've personally fought a handful of people who had plenty of money and didn't fight back, and I've heard similar reports from a lot of OP members. You're at war, what else do you need your tens of millions of dollars for hmm? Are you guys vicious cobras or harmless turtles? [/quote]
This would be my thought too. I bet if peace would be declared, a lot of those guys not fighting would suddenly be active again.

[King James XVIII]

[quote name='Owney OSullivan' timestamp='1321758986' post='2847279']
And the way I heard it, TPC was offering peace to us, almost as if it was a gift or they were doing us a favor.[/quote]

Incorrect. That would have been a ridiculous thing for me to do to, especially when fighting one of the top alliances in TE while there is clearly a lot of "tension" between the two alliances.