The dawn of the Iron Age

[Prodigal Moon]

Having treaties all across the web can either be indicative of hegemonic leadership or a completely incoherent foreign policy. Guess which is the case with IRON.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Prodigal Moon

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1325551238' post='2891032']
TOP [s]Ardus[/s] wanted Polar [s]XX[/s] destroyed. Yevgeni [s]He[/s] can't do it by himself because TOP [s]MK[/s] [s](and it's vassal, GOONS)[/s] simply doesn't have the firepower. If he went to alliances like MK [s]TOP[/s] and VE [s]IRON[/s] and the other assorted meatshields and said "Hey, I want you to go kill Polar [s]XX[/s] for me" they would have told him to go screw. They'll take orders all day long, but they at least want to feel like they are making decisions for themselves.

So what does TOP [s]MK[/s] have to do? Simple. They have to arrange for the meatshields the wars they want (MK [s]NpO[/s] for XX [s]Duckroll[/s], SFs for Mjolnir, Non Grata for FARK etc) while making sure that NpO [s]XX[/s] falls in the process. Because if they gave the meatshields the wars they wanted ... and then said "Okay, now we'd like to destroy Polar [s]XX[/s]" ... many of the meatshields would have said "good luck with that" and refused to help (or more likely remained non-committal and stalled forever) - they never would have been able to sell to their general memberships (who still pretend/believe that they aren't meatshields) that set of wars without causing internal issues.

Everybody knows this. I don't know why you are pretending otherwise.
[/quote]
You finally cracked the code. Finally got us. We used MJ's hatred of SF, MK's hatred of XX and NG's hatred of FARK against them so we could have our war with Polar. How in the world did you see how ruse? I thought we had surely framed Ardus as the architect of all of this instead of Yevgeni.

Edit: The majority of people in our coalition got to fight the wars they wanted or have certain desired outcomes happen. That isn't because of some master plan created by a handful of people but rather a group of alliances coming together to work on a plan that was mutually beneficial.

Until you can understand this simple concept you will continue to sprout moronic conspiracy theories. Your entire post can be flipped around to make it seem like a number of people masterminded this war. Non Grata used TOP, Mj and MK's dislike of certain alliances in order to fight FARK and cause general mayhem. Or MJ used Non Grata, MK and TOP's dislike of certain alliances to finally square their deal with Superfriends. Or TOP used Non Grata, MK and Mj so we could have our war against Polar.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Feanor Noldorin

[Bob]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1325556022' post='2891106']
You finally cracked the code. Finally got us. We used MJ's hatred of SF, MK's hatred of XX and NG's hatred of FARK against them so we could have our war with Polar. How in the world did you see how ruse? I thought we had surely framed Ardus as the architect of all of this instead of Yevgeni.

Edit: The majority of people in our coalition got to fight the wars they wanted or have certain desired outcomes happen. That isn't because of some master plan created by a handful of people but rather a group of alliances coming together to work on a plan that was mutually beneficial.

Until you can understand this simple concept you will continue to sprout moronic conspiracy theories. Your entire post can be flipped around to make it seem like Non Grata, Mjolnir, MK or TOP is the master mind behind the whole war. Each faction got what they wanted and an argument could be made that each faction "used" the others to achieve this.
[/quote]
No no no you created our hatred of SF too! what are you missing here feanor come on

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1325556730' post='2891116']
No no no you created our hatred of SF too! what are you missing here feanor come on
[/quote]
Did we create your hatred of SF or was it Ardus?!

[Monster]

I like how I helped set it up. Honestly, a lot of what happened wasn't really necessary. FOK had more than enough reason to cancel Fark because of Fark's behavior in the last war. I'm not sure what the long-term thinking there was. Same goes for SFs really, R&R is just lucky they're FOK's oldest treaty because they weren't exactly stellar either. RIA decided to take a dump on PB before, during, and after the war and somehow thought that the misconceptions the OWF had would carry them somehow. That's without pointing to the obvious things.

edit: If anything applying the pressure made things a lot more difficult because people don't like to have orders barked at them like "cancel x." "Screw over your allies because we want to roll their allies." Was VE ever seriously going to support an alliance that hates them in Polar? No, you just would have had to manage the counters in a careful fashion. Would you be able to impose GODesque terms on them? No, but given that most of Xiph's demands have been more spectacle than follow through, it didn't make much sense to begin with. You didn't really have the warchests in June so instead you just did things that would result in a backlash after. I could have predicted the coalition that is fighting then. If you had just shut up, things would have gone a lot smoother for your cause. The worst case scenario in a DR vs Polar centered for you would have been a peripheral commitment by certain PB alliances.

Ardus was saying NPO would never help Mjolnir, which I always knew was total crap, given Mary and Brehon spent most of DH-NPO sucking up to Valhalla? Did the Olympus Mjolnir sigs not give a clear hint either? Jesus. Did NoR have to put up with Letum's whining which was always transparently BS? Sure.

Sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Roquentin

[Krack]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325558279' post='2891144']
I like how I helped set it up.[/quote]

Well, it was certainly done well. But most people don't like it when they are used as labor and then tossed aside when the job is done. To each their own, I suppose.

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325558279' post='2891144']Honestly, a lot of what happened wasn't really necessary. FOK had more than enough reason to cancel Fark because of Fark's behavior in the last war. I'm not sure what the long-term thinking there was.
[/quote]

I'm told FOK did not have one single internal discussion about dropping their treaty with FARK until Ardus came and told them to do it.

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325558279' post='2891144']Same goes for SFs really, R&R is just lucky they're FOK's oldest treaty because they weren't exactly stellar either. RIA decided to take a dump on PB before, during, and after the war and somehow thought that the misconceptions the OWF had would carry them somehow. That's without pointing to the obvious things.

edit: If anything applying the pressure made things a lot more difficult because people don't like to have orders barked at them like "cancel x." "Screw over your allies because we want to roll their allies." Was VE ever seriously going to support an alliance that hates them in Polar? No, you just would have had to manage the counters in a careful fashion. Would you be able to impose GODesque terms on them? No, but given that most of Xiph's demands have been more spectacle than follow through, it didn't make much sense to begin with. You didn't really have the warchests in June so instead you just did things that would result in a backlash after. I could have predicted the coalition that is fighting then. If you had just shut up, things would have gone a lot smoother for your cause. The worst case scenario in a DR vs Polar centered for you would have been a peripheral commitment by certain PB alliances.

Ardus was saying NPO would never help Mjolnir, which I always knew was total crap, given Mary and Brehon spent most of DH-NPO sucking up to Valhalla? Did the Olympus Mjolnir sigs not give a clear hint either? Jesus. Did NoR have to put up with Letum's whining which was always transparently BS? Sure.
[/quote]

Could you PM this to Feanor? He's starting to think he's not a seat filler.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Krack

[Monster]

It's not even really Feanor since TOP's wcs probably weren't bad then. More MK, but it's addressed to everyone who enjoyed playing NPO-lite when it was a dick move.

[Krack]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325563980' post='2891213']
More MK, but it's addressed to everyone who enjoyed playing NPO-lite when it was a dick move.
[/quote]

Interesting comment, seeing as though that last part includes yourself. Oh how delighted you were to make sure everyone knew you were the driving force behind NPO getting it's second beatdown last year because the teens were bored.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Krack

[SWAT128]

Other than the downgrade with VE, I'm not exactly sure how we took at "dump" on PB.

[Monster]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1325564620' post='2891226']
Interesting comment, seeing as though that last part includes yourself. Oh how delighted you were to make sure everyone knew you were the driving force behind NPO getting it's second beatdown last year because the teens were bored.
[/quote]

It would have happened anyway through treaty chains since it's been revealed what was going to happen(Legion on FOK), but everyone liked to say MK did it and they've really resented taking the flak for something they wanted to do over SirPaul's posting. I mean, considering they're still a convenient target now, I don't know what you're talking about. Unless you think all wars are based on "teens being bored, which wouldn't be an inaccurate description but means little in this context. edit: There's a possibility you're the one being purposefully obtuse when all of these things have already been accounted for, so lol. I don't even recall isolating NPO or anything or ordering allies to cancel on them. I had no common ties to Polar either. Haven't I already said if I didn't have FAN on board I wouldn't have preempted?


[quote name='SWAT128' timestamp='1325566198' post='2891252']
Other than the downgrade with VE, I'm not exactly sure how we took at "dump" on PB.
[/quote]

You were trashing PB a million times. You attacked SLCB head-on. You vetoed the plan that could have avoided the RoK situation. SOS stuff, too.


[quote name='Krack']I'm told FOK did not have one single internal discussion about dropping their treaty with FARK until Ardus came and told them to do it.[/quote]

I'm surprised, because it would have been a lot smarter to push for it internally rather than have Ardus come over.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Roquentin

[Krack]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325567754' post='2891278']
It would have happened anyway through treaty chains since it's been revealed what was going to happen(Legion on FOK), but everyone liked to say MK did it and they've really resented taking the flak for something they wanted to do over SirPaul's posting. I mean, considering they're still a convenient target now, I don't know what you're talking about. Unless you think all wars are based on "teens being bored, which wouldn't be an inaccurate description but means little in this context. edit: There's a possibility you're the one being purposefully obtuse when all of these things have already been accounted for, so lol.
[/quote]

I don't know how I could be any clearer. A year ago, when you attacked NPO again (unprovoked and with no reason other than Doomhouse was bored) - I had a conversation with you where I said (paraphrase) "I'm a little surprised these other idiots would do this, but I'm shocked you'd participate in it and not try to talk them out of it." And your response was (paraphrase) "Talk them out of it? It was my idea. I suggested it and made it happen! Hahaha!"

So ... for you, a year later, to chastise the rest of them with a statement like, "More MK, but it's addressed to everyone who enjoyed playing NPO-lite when it was a dick move" is comical.

[Monster]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1325569516' post='2891295']
I don't know how I could be any clearer. A year ago, when you attacked NPO again (unprovoked and with no reason other than Doomhouse was bored) - I had a conversation with you where I said (paraphrase) "I'm a little surprised these other idiots would do this, but I'm shocked you'd participate in it and not try to talk them out of it." And your response was (paraphrase) "Talk them out of it? It was my idea. I suggested it and made it happen! Hahaha!"

So ... for you, a year later, to chastise the rest of them with a statement like, "More MK, but it's addressed to everyone who enjoyed playing NPO-lite when it was a dick move" is comical.
[/quote]

Um, are you intentionally being an idiot about this? It was never about boredom. The DoW doesn't even say that. It had a clear strategic aim. If I wanted to do it over boredom, I'd have done it when the idea was originally suggested weeks before or when Xiph brought it up originally. I was called a chicken!@#$ by MK for not wanting to do it over boredom, so why don't you just eat that.

here you go since you lack the ability to read Krack:

[quote]The New Polar Order and her myriad allies have gone to great lengths to protect a single alliance from damage in this latest global calamity. Rather than putting forth a maximal effort in what was perceived to be a losing effort from the onset, these alliances have conspired to take the beating so that their flagship alliance can remain strong and resolute. Of particular note is the valorious Legion, whose mutual defense pact with the New Polar Order remains untapped. Perhaps it is a hope for a return to past 'glory.' Subservience suited them well throughout much of their existence, so this is not a particularly surprising strategy. I was asked in particular to pay great heed to the efforts of the Siberian Tiger Alliance in this regard, masterfully positioning alliances in a way to protect the core.[/quote]

It was already revealed to be spot on more or less, just with Polar's allies not actually being in on it.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Roquentin

[Krack]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325569748' post='2891301']
Um, are you intentionally being an idiot about this? It was never about boredom. The DoW doesn't even say that. It had a clear strategic aim. If I wanted to do it over boredom, I'd have done it when the idea was originally suggested weeks before.
[/quote]

Just for the sake of the rest of the community, let's remove the concept of boredom completely from the conversation. That doesn't change the fact that you making this rebuke ("More MK, but it's addressed to everyone who enjoyed playing NPO-lite when it was a dick move.") now makes you sound ridiculous in light of the truth that you were the ring-leader of the very same *@#$ show a year ago.

[Monster]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1325570118' post='2891307']
Just for the sake of the rest of the community, let's remove the concept of boredom completely from the conversation. That doesn't change the fact that you making this rebuke ("More MK, but it's addressed to everyone who enjoyed playing NPO-lite when it was a dick move.") now makes you sound ridiculous in light of the truth that you were the ring-leader of the very same *@#$ show a year ago.
[/quote]

How? Is simply playing politics the same thing? I don't really ever recall demanding cancellations from anyone. Most people in Umbrella weren't big fans of Polar/STA when MK was treatied to them and we never demanded it. Hell, that was the difference between me and another alliance with regards to TOP on IRON. I don't really recall playing groups off one another on false pretenses.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Roquentin

[Krack]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325569748' post='2891301']
here you go since you lack the ability to read Krack:
[quote name='Doomhouse DoW on NPO']
The New Polar Order and her myriad allies have gone to great lengths to protect a single alliance from damage in this latest global calamity. Rather than putting forth a maximal effort in what was perceived to be a losing effort from the onset, these alliances have conspired to take the beating so that their flagship alliance can remain strong and resolute. Of particular note is the valorious Legion, whose mutual defense pact with the New Polar Order remains untapped. Perhaps it is a hope for a return to past 'glory.' Subservience suited them well throughout much of their existence, so this is not a particularly surprising strategy. I was asked in particular to pay great heed to the efforts of the Siberian Tiger Alliance in this regard, masterfully positioning alliances in a way to protect the core.
[/quote]
[/quote]

Oh fun. Let's post more from that very same DoW ...

[quote name='Doomhouse DoW on NPO']Or, perhaps it is even more simple than that.

Maybe it's just a matter of loathing. Maybe it is because we believe that Everything. Must. Die. Maybe it is because we think you deserve to burn.

It doesn't actually matter. Whatever reason we decided to state, our foes would take their own, believe it, and attempt to spin it to their benefit. I welcome them to try. I wish them good luck, even, for they will surely need it. As for us? We always hear people saying "Do something about it!" with great bravado, so how about this?[/quote]

That doesn't sound like "It was never about boredom. The DoW doesn't even say that. It had a clear strategic aim," to me, but then again, I read the entire DoW and not just the first paragraph. Either way, as I already stated, it's irrelevant to my point - the attack you orchestrated on NPO in Jan 2011 was no more "strategic" in it's aim than the current set of wars going on right now. For you to chastise them is borderline funny. It might be worthy of a rebuke (like most things, some parts probably are and some probably arent), but if you think you're the one with the moral clarity to make it, you're delusional.

[Monster]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1325570824' post='2891314']
Oh fun. Let's post more from that very same DoW ...



That doesn't sound like "It was never about boredom. The DoW doesn't even say that. It had a clear strategic aim," to me, but then again, I read the entire DoW and not just the first paragraph. Either way, as I already stated, it's irrelevant to my point - the attack you orchestrated on NPO in Jan 2011 was no more "strategic" in it's aim than the current set of wars going on right now. For you to chastise them is borderline funny. It might be worthy of a rebuke (like most things, some parts probably are and some probably arent), but if you think you're the one with the moral clarity to make it, you're delusional.
[/quote]

I haven't even said anything about the current set of wars. You are mistaking my criticism of the approach taken to them to the wars themselves. I've said petty much everything could have been accomplished without the sadistic bluster employed to get it. I even said, strategically, all the talk harmed the cause.


So what? That was just window dressing. The first paragraph contained the actual reason and it was always the reason for me. Unfortunately people did take Archon up on the offer.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Roquentin

[Krack]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325570893' post='2891316']
So what? That was just window dressing.
[/quote]

You signed your name to it. You own it.

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325570893' post='2891316']
The first paragraph contained the actual reason and it was always the reason for me. Unfortunately people did take Archon up on the offer.
[/quote]

I did a quick search, but I must have missed your post in the resulting 81 page thread where you disavowed that section of the DoW.

[Samus]

Someone remind me how this thread went from praising the 'IRON age' to irrelevant arguements about NPO/DH?

[Krack]

[quote name='Samus' timestamp='1325571643' post='2891327']
Someone remind me how this thread went from praising the 'IRON age' to irrelevant arguements about NPO/DH?
[/quote]

You have a fair point. Getting back to the OP, I think we're all in agreement that it's ludicrous to believe IRON, based on their history, will begin influencing any foreign affairs that take place on Planet Bob.

[Monster]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1325572133' post='2891335']
You have a fair point. Getting back to the OP, I think we're all in agreement that it's ludicrous to believe IRON, based on their history, will begin influencing any foreign affairs that take place on Planet Bob.
[/quote]

I think they can if they want to. It would be easier than someone like MHA because the government has full authority.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Roquentin

[Krack]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1325572272' post='2891336']
I think they can if they want to. It would be easier than someone like MHA because the government has full authority.
[/quote]

Of course they [i]could[/i], if they wanted to (it's not like they are TOP) - they are very large and have several meatshield alliances already under them. But the thesis of the OP was that they [i]would[/i].

... and anyone would be foolish to believe that.

[Monster]

An issue in the past is that they were very closed off. The current government seems to be more extroverted. NAH was good at that too.

[Ardus]

[quote name='Samus' timestamp='1325571643' post='2891327']
Someone remind me how this thread went from praising the 'IRON age' to irrelevant arguements about NPO/DH?
[/quote]
This outcome was inevitable the moment somebody decided to pin down just who is walking out of this war in the best position.

I for one am enjoying all the attention. That and watching Roq squirm under Krack's surprisingly probing questions and points.

[Monster]

I, for one, agree with Krack's point and will apply it to the CAMTIN DoW which was more about a killing machine rather than a preemptive strike against CSN, TTK, and CRAP. I mean, it said it in topic that they were just being used as a "Military testing center." Certainly had nothing to do with the other stuff going on that stemmed from TOP/IRON's dec.

edit: In addition, I am going to adopt the line that IRON/TOP attacked just because they don't like C&G and not because it had anything to do with the NpO-\m/ conflict. I mean it did say both things, but I will always accept the least context-informed explanation.

No, you obtuse fool. It's especially dumb of you to say while Fark is just repeating the same thing with the exception of the DoS, and that's not really too much better. Unless we're in old Fark school of thought where any war is bad.

Ardus: Machiavellian mastermind or personification of how MK's posting style is injurious to any cause they push forth?

Also Krack, who cares about moral clarity or being fit to hold the high ground? The issue is these guys haven't had competent opposition in the last 3 years. Where better for it to come from? The idea that there is some totally clean person around to denounce them is insane. Given you know all the details, was Van Hoo really a bastion of moralism? No. The tactics I have used have more or less been universally adopted, so no one is really fit to go after me for that. NpO was attacked for a two year old grudge after already getting rolled earlier in the year. They are being kept at war until their upper tier exits pm. Preemptive strikes have been used all around. Coalition warfare, which was decried before, is now something good to people.

They have lived off the achievement of others and dispense with the people who do the actual work after they are no longer in line. SFs made the decision to side with them and Frostbite over TOP because TOP/IRON was getting too big and are the only reason MK could win. Apparently, that was a huge mistake on their part. Hell, it was a mistake on my part, too. I'd have had less issues if the IRON summer 2010 cancellations went through earlier on because DR could have been a potential independent cluster with Citadel. I didn't really want to go to bat for TPF or GGA, really. I should have just told MK to suck it and hit Polar when they declared on TOP. I hate to say it, but Nizzle was right. It's not even NPO-lite. It is literally NPO.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Roquentin

[Stewie]

Surely this is the Pandoran Complaints age?