Jump to content

Opportunity Lost


Brehon
 Share

Recommended Posts

We have all seen peace terms that are good, bad, healthy, destructive, oppressive, foolish and frankly just dumb. Time evolves and we take the lessons learned and move forward, or at least attempt to. I have had the fortune of being on both sides of the table as well as an outside observer. Each incident has given way to new knowledge and understanding of the various personalities, alliances and situations in this world. I try to be level headed (hell I work on that all the time) and when I have been foolish I have been quick to acknowledge it and move on. I will openly say I would like to punish those that have jumped on my alliance, win or lose. But its an emotional response and once the emotions go away, logic has to step in. It is in this arena I write this post.

Plainly put, FARK and FAN jumped the NPO for a DOS that solidified our allies to a side. No problem, its war these things are part of it. In response to our counter & in defense of FARK, Sparta jumps on Oly (and [s]Valhalla[/s] I meant BAPS damnit!!!). Those fronts are met with numeric losses that were/are not very arguable. You don't lose that kind of NS and go look at me I am the victor. Hell I was there when we tried that in the DH/NPO war. It was foolish then, it was foolish now. Make no mistake none have said "we have won this". What they have said is "we are not defeated". In and by itself this is prideful propaganda and in this I understand and can accept it. Doesn't change it from being foolish.

However a doorway has now been opened. For the first time in a long time, a huge list of victorious alliances have stated "No reps, admit defeat, end wars, don't re-enter". This has been met with "Sorry that isn't acceptable. We aren't defeated. We don't like the no re-entry." I can only say W...T...F. In his case it is particularly rude (and that is the right word for it) considering the war aggressors (FARK) lost, numeric or otherwise. The only thing left is for the alliance to lose even more NS as they get closer and closer to their mathematical bottom (#of nations x min NS (which isn't zero) = mathematical bottom). This isn't good for the alliance nor the community. This was matched by Sparta at this point. Trust me, as a person who used the PM tactic I understand. But a loss is a loss.

Two things will now follow. First the next major conflict I am willing to bet people wont consider white peace (no reps) because it wasn't appreciated in action (in words everyone has been most gracious). It wont be worth the effort to even talk about it. Instead we will see reps again and I imagine they will be painful simply so the point is made. Second new bitterness and disrespect is formed and any fun is pulled out of it. Bitterness and disrespect because as I stated above, gov members (and alliance members) will simply say screw it. Fun, which this should all be, is taken away because what fun is there in winning or participating if people are going to act smug and dis-ingenuous.

If war is meant to be fun, as many have claimed, accepting or admitting defeat, surrendering or similar is all part of it. No by acting in the way people are, we have opened the door for the end of wars to be just as !@#$%* as they were in the past. I guess congratulations are in order. For all the hate and for all the changes wanted, you really didn't want them at all.

Edited by Brehon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 350
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That's not how war works.

While it may be unaimiable to watch one's lower tiers suffer from the wanton destruction brought unto it by large wonder/improv full nations, it's the price you pay in war.
While there is a hint of you downplaying what seems to be the reason your alliance was attacked, it's about as valid as the reason you had for the DoS in the first place.

War is hell, and it takes multiple parties to determine when that conflict ends. The aim of war is not to pitch a quick fight, accept that many alliances have had it in for you and call it a night for some. No, there are many interpretations to war, and the OOC reasons aside for ending one, I'll be damned if I consider a member of IRON who would not give battle to Polaris because they feel [i]they[/i] are ready to end a fight because they've taken a hit or two as being justified. No, the war ends when my government decides it. I can not fault my enemy soldiers for holding out for whatever it may be, just as much as I do not hold it agains my enemies government for making war painful. I would expect and respect nothing less.

Edited by IYIyTh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1326473799' post='2898811']
Why wait for next war?

They clearly preempted you, and you won. They don't appreciate the white peace offers, I say start adding on 50 tech per member for every day they avoid taking peace.
[/quote]

I would like to issue a Declaration of Support for this course of action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1326473799' post='2898811']
Why wait for next war?

They clearly preempted you, and you won. They don't appreciate the white peace offers, I say start adding on 50 tech per member for every day they avoid taking peace.
[/quote]

^this

I dont like dealing with reps, but I'd they are doing something you dont like, punish them for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1326473889' post='2898812']
I would like to issue a Declaration of Support for this course of action.
[/quote]

You could always just declare war on Sparta if you feel so strongly on the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1326473889' post='2898812']
I would like to issue a Declaration of Support for this course of action.
[/quote]

Careful that could be followed by a pre-empt in response :)

Myth - I have no problem with them joining the war, I explained that (or so I thought). War is hell.... agreed but some (particularly those involved in this front) have claimed its all fun. THAT is the basis of my post. Meh, whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fark and company, you guys are sovereign alliances, and as such you have every right to refuse a "concession of defeat" and "no re-entry", foolish as it may seem to us.

However, you must recognize that as another sovereign alliance, we do not take too kindly to, at the end of a tough war, having to deal with opponents that act like petulant children and refuse a very lenient resolution not out of any honor or practicality, but for sheer stubborn and arrogant pride.

You also have, of course, the right to believe your pride is worth more than your prosperity or community. But we also have every right to regard your artificial and unnecessary extension of this war for the sake of said pride to be absolutely ludicrous. Especially when we've had to resist significant pressure to seek punitive terms, only to have that resistance thrown in our face with your actions.

We aren't stupid you know. If an alliance looks like they're out to damage us as much as possible out of sheer spite, secure in the belief that they'll have a free pass out of the conflict at the end, you'll start to see some pretty convincing arguments that said "free pass" should be removed.

Edited by Letum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So because you're no longer having fun, you want to take your ball and go home and if not charge the neighborhood kids for playing with it? (now or in the future, but I'm pretty sure that this whole post is some sort of really weird awkward attempt at pressuring the alliances you have mentioned, which I don't think you'll find will be successful, perhaps even counterproductive)

While you summarize the achievements of what you objectively qualify as a victorious war, you do not accurately portray an objective situation where an outnumbered lower tier is in trouble due to game mechanics et al. True, their upper tiers may be decimated or much of their strength tied up in peace mode, but they are not entirely without friends and a few of those probably wouldn't mind seeing your alliance hit quite a bit more. Your alliance opened itself up for such a situation with its DoS, validity or other nonsense aside.

Essentially, your entire post is a summary belief that if an alliance disagrees with whether or not it has been defeated it is entitled to crippling reparations because not everyone (see: your alliance,) is enjoying the current logistical predicament.


Maybe I'm just more astounded that you didn't just heavy-fist in negotiations instead, unless there was some other roadblock we all need to be made aware of, but otherwise this looks like...well, whining.

From the "victors," no less.

Edited by IYIyTh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1326474963' post='2898834']
So because you're no longer having fun, you want to take your ball and go home and if not charge the neighborhood kids for playing with it? (now or in the future, but I'm pretty sure that this whole post is some sort of really weird awkward attempt at pressuring the alliances you have mentioned, which I don't think you'll find will be successful, perhaps even counterproductive)

While you summarize the achievements of what you objectively qualify as a victorious war, you do not accurately portray an objective situation where an outnumbered lower tier is in trouble due to game mechanics et al. True, their upper tiers may be decimated or much of their strength tied up in peace mode, but they are not entirely without friends and a few of those probably wouldn't mind seeing your alliance hit quite a bit more. Your alliance opened itself up for such a situation with its DoS, validity or other nonsense aside.

Essentially, your entire post is a summary belief that if an alliance disagrees with whether or not it has been defeated it is entitled to crippling reparations because not everyone (see: your alliance,) is enjoying the current logistical predicament.


Maybe I'm just more astounded that you didn't just heavy-fist in negotiations instead, unless there was some other roadblock we all need to be made aware of, but otherwise this looks like...well, whining.

From the "victors," no less.
[/quote]

:facepalm:

You cannot possibly be this dense. An opportunity to stop bs was missed. That was/is continues to be the point of my post. This war will end with a white peace and some fun by the parties involved. But I very much see this situation used in the future to justify pushing harsh reps on someone.

I have no issues with them jumping in and declaring on us. You have assumed incorrectly there isn't enjoyment in this war, you are incorrect.

As for my alliance being hit more... um yeah lets do that. Not a place we haven't been before. I know it is hard for people to believe there is any sincerity or care from the NPO for the community at large... that is your failing not mine. I actually do care. There was no roadblock, there was no need for heavy handed anything. Adding that for clarity.

You really want to go this route Myth?

Edited by Brehon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1326473799' post='2898811']
Why wait for next war?

They clearly preempted you, and you won. They don't appreciate the white peace offers, I say start adding on 50 tech per member for every day they avoid taking peace.
[/quote]

I'm finding it difficult to argue with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im going to go with the choir on this one. 50 tech per member, per day that they refuse terms to end a war that they have no chance of winning.

We have an entire community who thinks wars need to be shorter and more frequent, and now many of those same people who have echoed this sentiment in the past, want to drag a lost war longer based on foolish pride, or based on not wanting to surrender to an alliance that is part of the attacking coalition, because they feel a certain alliance is below them in stature, and as such will not sign any surrender document that has their name on it. Silly, petty pride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1326474963' post='2898834']
So because you're no longer having fun, you want to take your ball and go home and if not charge the neighborhood kids for playing with it? (now or in the future, but I'm pretty sure that this whole post is some sort of really weird awkward attempt at pressuring the alliances you have mentioned, which I don't think you'll find will be successful, perhaps even counterproductive)

While you summarize the achievements of what you objectively qualify as a victorious war, you do not accurately portray an objective situation where an outnumbered lower tier is in trouble due to game mechanics et al. True, their upper tiers may be decimated or much of their strength tied up in peace mode, but they are not entirely without friends and a few of those probably wouldn't mind seeing your alliance hit quite a bit more. Your alliance opened itself up for such a situation with its DoS, validity or other nonsense aside.

Essentially, your entire post is a summary belief that if an alliance disagrees with whether or not it has been defeated it is entitled to crippling reparations because not everyone (see: your alliance,) is enjoying the current logistical predicament.


Maybe I'm just more astounded that you didn't just heavy-fist in negotiations instead, unless there was some other roadblock we all need to be made aware of, but otherwise this looks like...well, whining.

From the "victors," no less.
[/quote]

Just when you think one man's ego-driven rants cant get any more stupid.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1326473987' post='2898816']
You could always just declare war on Sparta if you feel so strongly on the issue.
[/quote]

Declare on [i]what[/i] exactly?

Over 2/3rds of Sparta are in peace mode. Barely any free slots (last week genuinely zero in my range) and the ones that are "fighting" are doing so in turtle mode.

Sparta have lost this conflict and I can't see how they can possibly argue otherwise.

And we shouldn't forget they were the ones doing the declaring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's pretty clear this OP was a public statement by Brehon regarding the deterioration of NPO/FARK peace talks, as opposed to whining. Then again, Polar is still at war, and FARK went in to defend Polar, so this actually seems reasonable from both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1326475612' post='2898844']
Im going to go with the choir on this one. 50 tech per member, per day that they refuse terms to end a war that they have no chance of winning.
[/quote]

I would love to see this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...