Announcement from Non Grata

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Mogar' timestamp='1335593184' post='2960344']
The only reason you'd do the pre empt in the first place would be if you thought it was best for TOP, which would lead back to the stat collecting.
[/quote]
TOP can be accused of a lot of things, but I don't think stat collecting during war is a good one. They are always more than willing to fight a good amount of NS if the situation calls for it.

Edited April 28, 2012 by Methrage

[potato]

[quote name='Mogar' timestamp='1335603377' post='2960366']
alliances like TOP/Gramlins/other upper tier alliances, in the current method of coalition warfare would only need to be active for the first round of wars(admittedly still incredibly destructive at those tech levels), nuclear anarchy prevents your enemies from re-declaring, and their allies(your alliance in the case of TOP) will take the damage from then onward, since by the time the first round nations are out of anarchy, they'll be fractions of their former size, and not in range of the nations that declared in the first round.
[/quote]

Welp. You heard it here first, boys and gals: TOP vs C&G lasted only one week. The rest of the time, both sides were staring at each other menacingly.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1335606066' post='2960371']
Welp. You heard it here first, boys and gals: TOP vs C&G lasted only one week. The rest of the time, both sides were staring at each other menacingly.
[/quote]

My evil stare made Yevgeni tremble, I know it did.

[Sigrun Vapneir]

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1335591818' post='2960340']
Oh, it's Schattenman's "Attention at any cost!" routine again. Yawn. You're a fairly intelligent guy, Schatt, and implying that I flushed TOP down the toilet by participating in a highly risky preempt against an entire bloc and then following that two lines later with the implication that I'm a stat collector was not at all well thought-out. I can thus only assume that it was motivated by your constant and desperate need to always get a contrary word in.[/quote]

Err no.

[quote]
[quote]Umbrella would likely--as usual--have been content to just sit around and admire its tech numbers.[/quote]

Crymson single-handedly takes irony to new heights as only he could. [/quote]

Of all non-neutral alliances top has most often been accused of sitting around admiring your tech. Umbrella would probably be number 2. I dont really validate that sort of accusation, personally. I'm an old hippy myself and it's the last thing I'd criticise you for. But seeing a member of top taking that type of swipe at Umbrella is [i]hilarious[/i].

But the Tromp-baiting I dont get. It looks like typical Crymson diplomacy to me, I dont see the irony, perhaps someone would be kind enough to explain that one to me? Doubtless I missed something.

[Proxian Empire]

This was unexpected from my point of view. I am curious to see what will happen next with NG.

[Lurunin]

[quote name='King Penchuk' timestamp='1335621520' post='2960409']
This was unexpected from my point of view. I am curious to see what will happen next with NG.
[/quote]

I honestly don't know but I'm finding it hilarious the people who are only now making their hate of NG known on the world stage AFTER they leave PB

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1335623531' post='2960414']
I honestly don't know but I'm finding it hilarious the people who are only now making their hate of NG known on the world stage AFTER they leave PB
[/quote]

Who would that be?

[Lord Boris]

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1335623531' post='2960414']
I honestly don't know but I'm finding it hilarious the people who are only now making their hate of NG known on the world stage AFTER they leave PB
[/quote]

Actually, I suspect NG has had much more vocal opposition than most alliances out there already, with the likely exceptions of Polar, MK, and GOONS.

[suryanto tan]

[quote name='Lurunin' timestamp='1335623531' post='2960414']
I honestly don't know but I'm finding it hilarious the people who are only now making their hate of NG known on the world stage AFTER they leave PB
[/quote]

What?

Half of PB worth was derived from the Non Grata. If there was anyone one should fear off in PB, it was NG.

Edited April 29, 2012 by suryanto tan

[Monster]

[quote name='Lord Boris' timestamp='1335628091' post='2960425']
Actually, I suspect NG has had much more vocal opposition than most alliances out there already, with the likely exceptions of Polar, MK, and GOONS.
[/quote]

This is spot on. A lot of people just don't notice it since GOONS has been more in the spotlight lately. I'm actually surprised more about all the "good luck NG" stuff.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Yevgeni Luchenkov' timestamp='1335584859' post='2960297']
Except we actually took several targets on Fark as they attacked NPO, something you know (or should know?). What was our link to the NPO? Nonexistent.

To be honest, I'm not sure why this is devolving into TOP vs PB, not that I mind it. We are thankful for the help given to us (the war coalition) by NG, the PB element we found the most helpful and easier to work with. That's all there is to it.

How you doing these days, JA? Btw, I don't think Umbrella acted in a way that was opposed to our goals, in any way or form. Au contraire.
[/quote]

Crymson started it

Yeah we didn't act in a way which was opposed to your goals but certain people (like Crymson) have made it clear that they expected more from us which I feel is pretty unreasonable.

I'm doing alright though thanks, taking a break from the halls of government, how about you?

[Crymson]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1335649047' post='2960521']
Crymson started it

Yeah we didn't act in a way which was opposed to your goals but certain people (like Crymson) have made it clear that they expected more from us which I feel is pretty unreasonable.
[/quote]

Ah, and here I was thinking that you were just backing up Tromp and/or displaying PB solidarity, or some such; given that it's Tromp we're speaking of, though, I suppose that was a somewhat implausible notion. While I can see how you may have interpreted my words as you did--though I could not have predicted before the fact that you would do so--my original post was meant only as a rebuttal to Tromp; and the content therein was meant to be affirmation of NG in that context, not a direct indictment of the alliances still in PB.

You and I spoke many times about CN politics in the months leading up to the most recent war. Because I was always very candid in about my feelings and motivations in our conversations, I made sure to regularly note that because we (TOP) had no formal relations with Umbrella, we (myself included) did not presume to expect anything from Umbrella as far as our own agenda was concerned. I don't understand why you reached the conclusion that I felt otherwise.

Edited April 29, 2012 by Crymson

[Comrade Goby]

Dass wat VE gets for not being ceptable

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1335649047' post='2960521']
Crymson started it

Yeah we didn't act in a way which was opposed to your goals but certain people (like Crymson) have made it clear that they expected more from us which I feel is pretty unreasonable.

I'm doing alright though thanks, taking a break from the halls of government, how about you?
[/quote]
Very similarly. I thought I'd have the time to handle the Polaris reparations - it felt like a nice cycle - but I didn't due to RL reasons (an unexpected change of schedule).

As far as the past war goes, Umbrella did what Umbrella could do, given treaty conflicts and a lack of, shall we say, interest in the global war. And that was perfectly fine to me.

As for people attacking TOP for not doing enough, our first strike and subsequent help against Farkistan opened us to counter-attacks from all of Polar's sphere, all of SF and all of XX. We put ourselves on the line for what we considered our war. I don't think alliances who were in the coalition were disappointed by us, but I could be wrong.

I'll leave the thread for now, as this is about NG leaving PB. A move most people should think as pretty logical.

[IYIyTh]

[img]http://i.mediatakeout.com/avatars/1288297569-1658-stewie-griffingif.jpg[/img]

How dare you, Umbrella. [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/mad.gif[/img]

Your political maneuvering was completely insufficient!
Fighting someone elses battles was not enough. You should have been pre-empting your direct allies instead of attacking their MDoAP partners through optional aggression treaties while ignoring mutual and optional defense treaties with your other allies. And Fark, man! Fark! Don't get me started on how you absconded here! I mean come on -- downgrading and ignoring treaties just to grease the wheels aside -- what's the extra step in being on Fark a whole week before you're completely out of range? I just don't get why you wouldn't want to do this for us.

In fact, you should have been doing the upper tier work for your non-allies. I get that this really is none of your concern at all and you probably have no business in it whatsoever, but why not just grind your own upper tier down for our gain? It is totally in your best interest to be subservient to the will of your non-allies, and let's face it: Who wants to have to read a bunch of posts attempting to justify why you should be doing our work for us? You might as well just do it, because we're going to be ungreatful ingrates either way.

You have some nerve.

Also -- I am really saddened by the departure of Non Grata from PB. Just crocodile tears.

Edited April 29, 2012 by IYIyTh

[Monster]

Honestly given Umbrella's handling post-war of their FA situation, which meant no real change except realizing that an MDoAP with an alliance you don't really care about is untenable, I don't know why they didn't just cut the crap from get-go and do what the post describes. It's funny remembering all those posts about how there was going to be change after the war in terms of FA policy. I guess cancelling a treaty that was going to be downgraded most likely anyway is a big move.

Well, I guess there has been change, but NG made it happen and not Umbrella.

Edited April 29, 2012 by Roquentin

[magicninja]

Yeah this makes me feel ways about things too.

[Stewie]

[img]http://i.mediatakeout.com/avatars/1288297569-1658-stewie-griffingif.jpg[/img]

Myth, Myth, Myth.....

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1335728889' post='2960833']
[img]http://i.mediatakeout.com/avatars/1288297569-1658-stewie-griffingif.jpg[/img][/quote]

using my likeness... CB if I've ever seen one!!


[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1335728889' post='2960833']
How dare you, Umbrella. [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/mad.gif[/img]

Your political maneuvering was completely insufficient!
Fighting someone elses battles was not enough. You should have been pre-empting your direct allies instead of attacking their MDoAP partners through optional aggression treaties while ignoring mutual and optional defense treaties with your other allies. And Fark, man! Fark! Don't get me started on how you absconded here! I mean come on -- downgrading and ignoring treaties just to grease the wheels aside -- what's the extra step in being on Fark a whole week before you're completely out of range? I just don't get why you wouldn't want to do this for us.

In fact, you should have been doing the upper tier work for your non-allies. I get that this really is none of your concern at all and you probably have no business in it whatsoever, but why not just grind your own upper tier down for our gain? It is totally in your best interest to be subservient to the will of your non-allies, and let's face it: Who wants to have to read a bunch of posts attempting to justify why you should be doing our work for us? You might as well just do it, because we're going to be ungreatful ingrates either way.

You have some nerve.

Also -- I am really saddened by the departure of Non Grata from PB. Just crocodile tears.
[/quote]

Which treaties did Umb downgrade or ignore? the MHA treaty? Myth, you screwed that one up all on your own bro and then threw the downgrade back in their face? Harsh man...

If you mean Sparta... well their government were targeting allies with hate speech and giving a platform to Roquentin's rants. None of us in PB forced that cancellation.

The coalition didn't need Umbrella for upper tier work, we never asked for their help either for that conflict, I asked them when NG were engaged with UPN as a "what if Polar and FARK hit us" concept and they said no. The coalition took this into account as soon as they asked NG if we would have TOP/IRON's back and, as you can see, we arranged a multi sphere wrecking crew to handle that. (Much love to NPO, Oly, TIO, TLR, NoR, BAPS and TOP).

[Monster]

He's referring exclusively to the MHA downgrade and ignoring treaties during the war.

Not my fault if Umbrella's allies are !@#$%* and their own President didn't have an issue with my "hate speech." Hell, I even got told by an Umb gov member on the time to stay focused on MK and not respond to everyone. I mean, I don't really see much of a difference between feeling a certain way and broadcasting it, tbqh. I just had ammo. It's almost as if Umbrella's allies didn't make a habit of trashing Sparta lol.

You're right though. I don't think it was forced on Umbrella. I'd probably give Natan the award for making the Sparta cancellation happen because he's dumb. Hopefully for his sake it doesn't come back to haunt him. Maybe Raken too since he was planning on pushing for it. Though like I've said repeatedly Sparta was going to downgrade the treaty anyway if no change happened on Umbrella's end. I was the one arguing against downgrading.

I'd say the overall naivete on the part of Umbrella members living in the fantasy world where Sparta wouldn't be bitter about MK and the war is another contributing cause. Of course, the fact that their President's positions hold no weight ranks up high there too.

Edited April 30, 2012 by Roquentin

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='Stewie' timestamp='1335747056' post='2960940']
Myth, Myth, Myth.....



using my likeness... CB if I've ever seen one!!

[/quote]

Don't hold your breathe.

[quote name='Stewie' timestamp='1335747056' post='2960940']

Which treaties did Umb downgrade or ignore? the MHA treaty? Myth, you screwed that one up all on your own bro and then threw the downgrade back in their face? Harsh man... [/quote]

Let's not be revisionist here. Umbrella was moving in a different direction the moment Roquentin left office. I think I actually frustrated Umbrella members by being so fiercely dedicated of the survival of the treaty altogether.
No one who I actually held conversation with could in their right mind pretend that the treaty was "downgraded," for any greater reason (see: Not cancelled by one vote.) thanUmbrella planned on embarking on the misadventures of its non-allies for little gain and as on display here: ungreatfulness. I don't really hold that so much against them as I do their actions afterwards. Or, in other words: Participating in deplorable acts simply because they might get awkward looks if they decided not to lend a help to a cause that wasn't their own.

In fact, it was one of the main points in the really apalling appeal I had to make to my allies at the time to consider defending their allies or simply not aid in their destruction firsthand.

As for after the downgrade -- I don't believe [i][b]we [/b][/i]did anthing of the sort. But that's a whole can of worms that takes away from the really terse and equally contemptible message I had for both parties I was referring to in the conversation and at the same time is a suggestion that actually has no bearing or relation to any of your points.

Was my private gut feeling that Umbrella was going to leave MHA and Sparta out to dry made public? Sure. Nevermind that I had been assured this wasn't a problem in the relationship by the alliance's leader--- Ultimately ...Was it Wrong?

[quote name='Stewie' timestamp='1335747056' post='2960940']

If you mean Sparta... well their government were targeting allies with hate speech and giving a platform to Roquentin's rants. None of us in PB forced that cancellation. [/quote]

No, you misunderstood me. I'm referring to the laughable concept where alliances like The Apparatus were defending the Mostly Harmless Alliance on an Optional Defense Pact while Umbrella was actively seeking ways to engage MHA and Sparta's allies through optional Aggression pacts and effectively ignoring their existing treaties with them.

[quote name='Stewie' timestamp='1335747056' post='2960940']
The coalition didn't need Umbrella for upper tier work, we never asked for their help either for that conflict, I asked them when NG were engaged with UPN as a "what if Polar and FARK hit us" concept and they said no. The coalition took this into account as soon as they asked NG if we would have TOP/IRON's back and, as you can see, we arranged a multi sphere wrecking crew to handle that. (Much love to NPO, Oly, TIO, TLR, NoR, BAPS and TOP).
[/quote]

Perhaps you might want to holler at your boy, because Crymson let his and I'm sure many of that coalitions feelings slip that they were/are ungreatful ingrates and they felt Umbrella should've bent even more backwards (seriously if they had done so even more they might have been bending forward,) for a cause they had little to gain from and even less reason to be involved.

I know there were multiple attempts by multiple parties on multiple occasions and I'm sure the call for them to directly attack Fark or others was more than a minor annoyance.

Edited April 30, 2012 by IYIyTh

[Monster]

Let's not forget Umbrella approved the preemptive strike on MHA.

I mean, to be honest, Myth, it was kind of a !@#$%* for me on a personal level due to outside stuff and dealing with MK is a full time job. In retrospect, I probably would have pushed for just staying out altogether since we had nothing to gain from participation and actively aiding the destruction of our allies. Alternatively, limiting counters on allies would have been the right thing, but bit participation just to please people was a bad idea. I'd say VE and FOK had the right ideas. I always saw just letting our allies get wiped out as self-castration, and evidently, it is the case and the product is a 13m NS alliance of eunuchs.

Edited April 30, 2012 by Roquentin

[Crymson]

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1335748369' post='2960949']
Perhaps you might want to holler at your boy, because Crymson let his and I'm sure many of that coalitions feelings slip that they were/are ungreatful ingrates and they felt Umbrella should've bent even more backwards (seriously if they had done so even more they might have been bending forward,) for a cause they had little to gain from and even less reason to be involved.
[/quote]

I was going to write something about your awful reading comprehension, but I realized that further evidence of your general stupidity is necessary to nobody.

Edited April 30, 2012 by Crymson

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1335751877' post='2960967']
I was going to write something about your awful reading comprehension, but I realized that further evidence of your general stupidity is necessary to nobody.
[/quote]

[img]http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/masonry/000/233/314/fd7.jpg[/img]

Sometimes I think you actually gesture behind you after you're done writing as if there were an invisible crowd of friends who find you completely hilarious or fist pump the air in celebration.

Tell me more about how Umbrella should have done more to advance your own agenda, being non-allies and getting pretty much nothing out of it?

[Monster]

Anyway, Deinos for PB '12?

[trimm]

I love how people are treating this as some significant move when NG still has treaties with most of the alliances in PB. Redundancy for the win!

And for heaven's sake, everyone and their brother knows that Umbrella has no idea what to do when it comes to their treaties, why are we discussing it here?