IRON Announcement

[Hereno]

Hmmm did we fight in IRON-LSF? If not, hello.

 

I don't think so, but then that's a long time to remember individual opponents.

Hi. It's nice to meet you on such lovely terms?

 

You guys can kiss my ass now. How's that for diplomacy? Next time try not to make it obvious by showing up to suck up to us a week before there is a war where you would absolutely love for us to be on your side. If I were Int I'd already be drawing up the cancellation. Why keep ties to someone who basically just said they wouldn't mind seeing your bloc rolled?

 

INT currently has worse allies than that and still keep them. I wouldn't hold my breath for a cancellation unless OsRavan has already approved it for them.

 

But, hey, bud, if you're cool with allies who actively plot against you with their other allies, it was your surrender to sign.

 

And this post is just awesome in the context of my response to magicninja above (no irony/sarcasm).

[Icewolf]

We apparently live in an age where treaties cannot be cancelled because alliances are moving in different directions and one party comes to the conclusion that it cannot work out. There has to be a misconduct by one side, according to the logic here. So when IRON cancels a treaty for a reason that happens to involved a reference to another block, it can only be because we regard NPO as having acted in a very evil way by considering that block. Which means we must hate that block. 

 

Doesn't follow. I know some of you have agenda's to push. Magicninja and Rush Sykes (given neither of you are FA officials I will not tie your opinions to your alliances) are now broadcasting that they already knew IRON to be a bad sort and have a desire no doubt to justify that by assuming that IRON hates NPO and CnG and all their works because it then makes them the aggrieved party. 

Others just want to make a split between NPO and IRON because they are two of the most powerful players around, and not seeing any obvious wrongdoing from IRON towards NPO or NPO towards IRON they want to scream at NPO "SEE!! SEE!! THEY WANT TO BURN YOUR ALLIES." Which given we are still allied to their allies doesn't really make sense. But whoever lets sordid things like facts get in the way of good propoganda eh? 

 

The truth is IRON didn't, does not, and will not want to watch CnG get pounded. We didn't like it during the last war, and if it happens again (which I doubt will be in the near future) we are not looking forward to it. Clearly some in their number have a mild dislike towards us so we are unlikely to trade Christmas cards with those individuals, but we are still allied to and friends with The International so screwing over CnG means screwing over our allies. Given that isn't what IRON does I can only assume that others are projecting their standards onto us....make of that what you will. 

 

The truth of this matter is that we do not see a good future with NPO. Our paths are divergent and not likely to immediately realign. They accept that. We accept that. The examples in the OP are of us not working well together, not of us having a bitter dispute or completely misaligned goals or some great wrong that we are punishing with cancellation. It was just a sign that we do not work well together at this present time. We went down the road before of keeping a treaty that could not work well until a major wrong was committed. Seeing as so many have brought it up people should be aware of what that was. Was that a good idea? Did it end well for either side? Is it a practice to be encouraged? No. Should IRON tred the same path? No. 

 

That is all this is. We didn't work well together. Not "your goals are abhorrent to us." Not "you have betrayed us." Not "you are a great evil." Simply, "we don't work well together." I know that is a rare thing in this world, hence everyone assuming that we believe CnG must be destroyed at all cost because they are used to the idea that something must have been done wrong for a split. But that is not the case. To those on both sides trolling the other, you are like the "bros" that call the ex a hoe after an amicable break up...you are not helping and a great many of you I think are doing it not because you feel bad about the break up but because you disliked the ex. When quite frankly, I still expect to see NPO down at the bar on Friday night and hope to see them around plenty. 

Peace. 

[The Warrior]

They're speaking on people's intelligence without actually finding out what they're capable of, as well as commenting on people's overall mindset without ever knowing them.

 

But if you saw IRON's "task force" in BiPolar, this is still an upgrade.

Cute. When are you gonna get a free upgrade?

 

 

 

This is the second time IRON has cancelled a treaty without properly airing out grievances post-war.  Also, there are two new governments in place at both alliances, so it's possible that NPO has different priorities and Mia is just following the standard of being an awful leader for an awful alliance.

 

IRON just doesn't like making sensible decisions, basically.

IRON has no obligation whatsoever to allow you to see the "airing out" of our grievances. In both cases referenced above, reasons were communicated in private as is custom just about every time a cancelation clause is invoked.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hold on.

*runs to get pen and paper*

"IRON wants to see CnG destroyed."

 

Got it. Thanks.

You can read anything you want into a situation when you view it through a warped perspective. That does not make it reality.

 

 

 

You just had a long post where you cancelled on an ally for caring about CnG..... Somehow, I don't think INT are that stupid. It's noted and stored for future reference IRON. Thank you. We were kind of wondering who on that side was just trying to buddy up to us for bullshit reasons. Suspicion 1 confirmed. 

I don't think INT needs you to speak for them. They know where we stand and how we feel about them. Spouting off falsehoods at the mouth will not sway them. If they have any issues with us, they will discuss them with us.

 

 

 

Pre-topic I had absolutely no love for NPO and you people have me sitting here defending them. Ugh.

I'm sure thay appreciate your tremendous efforts. :rolleyes:

 

 

 

I can't believe that I'm about to say this but:

 

You're upset that the NPO wouldn't let you destroy their other allies without them having a say about it? IRON is as dumb as they are incompetent.

Are you being intentionally obtuse? IRON was not engaged with any of NPO's allies. A further extended war would have only damaged NPO's other allies by proxy, not by IRON's doing. We understand that you just had to get a shot in there though. We know you.

 

 

 

Couple that with the utter hilarity that IRON gov tried to sell to all of C&G in the months prior to the war. "We have no desire or wish to hit DH"... over and over and over and over.. to anyone who would drink the juice(fortunately, nobody in TLR bought that line of nonsense, we much preferred NPO's honest of saying "you realize DH is next?" IRON had no desire to war DH, but they wanted the war to last longer. They had no desire to see C&G harmed, but they wanted the war to last longer. It is an inconvenient truth that they try to cover their duplicity up with. 

Desiring that the war last longer and seeing C&G harmed are not the same thing. C&G did not have to be harmed futher. There existed the ability to exit the war at any time of your choosing by negotiating a separate peace. Now whether or not you decided to use that avenue was entirely up to you. Stop pretending that an extended war had to mean C&G suffer further damage.

 

I totally agree. IRON has so many friends of ours. Our friendships that we developed will remain even without an official document full of official terms. It's just as simple as our alliances have gone in separate directions politically and it was smart for IRON to be preemptive to not continue our official treaty. I personally do not think it takes a team of 20 unofficial philosophers to decide what the future holds regarding the future of the two alliances. Lets just leave it to the fact that our friends wanted to take a different direction, and that is all.

Finally, this statement here is all that anyone really need take away from the situation. IRON and NPO are friends. However, being friends does not mean that we always have to agree and at this time, our paths do not.

[RevolutionaryRebel]

EvU and Hooligans all had involvement on your side of the war too.

How could he forget? Given the strength of EvU's blitz, I'm sure they could have carried GATO all the way against Legion, Fark, R&R...

 

Desiring that the war last longer and seeing C&G harmed are not the same thing. C&G did not have to be harmed futher. There existed the ability to exit the war at any time of your choosing by negotiating a separate peace. Now whether or not you decided to use that avenue was entirely up to you. Stop pretending that an extended war had to mean C&G suffer further damage.

Ending it early would have resulted in significant political damage. Not to mention, the effect leaving DH isolated against an entire coalition would have had on C&G's primary Allies. Friends>Infra prevails?
 

Finally, this statement here is all that anyone really need take away from the situation. IRON and NPO are friends. However, being friends does not mean that we always have to agree and at this time, our paths do not.

Is it possible to have a treaty and still disagree? Why can the whole treaty rather than downgrade? Are your paths that divergent?

Edited May 24, 2013 by revolutionary rebel

[salsabeast1]

When will people realize Equilibrium was all about DH, and CnG was just a cockbloc?

[Mr Vicarious]

The only one that screwed up there was Polaris. What I was referring to was they stated they were in that channel and that is where they said the go ahead came from.

 

You and I both know that this isn't true.

Edited May 24, 2013 by Mr Vicarious

[RevolutionaryRebel]

When will people realize Equilibrium was all about DH, and CnG was just a cockbloc?

I'm sure there was another set of Alliances involved as well. After all, DH didn't declare war on itself.

[Omniscient1]

 
Yes, but generally the cores stay together. The core on this one.. is in a shambles. Not even you with your fantastical mind could deny that.

True, but that insinuates that Pacifica was unable to build a consensus; not that everyone else was stupid.

You have to be honest though, my friend, it's much more interesting this way isn't it?

[xR1 Fatal Instinct]

We were going to. That hasn't changed. I meant limited in the sense that we had to fight from the top down. We just ran out of time I guess. We'll destroy you next time if it will make you feel better. We'll see if you guys can muster up anything over 50k.  

 

on ghosts....We don't care to most of the time. for every 1 we force off 2 more pop up. We don't have a hundred 1000 ns guys on the real roster to deal with all of them at once. Its fruitless and most of our new guys that could engage grow out of range the first day they join. Also hey there's the added bonus of masking what we truly have going on. Not that an alliance like yours would know the problems we have up here up top anyway. i.e. Huge swing and a miss Jim.

 

You would actually have to come out of peace mode to do that, dear. Ran out of time? How long did the war last, 2 months minimum? Quit spewing your bullshit trying to save face. GATO is a piece of shit alliance and everyone knows it. Maybe when you guys muster up the balls to actually do something you can come find us. Because being at war for months didn't do it.

 

We wouldn't know the problems you have because we have a small member base now? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Invicta at one point was one of the top alliances in this world. (clarify top 20, if I remember it was 14 or 15)

Edited May 24, 2013 by xR1 Fatal Instinct

[Hereno]

We apparently live in an age where treaties cannot be cancelled because alliances are moving in different directions and one party comes to the conclusion that it cannot work out. There has to be a misconduct by one side, according to the logic here. So when IRON cancels a treaty for a reason that happens to involved a reference to another block, it can only be because we regard NPO as having acted in a very evil way by considering that block. Which means we must hate that block. 

 

Doesn't follow. I know some of you have agenda's to push. Magicninja and Rush Sykes (given neither of you are FA officials I will not tie your opinions to your alliances) are now broadcasting that they already knew IRON to be a bad sort and have a desire no doubt to justify that by assuming that IRON hates NPO and CnG and all their works because it then makes them the aggrieved party. 

Others just want to make a split between NPO and IRON because they are two of the most powerful players around, and not seeing any obvious wrongdoing from IRON towards NPO or NPO towards IRON they want to scream at NPO "SEE!! SEE!! THEY WANT TO BURN YOUR ALLIES." Which given we are still allied to their allies doesn't really make sense. But whoever lets sordid things like facts get in the way of good propoganda eh? 

 

The truth is IRON didn't, does not, and will not want to watch CnG get pounded. We didn't like it during the last war, and if it happens again (which I doubt will be in the near future) we are not looking forward to it. Clearly some in their number have a mild dislike towards us so we are unlikely to trade Christmas cards with those individuals, but we are still allied to and friends with The International so screwing over CnG means screwing over our allies. Given that isn't what IRON does I can only assume that others are projecting their standards onto us....make of that what you will. 

 

The truth of this matter is that we do not see a good future with NPO. Our paths are divergent and not likely to immediately realign. They accept that. We accept that. The examples in the OP are of us not working well together, not of us having a bitter dispute or completely misaligned goals or some great wrong that we are punishing with cancellation. It was just a sign that we do not work well together at this present time. We went down the road before of keeping a treaty that could not work well until a major wrong was committed. Seeing as so many have brought it up people should be aware of what that was. Was that a good idea? Did it end well for either side? Is it a practice to be encouraged? No. Should IRON tred the same path? No. 

 

That is all this is. We didn't work well together. Not "your goals are abhorrent to us." Not "you have betrayed us." Not "you are a great evil." Simply, "we don't work well together." I know that is a rare thing in this world, hence everyone assuming that we believe CnG must be destroyed at all cost because they are used to the idea that something must have been done wrong for a split. But that is not the case. To those on both sides trolling the other, you are like the "bros" that call the ex a hoe after an amicable break up...you are not helping and a great many of you I think are doing it not because you feel bad about the break up but because you disliked the ex. When quite frankly, I still expect to see NPO down at the bar on Friday night and hope to see them around plenty. 

Peace. 

 

The thing is, your post not only directly contradicts what Mia said in the OP, but it contradicts itself. I get consistency between "we are tied to INT" and "we don't want to see C&G get its ass kicked", but when you mention NPO's ties to C&G as the contradiction between your FA paths, that flies in the face of everything you said in favor of C&G. That your own alliance can't even make up its own mind about the reason that you cancelled, keeping your contradiction with your president in mind, all I am seeing is that the people blasting IRON for cancelling over what amounts to nothing being given more merit.

[Goldie]

20+ alliances on 5 makes it pretty pretty obvious.....no alliance could stand up to that without playing to strengths. Which we did well....as did some others on our side...some didn't have the chance and some of us were VE.  

It's pretty telling that probably any alliance that you aren't directly allied to in this game would rather fight you than fight us. But that's fine, keep taking your shots, and believing that you'll ever use that vaunted war machine of yours, if you can ever figure out which parts aren't rusted shut.

[Crownguard]

When will people realize Equilibrium was all about DH, and CnG was just a cockbloc?

 

 

I wasn't aware it took 22 wingmen to get that cockbloc out of the way, but whatever works I suppose.

 

 

All we can say is that we are sorry for our friends in IRON in having to take this juncture (and hope it works out for them), and wish the best for our friends' friends in NPO.  Anything else beyond that is speculation and a bunch of people giving their free opinions.

[rsoxbronco1]

NG, TLR and GATO all fought(if someone counts what GATO did as fighting) for Umbrella,

One again, showing your total grasp of treaties, politics, strategy, and tactics.

[D34th]

One again, showing your total grasp of treaties, politics, strategy, and tactics.

 

I can give you some lessons if you beg. 

[rsoxbronco1]

I can give you some lessons if you beg. 

credentials please

[Wu Tang Clan]

It's pretty telling that probably any alliance that you aren't directly allied to in this game would rather fight you than fight us. But that's fine, keep taking your shots, and believing that you'll ever use that vaunted war machine of yours, if you can ever figure out which parts aren't rusted shut.

 

I must say, I don't hold much respect for VE, but you guys fought very well last war, and managed to gain a little bit in my book. GATO on the other hand...

[rsoxbronco1]

Now I'm defending NPO and GATO in the same topic.

 

GATO attacked select targets with careful precision and decisive follow through in the eQuilibrium war.  Their wars were methodical, exacting, and tactically well thought out.  Their astute strategy of using their strengths and avoiding eQ's strengths was classically well developed.

 

If GATO had shirked some agreements and sided with eQ (something that was hoped for by some parties, thought they'll likely deny it now) they would be basking in the praises and adulation of the same OWF masses who now denigrate them.

[Nintenderek]

IRON, AI and NPO agreed to these points for the war to start:

Umbrella would take significant damage to reduce their power
Umbrella would be taken from its "untouchable" position
There would be no reps.
Damage would be kept at a lower level for MK and potentially GOONS for our joint ally in NG.
NG would support whoever was hit (either side)
 

 

 

One doesn't agree to anything before the war even begins.  That makes the war completely pointless.

[Neo Uruk]

One doesn't agree to anything before the war even begins.  That makes the war completely pointless.

This is just classic.

[rsoxbronco1]

One doesn't agree to anything before the war even begins.  That makes the war completely pointless.

How do you manage to tie your shoes in the morning?

[longnameislonger]

How do you manage to tie your shoes in the morning?

 

they don't let him have shoestrings. he wears velcro shoes.

[ChairmanHal]

Now I'm defending NPO and GATO in the same topic.

 

GATO attacked select targets with careful precision and decisive follow through in the eQuilibrium war.  Their wars were methodical, exacting, and tactically well thought out.  Their astute strategy of using their strengths and avoiding eQ's strengths was classically well developed.

 

If GATO had shirked some agreements and sided with eQ (something that was hoped for by some parties, thought they'll likely deny it now) they would be basking in the praises and adulation of the same OWF masses who now denigrate them.

 

Or those same EQ alliances would be complaining about how little effort GATO put into the war and that alliances like GATO were a discredit to the coalition, not an asset.

 

But hey, what you are describing is a "Randy Moss" or "Terrell Owens"-like kind of effort.  Looked good on some plays, took too many plays off.  Yes, that was a problem on the EQ side as well.

Edited May 24, 2013 by ChairmanHal

[Neo Uruk]

Or those same EQ alliances would be complaining about how little effort GATO put into the war and that alliances like GATO were a discredit to the coalition, not an asset.

 

But hey, what you are describing is a "Randy Moss" or "Terrell Owens"-like kind of effort.  Looked good on some plays, took too many plays off.  Yes, that was a problem on the EQ side as well.

No, see, on EQ's side GATO wouldn't have had to hide their upper tier.
 

Your argument is a "Jamarcus Russell" effort. Not really good, but it's ok because it's irrelevant anyways.

[rsoxbronco1]

Or those same EQ alliances would be complaining about how little effort GATO put into the war and that alliances like GATO were a discredit to the coalition, not an asset..

I can list the number of alliances that weren't a discredit to eQ on one hand.

[ChairmanHal]

If NPO had put the protection of C&G over the needs and wants of the eQ coalition, they would never have joined eQ in the first place and helped organize the war, and would have jumped in on C&G's side if others had started it anyway.  Or they would have made the war last a lot less 2 months and 10 days that is lasted.

 

Also some in IRON has claimed in this thread that their actions in the war just illustrate the point that their goals aren't the same, and those actions themselves aren't the actual reason for it.

 

Basically your beef seems to be that NPO pushed for the war to last the 2 months that it did, rather than 3 or 4 or more.  And that meant that they put C&G over their allies in eQ, in spite of all they did for eQ.  That's pretty flimsy logic, and a flimsy beef to have with them.

 

Trust me when I say that Brehon very much put protection of C&G over the needs and wants of the rest of the EQ Coalition.  It would have been nice however if they had made clear just how much they planned to do so before the war started.  This cancellation isn't just about whether EQ won in 2 months or 4.