IRON Announcement

[Prodigal Moon]

Conflicting treaties strike again.

[D34th]

An alliance that sticks up for all its allies instead of just some? I mean, CnG approached NPO as soon as wounds healed between the alliances involved. MK even (mostly) stopped hounding them. NPO carried IRON's war out as best they could. They stopped at reps. Why? Because 1) if anyone in EQ deserved reps, it was NPO for actually fighting a good fight and 2) What the fuck does IRON need reps for in an aggressive war that it wasn't even involved in the CB for?  You can say the same about GOONS as to #2, but at least they give a damn enough to fight for DH.

 

I don't even remotely like NPO, this is just pure bullshit.

 

IRON's war? Everybody knows that Brehon was who wanted that war so badly because his grudges with Umbrella and he started the war knowing that their allies in CnG would be fucked due their obligations, so no, NPO didn't stick for all its allies, if that was the case Brehon should had used diplomacy and save CnG from fighting a losing war. What EQ showed - not one, but two times, - is that when NPO want something they don't care how it will affect their allies, they just go for it. They harmed their CnG allies starting the war and harmed their other allies finishing the war before everyone else wanted.

[salsabeast1]

NPO's reaction to alliances asking about NG was "have at them".

This.

[Stewie]

NPO's reaction to alliances asking about NG was "have at them".

We wouldn't have it any other way.

[Goldie]

We wouldn't have it any other way.

To be fair, a lot of people did have it the other way in the reversed situation.

[Sarkin]

My condolences for the treaty cancellation. On a side note, nice OP. Explanations are good things; there should be more of them on the OWF.

[Farnsworth]

Hmm... pretty substantial announcement right here. 

I like the amount of straightforwardness in the OP. 

 

Best of luck to both!

[Schattenmann]

To anyone saying IRON didn't fight for the coalition, that's funny as hell. I was on VE front with them and we struggled to find any open defensive slots whatsoever.

 

IRON also made it a helluva job to find slots on Umbrella. 

[Hereno]

This is exactly the kind of actions we should promote. IRON recognized NPO's efforts as an ally, and admitted they view themselves going a different direction politically and used that as the reason for the cancellation. Stating they wished the war was more decisive, and NPO chose their coalition over their other allies.

 

In my opinion a world in which treaties are chosen for political purposes and promoting an agenda is more dynamic, and should be embraced.

 

I wish you luck IRON.

 

Don't get me wrong, watching IRON shoot itself in the foot ITT has been quite enjoyable for me, but I'm not going to pretend the turd that is the OP is gold just because it provides popcorn.

[Zacharias]

I'm usually somewhat saddened to see treaties go. This is not one of those times. Good move IRON

[SoADarthCyfe6]

Well, the cancellation reasons are understandable, but I think this will turn out to be a big mistake on IRON's part. Either way, best of luck to IRON and to our allies in NPO moving forward.

[Devilyn Caster]

IRON's war? Everybody knows that Brehon was who wanted that war so badly because his grudges with Umbrella and he started the war knowing that their allies in CnG would be fucked due their obligations, so no, NPO didn't stick for all its allies, if that was the case Brehon should had used diplomacy and save CnG from fighting a losing war. What EQ showed - not one, but two times, - is that when NPO want something they don't care how it will affect their allies, they just go for it. They harmed their CnG allies starting the war and harmed their other allies finishing the war before everyone else wanted.

 

The idea that Brehon could have "saved" CnG from a losing war is so ludicrous that I can barely wrap my head around it. Brehon knew where CnG stood with regards to this war, and we were okay with where they stood. It was a tremendous balancing act on both our parts, and the fruits of that balancing act have led to a tighter bond between NPO, CnG, and NG. When myself and my gov't in TLR spent more time communicating with Brehon and Farrin than your own allies in your own coalition, how can you blame anyone but yourselves for this? IRON is and always will be followers, nothing more - you don't have the political strength or wherewithal that NPO has. I would have expected at least some cursory check ins with your allies in CnG and NG, but I guess that is still too much to ask. Coalitions are just that - coalitions. They exist for a single purpose; when that purpose is achieved, they disappear. NPO looking out for ALL of it's allies instead of its coalition is the longterm, practical and politically correct move - something I don't expect you to understand.

[The Warrior]

Having fought you and IRON a few wars ago I was impressed if that matters.Figured some cancellations would come after the way the last war ended but I didnt expect this one. I dont know what you guys expected though. From the outside it looked pretty clear pre-war where NPO was going with NG/C&G. 

Heh, I remember fighting you. Sorry about that. :P

Edited May 22, 2013 by The Warrior

[Lord Boris]

Best of luck to both parties.

 

Perhaps the truly tragic thing in this thread is that IRON apparently believed NPO has any motivations beyond that which benefits their own short and long-term goals.  NPO perhaps more than just about anyone plays the longer duration politics side of things.  I don't even see this as a bad thing (in fact I feel more should do so in order to keep things interesting), but I can't see anyone with a clear head somehow being surprised that NPO would do some longer-term thinking and see that their allies on the other side of the conflict would be useful to their plans down the road and would take actions to try to preserve them where they could.

[D34th]

The idea that Brehon could have "saved" CnG from a losing war is so ludicrous that I can barely wrap my head around it. Brehon knew where CnG stood with regards to this war, and we were okay with where they stood. It was a tremendous balancing act on both our parts, and the fruits of that balancing act have led to a tighter bond between NPO, CnG, and NG. When myself and my gov't in TLR spent more time communicating with Brehon and Farrin than your own allies in your own coalition, how can you blame anyone but yourselves for this? IRON is and always will be followers, nothing more - you don't have the political strength or wherewithal that NPO has. I would have expected at least some cursory check ins with your allies in CnG and NG, but I guess that is still too much to ask. Coalitions are just that - coalitions. They exist for a single purpose; when that purpose is achieved, they disappear. NPO looking out for ALL of it's allies instead of its coalition is the longterm, practical and politically correct move - something I don't expect you to understand.

 

First of all, do you realize that I'm not in IRON right? 

That said, OH THE IRONy of CnG members calling IRON of followers. 

"Oho!" said the pot to the kettle;

"You are dirty and ugly and black!"

With that considerations in mind, NPO isn't the only one to be blamed, also is CnG. If you people stopped to sign conflicting treaties all this mess could be avoided, not that I'd advise you to do that, I quite like to laugh at your mess.

[Charles the Great]

O/  IRON

 

:ehm:

[Malabyte]

Thank you, IRON. I will covet all of the friendships we have made between our alliances. I hope to stay in contact with as many of you as possible.

As for your future, it's sad to see we've gone in different directions but I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors.

[Neo Uruk]

If more than just Brehon made the peace terms for EQ, you might actually be correct.

 

Maybe if there was another alliance leader in EQ capable of drafting a document composed of more than one-syllable words and "HAHA FUCK UMBRELLA" or trying to shove reps in an undeserving party's face, which after refusal some alliances would have probably just withdrawn from EQ, we could've seen that.

IRON's war? Everybody knows that Brehon was who wanted that war so badly because his grudges with Umbrella and he started the war knowing that their allies in CnG would be fucked due their obligations, so no, NPO didn't stick for all its allies, if that was the case Brehon should had used diplomacy and save CnG from fighting a losing war. What EQ showed - not one, but two times, - is that when NPO want something they don't care how it will affect their allies, they just go for it. They harmed their CnG allies starting the war and harmed their other allies finishing the war before everyone else wanted.

 

 

First of all, do you realize that I'm not in IRON right? 

That said, OH THE IRONy of CnG members calling IRON of followers. 

"Oho!" said the pot to the kettle;

"You are dirty and ugly and black!"

With that considerations in mind, NPO isn't the only one to be blamed, also is CnG. If you people stopped to sign conflicting treaties all this mess could be avoided, not that I'd advise you to do that, I quite like to laugh at your mess.

You just really like hearing yourself talk, don't you?

Edited May 22, 2013 by Neo Uruk

[Chaoshawk]

I'm glad IRON reasoned the cancellation instead of saying, "Reasons were given in private." Regardless of the reasoning, at least it gives us something to talk about post-war, so thank you.

 

 

I find the assertion that the NPO is to blame that coalition called Equilibrium failed to achieve "solid victory" is wrong. I find the conflict against Doomhouse due to Umbrellas action in handling the rogue on Ai, ending in a clear victory. That it could have been even more decisive, I find not the failing on part of NPOs action during that war.

 

Among many words, there was a clear level of criticism leveled at us on that point, I felt so called to shortly answer it.

 

Good luck and happy trails IRON.

 

Evidently, DH or Umbrella wasn't stomped on enough. 

[MCRABT]

Best of luck to both parties.

 

Perhaps the truly tragic thing in this thread is that IRON apparently believed NPO has any motivations beyond that which benefits their own short and long-term goals.  NPO perhaps more than just about anyone plays the longer duration politics side of things.  I don't even see this as a bad thing (in fact I feel more should do so in order to keep things interesting), but I can't see anyone with a clear head somehow being surprised that NPO would do some longer-term thinking and see that their allies on the other side of the conflict would be useful to their plans down the road and would take actions to try to preserve them where they could.

 

I didn't see anything to indicate surprise in the OP, in fact my interpretation was that IRON empathises with NPO's position, holds no ill-will about NPO's decisions and simply wishes to move in a separate direction. I don't really understand what all the posturing is about. 

[Farrin Xies]

 
IRON's war? Everybody knows that Brehon was who wanted that war so badly because his grudges with Umbrella and he started the war knowing that their allies in CnG would be fucked due their obligations, so no, NPO didn't stick for all its allies, if that was the case Brehon should had used diplomacy and save CnG from fighting a losing war. What EQ showed - not one, but two times, - is that when NPO want something they don't care how it will affect their allies, they just go for it. They harmed their CnG allies starting the war and harmed their other allies finishing the war before everyone else wanted.

Oh wow, not even sure where to start. Do you not think if we could have waved a magic wand and not had our friends and allies in CnG or NG on the other side, you really think we wouldn't have taken that in a heartbeat? CnG told us they felt responsible for enabling the actions on DH's part we were waging war against, and thus should share in some of the repercussions for that. I don't completely agree with that, but I sure as hell respect it. My respect for many of my allies on the opposite side of the coalition rose by leaps and bounds just as my respect for many people (though not our allies) on "our" side in EQ dropped.

As for harming our allies the second time you mentioned, I'd say that's between me and my allies. Everything Brehon did in this last war was for Ai first, our other allies second, and the coalition third. Continuing the war as many of you wanted would have done nothing but hurt Ai, NPO, and the tiny number of other alliances willing to send out even one or two more people into the extended war. As far as continuing the war in general, we were rapidly approaching the point where the damage we were doing to them was less than the damage they were doing back to us. At that point in time, you take your victory and go home. It could have been done differently, and I likely would have done it differently. With that said, I'm satisfied with the outcome it achieved.

[mythicknight]

A thick decision.

[Salmia]

We have no judgment when comes to NPO's decisions in this last war, we respect and empathize with them.  IRON is moving in a new direction, the OP is simply an explanation why the relationship is no longer tenable rather than pointing the finger.

[Omniscient1]

 
There is a difference between lying to your coalition and thereby putting the entire war effort of yourselves, your allies, and the coalition in jeopardy... and looking out for your allies on the opposite side of a war. NPO managed to lead Equilibrium to victory while helping out NSO on the side with the massacre of Kaskus, and still found time to do what they could for their allies in C&G on the other side of the conflict. Like them or hate them, that is a fine balancing act that very few alliances could pull off. Even fewer still would see it as a reason to cancel their treaty. That Mia went on for paragraphs in the OP praising NPO for this while subsequently using it as IRON's purpose behind the cancellation can mean one of two things. That we aren't being told the whole story, or that IRON are so full of themselves they're making Narcissus weep in his imaginary grave. I'm going to go with "probably a little bit of both". In either case, IRON's act is not a case of "growing a pair" and seizing their own destiny; it is an act of petulance which will ultimately hurt them in the long term.

Oh yes it'll hurt them, but everyone around here complains of no one standing up for themselves and then when people do stand up for themselves we get this bullshit. Why is it hard for people to understand that if alliance A dislikes the way alliance B is going they can cancel. The same arguments were thrown at several alliances, most recently Argent. This may seem like a shock, but this is how FA works.

The peanut gallery needs to grab a tampon and quit pmsing. I get you personally have an axe to grind with them, but you can't fault them on the pure principle of the situation.

[Neo Uruk]

We have no judgment when comes to NPO's decisions in this last war, we respect and empathize with them.  IRON is moving in a new direction, the OP is simply an explanation why the relationship is no longer tenable rather than pointing the finger.

If you have no judgement, why not just say "we wanted NPO to suicide and they wouldn't"? The way you phrased it makes you sound petty and overly self-indulged.