Welcome to the Naughty Corner STA

[D34th]

Secondly you obviously don't remember how XX was burned to the ground in the Grudge War through an even more egregious oA chain than this, and I don't recall you guys getting up in arms about it and charging to Fark's defense.

May be we didn't charge because we were getting pounded to the ground while defending Polaris?

[pezstar]

I don't see anyone in Polar complaining that STA honored it's commitments. I see members of Polar expressing surprise that we're taking flak for not shielding you from the consequences of your choices.

 

Frankly, it's because we expended both our political capital and our nations by defending Polaris for years, and since we ended our treaty, we'd been told several times by NpO that even though you knew it was over, you'd still protect us when push came to shove. Then, when that day came, you were unwilling to spend a little political capital on STA when you were absolutely in a position to do so. 

 

We'd never expect you to prevent us from being countered. That's absurd. Of course we should be countered by NADC's allies. But this? No. This is the sort of thing would wouldn't have been surprised to hear that you'd prevented once the war was over. Instead, we've heard that you approved of it. That's why we're disappointed. 

 

Perhaps it's my fault. Perhaps I misunderstood.

 

Good luck with your wars. I hope it's all worth it to you. 

[Coloradia]

It actually has been quite common.  There may be fair objections to make over this but I don't think using oAs is one of them.  That's just how coalitions work.

oA and ghost DoW's occur from time to time. How often have you seen a 3x oA followed by a further 4x oA on the counter?

[FreddieMercury]

Attack across a coalition without treaties and you take flak. Attack across a coalition using treaties and you take flak.
 
Can't win with this crowd, I swear.

Well if you're on the losing side you gotta milk it for all it is worth. Edited November 21, 2013 by FreddieMercury

[Ogaden]

May be we didn't charge because we were getting pounded to the ground while defending Polaris?

We would have helped too but NoR and about 6 others were doing the same

[Gingervites]

Good job on loosing more respect in my eyes.

They probably don't care about your respect

[Cenk Uygur]

Glad to see you fighting alongside us, IRON.

[Jyrinx]

I don't get this accusation. NADC and all of their allies were all already heavily committed and essentially incapable of defending itself from you guys, especially considering how heavy your upper tier is. How is letting NADC burn to the ground the honorable option for a coalition to take? o_O

Secondly you obviously don't remember how XX was burned to the ground in the Grudge War through an even more egregious oA chain than this, and I don't recall you guys getting up in arms about it and charging to Fark's defense.

 

The irony of course being that your coalition is not really doing much to take down our "upper tier" (I really don't think we have much of one, but maybe I just instinctively think Umbrella when someone says top tier and can't imagine comparing us to them). Unless of course IRON will be taking its top tier out of peace mode soon. Then it really gets fun.

 

I disagree that the only option for your coalition was to let NADC burn, but I'll punt that and address an even more fundamental point: you should indeed do what's right and just, regardless of if it wins you wars. At least, that's how STA thinks. And maybe we're wrong, maybe pragmatism should be how politics is played. But it's just so alien to us to think in that matter that it's hard for us to sometimes appreciate that others sincerely believe that. If you guys do sincerely believe in pragmatism over honor, then that's fine. It's not how we roll but okay. But we'll definitely point out that it's ridiculous and not really honorable.

 

STA will do what we think is right. If it means we burn for allies for the bazillionth time, then so be it. I haven't dined in hell in a while anyway.

Edited November 21, 2013 by Jyrinx

[bzelger]

I haven't dined in hell in a while anyway.

They always overcook the chicken. :(

[Vindicator]

Frankly, it's because we expended both our political capital and our nations by defending Polaris for years, and since we ended our treaty, we'd been told several times by NpO that even though you knew it was over, you'd still protect us when push came to shove. Then, when that day came, you were unwilling to spend a little political capital on STA when you were absolutely in a position to do so. 

 

We'd never expect you to prevent us from being countered. That's absurd. Of course we should be countered by NADC's allies. But this? No. This is the sort of thing would wouldn't have been surprised to hear that you'd prevented once the war was over. Instead, we've heard that you approved of it. That's why we're disappointed. 

 

Perhaps it's my fault. Perhaps I misunderstood.

 

Good luck with your wars. I hope it's all worth it to you. 

 

First off, your nations don't seem THAT expended. Pretty nice high tier you've got going there for 1/3 of your alliance.

 

Also it's good to see that the world still works in binary, I guess. Polaris didn't prevent it so that MUST mean that we approved of it, nay encouraged it and planned for it!

 

I'm not sure how you think coalitions work but there is never 1 single alliance that decides how each and every counter will go and signs off on everything (well, NPO tried that in EQ and it worked out so well that nobody's touched that approach since).

 

What I believe happened is that you came in, with your non-expended high-tier nations, on the other side. You had to be countered. You were countered with enough force to defeat you (as is kind of the point of a counter), and since the coalition knows that you fight well I guess they threw plenty of force in for good measure.

 

However you're making it sound as if Polaris saw you going in and we were like "OKAY, I need at least 4 different AAs to hit these guys because lololololololol". If that's really what you believe, then I can't help you here.

[WarriorConcept]

So to recap for everyone, IRON ignored their treaty with NG, then declared war on an alliance protecting their ally. Then, instead of having one of NADC's actual allies declare on us, IRON declares on STA using not 1, but 4 treaties to get to an oA to enter against us, a much, MUCH smaller alliance attacking an alliance IRON is not allied to and with whom we are pretty evenly matched. It serves no strategic value whatsoever, and no matter how hard I try, I can't figure out why you'd choose to do this rather than do something that actually HELPS your coalition.

Shame on IRON. We now know why it took you so long to enter the war... you had to stop to search for your dignity. It looks like you weren't able to find it. Shame on FARK. We thought a lot of you before this nonsense and have had several discussions with TPF about getting closer to you. You were one of the few alliances we truly respected. And to NpO: Our illusions have been shattered. We know. Yeah. Oops.

 

It's almost like this is coalition warfare.

[Kochers]

To correct Pez's original statement, Echelon and TTK are both direct NADC allies. However, Echelon is only 12 nations and TTK has another engagement, so a few more cool cats joined the party. I'm not going to attempt to speak to the honor of such an arrangement. I'll let the peanut gallery comment on that one ;)

[Jyrinx]

First off, your nations don't seem THAT expended. Pretty nice high tier you've got going there for 1/3 of your alliance.

 

Also it's good to see that the world still works in binary, I guess. Polaris didn't prevent it so that MUST mean that we approved of it, nay encouraged it and planned for it!

 

I'm not sure how you think coalitions work but there is never 1 single alliance that decides how each and every counter will go and signs off on everything (well, NPO tried that in EQ and it worked out so well that nobody's touched that approach since).

 

What I believe happened is that you came in, with your non-expended high-tier nations, on the other side. You had to be countered. You were countered with enough force to defeat you (as is kind of the point of a counter), and since the coalition knows that you fight well I guess they threw plenty of force in for good measure.

 

However you're making it sound as if Polaris saw you going in and we were like "OKAY, I need at least 4 different AAs to hit these guys because lololololololol". If that's really what you believe, then I can't help you here.

 

I don't think we believe that Polaris was plotting against STA actively. I think our disappointment is more along the lines that Polaris didn't do anything to stop the oA chain from happening. As I stated before, Polaris has absolutely no technical obligation to STA and thus what you're doing is superficially fine.

 

But there's a deeper history between our alliances. When Polaris was the pariah of the world, we stuck by you. When you were getting beaten in the noCB war, we declared on every alliance at war with you. Through multiple times in our history we risked total destruction to stand by you. We bleed with you, we fought for you, we suffer alongside you. We cancelled our treaty with you after that due to communication issues, but never once did we regret fighting for you. It was a privilege and honor to fight in the defense of an ally when the whole world hates you. As an aside, that's a commitment your new friend TOP will never give you.

 

After that kind of commitment, I would hope that your honor would bind you to perhaps not actively defend us but to at least prevent ridiculous oA chains from being formed against your old blood brother. I again hesitate to call it a debt or that you owe us, but more akin to a feeling of profound honor.

 

You have no literal obligation to us. And for that you can wash your hands clean of what has transpired. The fact that you are able to do so though saddens me deeply because it means that I completely misunderstood the psyche of your alliance. And for that I have no one to blame but myself.

[pezstar]

I don't think we believe that Polaris was plotting against STA actively. I think our disappointment is more along the lines that Polaris didn't do anything to stop the oA chain from happening. As I stated before, Polaris has absolutely no technical obligation to STA and thus what you're doing is superficially fine.

 

But there's a deeper history between our alliances. When Polaris was the pariah of the world, we stuck by you. When you were getting beaten in the noCB war, we declared on every alliance at war with you. Through multiple times in our history we risked total destruction to stand by you. We bleed with you, we fought for you, we suffer alongside you. We cancelled our treaty with you after that due to communication issues, but never once did we regret fighting for you. It was a privilege and honor to fight in the defense of an ally when the whole world hates you. As an aside, that's a commitment your new friend TOP will never give you.

 

After that kind of commitment, I would hope that your honor would bind you to perhaps not actively defend us but to at least prevent ridiculous oA chains from being formed against your old blood brother. I again hesitate to call it a debt or that you owe us, but more akin to a feeling of profound honor.

 

You have no literal obligation to us. And for that you can wash your hands clean of what has transpired. The fact that you are able to do so though saddens me deeply because it means that I completely misunderstood the psyche of your alliance. And for that I have no one to blame but myself.

 

Jyrinx has said what I want to say, only so much better, as he so often does. Thank you, Jyrinx. 

[WarriorConcept]

I don't think we believe that Polaris was plotting against STA actively. I think our disappointment is more along the lines that Polaris didn't do anything to stop the oA chain from happening. As I stated before, Polaris has absolutely no technical obligation to STA and thus what you're doing is superficially fine.

 

But there's a deeper history between our alliances. When Polaris was the pariah of the world, we stuck by you. When you were getting beaten in the noCB war, we declared on every alliance at war with you. Through multiple times in our history we risked total destruction to stand by you. We bleed with you, we fought for you, we suffer alongside you. We cancelled our treaty with you after that due to communication issues, but never once did we regret fighting for you. It was a privilege and honor to fight in the defense of an ally when the whole world hates you. As an aside, that's a commitment your new friend TOP will never give you.

 

After that kind of commitment, I would hope that your honor would bind you to perhaps not actively defend us but to at least prevent ridiculous oA chains from being formed against your old blood brother. I again hesitate to call it a debt or that you owe us, but more akin to a feeling of profound honor.

 

You have no literal obligation to us. And for that you can wash your hands clean of what has transpired. The fact that you are able to do so though saddens me deeply because it means that I completely misunderstood the psyche of your alliance. And for that I have no one to blame but myself.

 

You really need to get off your cross Jyrinx. This is coalition warfare and alliances will be moved around on fronts where it's more advantageous for the whole side. Really don't see how you can take this personally and assign blame on Polaris when these decisions are reached by an overall consensus from a group of alliances, in which Polaris is but a single voice.

[Judge X]

 
I don't think we believe that Polaris was plotting against STA actively. I think our disappointment is more along the lines that Polaris didn't do anything to stop the oA chain from happening. As I stated before, Polaris has absolutely no technical obligation to STA and thus what you're doing is superficially fine.
 
But there's a deeper history between our alliances. When Polaris was the pariah of the world, we stuck by you. When you were getting beaten in the noCB war, we declared on every alliance at war with you. Through multiple times in our history we risked total destruction to stand by you. We bleed with you, we fought for you, we suffer alongside you. We cancelled our treaty with you after that due to communication issues, but never once did we regret fighting for you. It was a privilege and honor to fight in the defense of an ally when the whole world hates you. As an aside, that's a commitment your new friend TOP will never give you.
 
After that kind of commitment, I would hope that your honor would bind you to perhaps not actively defend us but to at least prevent ridiculous oA chains from being formed against your old blood brother. I again hesitate to call it a debt or that you owe us, but more akin to a feeling of profound honor.
 
You have no literal obligation to us. And for that you can wash your hands clean of what has transpired. The fact that you are able to do so though saddens me deeply because it means that I completely misunderstood the psyche of your alliance. And for that I have no one to blame but myself.

I will use this again one day soon.

[Jyrinx]

You really need to get off your cross Jyrinx. This is coalition warfare and alliances will be moved around on fronts where it's more advantageous for the whole side. Really don't see how you can take this personally and assign blame on Polaris when these decisions are reached by an overall consensus from a group of alliances, in which Polaris is but a single voice.

 

I don't "blame" Polaris. I blame myself for ascribing a certain viewpoint to an alliance that clearly was not their view.

 

As I said before, there is nothing wrong with viewing things through a coalition lens where everything is done for the benefit or detriment of the coalition, allies and friends be damned. That is not how STA works, but if that's how you guys roll with pragmatism overruling everything else then so be it. You're free to live by your own ideals, or lack thereof.

[Jacob Reiffenstein]

Good job IRON burn STA to the ground for me please.

 

Thanks for vindicating my longstanding opinion about NpO.

[Willaim Kreiger]

I don't think we believe that Polaris was plotting against STA actively. I think our disappointment is more along the lines that Polaris didn't do anything to stop the oA chain from happening. As I stated before, Polaris has absolutely no technical obligation to STA and thus what you're doing is superficially fine.

 

But there's a deeper history between our alliances. When Polaris was the pariah of the world, we stuck by you. When you were getting beaten in the noCB war, we declared on every alliance at war with you. Through multiple times in our history we risked total destruction to stand by you. We bleed with you, we fought for you, we suffer alongside you. We cancelled our treaty with you after that due to communication issues, but never once did we regret fighting for you. It was a privilege and honor to fight in the defense of an ally when the whole world hates you. As an aside, that's a commitment your new friend TOP will never give you.

 

After that kind of commitment, I would hope that your honor would bind you to perhaps not actively defend us but to at least prevent ridiculous oA chains from being formed against your old blood brother. I again hesitate to call it a debt or that you owe us, but more akin to a feeling of profound honor.

 

You have no literal obligation to us. And for that you can wash your hands clean of what has transpired. The fact that you are able to do so though saddens me deeply because it means that I completely misunderstood the psyche of your alliance. And for that I have no one to blame but myself.

Look, I'm not going to get into the history of how our treaty was cancelled and why with you on the OWF.  It wouldn't do anyone any favors and dirty laundry is best aired elsewhere.  Suffice to say, the picture you are painting is sweet and dandy and portrays you guys very well but it leaves out plenty of fact and even substitutes some excellent fiction.  Do I enjoy watching you get countered?  Not particularly, but warfare is warfare.  Good luck out there.

 

 

Thanks for vindicating my longstanding opinion about NpO.

Ah, yes.  Because one often inactive member with a bone to pick against one STA member is an official representative of our alliance!

[WarriorConcept]

I don't "blame" Polaris. I blame myself for ascribing a certain viewpoint to an alliance that clearly was not their view.

 

As I said before, there is nothing wrong with viewing things through a coalition lens where everything is done for the benefit or detriment of the coalition, allies and friends be damned. That is not how STA works, but if that's how you guys roll with pragmatism overruling everything else then so be it. You're free to live by your own ideals, or lack thereof.

 

You seem to imply that this entry was solely on Polaris, or rather that Polaris could have stopped it themselves. You're trying to create a fantasy world where you're being wronged by an ex-ally, but that's simply not the case.

[D34th]

I don't think we believe that Polaris was plotting against STA actively. I think our disappointment is more along the lines that Polaris didn't do anything to stop the oA chain from happening. As I stated before, Polaris has absolutely no technical obligation to STA and thus what you're doing is superficially fine.
 
But there's a deeper history between our alliances. When Polaris was the pariah of the world, we stuck by you. When you were getting beaten in the noCB war, we declared on every alliance at war with you. Through multiple times in our history we risked total destruction to stand by you. We bleed with you, we fought for you, we suffer alongside you. We cancelled our treaty with you after that due to communication issues, but never once did we regret fighting for you. It was a privilege and honor to fight in the defense of an ally when the whole world hates you. As an aside, that's a commitment your new friend TOP will never give you.
 
After that kind of commitment, I would hope that your honor would bind you to perhaps not actively defend us but to at least prevent ridiculous oA chains from being formed against your old blood brother. I again hesitate to call it a debt or that you owe us, but more akin to a feeling of profound honor.
 
You have no literal obligation to us. And for that you can wash your hands clean of what has transpired. The fact that you are able to do so though saddens me deeply because it means that I completely misunderstood the psyche of your alliance. And for that I have no one to blame but myself.

This post explains almost perfectly how I feel, the only difference is that I was in the other side as a member of Polaris, what somehow make things even more harder to me.

[Jyrinx]

You seem to imply that this entry was solely on Polaris, or rather that Polaris could have stopped it themselves. You're trying to create a fantasy world where you're being wronged by an ex-ally, but that's simply not the case.

 

Rest assured that I have no fantasy that Polaris could unilaterally veto it, but it was my understanding that they did not even try very hard to stop it. Whether they could stop it or not being my issue. But again, I've already admitted that it's my fault for viewing them in such a way. To that end, consider it a moot point.

[Rebel Virginia]

This is a ridiculous set of chaining. Then again, you're a ridiculous alliance. Still, I commend you, RON. In all my years I don't believe I've seen any other alliance dig so splendid a grave for themselves as you have these last few days. Bravo!

[x Tela x]

This is a ridiculous set of chaining. Then again, you're a ridiculous alliance. Still, I commend you, RON. In all my years I don't believe I've seen any other alliance dig so splendid a grave for themselves as you have these last few days. Bravo!

Excuse me, RV. You don't love me anymore. :(

 

 

Also, for what it's worth, welcome to the real front IRON. I still dislike this entire war and everything it stands for - but welcome, and have fun. :)

[WarriorConcept]

Rest assured that I have no fantasy that Polaris could unilaterally veto it, but it was my understanding that they did not even try very hard to stop it. Whether they could stop it or not being my issue. But again, I've already admitted that it's my fault for viewing them in such a way. To that end, consider it a moot point.

 

Why attempt to try and stop coverage for a member of its coalition?  Not only would it naturally not work, but it would undermine the people helping them in this war. I mean don't get me wrong, you're entitled to your opinion of course but trying to harm its own coalition via the action you suggest would be even lower than trying to put up some resistance into countering y'all.