Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Isn't the best way to conduct a war fighting the main target and inflicting the damage on those you state actually deserve it? That way you get your damage in, and you don't have to include reps/punishment after the war to get the same amount of destruction. It shows that there are ulterior motives when this is not the course of action, and the stated reasons don't match the actions. The Schlieffen Plan justification you're giving is disingenuous because you can accomplish your stated goal by actually fighting the people you say you started the war to fight.

 

Isn't NPO still talking about how much damage they are taking (in that peace term thread they are talking about how they have taken 50% NS damage...), so I am not sure how we are still not covering NPO. Same goes for NG and NSO both of whom have taken substantial amounts of damage. So, from the looks of it, we are accomplishing that goal. 

 

The unwillingness to give up Sparta's front with white peace has led your side to give itself a lot more damage taken. It was not necessary to drag this front out, nor was it necessary to draw RnR in.

 

From what I heard, they had grey peace. No Reentry clause, bout as white as it gets on Planet Bob mate. So, you may want to stop talking about our side being unwilling to give peace and instead start pondering why US refused the standard "white" peace.

 

The Sparta front was offered white peace. White peace no reentry, nothing else asked. The problem was Berbers refused it because he wanted a no reentry clause on Sparta as well. The losing coalition does not get to determine where the winners are redeployed at.

Hell the US front can get white peace tomorrow if they ask for it. Done and done, admit you lost, go your own way. But we will not accept that we can't redeploy our forces elsewhere afterwards.

 

Yup, there it is. 

 

Hail Goons; GonoS; Pink Elephants; Plan B; Britney Spears?

 

Selena Gomez mate, Selena Gomez...

 

 

I'm not making the argument that we're the target. The target is NSO NG NPO God only knows, but it's not US.  :smug: 

 

I was merely making sure you didn't cast away Alex's argument as nonsense, considering your coalition directed a lot of forces fighting on the main front to our outlying front. Even you admitted to seeing the disconnect there.

 

Meh, US wanted to stay in when they refused peace. R&R then entered after US refused peace. Y'all get some special treatment for refusing peace and then escalating the front with R&R's entry. Deal with it. If you did not like it, you should have told NATO/TIO to peace out or you won't back them up. Otherwise, can I please stop listening to such inane arguments about this front. I am seriously starting to consider buckaroo as one of the better posters after listening to some of the arguments from y'alls side.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 385
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

That was a consequence of us allowing TIO/NATO to have a free pass at Sparta for so long. Even then, TOP/Umb were the only ones to oA in I believe -- just like they did on others, and the strategical reason behind that is obvious. Hint: It's not because this war is now suddenly about you.

 

I've never really liked you or your posts [or your alliance] but the combination of audacity and stupid in this one was enough to make me laugh so kudos I think you can shut up now, Tywin of the GOONS DoW thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize military skill is beyond NATO but usually in a war when a front is mostly handled you shift to one that needs more attention. All of those alliances have been at war for months and two of them are in no fighting condition, R&R despite being horrible is still fresh.


Really? An AA that's reversed the damage differential and is launching more offensive wars than people on your side is handled?
Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I heard, they had grey peace. No Reentry clause, bout as white as it gets on Planet Bob.
 

 
Meh, US wanted to stay in when they refused peace. R&R then entered after US refused peace. Y'all get some special treatment for refusing peace and then escalating the front with R&R's entry. Deal with it. If you did not like it, you should have told NATO/TIO to peace out or you won't back them up. Otherwise, can I please stop listening to such inane arguments about this front. I am seriously starting to consider buckaroo as one of the better posters after listening to some of the arguments from y'alls side.


Umm, the Sparta front was escalated by your coalition. You also missed the point, everyone abandoned the war on NPO to beat R&R like the village donkey and there is no good reason for it other than post-war strategic considerations.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Umm, the Sparta front was escalated by your coalition. You also missed the point, everyone abandoned the war on NPO to beat R&R like the village donkey and there is no good reason for it other than post-war strategic considerations.

 

If that is what you think, then you have no idea what coalition warfare is like. You do realize R&R DoWed TOP, who was at war with NPO correct? Thus, R&R directly hampered with NPO's beatdown. So, this may be a shocker, but we decided to deal with R&R. TOP has few low-tier nations to deal with R&R and thus reinforcements were brought in to help rectify that situation. 

 

As for the escalation- I will give you that. Lookin at the CN Wiki for the Disorder War, I saw the dates for the DoWs. My bad there. Either way, it does not matter who escalated what. NATO/TIO were given "white" peace and refused. Thus, a bunch of DoWs on NATO/TIO to get them to peace out. R&R enters and what? Expected kid gloves? hahahahaha

 

As for neglecting NPO, nah. As I pointed out, NPO has taken around 50% NS damage. The Sparta/US front is a mere distraction for now. NPO should be thankful for the respite. Once US is beaten down and/or leaves the war, NPO will be given the "proper" amount of attention. But, y'all will continue to receive attention until y'all leave the war (on our terms, not yours) or you are beaten down enough that we can redirect forces back to NPO. 

 

Until then, we get this thread and others just like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sardonic runs GOONS, he doesn't like the terms for NPO. I on the other hand think they are fantastic. We outvoted Sardonic to move on R&R. I have reasons of my own for calling for that vote.

Your report of the way Sardonic handled and is handling your internal situations and GOONS's FA, along with his recent posts, throws a very favourable light on the man.

I don't really care about who enters/exits this war, and why, but you GOONS are lucky to have Sardonic.
 
(Of course, you might just be doing it on purpose... GOONS mind trick!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If that is what you think, then you have no idea what coalition warfare is like. You do realize R&R DoWed TOP, who was at war with NPO correct? Thus, R&R directly hampered with NPO's beatdown. So, this may be a shocker, but we decided to deal with R&R. TOP has few low-tier nations to deal with R&R and thus reinforcements were brought in to help rectify that situation. 

 

 

 

 

Umm, TOP had like 5 offensive wars on NPO when they hit NATO and triggered R&R's MD, not sure what world you live on but that's not exactly hampering the NPO front.   I understand coalition warfare and all that jazz, I just haven't gotten one satisfactory answer as to why R&R somehow has to be the focus now, considering NPO "hasn't taken enough damage" apparently.
 
 

 

 

 

As for the escalation- I will give you that. Lookin at the CN Wiki for the Disorder War, I saw the dates for the DoWs. My bad there. Either way, it does not matter who escalated what. NATO/TIO were given "white" peace and refused. Thus, a bunch of DoWs on NATO/TIO to get them to peace out. R&R enters and what? Expected kid gloves? hahahahaha

 

 

 
Nobody expected kid gloves and if you think Usual Suspects is upset about getting to fight GOONS you have no idea what goes on in our AA's.  There is a huge gap between being handled with kid gloves and becoming the object of the majority of offensive declarations.  This whole shorten the war argument isn't going to fly, because I guarantee you GOONS coming in on this front did nothing to shorten this war.
 

 

 

As for neglecting NPO, nah. As I pointed out, NPO has taken around 50% NS damage. The Sparta/US front is a mere distraction for now. NPO should be thankful for the respite. Once US is beaten down and/or leaves the war, NPO will be given the "proper" amount of attention. But, y'all will continue to receive attention until y'all leave the war (on our terms, not yours) or you are beaten down enough that we can redirect forces back to NPO. 

 

 

 

And right here is why outlying fronts don't want to give peace, because of all this "Pacifica will get theirs when the war de-escalates" talk.

 

There is absolutely no reason to continue this travesty of a war to get the terms suggested unless Platysphere has their eye on a target already and they want to make sure there is no significant NS reserve in another sphere that could complicate the next war for them.  Which by the way is the same logic used when your predecessor sphere forced NPO to the terms in the DH-NPO war and we all know what the results of that were for those ex-coalition mates.

Edited by berbers
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh TIO is attacking us now!
 
God thats so great, a pathetic alliance so terrible it has to follow NATO around is countering us with no declaration. I love it.

It seems rather poignant given Marx was the first to launch a war between GOONS and NATO in EQ without a declaration. Not that NATO minded, but it is rather amusing to watch him and you subsequently call others out for not recognising hostilities with GOONS :D

The Sparta front was offered white peace. White peace no reentry, nothing else asked. The problem was Berbers refused it because he wanted a no reentry clause on Sparta as well. The losing coalition does not get to determine where the winners are redeployed at.

Wow, for a guy who was in gov once 3 terms ago, Berbers sure has a lot to answer for :|
Link to post
Share on other sites

People are trying way too hard, on both sides.

 

NpO/TOP believe they can put more pressure on us (US) by throwing GOONS in, and why wouldn't they? It is a completely legit tactic, time will tell whether it will succeed or not. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh this again, yeah? :|

 

Child's play.

 

You shush, Crymson does not care. HE DOES NOT CARE I SAY. Ask him, he will tell you ad-nauseum how much he doesnt care, while failing to address his 587937623983 posts showing, in fact, that he cares oh so deeply. But, HE STILL DOESNT CARE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your report of the way Sardonic handled and is handling your internal situations and GOONS's FA, along with his recent posts, throws a very favourable light on the man.
I don't really care about who enters/exits this war, and why, but you GOONS are lucky to have Sardonic.
 (Of course, you might just be doing it on purpose... GOONS mind trick!)


We agree on this. Sardonic is pretty awesome.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Umm, the Sparta front was escalated by your coalition. You also missed the point, everyone abandoned the war on NPO to beat R&R like the village donkey and there is no good reason for it other than post-war strategic considerations.


Or its to put pressure on a weaker link of the chain, I suppose we will find out soon enough if RnR or any other peripheral alliance to the core of the war, wish to turn into a ruin for them or if they will tap out.

 

Moral is high when fighting for your own survival, but the moral within an alliance soon disappears when you are fighting not for yourself or allies but someone completely unrelated.

Edited by the rebel
Link to post
Share on other sites


 
Moral is high when fighting for your own survival, but the moral within an alliance soon disappears when you are fighting not for yourself or allies but someone completely unrelated.


Like being a meat shield for TOP/NpO? I suspect the AAs that oA'd in on an aggressive war for someone else will tap out over unnecessary damage due to punitive reps before our side.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

*waste of letters*

 

Let me guess, at some point you will bandwagon onto us, and then bring back the point that someone told R&R to surrender and join UPN, and demand reps/apology. :v

 

Yeah cause we have a long history of demanding reps :)

 

Don't worry, I can guarantee you that wont happen. 

 

Or its to put pressure on a weaker link of the chain, I suppose we will find out soon enough if RnR or any other peripheral alliance to the core of the war, wish to turn into a ruin for them or if they will tap out.

 

Moral is high when fighting for your own survival, but the moral within an alliance soon disappears when you are fighting not for yourself or allies but someone completely unrelated.

 

How long were you in R&R? Cause you really don't get us do you... 

 

But good luck to you and all others on waiting for us to tap out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like being a meat shield for TOP/NpO? I suspect the AAs that oA'd in on an aggressive war for someone else will tap out over unnecessary damage due to punitive reps before our side.

 

Sure the moral part is the same for everyone, but the whole point being is that its easier to sell a long running war to the general membership (the 99% that don't read anything on here) if its fighting for their direct allies, but if they are being told to fight because an unrelated alliance isn't accepting peace that could end the whole war, it becomes a harder sell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How long were you in R&R? Cause you really don't get us do you... 

 

But good luck to you and all others on waiting for us to tap out. 

 

"RnR or any other peripheral alliance"

 

Its good to read properly before jumping the gun and looking a fool. Nice try Ego.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 
Sure the moral part is the same for everyone, but the whole point being is that its easier to sell a long running war to the general membership (the 99% that don't read anything on here) if its fighting for their direct allies, but if they are being told to fight because an unrelated alliance isn't accepting peace that could end the whole war, it becomes a harder sell.

Not necessarily. Members often judge sides by the alliances they are fighting against, which is much more meaningful than alliances they are fighting "for" indirectly. In that respect, a declaration like this might make the war easier to sell to members given historical grievances. Edited by Sir Humphrey
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You remember that first alliance you declared on, you know, the one that apparently needs to get terms for this war to end?  They are declaring 2 offensive wars for every 1 defensive war they have, maybe your coalition could use some help there?  

 

Oh no, that's right, you guys throttled down on NPO because you disagree with the terms right?  So on the one hand, you are a team player and help the coalition, and on the other hand you disagree with the coalition and take your ball and go home on the NPO front?

 

Pathetic.

 

Edit:  Actually, it's so transparent it's laughable.  You guys used XX-SF alliances to beat NPO down and force terms in the DH-NPO war, and then turned around and beat XX-SF down twice in a row.  This whole re-deployment thing is a thinly veiled attempt to beat up an alliance that is a guaranteed enemy of yours when you go for the repeat.

GOONS: Bad for enabling terms, worse for not enabling them.

 

You can't change the wind, but you can adjust your sails, and that is exactly what we are doing.

 

Also we harbor no particularly large amount of animosity towards R&R, despite their badposting itt.

 

e:

 

Your report of the way Sardonic handled and is handling your internal situations and GOONS's FA, along with his recent posts, throws a very favourable light on the man.

I don't really care about who enters/exits this war, and why, but you GOONS are lucky to have Sardonic.
 
(Of course, you might just be doing it on purpose... GOONS mind trick!)

 

Sardonic continues to be the best in GOONS gov; unfortunate that you succumbed to unfathomable ampersand lust, but w/e - enjoy being (roughly) where R&R was in EQ and holding yourselves to the same standard.

 

We agree on this. Sardonic is pretty awesome.

 

Thank you for the kind words.

Edited by Sardonic
Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is a giver. As always, thank you GOONS for the entertainment. 

 

Really? An AA that's reversed the damage differential and is launching more offensive wars than people on your side is handled?

Congratulations. You've reached the level where you have less to lose than the other side and larger nations are now fighting less equipped nations. This might come as a shock to you, but welcome to Cybernations wars. However, you've clearly won the war and defeated us all. Please give me lenient terms for my surrender.

 

Umm, the Sparta front was escalated by your coalition. You also missed the point, everyone abandoned the war on NPO to beat R&R like the village donkey and there is no good reason for it other than post-war strategic considerations.

R&R is a fresh alliance, NPO is not. Your grasp of common sense seems to be waning as you approach Rush territory of ranting and raving.

 

People are trying way too hard, on both sides.

 

NpO/TOP believe they can put more pressure on us (US) by throwing GOONS in, and why wouldn't they? It is a completely legit tactic, time will tell whether it will succeed or not. 

Good post. I wish you guys luck. Just wish it didn't have to go down like this.

 

Like being a meat shield for TOP/NpO? I suspect the AAs that oA'd in on an aggressive war for someone else will tap out over unnecessary damage due to punitive reps before our side.

A meatshield for Polar? Please, we've taken the most damage on our side. Give that one up right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I heard, they had grey peace. No Reentry clause, bout as white as it gets on Planet Bob mate. So, you may want to stop talking about our side being unwilling to give peace and instead start pondering why US refused the standard "white" peace.

While true, it didn't make sense for US to tag themselves like that given the damage ratios on the front at the time.
Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...