Sephiroth Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 This again? Tell me what is unreasonable about keeping 30 nations who never fought in the war in PM as a punishment for hiding. If our opening offer was too far reaching a counter offer would be appreciated. But by no means are these terms the most brutal of all time ever like you are claiming. We called out GOD because your glorious leader called us out when our allies requested assistance, of course you probably weren't able to access the areas he was posting in. But Xiph called us out by name, told us that he would attack us if we honored our treaty to TOP and left it at that. Everyone here is so up in arms that we were asked to hit R&R who came to the party late and we had the closest treaty tie. We didn't multi chain in or optional anything. We came in on an MD. So you can whine about your pure intentions and honoring your treaty but don't try to make it out like we weren't doing the same thing. We asked that our direct treaty partners were treated fairly on the other side and were not obliterated, the coalition obliged us on our concerns. GOD demanded we do nothing to their treaty partner and threatened us if we did. Who is the great coalition partner now? Whatever was communicated in private channels isn't really comparable to calling out a coalition partner in a public DoW on their treaty partner, forcing them to either respond with force or be humiliated in public while likely permanently damaging relations with that treaty partner. It sounds like they communicated in proper channels they didn't want you hitting their treaty partner, then you did so anyways and made sure to bait them into attacking you by calling them out in a way which made sure they did so you could get your allies to pile on. Arguments in coalition channels regarding whether alliances find it acceptable for their allies on the other side to get hit are normal, calling out coalition partners in DoWs on their allies to force them into switching sides isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Whatever was communicated in private channels isn't really comparable to calling out a coalition partner in a public DoW on their treaty partner, forcing them to either respond with force or be humiliated in public while likely permanently damaging relations with that treaty partner. It sounds like they communicated in proper channels they didn't want you hitting their treaty partner, then you did so anyways and made sure to bait them into attacking you by calling them out in a way which made sure they did so you could get your allies to pile on. Arguments in coalition channels regarding whether alliances find it acceptable for their allies on the other side to get hit are normal, calling out coalition partners in DoWs on their allies to force them into switching sides isn't. Come on now, I highly doubt the subtitle of a thread "forced" GOD to defend RnR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Come on now, I highly doubt the subtitle of a thread "forced" GOD to defend RnR. You can't really force anyone to do anything, but you can make the alternative so damaging they are very likely to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dajobo Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Dajobo ended that discussion with Farrin without giving him much more room to speak, just a simple 'go talk to your allies' and no real interest in further discussion .. Nice twist. I actually asked Farrin to talk with his allies and get back to me. I wasn't being a dick and trying to strong-arm anyone or make them speak for all their allies without letting them have some time to think and discuss. That's just courtesy and respect, you should try it one day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baltus Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Come on now, I highly doubt the subtitle of a thread "forced" GOD to defend RnR. Don't underestimate the power of subtitles! You have no idea what they can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 You can't really force anyone to do anything, but you can make the alternative so damaging they are very likely to do it. So, you can attack their ally and it's ok, but you use their name in a subtitle in their thread and life is no longer worth living? I'm not seeing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 So, you can attack their ally and it's ok, but you use their name in a subtitle in their thread and life is no longer worth living? I'm not seeing it. To compare them attacking GOONS to deciding life is no longer worth living is a stretch in my opinion. I'm not seeing that either. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Leaving Umar in PM (he is our only big guy) for 6 months would be pretty funny since he would go completely insane. I'd quit GOONS and go join DBDC if you tried to pull something like that ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baltus Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Whatever was communicated in private channels isn't really comparable to calling out a coalition partner in a public DoW on their treaty partner, forcing them to either respond with force or be humiliated in public while likely permanently damaging relations with that treaty partner. It sounds like they communicated in proper channels they didn't want you hitting their treaty partner, then you did so anyways and made sure to bait them into attacking you by calling them out in a way which made sure they did so you could get your allies to pile on. Arguments in coalition channels regarding whether alliances find it acceptable for their allies on the other side to get hit are normal, calling out coalition partners in DoWs on their allies to force them into switching sides isn't. GOD did their part in the war and bowed out. Everyone thanked them for their support and we continued with the war. A little while ago GOONS informed the coalition of their intent to defend TOP from R&R. GOD finds out about this and tell the coalition that this was and I quote "ridiculous and unacceptable". This was never brought up as an issue beforehand and suddenly out of nowhere GOD is threatening to go much further than defend R&R forth just because GOONS activated a MD treaty? Several alliances have MD allies on the other side but so far not a single one has done anything similar to what GOD did. Dajobo ended that discussion with Farrin without giving him much more room to speak, just a simple 'go talk to your allies' and no real interest in further discussion .. I don't think Dajabo would've minded if Farrin had continued the discussion. Either way I sincerely doubt Dajabo intended to be hateful or try to keep talking to a minimum when he's one of the nicest people in our coalition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Yup Dajobo is a cool cat. The way Farrin talked to him didnt impress anyone in coalition HQ when I was there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 You'd think GOD would understand coalition warfare after, what, 6 years of participating in it? The treaty web is so $%&@ed up nowadays that there's always going to be an alliance (or many) with treaties on both sides of the conflict. Just nut up and deal with it. Or isn't that what you told RoK during VE-NpO? !@#$@#$ hypocrites. Not gonna lie.. watching someone in the central alliance of the other coalition screaming "hypocrites" is delicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex987 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 A little while ago GOONS informed the coalition of their intent to defend TOP from R&R. I'd stick with the "activate their MD treaty" wording, because the activation of this treaty was not to lay pressure off of TOP nations, GOONS and TOP are alliances in the opposite tiers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) To be honest, I find it a little puzzling that GOD decided to activate its treaty with R&R now, as opposed to activating it a few weeks ago when UPN, HB, MI6 and Umbrella declared war on R&R. Why the change of heart? edit: grammar Edited January 14, 2014 by Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander shepard Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 To be honest, I find it a little puzzling that GOD decided to activate its treaty with R&R now, as opposed to activating it a few weeks ago when UPN, HB, MI6 and Umbrella declared war on R&R. Why the change of heart? edit: grammar More weight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) I suppose the fact that Farrin said "Unacceptable, we will give white peace to you." could be taken as a counter offer. But its not one we are even willing to admit is a counter offer since it is so off the mark. So if you count that as a counter offer then yes we got one which we rejected before it was ever put out. They are free to make a serious counter offer at any time for us to discuss. Our coalition should pull this and just pretend no offer was made to Pacifica until something reasonable comes from your end. I mean, objectively speaking, white peace is leaps and bounds more reasonable than the !@#$ that was offered. I know nobody can just admit that because you all have to pretend so that the single person who might be swayed by the spin and !@#$%^&* going on will eat it all up, but come on.Yup Dajobo is a cool cat. The way Farrin talked to him didnt impress anyone in coalition HQ when I was there. Nobody is trying to impress you, but if we were, it would be quite simple to do with a good laser pointer and a dark room. Edited January 14, 2014 by Hereno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 More weight What does that mean? Four alliances declaring war on their ally was OK but a fifth one wasn't? How does that make any sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 I could see political reasons not to declare on two of them, and tier reasons not to declare on the other two. There's always a chance they just don't like you though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 What does that mean? Four alliances declaring war on their ally was OK but a fifth one wasn't? How does that make any sense? Its fairly obvious there is a lack of reasoning skills on the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 I could see political reasons not to declare on two of them, and tier reasons not to declare on the other two. There's always a chance they just don't like you though! Please fill me in, I'm not up to speed on the whole politics/tier stuff. I was really just hoping to obtain an understanding of the rationale for the apparent inconsistency I noted above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Its fairly obvious there is a lack of reasoning skills on the other side.Have you seen your coalition's alignments and poor decisions lately? You've pissed a lot of people off that didn't have to be.Also, more weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hornguard Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 But they only got 1 offer, perhaps they should get other offers. But wait, there's more! We'll throw in a deluxe, ultra, special, new, improved, thing for no extra cost, just pay extra processing & handling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Have you seen your coalition's alignments and poor decisions lately? You've pissed a lot of people off that didn't have to be. Also, more weight. Is this what you're talking about? I wouldn't think that's a particularly germane analogy to use with regard to GOD and R&R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Have you seen your coalition's alignments and poor decisions lately? You've pissed a lot of people off that didn't have to be.Also, more weight. In the end GOD is just more souls for the reaper machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenMorningstar Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Our coalition should pull this and just pretend no offer was made to Pacifica until something reasonable comes from your end. I mean, objectively speaking, white peace is leaps and bounds more reasonable than the !@#$ that was offered. I know nobody can just admit that because you all have to pretend so that the single person who might be swayed by the spin and !@#$%^&* going on will eat it all up, but come on. You guys can keep saying stuff like this and painting us as the bad guys or come back with a reasonable counter offer. It's not our decision to do one sided negotiating. It's hard to negotiate with the losing side when they can't accept that they are aren't in control here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Is this what you're talking about? I wouldn't think that's a particularly germane analogy to use with regard to GOD and R&R.They certainly haven't backed down, have they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts