Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) They certainly haven't backed down, have they? I don't see your point - what has that got to do with them ignoring 4 alliances declaring war on their ally and then deciding to intervene two to three weeks later when a 5th one turns up? Edited January 14, 2014 by Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 I don't see your point - what has that got to do with them ignoring 4 alliances declaring war on their ally and then deciding to intervene two weeks later when a 5th one turns up?Well, this coalition uses strategy. As well as the fact that R&R was very much aware of GOD's desire to fight at that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) Well, this coalition uses strategy. As well as the fact that R&R was very much aware of GOD's desire to fight at that point. I hope you arent talking about your side considering how much belly aching there is about strategic oAs over there. Edited January 14, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Heck, they could also take the peace negotiations seriously and counter with something reasonable, if they really want peace for their allies. Why NPO can't get white peace and need to pay reparations or get surrender terms? After all they're just defending an ally, unless the reasons behind this war are a lie and NPO was the main target? Are you implying that Dajobo lied in the initial DoW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 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. Ugh, I fucking hate this forum sometimes. There's no way I am going to believe that there are enough of you over there that dumb as to actually believe that the terms offered to NPO were in any way reasonable. Nobody over here is that stupid either, and nobody is on the sidelines but the neutrals. So then why pretend? Who do you think is being fooled? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Ugh, I !@#$@#$ hate this forum sometimes. There's no way I am going to believe that there are enough of you over there that dumb as to actually believe that the terms offered to NPO were in any way reasonable. Nobody over here is that stupid either, and nobody is on the sidelines but the neutrals. So then why pretend? Who do you think is being fooled? It's obvious you are not of the Sith with that mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenMorningstar Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Ugh, I !@#$@#$ hate this forum sometimes. There's no way I am going to believe that there are enough of you over there that dumb as to actually believe that the terms offered to NPO were in any way reasonable. Nobody over here is that stupid either, and nobody is on the sidelines but the neutrals. So then why pretend? Who do you think is being fooled?it's called an opening offer genius. 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 Well, this coalition uses strategy. As well as the fact that R&R was very much aware of GOD's desire to fight at that point. So, what strategy would that be then? Wait two to three weeks to get dog-piled rather than going straight in to bat for their ally? I gather that you're confirming that GOD wasn't keen to defend R&R against UPN, HB, MI6 and Umbrella but they're OK with helping them out against GOONS but, as above, all I'm after is the rationale for the selectivity about who they will and who they won't defend their allies against. I'm not really up to speed with the whole optional aspect of their mutual defence deal with R&R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) I hope you arent talking about your side considering how much belly aching there is about strategic oAs over there.Those strategic oAs serve no purpose but to ""punish"" us and piss allies in your coalition off. You have several alliances who would tap if they weren't too proud.So, what strategy would that be then? Wait two to three weeks to get dog-piled rather than going straight in to bat for their ally? I gather that you're confirming that GOD wasn't keen to defend R&R against UPN, HB, MI6 and Umbrella but they're OK with helping them out against GOONS but, as above, all I'm after is the rationale for the selectivity about who they will and who they won't defend their allies against. I'm not really up to speed with the whole optional aspect of their mutual defence deal with R&R.As posted before, tier advantages and strategic concerns with allies were taken into consideration. Edited January 14, 2014 by Neo Uruk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Those strategic oAs serve no purpose but to ""punish"" us and piss allies in your coalition off. You have several alliances who would tap if they weren't too proud.As posted before, tier advantages and strategic concerns with allies were taken into consideration. Several alliances? Why stop there, might as well name them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) Several alliances? Why stop there, might as well name them.The fact that you don't know them doesn't mean I should incite a !@#$load of "NO WE'RE WINNING SOUNDLY" posts from those fronts. Edited January 14, 2014 by Neo Uruk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Lol, you are such a liar, there are no several alliances nearly about to capitulate. 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 As posted before, tier advantages and strategic concerns with allies were taken into consideration. Is it really that hard to spell these out in plain English? What tier advantages? What strategic concerns? Sounds like BS waffle to me at first blush, Rey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Is it really that hard to spell these out in plain English? What tier advantages? What strategic concerns? Sounds like BS waffle to me at first blush, Rey.I'm not really too "in the know," I get a lot of second-hand information. I'm assuming it's because HB have high warchests due to hardly participating in the last few wars, MI6 being fairly military capable and with a decent higher tier. I'm not entirely sure, but I can assure you that while many dislike them, GOD have never been afraid of a scuffle.Lol, you are such a liar, there are no several alliances nearly about to capitulate.If you say so, Master of the Universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Well dont make claims you cant back up lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 it's called an opening offer genius. If the only offer NPO has gotten after all of this time was not meant to be taken seriously, then they can't really be said to be holding up the peace process, can they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Well dont make claims you cant back up lol.I can very well back them up if you'd like me to. Seek me out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baltus Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 If the only offer NPO has gotten after all of this time was not meant to be taken seriously, then they can't really be said to be holding up the peace process, can they? The offer is very serious. Pacifica could accept and that front would be done. However, clearly they don't want to accept so the idea is that they try to negotiate with their counterparts to try to bring the numbers in the favor. Once both sides find middle ground then that's that. They are holding up the peace process in the sense that the ball is now in their court to negotiate with their enemies rather than say "we want white peace thanks" when clearly nobody that they're fighting is interested in giving them that. Sure that can be their starting position but in the end both parties will probably need to shift towards the middle. So far we've only been talking about the NPO front. Nearly every other front including the one this thread is about have been offered extremely fair terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 The offer is very serious. Pacifica could accept and that front would be done. However, clearly they don't want to accept so the idea is that they try to negotiate with their counterparts to try to bring the numbers in the favor. Once both sides find middle ground then that's that. They are holding up the peace process in the sense that the ball is now in their court to negotiate with their enemies rather than say "we want white peace thanks" when clearly nobody that they're fighting is interested in giving them that. Sure that can be their starting position but in the end both parties will probably need to shift towards the middle. So far we've only been talking about the NPO front. Nearly every other front including the one this thread is about have been offered extremely fair terms. Baltus, why would you insult my intelligence by replying to me with a post stating that the offer is "serious" when another member of your coalition just admitted that it was an opener that was never intended to be taken as a serious offer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 I think he was actually criticizing Farrins lack of desire to actually negotiate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenMorningstar Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) Baltus, why would you insult my intelligence by replying to me with a post stating that the offer is "serious" when another member of your coalition just admitted that it was an opener that was never intended to be taken as a serious offer? It's the offer we voted on. It's very serious. But we aren't saying it's this or nothing. I don't understand why you have such a damn hard time with the notion that we are flexible and open to negotiation. You are being purposely stupid in this matter.I think he was actually criticizing Farrins lack of desire to actually negotiate. Basically this Edited January 14, 2014 by KenMorningstar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baltus Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Baltus, why would you insult my intelligence by replying to me with a post stating that the offer is "serious" when another member of your coalition just admitted that it was an opener that was never intended to be taken as a serious offer? I'm not here to insult you Hereno. Ken said it was an opening offer. Just like in any other negotiation people can choose to accept the initial offer and then it's all over. Sometimes that happens but usually everyone has their own agenda. And then they negotiate. Let's say I want to sell you a bottle of coke for ten dollars. I'm the only vendor for hundreds of miles and I know you need my bottle of coke but I also don't have infinite customers. You can offer to pay me all ten and we'll be done. Now if you only offer me a dollar when I know you have ten, I'll refuse. We can keep going back and forth but ideally we find middle ground like three or four. You can refuse to budge and go tell all of your friends how horrible I am but I know you need me just as much as I need you. Obviously I'm not talking about you or me since neither of our alliances are involved on this front. Basically, as I stated before, the ball is in Pacifica's court and they need to try to negotiate with their enemies. It's fine if they want white peace but they won't be getting it and the sooner they realize that the faster things can move along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Humphrey Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 An opening offer made in good faith is one thing. An ambit claim designed to make subsequent offers look reasonable by comparison is quite another thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 An opening offer made in good faith is one thing. An ambit claim designed to make subsequent offers look reasonable by comparison is quite another thing. I wasnt aware this is craigslist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
im317 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 So, what strategy would that be then? Wait two to three weeks to get dog-piled rather than going straight in to bat for their ally? I gather that you're confirming that GOD wasn't keen to defend R&R against UPN, HB, MI6 and Umbrella but they're OK with helping them out against GOONS but, as above, all I'm after is the rationale for the selectivity about who they will and who they won't defend their allies against. I'm not really up to speed with the whole optional aspect of their mutual defence deal with R&R. these are just my guesses as i was on vacation for the majority of the time R&R has been in the war so i haven't actually talked with anyone about it but i figure there at least partially accurate. UPN is in Aftermath, so are GOD's allies in CRAP, TTK, CCC and MCXA. HB has that pesky DT treaty. you know DT the #8 ranked alliance who have not fought at all in this war and are thus fresh. MI6 has a treaty with Valhalla who is only fighting NPO. they are also allied to GOD's ally NPL. i may be missing something else here. Umbrella is probably that tier issue that was mentioned before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts