Neo Uruk Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 Unknown Smurf posts in 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceres Soveign Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 We were not extorting reps for peace. Their former leader, El Presidente, Nation name: New Egypt, told Lord Caparo and I that a merger was in place and was occurring on thursday into Friday- we even started drafting a joint constitution and we even informed our allies of the merger. Then Ceres gets pissy and removes El Presidente from power and says no to the merger- on top of that, they insulted us in the process. So we sent them a $*)# you package. the 'reps' we installed was like 100 tech per ally we informed because it just didn't sit well. The negotiation process is fairly simple: we ask for more and we expect them to want less and then we settle on what we originally planned, white peace. Presidente is still in power, this merger was denied because it didn't have consent of the alliance population. Elite Virgin, who works for Hitchcock, is the one who accepted the merger, not the alliance. Hitchcock tried to fix this merger from the start. Why do you think Monsters Inc committed to war after TSO removed your mole? Because Hitchcock didn't get his way, and war seems to be the only thing he knows. Now, back up and rethink your situation Hitchcock. Monsters Inc was totally extorting reps for peace. First we decline your merger because it didn't have consent, so you attack us, and we pay you? Because that makes perfect sense... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 You are aware that Lord Hitchcock was not only in the first wave, but was the very first to declare any wars, right? I was not. However I would imagine it was an emotional action by LH as he has been quite logical in proceedings since and worked with me (and others) to try and get this resolved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 I was not. However I would imagine it was an emotional action by LH as he has been quite logical in proceedings since and worked with me (and others) to try and get this resolved. So when the leader of an alliance emotionally declares an undeclared war by leading the charge into a battle, this is to be immediately forgiven because they realized they were outgunned and logically now want white peace, as the aggressors? Sounds pretty logical for TSO to reject that notion as much as it does MI to propose them. I know I'd want white peace if I was in MI's shoes. I also can't think of many alliances that'd just stand down and accept the attacks as an "emotional response" to being rejected from a merger as being an okay thing to do. Sorry US, but MI's only victim card here is being a victim to their own manufactured circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 I was not. However I would imagine it was an emotional action by LH as he has been quite logical in proceedings since and worked with me (and others) to try and get this resolved. So according to you, Hitchcock should not have to pay any kind of consequences for his actions, except a slap on the wrist? Want to know how an alliance can learn from its mistakes? War. If Minc gets curbstomped because of Hitchcock's actions, they may finally realize that they need to ensure Hitchcock don't pull any more stupid stunts like this. Also, damn you for making me agree with Xanth... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 Hey now, don't make Kaskus do something really whacky! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elite Virgin Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 Presidente is still in power, this merger was denied because it didn't have consent of the alliance population. Elite Virgin, who works for Hitchcock, is the one who accepted the merger, not the alliance. Hitchcock tried to fix this merger from the start. Why do you think Monsters Inc committed to war after TSO removed your mole? Because Hitchcock didn't get his way, and war seems to be the only thing he knows. Now, back up and rethink your situation Hitchcock. Monsters Inc was totally extorting reps for peace. First we decline your merger because it didn't have consent, so you attack us, and we pay you? Because that makes perfect sense... Hold up buddy. I wasn't even talking to LH until EP said a merger might be a good idea. I got on, was like what is going on guys? I talked to MI for hours. The merger just sorta stuck with me how beneficial we would be. Then the ex-leader comes on and says, I come to defense of EP and get in an hour long tense discussion with Ceres. He insults me, He insults Monsters. He was very close minded. I post my resignation and go over to NADC, who denies me. Go to SNX, NADC tells SNX, you accept him we roll you (Not like that, but you get the idea :P). So I am like, well TSO really doesn't like me. Enemy of thy enemy is friend. Oh, go to Monsters. I don't work for Hitchcock (Obviously I do now because he is my master :P). Appears Premier and Prime Minister had all the power. With a weak government, seemed time for TSO to come to a close. I mean, look how they fend for themselves. Anyway, I just wanted you guys to know what I am up to :P. I still love TSO members, Ceres is sorta a dick now, but most of the time before this we got along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kream Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 Lolz that's funny seeing as we have had merge talks with TSO before....Only difference is we didn't get butt hurt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elite Virgin Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) Lolz that's funny seeing as we have had merge talks with TSO before....Only difference is we didn't get butt hurt Only difference is you went inactive :( and then Ceres didn't be a complete !@#$%. To: Hombre Sabio From: Kream Date: 5/22/2015 12:45:31 AM Subject: RE: You are a worthy adversary! Message: LoLz yeah i will definitely say your alliance is more competent then my allies Edited May 22, 2015 by Elite Virgin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duderonomy Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 I don't know why people bother mentioning secret treaties. If it's secret, it has no moral basis and your target's allies should feel obligated by MDs. If you want to roll somebody, then just roll them, but don't try to act like you're responding to a treaty that doesn't exist. It's on the OWF for all to see, or you're just lying. CBs aren't important. Dumb CBs deserve ridicule. Kaskus's CBs are better than most of what I've seen from this side of the web. A no-CB or "don't like you" CB is better than blatantly insulting everyone reading your declaration. If this is actually protectorate defense, then I apologize, because we don't need a hundred protectorate agreements cluttering things. But please be more clear in your communication in the future. I also apologize if this was posted to the AA description BEFORE the war (you know if it was or wasn't) and Monsters Inc did not contact you about it. Don't know why I care, but kinda tired of spineless secret treaties. Just roll people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 It's on the OWF for all to see, or you're just lying.That's not very proper! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeology Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 We were not extorting reps for peace. Their former leader, El Presidente, Nation name: New Egypt, told Lord Caparo and I that a merger was in place and was occurring on thursday into Friday- we even started drafting a joint constitution and we even informed our allies of the merger. Then Ceres gets pissy and removes El Presidente from power and says no to the merger- on top of that, they insulted us in the process. So we sent them a $*)# you package. the 'reps' we installed was like 100 tech per ally we informed because it just didn't sit well. The negotiation process is fairly simple: we ask for more and we expect them to want less and then we settle on what we originally planned, white peace. Some friendly advice. Next time a merger falls threw just go to your allies and say it fell threw, people will understand. Mergers fall threw it's not the end of the world. Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood jrkee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 So when the leader of an alliance emotionally declares an undeclared war by leading the charge into a battle, this is to be immediately forgiven because they realized they were outgunned and logically now want white peace, as the aggressors? Sounds pretty logical for TSO to reject that notion as much as it does MI to propose them. I know I'd want white peace if I was in MI's shoes. I also can't think of many alliances that'd just stand down and accept the attacks as an "emotional response" to being rejected from a merger as being an okay thing to do. Sorry US, but MI's only victim card here is being a victim to their own manufactured circumstances. So according to you, Hitchcock should not have to pay any kind of consequences for his actions, except a slap on the wrist? Want to know how an alliance can learn from its mistakes? War. If Minc gets curbstomped because of Hitchcock's actions, they may finally realize that they need to ensure Hitchcock don't pull any more stupid stunts like this. Also, damn you for making me agree with Xanth... Uh for the record reps were offered -- and got no response. I was not expecting them to walk away with a slap on the wrist so to speak, but just stating that we're willing to negotiate here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dre4mwe4ver Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 I don't know why people bother mentioning secret treaties. If it's secret, it has no moral basis and your target's allies should feel obligated by MDs. If you want to roll somebody, then just roll them, but don't try to act like you're responding to a treaty that doesn't exist. It's on the OWF for all to see, or you're just lying. CBs aren't important. Dumb CBs deserve ridicule. Kaskus's CBs are better than most of what I've seen from this side of the web. A no-CB or "don't like you" CB is better than blatantly insulting everyone reading your declaration. If this is actually protectorate defense, then I apologize, because we don't need a hundred protectorate agreements cluttering things. But please be more clear in your communication in the future. I also apologize if this was posted to the AA description BEFORE the war (you know if it was or wasn't) and Monsters Inc did not contact you about it. Don't know why I care, but kinda tired of spineless secret treaties. Just roll people.It's not a protectorate. It's an MDoAP and yes, it was an existing treaty that was cearly posted on the Alliance Information page.That said, while I disagree that CBs aren't important, I agree that treaties shouldn't be invented on the spot and that everyone should "just roll people." So when the leader of an alliance emotionally declares an undeclared war by leading the charge into a battle, this is to be immediately forgiven because they realized they were outgunned and logically now want white peace, as the aggressors? Sounds pretty logical for TSO to reject that notion as much as it does MI to propose them. I know I'd want white peace if I was in MI's shoes. I also can't think of many alliances that'd just stand down and accept the attacks as an "emotional response" to being rejected from a merger as being an okay thing to do.Sorry US, but MI's only victim card here is being a victim to their own manufactured circumstances.I think it's clear that MI is a victim of MI's poor choices. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that MI owes everyone involved, especially MI, a sincere apology. Now, I haven't read the MI FA Guide in depth, but fortunately, we have several scholars of the MI Academy of Foreign Affairs in our midst, and they have shared with us that the best way to signal your willingness to have earnest dialogue about cleaning up the mess you made and show good faith is to punch them in the face and demand that they pay you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanth Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 If you're referring to the incident a few months prior, it has not happened since. As I said, the bright spot is the fact that they learned from their mistake, not that they made it. If you are referring to this current situation, Minc has not extorted reps (or even asked for them) to my knowledge. Unless you count the asking for 100tech, which was a tactic to just bring all parties to the table as Hitchcock suggested, nothing malicious. (EDIT: I did not know about this until this until reading it here; though I wouldn't have suggested that they do it if I had known about it beforehand, it has happened and I don't know what to do about it. Other than excuse them for being new to the planet. Advocating change and then demanding people conform seems a bit counterproductive, don't you think?) Some members of Minc attacked, they did not declare war an official over the issue (considering they are the loudmouths that they are I'm sure we would see an OWF topic about it if they did :P ) As I said above, Minc offers much more freedom to its members which causes incidents like these. Their government, however, has made a good faith effort to end this war at terms beneficial to TSO/TSC; we are just waiting on Ceres. you have actually started believing your own bs these days haven't you. At some point you have to realize no one trusts nor believes anything you say based on your track record. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanth Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 So according to you, Hitchcock should not have to pay any kind of consequences for his actions, except a slap on the wrist? Want to know how an alliance can learn from its mistakes? War. If Minc gets curbstomped because of Hitchcock's actions, they may finally realize that they need to ensure Hitchcock don't pull any more stupid stunts like this. Also, damn you for making me agree with Xanth... I'm as shocked as you are Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexio15 Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 So first off the treaty with tso and TSC has been active for as long as tso has been around. Just to get that out the way. Now smurf you and I both know that MI aren't an alliance full of noobs. They have all been around the bloc a fair few times. So that excuse is kind of out the window. Demanding reps from an alliance they have hit in an act of aggression is never a good move. Come on man you're better than that. I get the whole defend protectorate stance but they are so far in the wrong here. Also if the leader declares war on 3 members of an alliance out of 'emotion' and he gets followed by the vast majority of his AA it tends to be a DoW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 I don't know why people bother mentioning secret treaties. If it's secret, it has no moral basis and your target's allies should feel obligated by MDs. If you want to roll somebody, then just roll them, but don't try to act like you're responding to a treaty that doesn't exist. It's on the OWF for all to see, or you're just lying. CBs aren't important. Dumb CBs deserve ridicule. Kaskus's CBs are better than most of what I've seen from this side of the web. A no-CB or "don't like you" CB is better than blatantly insulting everyone reading your declaration. If this is actually protectorate defense, then I apologize, because we don't need a hundred protectorate agreements cluttering things. But please be more clear in your communication in the future. I also apologize if this was posted to the AA description BEFORE the war (you know if it was or wasn't) and Monsters Inc did not contact you about it. Don't know why I care, but kinda tired of spineless secret treaties. Just roll people. It wasn't really a secret, it was denoted on both alliances "About the AA" well before this conflict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 Uh for the record reps were offered -- and got no response. I was not expecting them to walk away with a slap on the wrist so to speak, but just stating that we're willing to negotiate here. You should tell Lord Hitchcock. the 'reps' we installed was like 100 tech per ally we informed because it just didn't sit well. The negotiation process is fairly simple: we ask for more and we expect them to want less and then we settle on what we originally planned, white peace. Usually to gain public support, you need to at least line up your version of the story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) Perhaps the veil has been lifted and they see now the true evil on planetbob are not the freedom loving rouges, and raiders, but rather the power hungry cowards who call shots from ivory towers. They completely try to stamp out any creativity from the landscape that is not their own. And because theirs is so limited they get jealous when they are out shined. Who can judge Kaskus, or anyone? Who sets the standards on planetbob morally? There was a time when the line between good and evil was much clearer here. But now it's blurred into a gray blob. What's the greater crime? Raiding, or bullying nations, and forcing them to conform, and run their nations according to the opinion of a few ruling elite? Did we all start nations in the beginning to be rulers of nations, and not citizens of alliances and submitting to tyranny? Aside from some aberrations in the upper tier, our world is a state of ordered anarchy; that is, a state of global affairs that is not formally governed by any central authority, but is still orderly. This Order takes the form of alliances featuring a sovereign institution that that lifts its membership above the state of nature. To establish common defense and global stability, the sovereign institution comes into military agreements with the institutions of other alliances. The sum total of this is civilization. This Order features the freedom for Nations to join any alliance who would accept them. I choose to be a member of the New Polar Order, an autocratic democracy, while others choose to reside in other forms of government like electoral democracy or dictatorship. As a producerist Alliance, the New Polar Order allows me to achieve my full freedom of potential in any field of creativity and production, in return for my service and shared defense of my brother and sister nations. The principal tyranny exists in the state of nature among the chaotic forces which attempt to prey among mostly low tier nations, new nations who are easily driven from our world by barbarian forces. The tyranny does not come from the alliance collective that defends itself against aggression. Edited May 23, 2015 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex0827a Posted May 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) Dammit Alex, you're supposed to be saving your tech and land for our next little tryst. Sorry man, I'm doing my best lol Let it also be noted that when peace comes between TSC and MI, it will be white peace. We will neither offer nor accept reps to or from anybody. Edited May 23, 2015 by Alex0827a Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YOLO SWAG Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 T Aside from some aberrations in the upper tier, our world is a state of ordered anarchy; that is, a state of global affairs that is not formally governed by any central authority, but is still orderly. This Order takes the form of alliances featuring a sovereign institution that that lifts its membership above the state of nature. To establish common defense and global stability, the sovereign institution comes into military agreements with the institutions of other alliances. The sum total of this is civilization. This Order features the freedom for Nations to join any alliance who would accept them. I choose to be a member of the New Polar Order, an autocratic democracy, while others choose to reside in other forms of government like electoral democracy or dictatorship. As a producerist Alliance, the New Polar Order allows me to achieve my full freedom of potential in any field of creativity and production, in return for my service and shared defense of my brother and sister nations. The principal tyranny exists in the state of nature among the chaotic forces which attempt to prey among mostly low tier nations, new nations who are easily driven from our world by barbarian forces. The tyranny does not come from the alliance collective that defends itself against aggression. Tyranny begets tyranny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King William Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 You missed the part about grievous insults though. I'll have to check my handbook, but I think that allows for a cut down to size CB, at the very least. Is that even worth the infamy?I don't roll out of bed unless it's my Day in the Sun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 Is that even worth the infamy? I don't roll out of bed unless it's my Day in the Sun. There is no infamy after grievous insults, just a hit to relations, which is quite justified honestly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingNeptune Posted May 23, 2015 Report Share Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) Sorry man, I'm doing my best lol Let it also be noted that when peace comes between TSC and MI, it will be white peace. We will neither offer nor accept reps to or from anybody. But at the very least we'll make you all wear dresses for a week, some of you are already. Edited May 23, 2015 by Kingneptune Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.