General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 Besides that, the two rounds were already already in motion. We never specified how many times he'd be hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 8 minutes ago, General Kanabis said: Based on what, that last message I sent Canik? What about that super ambiguous message he sent before that saying he didn't want to make anything official. Or the fact it dragged on over a week before I heard a response. In the dead silence, you tend to assume they're getting ready on the other side. Again, I'll reiterate. You suggested two rounds of war. Canik said two to three rounds of war would be acceptable. Then Canik said two rounds looked like they'd work. Then you said two rounds were acceptable. Then you were told it was only to be two rounds, within the two round period. Kashmir's other ally went to FTW and confirmed two rounds. Then you declared war anyway. The one and only point two rounds weren't on the table was when you pack pedaled to two counters, but you then went back again and said two rounds were acceptable. What does specifying the number of times hit in two rounds have to do with anything? Is it somehow possible to fight two rounds without new declarations? You can't claim FTW was extending the deal by letting the newest war expire when they explicitly told you it would end in a peace offer after the two round statuary limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 10 minutes ago, James Spanier said: Is it somehow possible to fight two rounds without new declarations? Yes because FTW's third counter was already ongoing, and round 2 already underway. The fourth declaration was overkill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 15 minutes ago, James Spanier said: they explicitly told you it would end in a peace offer after the two round statuary limit. He only reached out after they attacked the Kashmir AA. He wasn't so diplomatic before. To be clear, your are basing everything off my last message with Canik while we are basing everything off HIS last message, which clearly wasn't the same vibe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, General Kanabis said: Yes because FTW's third counter was already ongoing, and round 2 already underway. The fourth declaration was overkill. Okay, so the line is four, not three, glad we established that. Where was that agreed to, or even proposed, again? All I see is every party agreeing with two rounds, which this doesn't violate. Your subjective opinion that four is too many is just that, a subjective opinion. Maybe someone could have sent them a message protesting it, like Kashmir. 1 minute ago, General Kanabis said: He only reached out after they attacked the Kashmir AA. He wasn't so diplomatic before. To be clear, your are basing everything off my last message with Canik while we are basing everything off HIS last message, which clearly wasn't the same vibe. But before you declared war. So everyone was fine with two rounds, FTW continues to operate within the scope of two rounds, they tell you and Polar (who I assume was talking to FTW on behalf of Kashmir) there was a set date for peace, the day two rounds from the start of counters would end, but you yet still had no idea what their intentions were? What happened in the week would have more relevance to actual events if you had declared war at that time. It would actually have come off as preemptively defensive, disputable, but optically defensive. Instead you waited until after everyone involved clarified that the scope of the agreement not only hadn't changed but was now set in stone with a specific date. You stated you didn't know their intent when their intent was stated before you declared war. They told you, albeit late, so it it wasn't ambiguous. That now goes from preemptively defensive because they might escalate to preemptively offensive to prevent peace from actually having a chance. Now everyone is left to ponder if you actually informed Kashmir that there was a set date, or if you instead colluded to create a war where there was none. There's also the troubling scenario where both happened, but I don't imagine there will be answers to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 8 minutes ago, James Spanier said: They told you, albeit late, so it it wasn't ambiguous. That now goes from preemptively defensive because they might escalate to preemptively offensive to prevent peace from actually having a chance. When I said ambiguous I was referring to his previous two messages, when I was still considering the possibility of a peaceful resolution. I waited more than a week for a response or some sort of confirmation. (to go from "hey man i don't know the best i can probably do is two rounds but my people don't like you and they would love to escalate so we'll see probably just leave it at that" to "We will grant your guy peace before the wars expire" is significant) He didn't feel the need to reach out until there was real chance we'd counter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 22 minutes ago, James Spanier said: or if you instead colluded to create a war where there was none. Maybe the "some ppl" he mentions would find it more convenient your way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, General Kanabis said: When I said ambiguous I was referring to his previous two messages, when I was still considering the possibility of a peaceful resolution. I waited more than a week for a response or some sort of confirmation. (to go from "hey man i don't know the best i can probably do is two rounds but my people don't like you and they would love to escalate so we'll see probably just leave it at that" to "We will grant your guy peace before the wars expire" is significant) He didn't feel the need to reach out until there was real chance we'd counter. I'm not saying FTW's communication was either exemplary or punctual, but I am saying they did communicate it and you declared war anyway. Which is fine, you're free to renege on agreements on behalf of your allies (I guess?), but own up to it. You accuse FTW of plotting a war with COBRA through the actions outside of their control while you actively do everything in your power to make it happen. It's not even a self fulfilling prophecy, you went out of your way to cut out the prophecy and just did fulfilled it yourself. 8 minutes ago, General Kanabis said: Maybe the "some ppl" he mentions would find it more convenient your way. They probably would, so does that mean you are denying that you had full knowledge of the scope of terms and actively kept it from Kashmir to create a war you claimed the other side wanted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, James Spanier said: does that mean you are denying that you had full knowledge of the scope of terms I am denying that there were any real, concrete terms to begin with. The delay in communications hampered any desire to think optimistically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 Just now, General Kanabis said: I am denying that there were any real, concrete terms to begin with. The delay in communications hampered any desire to think optimistically. Everything that has been seen so far points to the terms being two weeks (at least) before they were confirmed to be two weeks by FTW. That was within the scope of what you and they had declared acceptable prior. This happened all before you declared war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 1 minute ago, James Spanier said: Everything that has been seen so far points to the terms being two weeks Let's just say this half-assed agreement wasn't riddled with words like "probably". Even if this was the case, the last FTW attack on Korlath wasn't even necessary to complete those two weeks. It was definitely out of line and we only truly considered a possibility of war beyond this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 1 minute ago, General Kanabis said: Let's just say this half-assed agreement wasn't riddled with words like "probably". Even if this was the case, the last FTW attack on Korlath wasn't even necessary to complete those two weeks. It was definitely out of line and we only truly considered a possibility of war beyond this point. First off, the agreement may have been riddled with non-definitive terms for the end date, but the scope was set. We have both agreed on this: it was two rounds, nothing less, maybe more. While the fourth war may not have been necessary to complete two weeks, it is in no way out of line with a two round timeline. FTW notified you (again, late but still done) seemingly without prompting that this fourth war did not extend the two round mark out beyond what the original date was set at. That is clear as day. Now if they said the end date and attacks continued or worse, more wars were declared, after the fact then that is absolutely a breach of agreement at any level of formalization at that point. It's also not a scenario that exists in reality. I again ask to know where it was even tentatively agreed that four wars were too many, or that no new wars could be declared after the date of the beginning of the second round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, James Spanier said: I again ask to know where it was even tentatively agreed that four wars were too many, or that no new wars could be declared after the date of the beginning of the second round. It was not and for this same reason, Korlath switched Alliances. They could have messaged us beforehand but they either chose not to, or waited for a third party to contact them. All I am saying is that they commenced the second round with a previous attack. They should have waited when they saw Korlath in Kashmir and discussed it further Precisely because the unofficial agreement didn't specify anything about number of wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 1 minute ago, General Kanabis said: It was not and for this same reason, Korlath switched Alliances. They could have messaged us beforehand but they either chose not to, or waited for a third party to contact them. All I am saying is that they commenced the second round with a previous attack. They should have waited when they saw Korlath in Kashmir and discussed it further Precisely because the unofficial agreement didn't specify anything about number of wars. That also assumes they noticed the AA change beforehand. I agree they should have notified beforehand (if they had noticed), though I also don't know exactly how it played out. The order for the fourth nation may have been received late for instance. We again circle back to the "FTW should have consulted Kashmir" vs "Kashmir should have consulted FTW" debate. The fact remains that neither happened (directly anyway, again I don't know if you and/or Polar were relaying information back to Kashmir), and COBRA forced a war when dialog was by no means no longer an option, especially when it was established that there was an end date. There was even a new player to consult, SirWilliam could have offered a refreshing change of tune to the dialog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 1 minute ago, James Spanier said: The order for the fourth nation may have been received late for instance. There is room for FTW to err but not much for us, it would seem. 2 minutes ago, James Spanier said: COBRA forced a war when dialog was by no means no longer an option, especially when it was established that there was an end date. I immediately set out to plan a counter as soon as I saw the Kashmir AA had been attacked. Historically, we are known to defend Kashmir almost within minutes. You may have some idea how many messages I sent out, given your experience here, so you will understand that when I actually ran my sleep deprived eyes over Canik's (much nicer) message, it was almost too late to actually change course with full effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, General Kanabis said: There is room for FTW to err but not much for us, it would seem. I immediately set out to plan a counter as soon as I saw the Kashmir AA had been attacked. Historically, we are known to defend Kashmir almost within minutes. You may have some idea how many messages I sent out, given your experience here, so you will understand that when I actually ran my sleep deprived eyes over Canik's (much nicer) message, it was almost too late to actually change course with full effect. Kashmir would have had plenty to err on, COBRA did not when they declared war. Again, as I said before, if you had countered immediately, the narrative could have been different, but instead it came after clarification, which tired or not would have been grounds for a pause. The entirety of COBRA can be notified of anything in one mass message. And yes I can confirm to understand such scenarios, you may recall the incident where TTK nations attacked Kashmir while peace talks for NADC with Polar were ongoing. But the difference there was that TTK immediately came out and said "Oh that was an error resulting from not keeping up with messages". They didn't post a DoW where they attempted to justify it only to later say they dropped the ball and they didn't mean to interrupt the dialog, oops. If you're starting the war/front to defend an ally, it's generally recommended to at least consult said ally before declaring. Unless Kashmir did sign off on this, though considering the lack of a coordinated DoW or even hail or acknowledgement I don't think that was the case. I get your whole defend immediately trigger thing, I'm just saying it doesn't make your narrative any more valid unless that is your narrative, no frills of attempted justification on top of attempted justification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, James Spanier said: If you're starting the war/front to defend an ally, it's generally recommended to at least consult said ally before declaring. Unless Kashmir did sign off on this, though considering the lack of a coordinated DoW or even hail or acknowledgement I don't think that was the case. I get your whole defend immediately trigger thing, I'm just saying it doesn't make your narrative any more valid unless that is your narrative, no frills of attempted justification on top of attempted justification. 6 hours ago, General Kanabis said: COBRA hereby declares war on the Freehold of The Wolves for aggression towards our MDP partners; Sellswords and Kashmir. These are not justifications. My CB has been stated and I did my best to publicly recall the series of events that led to our decision to make war upon the Freehold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smitty256 Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 (edited) 43 minutes ago, General Kanabis said: There is room for FTW to err but not much for us, it would seem. I immediately set out to plan a counter as soon as I saw the Kashmir AA had been attacked. Historically, we are known to defend Kashmir almost within minutes. You may have some idea how many messages I sent out, given your experience here, so you will understand that when I actually ran my sleep deprived eyes over Canik's (much nicer) message, it was almost too late to actually change course with full effect. Everyone here knows that you have a vendetta and hatred for the Mad King, Canik. You dropped the ball on this and are now trying to save face. If you actually cared about giving peace a chance, you wouldn't have declared war. Edited March 17, 2019 by Smitty256 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 Just now, Smitty256 said: Everyone here knows I sure as hell wasn't aware Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smitty256 Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 Just now, General Kanabis said: I sure as hell wasn't aware You dropped the ball on this and now COBRA is going to get rolled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 Just now, Smitty256 said: COBRA is going to get rolled. Not by FTW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smitty256 Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 1 minute ago, General Kanabis said: Not by FTW If that is what helps you fall asleep at night, then by means, keep telling yourself that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 Just now, Smitty256 said: what helps you fall asleep at night Ya know, stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 (edited) 25 minutes ago, General Kanabis said: These are not justifications. My CB has been stated and I did my best to publicly recall the series of events that led to our decision to make war upon the Freehold. Let's not be dishonest, citing the treaties you activated doesn't erase the fact you've invested a copious number of posts trying to justify this war. This has been three pages of walkback from 'the entire premise of FTW's """"aggression"""" against a single raider is illegal and unjustified' which your cited in your DoW to 'I was tired and couldn't undo what had been started with the kneejerk attack order I gave.' What do you think a justification is if not telling everyone your version of a series of events that led you to a decision to support the decision? Your recollections weren't from a faulty memory, you had far more access than I did to all this information that we had to wait one Canik screenshot for at a time, only for you to move the goal posts again and again. If all this was was activating a treaty that would have been that, instead you decided to debate every single point presented against the narrative in your own DoW. Edited March 17, 2019 by James Spanier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Kanabis Posted March 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, James Spanier said: Let's not be dishonest, citing the treaties you activated doesn't erase the fact you've invested a copious number of posts trying to justify this war. This has been three pages of walkback from 'the entire premise of FTW's """"aggression"""" against a single raider is illegal and unjustified' which your cited in your DoW to 'I was tired and couldn't undo what had been started with the kneejerk attack order I gave.' What do you think a justification is if not telling everyone your version of a series of events that led you to a decision to support the decision? Your recollections weren't from a faulty memory, you had far more access than I did to all this information that we had to wait one Canik screenshot for at a time, only for you to move the goal posts again and again. If all this was was activating a treaty that would have been that, instead you decided to debate every single point presented against the narrative in your own DoW. If the answers I give in response to your questions are being treated as justifications, then I have nothing else to say tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.fbfef4750c49eff6bf3067fda34c6f84.jpg)
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.