Levonscott Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Caustic said: Yo @AL Bundy, genuine curiosity. Did you ever follow through with clause 3? Or is this just an IRON/NPO led farce to never let NG grow again. Asking for a friend. As far as I'm aware, the NAP extension lapsed on the 1st of January, so fulfilling Clause 3 was not a legal requirement. Frankly, I do find myself disappointed that this was not done anyway, but I was only the drafter of the NAP, not MoFA. The powers that be have their reasoning. In any case, good luck and have fun, all. When the ashes clear, may we try yet another NAP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrinkledStraw Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 20 minutes ago, Robert2424 said: likely seeing there first action ever. If they didn't win, man, they'd have to be really incompetent. This is how war in CN is fought. Bad fighters Get rekted early. They fight the new fighters Who is a new fighter in this game and why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caustic Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 2 minutes ago, Levonscott said: In any case, good luck and have fun, all. When the ashes clear, may we try yet another NAP? Why would anyone do that in good faith only to repeat the cycle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerschbs Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Levonscott said: As far as I'm aware, the NAP extension lapsed on the 1st of January, so fulfilling Clause 3 was not a legal requirement. Frankly, I do find myself disappointed that this was not done anyway, but I was only the drafter of the NAP, not MoFA. The powers that be have their reasoning. In any case, good luck and have fun, all. When the ashes clear, may we try yet another NAP? Yea somehow I don’t see that happening friend. NAPs are pretty much useless, as shown here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caustic Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 Let's be real. There is no CB, just a vague allegation of "nefarious activity." The reality is that NPO/IRON saw our stat gains and slot usage and decided to pre-emptively hamstring us before we could become a problem someday in some vague future event. Idk. Nothing else plausible from where I'm sitting. Enjoy the nukes, we'll be at this as long as you want, just like last time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankobite Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Levonscott said: As far as I'm aware, the NAP extension lapsed on the 1st of January, so fulfilling Clause 3 was not a legal requirement. Frankly, I do find myself disappointed that this was not done anyway, but I was only the drafter of the NAP, not MoFA. The powers that be have their reasoning. In any case, good luck and have fun, all. When the ashes clear, may we try yet another NAP? Then why were the other clauses used as casus belli if it expired 1 Jan? Will RFI-Oculus enunciate the actual grievances or are can we dispense with the illusion that they matter? Edited January 17, 2021 by Tankobite subject verb agreement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Apocalypse Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 Just now, Caustic said: Let's be real. There is no CB, just a vague allegation of "nefarious activity." The reality is that NPO/IRON saw our stat gains and slot usage and decided to pre-emptively hamstring us before we could become a problem someday in some vague future event. Idk. Nothing else plausible from where I'm sitting. Enjoy the nukes, we'll be at this as long as you want, just like last time This. Seems to me that Cobra got bundled in as a pre-empt to stop us either countering or remaining on the sidelines and because they couldn't get the job done in one go last time round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert2424 Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 9 minutes ago, Johnny Apocalypse said: Maybe you'd be less bored if you fought an opponent of equal or greater strength. I know that isn't something that the people of IRON are very familiar with though. Well, you played Dangerous games, you won Dangerous prizes. Bigger alliances don't do the things you guys do. I don't know what to tell you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talbrys Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 4 minutes ago, Levonscott said: The powers that be have their reasoning. If only they had stated it in the DoW like a respectable alliance/coalition/decadent entity. Alas... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert2424 Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 13 minutes ago, CrinkledStraw said: Who is a new fighter in this game and why? New players in the game? You forget that most small nations are mostly new players? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankobite Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Robert2424 said: Bigger alliances don't do the things you guys do. What are those things exactly? Because I see big alliances go to war on flimsy pretexts all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Levonscott Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 4 minutes ago, Tankobite said: Then why were the other clauses used as casus belli if it expired 1 Jan? Will RFI-Oculus enunciate the actual grievances or are can we dispense with the illusion that they matter? It is my understanding that material was uncovered that demonstrates breaches of those other clauses, that occured during the duration of the NAP. However, these were not discovered until after the NAP expired, on the 1st of January. Thus, as I said, I feel (at least for NG), Clause 3 should have been utilised - even if the NAP had expired - since they occured during that time. From a strictly legal sense, however...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Apocalypse Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 Just now, Robert2424 said: Well, you played Dangerous games, you won Dangerous prizes. Bigger alliances don't do the things you guys do. I don't know what to tell you. I'll take the Dangerous Prizes over a life of tepid inertia any day. You're right, big alliances don't do what we do: You don't set yourself challenges, you pick an easy target because you are lazy. You don't dare test your ability or play realpolitik with any actual stakes, you sit and hoard pixels in fear that someone might have more than you one day You have all the charm and charisma of political mist; no style and no substance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankobite Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Levonscott said: It is my understanding that material was uncovered that demonstrates breaches of those other clauses, that occured during the duration of the NAP. However, these were not discovered until after the NAP expired, on the 1st of January. Thus, as I said, I feel (at least for NG), Clause 3 should have been utilised - even if the NAP had expired - since they occured during that time. From a strictly legal sense, however...? So, at what point will these grievances be disclosed? Surely your allies told you why they're asking you to fight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert2424 Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Tankobite said: What are those things exactly? Because I see big alliances go to war on flimsy pretexts all the time. Attack and spy alliances that have friends and expect no retaliation. Especially when the friends are bigger or equal size to them, and then point out how outnumbered they are after they are in over there head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkfox Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 2 minutes ago, Johnny Apocalypse said: I'll take the Dangerous Prizes over a life of tepid inertia any day. I too own a dictionary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Apocalypse Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 Just now, Robert2424 said: Attack and spy alliances that have friends and expect no retaliation. Especially when the friends are bigger or equal size to them, and then point out how outnumbered they are after they are in over there head. Yeah, I think you're missing what's being asked here. We understand what the accusations are, we're asking for evidence to verify your claims. [citation needed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankobite Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 Just now, Robert2424 said: Attack and spy alliances that have friends and expect no retaliation. Especially when the friends are bigger or equal size to them, and then point out how outnumbered they are after they are in over there head. So, will you demonstrate these cases? Surely it would make your CB not look like a joke to have included them in it? But I'm afraid you're just demonstrating that Johnny's point is correct. IRON and other large alliances are terrified of actually playing the game against peer AAs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankobite Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 1 minute ago, darkfox said: I too own a dictionary. No words in that sentence should require someone to look them up in a dictionary. Unless, perhaps they're ESL, which is naturally understandable. My hat is off to anyone who converses fluently in a language other than their mother tongue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkfox Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Tankobite said: But I'm afraid you're just demonstrating that Johnny's point is correct. IRON and other large alliances are terrified of actually playing the game against peer AAs What peer AAs would you suggest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caustic Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 8 minutes ago, Levonscott said: It is my understanding that material was uncovered that demonstrates breaches of those other clauses, that occured during the duration of the NAP. However, these were not discovered until after the NAP expired, on the 1st of January. Thus, as I said, I feel (at least for NG), Clause 3 should have been utilised - even if the NAP had expired - since they occured during that time. From a strictly legal sense, however...? We used to dump logs with CB's to actually prove intent, but like I said in my prior post. This is a pre-empt from RON/NPO against us for unknown reasons. It is what it is, CN at it's finest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkfox Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Tankobite said: No words in that sentence should require someone to look them up in a dictionary. Unless, perhaps they're ESL, which is naturally understandable. My hat is off to anyone who converses fluently in a language other than their mother tongue. Do you need a hug? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankobite Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 Just now, darkfox said: What peer AAs would you suggest? There's a button in-game that says "display all alliances." If you have the courage to play the game once cobra and NG are gone, I suggest you start there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert2424 Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 Maybe look around a bit and you might find you evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankobite Posted January 17, 2021 Report Share Posted January 17, 2021 2 minutes ago, darkfox said: Do you need a hug? Wicked come-back from the man who had to look up 'inertia' and or 'tepid' 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.