Ragnarok Announcement

[hizzy]

Hadn't some/most Karma alliances been maneuvering to put together an anti-NPO coalition before the OV incident? This is a sincere question BTW, I'm curious.

If anyone was, I didn't get an invite. Nueva Vida only came into this war because VE told us what was up, they told us they would defend OV, showed us the logs and all the info, and we decided we would back them up if they needed us.

edit: however, I can say without a doubt that if an anti-NPO coalition took the initiative to attack NPO outright, they would have lost, as a lot of people in karma had definitively stated that they would not support a war of aggression.

Edited May 30, 2009 by hizzy

[Doitzel]

Hmm. Interesting show by some I thought were friends. Appears when the tides are turned, and they are in power, they too are no better than what they preach.

Your clichés tempt the wrath of Francos Spain.

[Teriethien]

If anyone was, I didn't get an invite. Nueva Vida only came into this war because VE told us what was up, they told us they would defend OV, showed us the logs and all the info, and we decided we would back them up if they needed us.

edit: however, I can say without a doubt that if an anti-NPO coalition took the initiative to attack NPO outright, they would have lost, as a lot of people in karma had definitively stated that they would not support a war of aggression.

Ah, thanks for the answering. I suspected that NPO's enemies engineered the whole incident hoping for the NPO to slip up; a (semi)conspiracy story like that sounds cooler to me

[shahenshah]

It doesn't need to be written for it to be common sense.

Same reason that you shouldn't send non-nuclear and non-SDI nations to hit a nuclear rogue. Would you do that if it wasn't written down somewhere?

There policy was already written in the regards you're referring to. Its common sense to follow the policy thats already in place instead of trying to figure out the policies and norms of informal blob of a bloc...in which you will find common sense to exist in form from one extreme to another.

Edited May 30, 2009 by shahenshah

[enderland]

We went out of our way to minimise damage to ourselves by maintaining a fairly standard no-first-strike-nuke policy. It's not our fault that the RIA and other assorted alliances didn't think to do that (or decided not to) themselves. I don't mean to preach condescendingly but as a tip for the future, the key to war is to maximise damage to the enemy while minimising damage taken.

Rather than blame us for not protecting you, maybe you should consider what you could have done to protect yourselves.

Please tell me this is a joke.

[WalkerNinja]

Your clichés tempt the wrath of Francos Spain.

I agree with this man.

If Paradoxians are going to try and make out to be better than everyone else, they seriously need to increase the originality of their prose. How can our excellence be communicated through such cliches?

Also, I find it amusing how we get cast in every possible role in this war. So far we've been hegemonist villain, karmic savior, backroom brute, sappy pushover, fierce warrior, sniveling coward, too slow to act, too quick to act, too generous, and too stingy.

Ah, life in the Order of the Paradox is never boring.

[hizzy]

There policy was already written in the regards you're referring to. Its common sense to follow the policy thats already in place instead of trying to figure out the policies and norms of informal blob of a bloc...in which you will find common sense to exist in form from one extreme to another.

It's not really THAT hard to figure out what the best course of action is at a time when the GRL is at record highs.

[Vladimir Stukov II]

Our war with Echelon went nuclear from the start. If TOP didn't want to go nuke free, they should have stayed out of the fight and let someone else that was willing to nuke take their place.

Alright find me this magical alliance with TOP's upper tier that wasn't involved in the war when we entered. There was no other alliance to take the slots TOP filled. Without us your larger nations would have been all alone and may have very well taken more damage.

[Death666Angel]

Alright find me this magical alliance with TOP's upper tier that wasn't involved in the war when we entered. There was no other alliance to take the slots TOP filled. Without us your larger nations would have been all alone and may have very well taken more damage.

I would just like to support this!

Until the 4th round for me in this war, TOP was the only one who filled my defensive slots. I had 6 TOP nations against me. If it hadn't been for them, I would have continued to grow in tech and land throughout this war, as I had the first 3 days even though I took nukes. A great tech amount + coordinated strikes >>> nukes.

TOP has been a great enemy doing tremendous work the other 13 alliances we are at war with didn't, so please do not bash them as the war would have looked much different had they and TSO not entered.

[uaciaut]

We went out of our way to minimise damage to ourselves by maintaining a fairly standard no-first-strike-nuke policy. It's not our fault that the RIA and other assorted alliances didn't think to do that (or decided not to) themselves. I don't mean to preach condescendingly but as a tip for the future, the key to war is to maximise damage to the enemy while minimising damage taken.

Rather than blame us for not protecting you, maybe you should consider what you could have done to protect yourselves.

You chose to get involved in a war where both sides asked for 100% involvement (like any great wars i guess). Trying to subtract yourselves (partially) from entirely involving in one side will most likely earn you the disdain of both sides, as you can see. And claiming that you do stuff only for your direct allies and won't ever give a !@#$ for anyone else won't make you more popular either really.

But that aside i'd like to apologize for any accusation i've thrown regarding TOP's commitment to Umbrella in their support during the war with OMFG. I completely misunderstood what tex said as "we didn't nuke ANYONE who didn't nuke us at first" and well yeah, it just annoyed me D:

Also SAVE US BROTHER KANE D:

[SpiderJerusalem]

I can think of something you do care about oh ho ho

I like the cut of your jib my fine gentleman

I think we made it fairly clear from the outset that we were not subscribing to the whole Karma side but were involved simply as our agenda (to help our allies win their wars/receive optimal peace-terms) over-lapped with theirs.

Do this include your allies on the hegemony side?

We went out of our way to minimise damage to ourselves

All I am hearing is "baaawwww, they must not destroy our precious infras"

Rather than blame us for not protecting you, maybe you should consider what you could have done to protect yourselves.

What? Are you kidding?

[Simon De Montfort]

I would just like to support this!

Until the 4th round for me in this war, TOP was the only one who filled my defensive slots. I had 6 TOP nations against me. If it hadn't been for them, I would have continued to grow in tech and land throughout this war, as I had the first 3 days even though I took nukes. A great tech amount + coordinated strikes >>> nukes.

TOP has been a great enemy doing tremendous work the other 13 alliances we are at war with didn't, so please do not bash them as the war would have looked much different had they and TSO not entered.

silence!

Full blown TOP bashing is in process!

[SWAT128]

Alright find me this magical alliance with TOP's upper tier that wasn't involved in the war when we entered. There was no other alliance to take the slots TOP filled. Without us your larger nations would have been all alone and may have very well taken more damage.

Actually, our middle tier ended up taking more damage because you let upper tier Echelon nations keep nukes stockpiled for when they fell out of your range. Our alliance is mostly made up of nations in the 20-30kns range, and not all of them have nukes. The least you could have done is put them in nuke anarchy, and hurt their economy.

[enderland]

silence!

Full blown TOP bashing is in process!

I love you guys, but quite a few of you are making it rather easy for people to do this

[agafaba]

Out of respect for TOP, IRON, and ROK, I will say that I am the one that originally had this information. I was under false pretenses and had a miscommunication of sorts. I hearby take all blame, and responsibility for this error. RoK has never officially asked for 9B/100k and the mistake in information is mine. If you have qualms, issues, or anything of the sort feel free to query me or contact me and I hope we can rectify this to the best of my ability.

LiquidMercury

/thread

oh wait, people are still posing in a thread thats been resolved for 29 pages?

[Death666Angel]

Actually, our middle tier ended up taking more damage because you let upper tier Echelon nations keep nukes stockpiled for when they fell out of your range. Our alliance is mostly made up of nations in the 20-30kns range, and not all of them have nukes. The least you could have done is put them in nuke anarchy, and hurt their economy.

First: I have spent a total of 1.5bill in this war, we do have bill locked nations, we do have nations in peace mode who cannot come out because they would be of no use. So don't think we aren't hurting economically. Although that you would think that makes me proud of Echelon .

Second: Last I checked TOP was one of 14 alliances at war with Echelon (with the least members too, more or less). And those other 13 alliances have let nations slip into peace mode and recover, as well as TOP.

Third: Because your nation-building advise is !@#$%* in a nuclear war, doesn't mean it's TOPs fault.

Fourth: eventually every nation in a war will drop very low, with or without TOP. And we have 17 WRC nations that are able to buy 2 nukes per day and we have a lot with HNS to store 5 unspyable nukes. So they would get to your non-SDI, non-MP nations anyway. And as I heard, a lot of nations without SDIs and MPs (not sure if RIA or another alliance) are attacking our MP nations with uranium resources. Pretty stupid, without being TOPs fault . Next time you fight a war, how about you don't attack the enemy, this way you don't take damage! O_o

Fifth: thanks for the shoutout here Vladimir, really appreacitated that !

Sixth: I enjoy this thread very much, thanks!

[Ardus]

This thread topic was about Ragnarok and peace term negotiations, not TOP's wartime nuclear policy. I'd say it can't be saved at this point.

[Simon De Montfort]

Actually, our middle tier ended up taking more damage because you let upper tier Echelon nations keep nukes stockpiled for when they fell out of your range. Our alliance is mostly made up of nations in the 20-30kns range, and not all of them have nukes. The least you could have done is put them in nuke anarchy, and hurt their economy.

Our maybe we could have gotten them to drop out of the war like my squad did with our Echelon target.

[Vladimir Stukov II]

Actually, our middle tier ended up taking more damage because you let upper tier Echelon nations keep nukes stockpiled for when they fell out of your range. Our alliance is mostly made up of nations in the 20-30kns range, and not all of them have nukes. The least you could have done is put them in nuke anarchy, and hurt their economy.

So you would have rather had them stay stronger so that they could have continued nuking your allies larger nations? Because if TOP didn't join you realize this is what would have happened right? I mean say what you want about other aspects of TOP, but criticizing our military contribution is just ridiculous. If you doubt this just ask our opponents how TOP entering effected them.

[Haflinger]

The Karma war is not about NPO or IRON. It is about defending OV.

NPO declared an aggressive war on OV, and IRON supported them. Karma did not "target" anyone. They came to us.

If that were true, the war would be over. The defense of OV is assured. The war objective has shifted.

The arguments about TOP are interesting. I really doubt you'd have gotten Purple out of the war if it hadn't been for TOP's intervention. Most of us were doing quite well before they attacked us; if you want to go back in time and get TOP to not attack us, I'd be much obliged. It would have been nice to escape to peace mode, restock nukes, and come back out and go back to nuking Orion.

With that said. Yes, they have a no-first-strike policy. So does Invicta. We quite happily nuked Orion and FOK and a few other individual nations who nuked us, but we didn't nuke TOP because we were both no-first-strike alliances.

If you don't wanna take nukes, try practicing a no-first-strike policy. If you don't mind taking nukes in war, then go ahead and fire away. If you don't want no-first-strike alliances to join in on your nuclear wars, tell them not to join when they're coming in.

As to the "honour" of IRON...

Oh, I think I know some things about Grämlins-IRON relations. It's just nice to see you admit these things.

Still, I have a strong dislike for people who cancel treaties during wartime. At least the two of you have that in common.

You guys weren't silent partners. You cancelled an MADP during wartime.

I'm glad to see others coming to the same conclusions as I did about three and a half weeks ago. Eventually the truth always gets out.

[Nananana]

Please tell me this is a joke.

launching a first strike nuke is to lose some sort of nuclear virginity(which you get back each war). Because everyone else is doing it we should do? That's just silly. I think that people are far too quick to "just do it", and TOP is not an alliance to sway under peer pressure.

Why is it so hard to simply want to treat other people like you want to be treated instead of treating others how they have treated people. If we go with the latter, then everyone has a right to take a shot at everyone.

[Krull]

launching a first strike nuke is to lose some sort of nuclear virginity(which you get back each war). Because everyone else is doing it we should do? That's just silly. I think that people are far too quick to "just do it", and TOP is not an alliance to sway under peer pressure.

Why is it so hard to simply want to treat other people like you want to be treated instead of treating others how they have treated people. If we go with the latter, then everyone has a right to take a shot at everyone.

Ok you want to protect your virginity, that's fine mang do whatever you want. But don't jump into an orgy then.

[Nananana]

Ok you want to protect your virginity, that's fine mang do whatever you want. But don't jump into an orgy then.

if you think about it, it's less an orgy and really more of a series of polyamorous relationships.

[HellAngel]

This thread is a !@#$@#$ joke. We went to hell to defend SF and this is what we get in return? We broke the Lux Aeterna, we attacked a direct treaty partner of our ally whom we had a ToA with. We risked everything in place to save your asses.

Thanks. Thanks to everyone included for making you show your true face.

Ok first things first.

1. Chill

He is getting bashed for wanting to make a deal with IRON. If you want to bash him, at least bash the whole alliance, because all archons stood behind that plan. And you know why? Winning wasnt so clear at the beginning. Nobody knew how it would blow up. I know the first thought i had when i heard about NPO and OV clashing was that we would either let SF get destroyed or get destroyed with them. It was natural we tried everything in our power to weaken the opposing side. A major alliance drawing out early would have brought odds to our side. Of course the TOP-IRON relationship also played a role. You know how this war would have ended if TOP joined the hegemony side. You would all not be here to tell the story.

The only thing he did wrong was claiming Gre would not join should the deal not get through. I can ensure you this would have cause internal riot and revolution. There are means to coup a government in Gremlins and i damn sure would have made use of it, but history disproved that point anyway.

2. "You did the same thing as Polar and therefor deserve the same fate"

ES was a huge dick to many alliances. He did threaten, ridicule and belittle others, always using the power of his allies. It is true that polar mainly got attacked for him, but the final straw was AlmightyGrub saying he would destroy TOP at the first given chance. When did Gremlins become a threat to SF alliances? When did we talk about bringing your demise behind your backs? Our intention was to make our side WIN, not to destroy it. You can believe it or you can not, i dont care anymore.

3. "TOP didnt go nuclear making all other alliances involved take more damage"

Seriously, wtf? This is war. Every alliance fights a war differently, and if you want to have them on your side, you better respect their way of playing the game. TOP, to my knowledge, never sanctioned first strike nukes in any war i know of. If you really think they care about the #1 spot then you definately never spoke to any one of them and your opinion lacks any facts to base it on.

Edited May 30, 2009 by HellAngel

[DogeWilliam]

I disagree. This was rumour control and the best way to addres the spread of rumours and gossip is to shine a very bright public light on them and clear the air instantly. Imagine if this issue had gotten out of control over the next week what damage could have been done and how distracting it could potentially have been if unanswered.

RoK leadership could have easily gone to the leadership of these other mentioned alliances and voiced their complaints. Then these alliances could have informed their membership to cease and desist from spreading the lie. Easy, and doesn't make the drama. Posting such a public announcement=drama.