Poaching from our ranks- NSO

[Haflinger]

If they dont give you the respect you want, what will you do about it? since you are a "neutral" alliance, you wont go to war over it right? is there another option?

Neutrals will go to war when their interests are threatened. They just don't have allies.

Is this what the world has come to?

Spying is NOT an act of war but sending PMs IS an act of war?

Yeah, pretty much. It's ... weird.

Second of all, if you read my argument the answer clearly is no- you can't recruit from us. Why? Because recruiting from us would harm our ability to project power, which is the goal in one way or another of all non neutral alliances. Recruiting from you is okay because it doesn't harm your ability to fulfill your chosen key policy imperatives, as neutrality is not dependent on numbers. In fact, I argued (and you through silence conceded), that the act of recruiting from your alliance increases your level of neutrality by weeding out non-neutrals, making it a net positive for you.

Why can't they recruit from you?

TDO recruiting from NSO is okay because it decreases NSO's level of neutrality by weeding out neutrals, making it a net positive for NSO, and as well it does not harm NSO's ability to project power, as the only nations it removes are the ones who are unlikely to support NSO leadership in wartime anyway.

(Oh god what a silly thread.)

So to resurrect an old point, why is poaching bad? I trust all of my own alliance members are loyal and satisfied enough with argent that they won't abandon us simply because someone sent them an unsolicited general private message. I mean if people lose members to poaching its from one of two reasons; either A the original alliance wasn't meeting their needs be it resource wise, or community wise and they decided to try something new. If this is the case it means poaching would promote quality based competition between alliances and motivate alliances of a lesser caliber to improve themselves internally. This would mean poaching has a net good effect on the community. Or B the individual in question was just an inactive person who had no real connection to the Alliance anyway. In which case this further is positive as it is a natural way of purging uncommitted and basically useless members. Not saying I necessarily agree either way, but just to point that out.

Meanwhile I pretty much agree with this logic, which is why Invicta never attacked Atlantis or Andromeda.

Neutrals joining together to fight? Isn't that a oxymoron?

No, it's not. You commit an act of war against a few different neutral alliances, watch them all use their CBs simultaneously.

Neutrals attacking? Do they even have guns?

TDO doesn't have the highest ANS in the game, but it's still over 7M NS and 828 nukes.

You guys should mass pm ODN, to check to see if they still don't have a spine either.

This would be an ... interesting move. lol.

Out of curiosity, I forget, was Moldavi in charge of NPO for the NPO beatdown of GPA? I'm thinking it was Moos by then. Yeah, had to have been.

It was Moo. However, that was a Continuum-led action, involving besides NPO IRON, TPF, TOP, FOK, NATO, Valhalla, and as well Umbrella and 64 Digits, with VE in a supporting role.

2. Safety in numbers does not apply to neutral alliances in the way you are describing. It takes a low threshold to ward off rogue attacks (no more than twenty are needed really) and an incredibly high one to ward off attacks from other alliances. In fact, because no true neutral alliance is part of a bloc, they will obviously be at a severe disadvantage should another bloc move against them. Since most non neutral alliances are in blocs, safety in numbers has no bearing on their security with respect to other alliances. My empirical evidence? See: the GPA being rolled as the number 1 alliance in the game.

NPO got rolled as the number 1 alliance in the game, obviously this means that membership in multiple blocs also has no bearing on their security with respect to other alliances.

I'm also curious as to how this isn't an act of war by NSO. It was more than poaching. It was a direct message to members of a sovereign alliance telling them that their government "muzzle(s) and restrict(s)" them, has "an absence of belief" and is "pathetic" and "impotent." This wasn't just a standard recruiting message that goes out accidentally to noobs. The last line particular is a direct invitation to war as I read it: "Oh, and need more proof of just how pathetic your neutral alliance is? Watch as they respond impotently, if at all" I can't imagine there would be too much complaint about lack of CB following essentially being taunted to war, especially given the lack of apology forthcoming here.

This is a pretty interesting point.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

So what were you hoping to prove with these shenanigans NSO?

[ChairmanHal]

You say that with some strange satisfaction.. As if you think he actually would care?

He already indicated that he does not. Sees it as a recruiting challenge.

I just see TDO getting their shorts in a wad and everyone knows in advance that they'll do nothing outside of this thread about it. There's a whole range of activities that could come into play aside from mounting up and charging guns blazing but they would require ACTION beyond an indignant OP.

[JayOvfEnnay]

Well, I'm pretty sure that just tLC and NSO alone could take TDO fairly quickly. Regardless of any other treaties or the rest of Frostbite. It would be fun to have a smaller semi-even war, although I know that this would not turn out to be that at all lol.

[D34th]

Firstly, as TDO founder and Aqua senator, I'm personally offended that nobody sent me a recruitment letter.

I demand a low level and cursory apology from somebody over this.

Furthermore, have NSO really thought this through?

I mean, if a whole bunch of whining, debate-laden peacenik Neutrals WERE all to join NSO in a bow-wave, could you cope with us?

Really, you'd end up depressed within days and willing to do anything to disband your alliance within a week or so.

C'mon NSO, this wasn't thought through, was it.

Let's move on and play nice.

Or, dammit, we'll start recruiting your members with a promise of unlimited Neutral Popcorn, or something.

Hello Theo, long time no see I hope you still remember me. I'm glady in see that you didn't take it too seriously.

Actually we rolled CIN because they were recruiting from our forum WHILE MEMBERS OF POLAR.

I'm sure none of you remember this but before around Great War III it was quite common to recruit from other alliances. Once NPO started running out of cb's things like "poaching" all the sudden became verboten. I've read this entire discussion and I've yet to see a good explanation as to why recruiting someone from an alliance is wrong. To be quite frank that's how we built Polaris back in the day. I sent a recruiting message to everyone in the game. Nobody rolled us then, and that was before the Initiative or even the Axis of Awesome. I used to send out recruiting messages to NAAC members about once or twice a month. NAAC never went to war with us over it, and they would have gone to war with us over wearing the wrong color socks if they could have gotten away with it.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that this is just another one of those stupid, arbitrary things that everyone thinks is a hard and fast rule of conduct but in fact it's something that no one can explain without going recursive. Stop living in the box NPO put you all in.

While we can agree that recruit messages aren't a casus belli isn't so classy while recruit call others alliances of being "pathetic".

Recruiting from an alliance is wrong for exactly the same reason that attacking its nations is wrong: it is an active attempt to weaken the alliance. Recruiting is actually a more valid thing to complain about even than spying, since it has a direct effect on the alliance's security, instead of an indirect one.

I have to disagree that Recruiting is actually a more valid thing to complain about even than spying, spying is an active attempt to gather information about an alliance to use it in your own benefit. In fact spy is worse than stealing because you will use what you stole against the victim. Do you really think that send recruit messages are worse than spy or are you saying that just because what happened to increase the drama?

Edited July 3, 2009 by D34th

[Electron Sponge]

While we can agree that recruit messages aren't a casus belli isn't so classy while recruit call others alliances of being "pathetic"

It's not a tack I'd ever take, I will say that.

ooc edit: What's being lost in this is the RP aspect of it, these are Sith we're talking about. That's how Sith talk.

Edited July 3, 2009 by Electron Sponge

[Haflinger]

Well, I'm pretty sure that just tLC and NSO alone could take TDO fairly quickly. Regardless of any other treaties or the rest of Frostbite. It would be fun to have a smaller semi-even war, although I know that this would not turn out to be that at all lol.

Now this is silly.

TDO: 688 nations, 7,371,161 NS, 828 nukes, 89 nations over 1K tech

tLC+NSO: 203 nations, 3,615,570 NS, 838 nukes, 51 nations over 1K tech

Yes, the higher concentration of nukes in the two Frostbite alliances would help, but that's a curbstomp. And that's assuming GPA and GOP didn't attack as well.

If the Polars get involved, then it flips the other way, but just those two against TDO?

[FreddieMercury]

Just don't make the same mistake NADC did when Polar recruited from it - by not doing anything. Atleast you started out good and made it public.

Agreed. Don't put up with poaching. Ever.

Looking upon TDO I see the NADC of the past, sanction and all. Neutrality sucks, not worth it at all, and we learned that the hard way.

Hopefully, top NSO gov in back channels are more reasonable than these rank and file ones. If you lay out your cards and you can't make them back down, back it up with force, and hell just break from your neutrality. You're sanctioned, big and people want to be friends with you. Don't make the same mistake we did.

And what would they do about if you become unneutral? Get a second of "lulz omfg we made you deviate from your core beliefs!!".

Shrug and crush 'em.

[JayOvfEnnay]

Now this is silly.

TDO: 688 nations, 7,371,161 NS, 828 nukes, 89 nations over 1K tech

tLC+NSO: 203 nations, 3,615,570 NS, 838 nukes, 51 nations over 1K tech

Yes, the higher concentration of nukes in the two Frostbite alliances would help, but that's a curbstomp. And that's assuming GPA and GOP didn't attack as well.

If the Polars get involved, then it flips the other way, but just those two against TDO?

Statistically it wouldn't be even, no, but think of it this way (no disrespect to TDO here) :

2-3 neutral alliances against 2 alliances that have fully competent members (speaking of war, here). 3v1 wars and a lot of damage dealt, I could see us rolling over it in no less than 2 weeks of war. NSO and tLC are lead by two of the greatest (and most handsome) leaders in history. We know our way around things. If it came to throwing down, I'm 100% sure it would be in the win column.

[Electron Sponge]

I think any talk of war is silly and unneccessary. This will be resolved diplomatically. Of course threads like this don't help that process but we don't live in a vacuum so things like this will happen.

[Haflinger]

Statistically it wouldn't be even, no, but think of it this way (no disrespect to TDO here) :

2-3 neutral alliances against 2 alliances that have fully competent members (speaking of war, here). 3v1 wars and a lot of damage dealt, I could see us rolling over it in no less than 2 weeks of war. NSO and tLC are lead by two of the greatest (and most handsome) leaders in history. We know our way around things. If it came to throwing down, I'm 100% sure it would be in the win column.

I've been in enough wars on Planet Bob to know that a huge statistical edge always wins here. And that was 1 neutral alliance against 2 non-neutral alliances with a 2:1 NS advantage and a 3:1 membercount advantage. That's a huge statistical advantage.

They'd be the ones with the tripleteams, you'd be receiving them.

[JayOvfEnnay]

I've been in enough wars on Planet Bob to know that a huge statistical edge always wins here. And that was 1 neutral alliance against 2 non-neutral alliances with a 2:1 NS advantage and a 3:1 membercount advantage. That's a huge statistical advantage.

They'd be the ones with the tripleteams, you'd be receiving them.

I forgot, myself and Sponge are not used to being overpowered, mirite?

I've been through enough wars to know that competence takes a fair part in this. Albeit MK didn't win in a fight against NPO, but they did more damage than is the norm. Now you compare this to our situation, atleast NPO had been to war before. The grunts aren't very good... at all, but atleast they had experience. TDO has never been to war and GPA's only war was against NPO and friends, we know how well that went. I really don't know !@#$ about GOP, but they're neutral so that they can't have all that much knowledge of the system either.

Now I'm sure TDO are good at nation building, and economic aspects of the game. Hell, they're probably one of the best. But that's not war. War isn't about building, it's about destroying. And I'm more than confident that strategy and knowledge would beat size in this matchup, because I'm more than confident we know how to do that much better than they do, to put it simply.

[Electron Sponge]

I forgot, myself and Sponge are not used to being overpowered, mirite?

Not even worth arguing. This isn't worth fighting a war over, and no war is going to happen. Our guerrilla fighting abilities are handy but our diplomatic acumen is more handy. Not every disagreement needs to end with shots fired. Let's not forget the greater lessons of Vox Populi.

[AlmightyGrub]

For those looking for a position on this matter from Polaris, I will discuss the matter with my Council, we will then move a motion to the Body Republic. If the motion is supported by the Body Republic, we will discuss matters arising and we shall then call for a vote on the matter from the entire alliance. If it passes by a 2/3 majority we shall consider that we have an opinion. Once we have said opinion I will return with great haste to these forums and I shall express the opinion in verbose and obtuse terms and then and only then shall the matter be clear.

Spare me the drama, this is a non-starter people.

NSO takes the piss, TDO bites hard, the rest of you bite harder = ZZZZZZ for Grub. NSO is a very naughty alliance who will be confined to the corner without any supper. Happy now? No supper is pretty damn harsh I think.

[Mussolandia]

Bring it

[Griff]

NSO are nothing more than a weak little kid hiding behind a giant bully!

Damn that NSO! Clearly they're a threat to all of planet bo... wait wut?

by insulting their sovereignty and then they run behind the Frostbite accord knowing that their allies will simply step in before anything becomes too hot.

As far as I know we haven't "run behind" Frostbite. I'm a little worried that you know all our sekrits however.

You see when GOP were discovered to have a big BIG protectorate the cowardly NSO went on their hand and knees and essentially begged for forgiveness, well while you are down there, there is a little something you can suck on too!

Hilarity ensues. Listen kid, sarcasm usually works better if you put a good smiley on the end.

And those who say that they are more than willing to step up against TDO for the NSO, well I would like to say to you that the only people that have posted for the NSO are the people with the Frostbite logo as their signature! So suck it!

You might want to check again

Secondly the stance by a number of forum members that TDO is spineless, haha! I would be assured that if your unaligned alliance was PMed by some pathetic excuse for an alliance (essentially a watered down NPO) you wouldn't go out with guns blazing, and if you did you would simply laughed off the boards. TDO = Smart.

All evidence to the contrary.

Finally I am trying to remember the reasons for this so called "Karma War" was it something to do with sneaky, snakey ways of people warping the facts and using aggression as a way to dominate Planet Bob. And I am just trying to remember when this all really started to get out of control... Was it when NPO attacked the neutral GPA? I am just trying to remember you know for facts sake!

NSO is hardly in a position to dominate planet bob, it seems you got lazy and connected us with the NPO, now you're just embarrassing yourself.

EDIT: No nation huh? LATERZ

Edited July 3, 2009 by Griff

[Bordiga]

Bring it

That didn't work out too well for the last guy.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

Bring it

Your mind tricks won't work on me Sith.

You heard Grub, No Supper!

Edited July 3, 2009 by Johnny Apocalypse

[Mussolandia]

That didn't work out too well for the last guy.

Silence, peasant. I am a legend and things always work my way. I would like you to present evidence that things "didn't work out his way" for the man whose quote I reproduced.

[AlmightyGrub]

Silence, peasant. I am a legend and things always work my way. I would like you to present evidence that things "didn't work out his way" for the man whose quote I reproduced.

Musso is still the man

[flak attack]

If this happened to GOD I'd bet the OP would look a bit different.

If I were making it, there would be no demand for an apology, that's for sure.

TDO doesn't have the highest ANS in the game, but it's still over 7M NS and 828 nukes.

If this turns into a war, look at the size of GPA's upper ranks. They would slice through NSO's like a knife through butter. Their 40th nation has over 3 times the NS of NSO's 40th. In fact, you have to go to their 120th to be on level with NSO's 40th. They aren't Gre, but they have a far stronger upper rank than NSO.

I would love to see the neutrals do something about this.

Edited July 3, 2009 by flak attack

[Electron Sponge]

That didn't work out too well for the last guy.

In the short term perhaps. In the long term? That guy was shown to be forthright and honest while the other side were shown to be untruthful aggressors looking to machinate any way possible to extend their hegemony even further. He was also shown to be quite handsome and charming, with that certain je ne sais quois that the ladies find irresistable.

Poor Musso, no slow roasted baby for him at the Frostbite picnic. Look at him, he's already cranky from hunger!

[Bordiga]

Silence, peasant. I am a legend and things always work my way. I would like you to present evidence that things "didn't work out his way" for the man whose quote I reproduced.

It was before my time, comrade, but I've heard the man who famously announced that phrase was defeated and driven from his old seat of power.

I suppose, however, that he did achieve his aim of "bringing it."

Let's hope your dream is realized, "Lord."

[Emperor Brutus]

NSO takes the piss, TDO bites hard, the rest of you bite harder = ZZZZZZ for Grub. NSO is a very naughty alliance who will be confined to the corner without any supper. Happy now? No supper is pretty damn harsh I think.

I don't think this is acceptable on any terms and as for NSO bad call, thank you Grub on taking away their dinner

[Chimaera]

I suppose it all depends on context. In a vacuum, that is neutral. But if it is associated with other rhetoric, say, declarations regarding their preferences of other alliances and how they rank them, then it wouldn't be. If they, like certain GPA members did last night, started comparing the merits of IAA to the now disbanded TGR as well as to TJO and so on, then it would be far less neutral, even if it was originally prompted by an act of aggression.

If I recall this correctly, an ex-GPA govt member approached NSO about the poaching, only to be recruited herself, and when asked to join the Sith she stated she'd rather join IAA. I can see the claim for a lack of neutrality, but considering she's also an ex-IAA member, I think a little leeway can be made, especially since her comment was meant as a shot to your alliance.