Valerius Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 See, the thing about this statement is that it's completely unsupported by facts. It is supported by the fact that an alliance intent on domination had it's domineering interests furthered significantly by these wars, which were started upon very questionable cassus bellum. Forget alliance affiliations for 10 seconds and connect the dots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 It is supported by the fact that an alliance intent on domination had it's domineering interests furthered significantly by these wars, which were started upon very questionable cassus bellum. Forget alliance affiliations for 10 seconds and connect the dots. Look, you're restating your conclusion and using it as supporting evidence. It doesn't work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 (edited) Look, you're restating your conclusion and using it as supporting evidence. It doesn't work. Fair enough. It's backed up by common sense, then. Edit: Spelling. Edited August 28, 2009 by President Kent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Fair enough. It's backed up by common sense, then. Edit: Spelling. Lol. Come on PK, you know that's a weak argument. There is no such thing as 'common sense', especially in matters like this. Everyone's opinion is always going to be coloured by their previous assumptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Lol. Come on PK, you know that's a weak argument. There is no such thing as 'common sense', especially in matters like this. Everyone's opinion is always going to be coloured by their previous assumptions. Not really. Pacifica is an aggressive alliance, and in her quest to eliminate opposition and forge hegemony, she resorted to unfair means against alliances, whose [peaceful] existence outside the soon-to-be hegemony was still considered a threat to it. And because of the elimination of these alliances, Pacifica went on to benefit immensely as the unparalleled leader of a completely united world. It makes complete sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Not really. Pacifica is an aggressive alliance, and in her quest to eliminate opposition and forge hegemony, she resorted to unfair means against alliances, whose [peaceful] existence outside the soon-to-be hegemony was still considered a threat to it. And because of the elimination of these alliances, Pacifica went on to benefit immensely as the unparalleled leader of a completely united world. It makes complete sense. See, you're getting back to the "quest to eliminate opposition" idea again. Which just... Well, assuming you're correct. Why did NPO not attack Ragnarok when the Hoo logs were released? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 See, you're getting back to the "quest to eliminate opposition" idea again. Which just...Well, assuming you're correct. Why did NPO not attack Ragnarok when the Hoo logs were released? I'm not familiar with the incident. It may have been during my absence. Elaborate and I'll attempt to answer your question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essenia Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 I'm not familiar with the incident. It may have been during my absence. Elaborate and I'll attempt to answer your question. 20:25 Hoo[AWAY] - no u 20:27 CENSORED - Goddmanit Hoo 20:27 CENSORED - Time for a little chat? 20:27 Hoo[AWAY] - Ok 20:29 CENSORED - Where's your FA headed currently? 20:30 Hoo[AWAY] - Tightening up bonds withold friends that we don't have military pacts with ... Carpe Diem, Ubercon, Orion, CSN ... alliances like that 20:30 Hoo[AWAY] - with old* 20:31 CENSORED - Right 20:31 CENSORED - Good strategy, none of them are very tight with the hegemony and the more allies you have the better really 20:32 Hoo[AWAY] - We like having allies outside the web a little, yeah 20:32 CENSORED - No doubt you've heard some of the latest rumours 20:32 CENSORED - You need to get over whatever it is with TOP that makes them not like you 20:32 Hoo[AWAY] - Yeah, I have ... 20:32 Hoo[AWAY] - Heh ... easier said then done 20:32 CENSORED - Indeed 20:32 CENSORED - I wish they didn't hate MK too 20:33 CENSORED - Goddamn Crymson and Saber 20:33 CENSORED - You need to tighten with Citadel 20:33 Hoo[AWAY] - If those rumors are true, they also have Citadel splitting 20:34 CENSORED - Well, plenty of rumours about SF and Citadel atm 20:34 CENSORED - But my latest info has SF higher up the list than Citadel is, and I don't see Citadel splitting just yet 20:34 Hoo[AWAY] - Higher up the target list? 20:34 CENSORED - Yes 20:34 - CENSORED is now known as CENSORED 20:35 Hoo[AWAY] - lol ... no one has a reason to target SF 20:35 CENSORED - I imagine everything about you that's annoyed other people lately is everything that's made me like you a lot more lately 20:35 CENSORED - What rumours have you heard then? 20:35 Hoo[AWAY] - haha 20:35 Hoo[AWAY] - That may be 20:35 Hoo[AWAY] - The Gremlins rumors 20:35 CENSORED - Ah right 20:35 CENSORED - Well they've been going for a while 20:36 Hoo[AWAY] - Yeah, but Gre told FARK themselves they were leaving tC 20:36 CENSORED - They've been trying to leave tC for a while 20:36 CENSORED - Syzygy wants to, and I guess he just got MoFA but.. 20:36 CENSORED - Not sure if they'll actually leave tC 20:36 Hoo[AWAY] - However, "Hoo's a big mouth and we need to eliminate him and SF by association" seems feasible too ... 20:36 CENSORED - 20:37 CENSORED - Well, SF is the second biggest non-NPO bloc so it makes sense that you're in line 20:37 CENSORED - And pissing off Echelon and now putting Legion in their place amongst other things puts you in the limelight 20:37 Hoo[AWAY] - Excellent 20:37 Hoo[AWAY] - Let them come 20:37 CENSORED - 20:37 CENSORED - That's what I wanted to talk about 20:37 CENSORED - Although if Syzygy does get what he wants, then I think there's no doubt Gremlins will be next 20:38 CENSORED - Anyhow, I would very much like to see SF and Citadel get closer together 20:38 CENSORED - It would be disappointing seeing both taken out seperately 20:39 Hoo[AWAY] - Well, TOP and RoK aren't all that cool ... post-13661-1143531603.png 20:39 CENSORED - I know 20:39 CENSORED - But TOP and Grem and surprisingly cool, despite what many think 20:39 CENSORED - And Rok and MHA are cool 20:40 CENSORED - I'd like to see MK and Rok be cool, as well as MK and some Citadel alliances be cool. As well as Rok and some citadel alliances be cool 20:40 CENSORED - Uniting Aqua and tieing SF and Citadel together 20:40 CENSORED - I've been preaching my goddamn mouth off recently inside MK telling people to shut the $%&@ up with old grudges 20:41 Hoo[AWAY] - heh 20:41 Hoo[AWAY] - Aqua unification is difficult 20:41 Hoo[AWAY] - It always stalls 20:42 CENSORED - There's still the odd person that thinks you basically ditched us in our time of need but meh, MK are warming to Rok again anyway 20:42 CENSORED - Aqua unification is difficult generally because MK-Rok relations arn't so great 20:42 Hoo[AWAY] - lol ... I just don't get that ... 20:42 Hoo[AWAY] - FARK-MK relations need work too ... 20:42 CENSORED - Yeah I know 20:42 CENSORED - Although I think Fark-MK relations basically deteriorated with Rok-MK relations 20:42 CENSORED - I think you have plenty of influence with Fark 20:43 Hoo[AWAY] - I dunno, even when RoK and MK were BFF that MDoAP seemed to rankle FARK 20:43 Hoo[AWAY] - However, FARK is easy to rankle 20:43 Hoo[AWAY] - 20:43 CENSORED - Heh 20:44 CENSORED - Well, I heard once that they were angry at us for being ex-LUE and defending them from GOONS or something weird. Like, they wanted to get away from us and prove they were bigger now or something 20:44 CENSORED - Sounded crazy so I didn't really listen 20:44 Hoo[AWAY] - NPO probably didn't like us sticking up for ACV and essentially 20:44 Hoo[AWAY] - Threatening to drop treaties 20:44 CENSORED - I hate NADC.. 20:44 CENSORED - So much 20:44 Hoo[AWAY] - They wanted to roll them and casually acted as if it was up to them 20:45 Hoo[AWAY] - We reminded them that it was not up to them 20:45 CENSORED - Did MHA stick up for ACV too? 20:45 Hoo[AWAY] - Yeah, but in a more subtle way 20:45 CENSORED - Yeah 20:45 Hoo[AWAY] - However, we did get an apology from Moo 20:45 CENSORED - Lol 20:45 CENSORED - That doesn't sound like a good thing tbh 20:45 Hoo[AWAY] - heh 20:45 CENSORED - As much as he needs all his allies, he really doesn't need any specific one 20:46 Hoo[AWAY] - Well, there are some amusing things that I am sworn to secrecy on that would make you lol ... 20:46 CENSORED - Anyhow, as I said, I want MK and Rok to make friends again because a step towards a united aqua would be a good one, and I think we're planning on signing with one or two more Citadel alliances once terms end. 20:46 CENSORED - Don't go blabbing that around or anything 20:46 Hoo[AWAY] - As long as one of them is Umrella ... we like those Umbrella guys 20:47 CENSORED - Do you know we have a 19 page thread in our Umbrella embassy called 'Daily Babes'.. 20:47 CENSORED - Xavii is awesome.. 20:47 CENSORED - 20:47 Hoo[AWAY] - heh 20:47 CENSORED - one of them would probably be Umbrella 20:47 Hoo[AWAY] - Sexy 20:48 CENSORED - Are you treatied to Umbrella? 20:48 Hoo[AWAY] - No, but we have three black protectorates and have gotten to know them well 20:48 Hoo[AWAY] - We talk to mrcalkin and Sceptor a lot 20:48 CENSORED - mrcalkin was in MK for a while 20:48 Hoo[AWAY] - Yeah, he's good people 20:48 CENSORED - And yeah, we talk to both of them a lot too 20:48 CENSORED - You should get a treaty with them ;P 20:49 CENSORED - I also love the fact that you stick up for Vanguard, even if so many people hate them 20:49 Hoo[AWAY] - We discussed RoK being \m/2.0 and Umbrella being [m]2.0 ... 20:49 CENSORED - Revanche is awesome 20:49 CENSORED - ;P 20:49 Hoo[AWAY] - <3 Vanguard ... allies from day one 20:49 Hoo[AWAY] - I think some of the powers that be forget that we are allies with them 20:49 CENSORED - Yeah 20:50 Hoo[AWAY] - We would drop TPF in a heartbeat if they attacked Vanguard 20:50 CENSORED - I wish MK could treaty with them, but some moron from MK was the one that let people know Revanche was Denial initially, so I think it's out of the question 20:50 CENSORED - I can't stand TPF to be honest 20:50 CENSORED - Slayer and TBB and magicninja are all morons.. 20:50 CENSORED - But it's good that you're treatied to them.. 20:51 Hoo[AWAY] - Slayer, TBB, and myself have always gotten along ... magic and I used to argue when he was in GATO though 20:51 Hoo[AWAY] - mhawk and RoK have zero relationship whatsoever ... that treaty is in jeopardy 20:51 CENSORED - magic is a !@#$@#$ moron.. TBB is barely literate, and Slayer is a racist.. 20:52 CENSORED - mhawk is ex-purple, so you putting Legion in their place probly annoyed him 20:52 CENSORED - But meh, most of purple even thinks Legion are pathetic 20:52 CENSORED - Valhalla think they're a joke anyway, Invicta is a bit clueless 20:52 CENSORED - I get along with mhawk better than Slayer though, I have a tiny bit of influence at least 20:53 Hoo[AWAY] - heh 20:53 Hoo[AWAY] - mhawk begged me to drop Vanguard last war 20:53 Hoo[AWAY] - When he was Elysium 20:53 Hoo[AWAY] - Valhalla doesn't like Legion ... CJ and I joke about them all the time ... 20:53 Hoo[AWAY] - He knows I will roll them one day 20:53 Hoo[AWAY] - 20:53 Hoo[AWAY] - mhawk is an all right guy, we just don't have the relationship with TPF since he took over that we had before with Slayer, TBB, Mogar, and others 20:54 Hoo[AWAY] - But, since we're having a "it doesn't leave this query" convo ... 20:54 Hoo[AWAY] - NPO and NATO asked us if we'd accept a tC invite 20:55 Hoo[AWAY] - "If a spot were to open up ..." 20:55 CENSORED - Interesting 20:56 CENSORED - That does alter things 20:56 Hoo[AWAY] - Yeah, unless it's a smokescreen 20:56 CENSORED - Hard to say 20:56 Hoo[AWAY] - I didn't outright decline because I thought it would be rude ... but we have no intention of ever joining tC 20:56 Hoo[AWAY] - FARK got the same offer 20:56 CENSORED - With Gremlins wanting to leave Q, and you making Moo apologise.. You're both in a fairly !@#$ position 20:57 Hoo[AWAY] - Well, our theory is that Moo apologizing is due to them wanting SF on their side IF something goes down 20:57 CENSORED - Very fine line you're on now Hoo, rejecting could be disasterous, but entering would be even worse 20:57 CENSORED - Yeah 20:57 CENSORED - Whoever he chooses to go to war with, he'll want the other bloc to help in the gangbang 20:57 Hoo[AWAY] - Anu of NATO approached me about tC and SF getting closer 20:57 CENSORED - NPO sent Anu back to NATO 20:58 Hoo[AWAY] - I like walking that line ... tongue.gif 20:58 Hoo[AWAY] - But, we have no interest in being in something like tC 20:58 CENSORED - Hmm, maybe Citadel are back at the top then.. Syzygy getting MoFA is probly changing things 20:58 CENSORED - Yeah 20:58 Hoo[AWAY] - That and we sort of take great pride in becoming what we have without being in the current circle of power 20:58 CENSORED - Yes 20:59 CENSORED - You could go with the 'There are members of tC that don't respect us, and I don't feel confortable entering a bloc in which we're only friends with certain member alliances' 20:59 Hoo[AWAY] - However, even if this IS the Gre issue ... we know we will clash with the powers that be eventually ... 20:59 CENSORED - Either you don't join and it's not so rude, or you do join and force a TOP treaty too 20:59 Hoo[AWAY] - lol 21:00 Hoo[AWAY] - Deep down, I think we're NPO's most annoying ally 21:00 CENSORED - Yes 21:00 CENSORED - 1V is their tightest power bloc 21:00 Hoo[AWAY] - They always come to us to iron out something 21:00 Hoo[AWAY] - During the last war, we were a pain in the $@! 21:00 CENSORED - 21:00 Hoo[AWAY] - Refusing to drop treaties and whatnot 21:01 Hoo[AWAY] - That and the "Coalition" wasn't something we wanted in ... we were there for the initial strategy and then never visited the boards or channel again ... 21:01 Hoo[AWAY] - They always had to track me down 21:01 Hoo[AWAY] - 21:01 CENSORED - 21:01 CENSORED - I always thought 1V would want SF to help take out Citadel 21:01 CENSORED - Cause Citadel will be tough, and I figured the more 'meatshields' they can get the better 21:02 CENSORED - But recently I heard the rumour that SF were going down first, which kinda surprised me but I got it from a legitimate enough source 21:02 Hoo[AWAY] - Eh ... with RoK and FARK both declining possible tC invites, we would probably shoot up the list 21:02 CENSORED - Yeah 21:02 CENSORED - Although Gremlins declined an MDoAP 21:02 Hoo[AWAY] - And like you said, I am vocal about my dislike for Echelon and Legion who are both NPO toadies 21:03 CENSORED - Either way, one of you is next 21:03 CENSORED - And I think rather than worrying about who, you should get together 21:04 Hoo[AWAY] - lol ... we did once discuss a Citadel/SF treaty 21:04 CENSORED - That would be amazing 21:04 CENSORED - I don't imagine Crymson or Saber wanted anything to do with it 21:04 Hoo[AWAY] - It would make a lot of alliances twitch if we did 21:05 CENSORED - It would 21:05 CENSORED - SF and Citadel together are a very powerful force 21:05 CENSORED - Citadel with the top nations and SF covering the lower tiers 21:05 CENSORED - Umbrella and RIA are treatied to Sparta, which could bring them in 21:06 Hoo[AWAY] - We count on Sparta 21:06 Hoo[AWAY] - FOK too 21:06 CENSORED - So did Polaris 21:06 CENSORED - FOK will stick tightly with TOP I figure, so if TOP sticks with Gremlins, then FOK will too 21:06 CENSORED - MHA will certainly stick with Gremlins too 21:06 Hoo[AWAY] - Eh, we know Sparta leadership pretty well and Tulak is RL friends with Delta 21:06 CENSORED - And I'm doing my very best to tell people in MK to not even think about turning into a survivalist alliance, and do what we always do which is fight for the right side 21:07 Hoo[AWAY] - FOK would go with LEO ... which is R&R (A SF member), MOON, and Orion 21:07 Hoo[AWAY] - Eh ... yeah, I don't think MK turning survivalist would go over well anyway 21:08 CENSORED - Ugh, it's depressing seeing Moo start cosying up to us 21:08 CENSORED - I don't doubt they plan on offering us some kind of treaty at the end of our terms 21:08 Hoo[AWAY] - lawl 21:08 CENSORED - But I do not want to be the next Legion 21:08 CENSORED - And unless we had a specific plan with regards to an NPO treaty, I wouldn't support it 21:08 Hoo[AWAY] - Better NPO than Legion or Echelon 21:09 CENSORED - Definitely 21:10 CENSORED - Citadel+SF+MHA+FOK+Sparta+Vanguard+MK/CnG would be a nice little grouping 21:10 CENSORED - Especially if a couple random ex-BLEU were roped in like NV 21:11 Hoo[AWAY] - We'd have MA, CSN, TTK, and ROCK too 21:11 Hoo[AWAY] - Not that we've actually diagramed sides or anything 21:11 Hoo[AWAY] - :X 21:11 CENSORED - 21:11 CENSORED - And teen titans 21:12 Hoo[AWAY] - Yeah, SF and TT are "No surrender" blocs ... soooo ... 21:12 Hoo[AWAY] - heh 21:12 CENSORED - You need to keep your nose clean so Citadel are the ones that get attacked 21:12 CENSORED - Cause if you guys get attacked, I wouldn't put money on Citadel doing their best to help you 21:12 CENSORED - Unless you get that SF/Citadel treaty 21:13 Hoo[AWAY] - Yeah 21:13 CENSORED - That would be quite nice 21:15 Hoo[AWAY] - I was downtown and in the bay all night ... I'm hitting the sack, man 21:16 CENSORED - That's fine 21:16 CENSORED - Ciao Hoo, we need to keep in touch 21:16 Hoo[AWAY] - yes we do ... 21:16 Hoo[AWAY] - Take care, man 21:17 CENSORED - You too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandwich Controversy Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 That's only half of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurion Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Not really any need for the censoring, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingEd Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 That's only half of it Hmmm, what were the implications of these logs during the time of the incident ? And did Pacifica have it's allies support to take RoK out ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred von Tirpitz Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 -snip- some logs- had lost my copy of those. Say what you will, those logs are not actionable. Even though eventually, in hindsight, stuff did somewhat go down as mentioned there. At the time, it was all.. talk, and yes the need to defend against what was at the time seen as "being up there on the list" was felt to be very real. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essenia Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 That's only half of it I'm not important enough to have the other half. Not really any need for the censoring, lol. They came to me that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 (edited) Haflinger: Well, I'm far from an authority on that situation, but my guess would be that that wouldn't have been a curbstomp. RoK had serious allies. GATO, FAN, GPA, ONOS and NADC had none, or next to none. And by the time of the Hoo logs (I'm guessing mid to late '08? Since that would explain my not knowing about them) the Hegemony was already beginning to show signs of cracks; the era for curbstomps in order to achieve Hegemony was well and truly over. Edit: Spelling. Edited August 28, 2009 by President Kent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fallen Fool Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 (edited) See, you're getting back to the "quest to eliminate opposition" idea again. Which just...Well, assuming you're correct. Why did NPO not attack Ragnarok when the Hoo logs were released? It was politically unfeasible because Ragnarok had one of the best networks of allies in the game, and most of them were also treated to NPO at the time? Not to mention the fact that , and the main potential rallying point to attack, Hoo, had left the game? Edited August 28, 2009 by Fallen_Fool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 (edited) We were discussing GPA, incidentally.I actually provided reasons why two of the alliances who attacked GPA attacked them. Both just happened to be NPO MADP partners. No one "just happened" to be MADP partners with Pacifica. And no one got to drag Pacifica into something without ultimately answering to Dilber and/or Moo. Whatever their AA. I have said repeatedly I am talking about enabling, and the only response you seem to have is "they didnt do it directly." Even if that is true, enabling allies to do the stuff still makes you culpable. Also there werent two alliances who attacked GPA. It was 9 alliances at update. One of those alliances was Pacifica. You denied those reasons out of hand, preferring instead to substitute "NPO made them do it because they thought GPA was a threat!"There's just no basis for that claim whatsoever. I dont believe the other gentleman actually made that claim, though he makes some that I believe are delusional. In particular, whether or no ONOS for instance dared dream of one day threatening Pacifica, Pacifica itself was clearly the only one capable of threatening Pacifica by the time of GWIII. Even in the abstract sense he is talking about. Thus I agree that there is no basis for the claim, in two senses at once. See, I know why NATO wanted to attack GPA, from direct contact with NATO government at the time. I had less contact with Valhalla at the time (that was before noWedge's ejection and the subsequent detente in Purple) but man, read the announcement - Wedgie doesn't beat around the bush and Val was obsessed with Swampy at the time. As I repeatedly tried to remind the other poster, Swampy was the centrepiece of "justification." Read the announcement, yes, read what it says. It says that Swampy was offered protection. The fact is he was not, and the fact that he was even masked as an affilliate (who gets no protection and is not guaranteed membership) for a few hours was due to Kurushio who worked for Chefjoe who worked for Dilber and NoWedge (the latter was removed early in the war leaving Chefjoe answerable only to Pacifica.) If that's a crime any democratic alliance in the game can be induced to commit a crime just about at will by someone in the position Pacifica was in. If you call that a solid CB so be it, I'll just shut up and let that affirmation stand for itself. It's fundamentally incompatible with all the nonsense about how the NPO is honourable or can be trusted. Edited August 28, 2009 by Sigrun Vapneir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 I dont believe the other gentleman actually made that claim, though he makes some that I believe are delusional. In particular, whether or no ONOS for instance dared dream of one day threatening Pacifica, Pacifica itself was clearly the only one capable of threatening Pacifica by the time of GWIII. Even in the abstract sense he is talking about. Thus I agree that there is no basis for the claim, in two senses at once. Neither me nor my arguments are delusional. I am not suggesting that ONOS posed a significant military thread to Pacifica; that would be delusional. Rather that they, as well as GUARD, posed a major ideological threat to the pursuit of a Pacifican hegemony. I didn't think that was such a new idea, and I'm getting pretty sick of restating it because people misinterpret me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Neither me nor my arguments are delusional. I am not suggesting that ONOS posed a significant military thread to Pacifica; that would be delusional. Rather that they, as well as GUARD, posed a major ideological threat to the pursuit of a Pacifican hegemony. I didn't think that was such a new idea, and I'm getting pretty sick of restating it because people misinterpret me. We are not misinterpreting you, we just don't accept your reasoning. Like Vlad said before, would we really be worried if our enemies took up neutrality and isolation? How is that a threat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 We are not misinterpreting you, we just don't accept your reasoning. Like Vlad said before, would we really be worried if our enemies took up neutrality and isolation? How is that a threat? You cannot have Hegemony when there are prosperous alliances outside of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 You cannot have Hegemony when there are prosperous alliances outside of it. So there never was a hegemony? What about ODN? TDO? Others that aren't coming to me because I haven't slept yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 (edited) So there never was a hegemony? What about ODN? TDO? Others that aren't coming to me because I haven't slept yet? I consider ODN a part of the former Hegemony. I imagine TDO was tolerated, but should they have risen as high as GPA did, I suspect their fate would have been similar. Though there was no equivalent of GGA on the Aqua sphere, another motivation for the destruction of GPA, and TDO's rise was after the period of curbstomps, so they aren't really relevant to this discussion. Edited August 28, 2009 by President Kent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 I consider ODN a part of the former Hegemony. I imagine TDO was tolerated, but should they have risen as high as GPA did, I suspect their fate would have been similar. Though there was no equivalent of GGA on the Aqua sphere, another motivation for the destruction of GPA, and TDO's rise was after the period of curbstomps, so they aren't really relevant to this discussion. How so? I may be wrong, I didn't take that much notice of ODN, but did they have treaties with hegemony? The only one I can think of off the top of my head is OUT. TDO may have become sanctioned after the hegemony was slipping, but they were big, and had the image of the 'true' neutral alliance after the GPA war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 How so? I may be wrong, I didn't take that much notice of ODN, but did they have treaties with hegemony? Hegemony is not a certain group of alliances. The Hegemony can be defined as the state of the MDP web post-UJW and pre-Karma (though they are very flimsy boundaries, and will probably vary more in truth), which included more or less everyone. If you're refering to 1V/Q and what I like to call the 'Upper Hegemony', then yes, ODN has an MDP with GGA. TDO may have become sanctioned after the hegemony was slipping, but they were big, and had the image of the 'true' neutral alliance after the GPA war. That may or may not have saved them should they have reached GPA's pre-war position under the Hegemony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldConqueror Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Hegemony is not a certain group of alliances. The Hegemony can be defined as the state of the MDP web post-UJW and pre-Karma (though they are very flimsy boundaries, and will probably vary more in truth), which included more or less everyone. If you're refering to 1V/Q and what I like to call the 'Upper Hegemony', then yes, ODN has an MDP with GGA. Ah, I assumed you meant the hegemony in the Karma war sense. And yes, I forgot about the GGA-ODN treaty. I assumed it was dropped somewhere along the way. That may or may not have saved them should they have reached GPA's pre-war position under the Hegemony. Yes, but if neutrality was an ideological threat then surely a 'pure neutral' alliance would be a big target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Yes, but if neutrality was an ideological threat then surely a 'pure neutral' alliance would be a big target. I'd phrase it more as a 'sanctioned neutral' alliance, or even more simply, a neutral alliance with the gawl to be ranked number one. TDO was neither, they weren't on anyone's radar. 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.