King DrunkWino Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 I just got a few teeny tiny things with this... Sakura's version of events leading up to and during the war that (I believe) HeinousOne dubbed the "Popcorn War". (Times are in PDT -- add two hours to get Server time)T-2 days (before the first IS nation DoW) Plans were discussed about raiding CG (amounted to "12 member AA, no protector, no treaties, lets raid 'em". T-24 hours Target lists assigned. 21:50 (right before and after update.) IS nations raid CG... (a day later) 22:00 CG declares war on IS. 22:01 deSouza fires the first nuke in the Popcorn War, at King Najibbles. See, I have yet to find a start raid button on the control panel all nation rulers use to interact with their subjects. There is however a declare war command. The Popcorn war didn't start with CG's declaration. It started when IS as an alliance attacked CG. Maybe that's just crazy old me. Also, I note how everyone was going on and on about how "IS was violating their own charter", and yet little/no comment was made about CG violating theirs. Moreover;a. To maintain the rights of individual nation tech raiding will be permitted under strict guidelines. Note the word 'individual'. This section wasn't relevant to the discussion in the first place. I really hope IS doesn't follow that great big hunk of steamed sophistry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 So you waited until everyone finally shut up about this and it was all over and then, instead of moving on and repairing the damage, you reignite the whole argument? That kind of forward thinking is what got you into this mess in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Wilson Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 So you waited until everyone finally shut up about this and it was all over and then, instead of moving on and repairing the damage, you reignite the whole argument? That kind of forward thinking is what got you into this mess in the first place. Its lolpink...did you expect anything else? Was their any point to this any way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Here is a thought, how about just saying "God we made a stupid decision" and be done with it. As for the accusation that people are latching onto the word "tech" in rference to the raid, YOU used the IS tech raiding clause in yoiur OP, and highlighted the word INDIVIDUAL, as being the reason the raid rules did not apply. IS as I can read, has no official policy on "punitive raids". Nor does any other alliance that I know of. You know why? Those are what we call WARS. When you use military to affix a punishment on another person or alliance in this game, it is a war. You can try all of the fancy word play you want. Doesnt change anything.Instead of letting CGs obvious failures consume them, as the whole world knew it would, you decided you could do what you wanted, and nobody would care. Problem was, alot of somebodys cared. You (and by you, i mean IS, cuz you were IS at the time), consolidated a pseudo-favorable public opinion of CG that they could feed off to win the war. IS made themselves look like politically incompetent fools, and quite honestly, made their allies in PWN look the same. Forethought FTW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Are you referring to Baseballer? Because he came to Invicta, and was deleted, weeks before this. Or am I wrong? I dunno if you're right about him, but it's not him I'm talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakura Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 So you waited until everyone finally shut up about this and it was all over and then, instead of moving on and repairing the damage, you reignite the whole argument? That kind of forward thinking is what got you into this mess in the first place. Actually, I waited until I left IS because of a gag-order that was in place. (Followed by the IS-CG NAP.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derwood1 Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Wow this was really helpful informative and made things much better...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jipps Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Poor NSO, now anybody can throw around their weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 By PB conventional standards, in general, 1 or more is considered an alliance. I'm the one, along with nueva vida, that started the whole "member count is irrelevent" thing, and while you can get away with it, don't ever say that it's conventional PB standard that 15 and under isn't an alliance, when half the alliances don't tech raid at all, half that do only allow it on those that have no alliance affiliation, 1/4 is 5 or under (or some variation thereof.. 2 or under in some cases), and the rest are 5 and over, usually to 10, very few go to 15. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 (edited) Regarding the statement, "15 members + no protector = not an alliance" Sometimes the lack of skill I see in the area of diplomacy on Planet Bob totally amazes me. Edited August 28, 2009 by White Chocolate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 (04:45:03 AM) Francesca[CG]: That does not rule out the possibility of our friends in NSO counter-attacking you. What what, now? Is there a different NSO? Because if a friendship existed somewhere I wasn't aware of it. I'm sure that my compatriots will agree that sentiment towards CG within the New Sith Order was anything but friendly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan III Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Mm..... I have the problem with the NSO part. "Our Friends"? huh, interesting. I highly doubt this but I think I will await Moldavi's response to that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 What what, now? Is there a different NSO? Because if a friendship existed somewhere I wasn't aware of it.I'm sure that my compatriots will agree that sentiment towards CG within the New Sith Order was anything but friendly. It's called a bluff and it worked. Recall at the time there was a fair amount of back and forth about Pink alliances coming to the aid of their own and the whole RAD affair was still fresh in people's minds, plus the Moldavi Doctrine II. Of course IS *could* have simply point blank asked NSO through a back channel what their intentions were and the bluff would have been exposed, but no one thought to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Xander the Only Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 It's called a bluff and it worked. Recall at the time there was a fair amount of back and forth about Pink alliances coming to the aid of their own and the whole RAD affair was still fresh in people's minds, plus the Moldavi Doctrine II.Of course IS *could* have simply point blank asked NSO through a back channel what their intentions were and the bluff would have been exposed, but no one thought to do that. Eh, I had a feeling that NSO might be interested in jumping in, but I also felt they didn't think much of CG, so it would be kind of odd for them to do it. There were bigger alliances we thought were going to jump in on CG's side; however, NSO wasn't one we strongly considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 By PB conventional standards, in general, 1 or more is considered an alliance. I'm the one, along with nueva vida, that started the whole "member count is irrelevent" thing, and while you can get away with it, don't ever say that it's conventional PB standard that 15 and under isn't an alliance, when half the alliances don't tech raid at all, half that do only allow it on those that have no alliance affiliation, 1/4 is 5 or under (or some variation thereof.. 2 or under in some cases), and the rest are 5 and over, usually to 10, very few go to 15. honestly the most ridiculous part of the whole thing is that he considers a protectorate agreement a necessary part of being an alliance. just goes back to what i've said before; these retarded standards are nothing more than the evolution of old standards under the pressure of greed. people used to tech raid nations who were 2 weeks inactive and unaligned, but they were too slow to get slots so they said "1 week inactive is good enough"... then any unaligned nation was targeted... then 5-man alliances... now we have the modern pinnacle of "15 members and no treaty". what next? anyone not in the sanction race doesn't count as an alliance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 honestly the most ridiculous part of the whole thing is that he considers a protectorate agreement a necessary part of being an alliance. just goes back to what i've said before; these retarded standards are nothing more than the evolution of old standards under the pressure of greed. people used to tech raid nations who were 2 weeks inactive and unaligned, but they were too slow to get slots so they said "1 week inactive is good enough"... then any unaligned nation was targeted... then 5-man alliances... now we have the modern pinnacle of "15 members and no treaty". what next? anyone not in the sanction race doesn't count as an alliance? Some would say that goes on already.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sup4l33t3ki11a Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 I didn't bother checking logs, hence the 'ish'. And Sup4l33t3ki11a did approach IS for peace. The peace was granted, end of story as far as I was concerned. "A little later: Francesca decides to extort money from IS, and makes the (by now) infamous ultimatum on the OWF. I watch the train wreck of a (OOC)thread (/OOC) repeatedly throughout the day. Preferring not to put in my two cents, as everyone seems to love to put a twist to my words, to infer that I said something bloody absurd. About 20:30: KX comes online, and 'negotiations' with Francesca/CG start. 20:32-21:00: Francesca repeatedly demands 150 million, and when asked for actual damages by both KX and Jason8 (the latter mediated that 'negotiation'), she kept dodging the issue. 21:00-22:00: Francesca "lowers" her demand back to the initial 105 million. (Keep in mind, to my knowledge, no IS nation had attacked CG since the white peace at this point), Francesca and HellScream still keep dodging the issue of actual damage done." ^^^^ from the OP. Well Sakura. Where do I start? Your perspective is lacking in most things, quite prominently in actual truths. I must firstly correct your assesment of 150mill being extortion. You clearly misunderstand the concept that in war, people lose money, tech, and infra. Not to mention soldiers and land. Then there is nuclear war. Please understand that *alot* more is lost during nuclear war. I personally had no such pleasure from IS as to be nuked, but I did however take other loses which amounted easily to over 50mill. That is just be personally, I am quite sure that desouza lost alot more than myself. The actual damages done to CG were alot higher than the pety sum of 150mill. If you lack the comperhension to understand that then may god take mercy on you. Also, I do not recall getting peace with IS? Session Start: Thu Aug 20 17:34:44 2009 Session Ident: KingXander[iS] 01[17:34] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> hey KingXander[iS] 01[17:34] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> why are you guys attacking CG? 01[17:38] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> hey 01[17:38] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> is the guy attacking me authorised to do so, and thus a rogue? [17:43] <KingXander[iS]> hello 01[17:44] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> hey, can you please explain why CG is under attack by IS nations? 01[17:44] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> I am trying to deduce if it is a war or tech raiding, in which case we plesantly request that you stop [17:45] <KingXander[iS]> its not a war [17:45] <KingXander[iS]> or else there would have been a DoW 01[17:45] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> then can you please peace out? [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> send peace if you guys want peace [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> its just a raid 01[17:53] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> it seems like an attack against us [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> and sorry, but my modem is !@#$ [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> which is why i keep disconnecting 01[17:53] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> mkay... [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> like i said before [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> if we planned to attack [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> we woulda done a dow 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> [17:44] <inzignificant> 20 million and we peace 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> [17:45] <tronpaul[iS]> either that, or francesca goes into anarchy for a period of 7 humiliating days 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> [17:45] <tronpaul[iS]> and collects each day 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> can you confirm or deny this? [17:54] <KingXander[iS]> that guy [17:54] <KingXander[iS]> 's not in my alliance [17:54] <KingXander[iS]> he's impersonating a member tho 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> ic 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> wont reply to him [17:55] <KingXander[iS]> k 01[17:55] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> it seems that several of CG's members have been attacked [17:55] <KingXander[iS]> no !@#$ [17:55] <KingXander[iS]> it was a raid 01[17:56] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> mkay.. 01[17:56] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> and you will all peace out? Session Close: Fri Aug 21 00:00:00 2009 Those are the logs I have of my communications with IS and I do not recall negotiating a peace deal with them. Please get your facts straight in the future my friend. Fail perspective is fail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelrat Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 (edited) honestly the most ridiculous part of the whole thing is that he considers a protectorate agreement a necessary part of being an alliance. just goes back to what i've said before; these retarded standards are nothing more than the evolution of old standards under the pressure of greed. people used to tech raid nations who were 2 weeks inactive and unaligned, but they were too slow to get slots so they said "1 week inactive is good enough"... then any unaligned nation was targeted... then 5-man alliances... now we have the modern pinnacle of "15 members and no treaty". what next? anyone not in the sanction race doesn't count as an alliance? Some would say that goes on already.... And did in the past . CN since it´s invention was, is and will be a playground for one rule, might makes right in every possible shade. Edited August 29, 2009 by Steelrat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Rune Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 (04:39:11 AM) Sakura: You've never seen me tech raid, have you?(04:39:23 AM) Francesca[CG]: I've not paid much attention to you or your alliance before. (04:39:38 AM) Francesca[CG]: But cruise missile and bomber strikes do not gain you tech. (04:39:42 AM) Francesca[CG]: And are not used in raids. (04:40:15 AM) Sakura: Bombers and CMs *do* take out tanks, and cause shrinkage in nations with larger populations. (04:40:25 AM) Francesca[CG]: Irrelevant. (04:40:44 AM) Francesca[CG]: They are not used for the purposes of gaining tech, which is the idea behind a tech raid. (04:41:03 AM) Sakura: Do you think I did this for tech? (04:41:26 AM) Sakura: When, in one day I might get 20~25 depending on outcome of two wars? (04:41:28 AM) Francesca[CG]: So you concede that this was not a tech raid. Thank you, that's all I need. (04:41:34 AM) Sakura: No. (04:41:42 AM) Sakura: It was a *land* raid. My bolding. Tech raid or land raid? There seems uncertainty on this point. And do alliances have different rules for Land Raids? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 honestly the most ridiculous part of the whole thing is that he considers a protectorate agreement a necessary part of being an alliance. just goes back to what i've said before; these retarded standards are nothing more than the evolution of old standards under the pressure of greed. people used to tech raid nations who were 2 weeks inactive and unaligned, but they were too slow to get slots so they said "1 week inactive is good enough"... then any unaligned nation was targeted... then 5-man alliances... now we have the modern pinnacle of "15 members and no treaty". what next? anyone not in the sanction race doesn't count as an alliance? As Steelrat said, it's all about 'might makes right' imho. That makes membership count a bit less important. I don't think techraiding is immoral though. CN is in essence a [ooc]nation simulator[/ooc] and war happens to be part of it, as is scarcity. But if you want to raid, you should also accept the consequences. Tech raid gone wrong => reparations/being gangbanged by 3 others in return. OT: I agree with Heft, it wasn't that smart to bring this up again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 (edited) (04:45:12 AM) Sakura: <15 members and no protector=not an alliance. Considering that your alliance later surrendered to them, you were probably wrong? Face it: they are were an alliance and they were able to prove it to you, with facts. Your ill-conceived criterion didn't save you from your PR and political debacle: you'd better learn from your mistakes or you'll be doomed to repeat them over and over. Edited August 30, 2009 by jerdge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigbigadorlou Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Zig was ghosting IS. Not a 'rogue'. FYI, I'm a rogue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigbigadorlou Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 "A little later:Francesca decides to extort money from IS, and makes the (by now) infamous ultimatum on the OWF. I watch the train wreck of a (OOC)thread (/OOC) repeatedly throughout the day. Preferring not to put in my two cents, as everyone seems to love to put a twist to my words, to infer that I said something bloody absurd. About 20:30: KX comes online, and 'negotiations' with Francesca/CG start. 20:32-21:00: Francesca repeatedly demands 150 million, and when asked for actual damages by both KX and Jason8 (the latter mediated that 'negotiation'), she kept dodging the issue. 21:00-22:00: Francesca "lowers" her demand back to the initial 105 million. (Keep in mind, to my knowledge, no IS nation had attacked CG since the white peace at this point), Francesca and HellScream still keep dodging the issue of actual damage done." ^^^^ from the OP. Well Sakura. Where do I start? Your perspective is lacking in most things, quite prominently in actual truths. I must firstly correct your assesment of 150mill being extortion. You clearly misunderstand the concept that in war, people lose money, tech, and infra. Not to mention soldiers and land. Then there is nuclear war. Please understand that *alot* more is lost during nuclear war. I personally had no such pleasure from IS as to be nuked, but I did however take other loses which amounted easily to over 50mill. That is just be personally, I am quite sure that desouza lost alot more than myself. The actual damages done to CG were alot higher than the pety sum of 150mill. If you lack the comperhension to understand that then may god take mercy on you. Also, I do not recall getting peace with IS? Session Start: Thu Aug 20 17:34:44 2009 Session Ident: KingXander[iS] 01[17:34] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> hey KingXander[iS] 01[17:34] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> why are you guys attacking CG? 01[17:38] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> hey 01[17:38] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> is the guy attacking me authorised to do so, and thus a rogue? [17:43] <KingXander[iS]> hello 01[17:44] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> hey, can you please explain why CG is under attack by IS nations? 01[17:44] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> I am trying to deduce if it is a war or tech raiding, in which case we plesantly request that you stop [17:45] <KingXander[iS]> its not a war [17:45] <KingXander[iS]> or else there would have been a DoW 01[17:45] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> then can you please peace out? [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> send peace if you guys want peace [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> its just a raid 01[17:53] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> it seems like an attack against us [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> and sorry, but my modem is !@#$ [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> which is why i keep disconnecting 01[17:53] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> mkay... [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> like i said before [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> if we planned to attack [17:53] <KingXander[iS]> we woulda done a dow 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> [17:44] <inzignificant> 20 million and we peace 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> [17:45] <tronpaul[iS]> either that, or francesca goes into anarchy for a period of 7 humiliating days 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> [17:45] <tronpaul[iS]> and collects each day 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> can you confirm or deny this? [17:54] <KingXander[iS]> that guy [17:54] <KingXander[iS]> 's not in my alliance [17:54] <KingXander[iS]> he's impersonating a member tho 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> ic 01[17:54] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> wont reply to him [17:55] <KingXander[iS]> k 01[17:55] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> it seems that several of CG's members have been attacked [17:55] <KingXander[iS]> no !@#$ [17:55] <KingXander[iS]> it was a raid 01[17:56] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> mkay.. 01[17:56] <Sup4l33t3ki11a[CG]> and you will all peace out? Session Close: Fri Aug 21 00:00:00 2009 Those are the logs I have of my communications with IS and I do not recall negotiating a peace deal with them. Please get your facts straight in the future my friend. Fail perspective is fail also, lawl at posting my logs. heh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teriethien Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Sakura's version of events leading up to and during the war that (I believe) HeinousOne dubbed the "Popcorn War".... "12 member AA, no protector, no treaties, lets raid 'em". ... Francesca decides to extort money from IS So basically, you picked someone who looked weak to bully, got the tables turned on you, and decides to show up here and complain about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 (edited) What what, now? Is there a different NSO? Because if a friendship existed somewhere I wasn't aware of it.I'm sure that my compatriots will agree that sentiment towards CG within the New Sith Order was anything but friendly. forget it Edited August 31, 2009 by Francesca Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts