yoyoabc Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 hi JW, hope you can clear the air on the restriction asap. anyway, it's nice to see this ends quick without more damages. i just wanna mention too that NEW is more than happy to help Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 So since apparently restricting movement amongst other alliances is considered taboo and looked down upon (unfortunately I was unaware of this previously) Brother Kane and I have come to an agreement.The restrictions portion of the agreement will be removed once Voldorish posts his apology for his actions. Once that's done, they'll be able to move where they so choose. seriously, how can you actually be unaware of restricting alliance movement without actually talkin to the alliances involved? honestly, that statement lacks some serious effort to acknowledge the sovereignty of other alliances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWConner Posted November 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Brother Kane's warchest was $1.6 Billion and he started with $1.8 Billion, they probably would have asked for 300m or so of that. Reaper started with $400m and is down around $300m right now.To get ONE alliance off the black list. To get ALL of them off you probably would have charged what, $45m each? For one, I was never out to extort from Brother Kane. I never once asked for unreasonable amounts. He refused $45 million and chose to accept the other portions. NationReaper was offered $30 million and 200 tech to each he attacked ($90 million and 600 tech total). Neither of these amounts are unreasonable. Both were rejected and alternatives were chosen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Wasn't it to all nations he was at war with? Pretty sure that's why he chose ZI.Thanks for the spy op and sharing it with the world. Considering JWconner's track record, I'd like a clarification on this aswell. He's shown he's willing to perpetuate a lie for 2 years already, I'd like to hear some sort of clarification here, since you and him are claiming different things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penelope Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 I respect that Conner said what he did in the OP.. even though in all seriousness i dont think it was something that was needed to be done. I however do not agree to all these disagreements in here.. sure feel free to have an opinion.. but 4 pages of going on and on about how unfair this all is? THEY AGREED TO THE TERMS!!!! and by some of the rogues own words, they were doing fairly well in the attacks, so why agree to something if their actually doing so well ??? so srsly, stop already, its over.. let it be done! \o VA \o VA Allies <3 conner and Erix who have been working so hard on fixing this situation... Erix who has been sick and stayin up all hours to try to make this all work out... say what you will of VA, but at least they appoligised for their mistakes.. unlike some ppl... even AFTER 2 years latter... so please show a bit more respect and stop degrading this Topic.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erixxxx Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 This is interesting, my alliance is getting targeted for restriction.Does VA have a problem with the RIA they would like to discuss? As said earlier, we'll be more than happy to discuss the reason for RIA's presence on that list in private. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyisraelie Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 I respect that Conner said what he did in the OP.. even though in all seriousness i dont think it was something that was needed to be done. I however do not agree to all these disagreements in here.. sure feel free to have an opinion.. but 4 pages of going on and on about how unfair this all is? THEY AGREED TO THE TERMS!!!! and by some of the rogues own words, they were doing fairly well in the attacks, so why agree to something if their actually doing so well ??? so srsly, stop already, its over.. let it be done! \o VA \o VA Allies <3 conner and Erix who have been working so hard on fixing this situation... Erix who has been sick and stayin up all hours to try to make this all work out... say what you will of VA, but at least they appoligised for their mistakes.. unlike some ppl... even AFTER 2 years latter... so please show a bit more respect and stop degrading this Topic.. You need a leash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 I respect that Conner said what he did in the OP.. even though in all seriousness i dont think it was something that was needed to be done. I however do not agree to all these disagreements in here.. sure feel free to have an opinion.. but 4 pages of going on and on about how unfair this all is? THEY AGREED TO THE TERMS!!!! and by some of the rogues own words, they were doing fairly well in the attacks, so why agree to something if their actually doing so well ??? so srsly, stop already, its over.. let it be done! \o VA \o VA Allies <3 conner and Erix who have been working so hard on fixing this situation... Erix who has been sick and stayin up all hours to try to make this all work out... say what you will of VA, but at least they appoligised for their mistakes.. unlike some ppl... even AFTER 2 years latter... so please show a bit more respect and stop degrading this Topic.. So, since they were doing fairly well in their attacks, I guess I was right in my assumptions that VA is militarily impotent and couldn't handle a couple of rogues, thus deciding to control the situation in other ways. I'd like an apology from VA, for obvious reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 As said earlier, we'll be more than happy to discuss the reason for RIA's presence on that list in private. Why not do it in public? What do you have to hide? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Why is Brother Kane forbidden to rejoin TOP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Kane Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Why is Brother Kane forbidden to rejoin TOP? They've seen the power when the two are combined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 I respect that Conner said what he did in the OP.. even though in all seriousness i dont think it was something that was needed to be done. I however do not agree to all these disagreements in here.. sure feel free to have an opinion.. but 4 pages of going on and on about how unfair this all is? THEY AGREED TO THE TERMS!!!! and by some of the rogues own words, they were doing fairly well in the attacks, so why agree to something if their actually doing so well ??? so srsly, stop already, its over.. let it be done! \o VA \o VA Allies <3 conner and Erix who have been working so hard on fixing this situation... Erix who has been sick and stayin up all hours to try to make this all work out... say what you will of VA, but at least they appoligised for their mistakes.. unlike some ppl... even AFTER 2 years latter... so please show a bit more respect and stop degrading this Topic.. my issue never stemmed from the fact that the rogues agreed to these terms. my issue stemmed from the fact that what i can tell, my alliance essentially got told by VA that we cannot accept certain nations without ever once being asked if this was ok. tl:dr- to my knowledge IAA just had VA attempt to dictate terms to us we never agreed upon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erixxxx Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 So, since they were doing fairly well in their attacks, I guess I was right in my assumptions that VA is militarily impotent and couldn't handle a couple of rogues, thus deciding to control the situation in other ways.I'd like an apology from VA, for obvious reasons. An apology for our military might (or lack thereof as some put it)? I'm kinda confused on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) So they cannot join MA, an ally of yours and RIA? Also, they are welcome to join IAA if wanted. Your restrictions are unjust, and from what I can tell we consider them invalid. <-- didnt read thread and after reading dont really even get still stands from the OP's post. Edited November 12, 2009 by Penlugue Solaris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erixxxx Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Why not do it in public? What do you have to hide? I had a feeling log dumping was being looked down on. Are you now asking us to do such things? After telling us how bad we've been with restricting their movements? Which is it, do things right, or do things that are looked down on? And we have nothing to hide. Some individuals might just not like these things on the forums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWConner Posted November 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 my issue never stemmed from the fact that the rogues agreed to these terms. my issue stemmed from the fact that what i can tell, my alliance essentially got told by VA that we cannot accept certain nations without ever once being asked if this was ok. tl:dr- to my knowledge IAA just had VA attempt to dictate terms to us we never agreed upon. For that I apologize. To all the alliances listed, I apologize on that part. In my haste in writing the terms, I looked at it from the applicants side, not the alliance's side. It was never the intention to tell another alliance they can't accept a member. It was moreso keeping from said nation to going to these alliances. After looking back, it was wrong, hence why Brother Kane and I have agreed to drop that from the terms. So to those that want to continue to harp on that issue, it is dead now. As for the reps, I'm fairly certain it was what I said it was...but I'll need to find the logs to support it otherwise. And AJ, using something done over 2 years ago to use as your support for my history of lying...really? I'm so happy you're here for comic relief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowDragon Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) EDIT: Looks like it doesn't really matter now. Fun stuff going on in this topic. >_> Edited November 12, 2009 by ShadowDragon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 For that I apologize. To all the alliances listed, I apologize on that part. In my haste in writing the terms, I looked at it from the applicants side, not the alliance's side. It was never the intention to tell another alliance they can't accept a member. It was moreso keeping from said nation to going to these alliances.After looking back, it was wrong, hence why Brother Kane and I have agreed to drop that from the terms. So to those that want to continue to harp on that issue, it is dead now. As for the reps, I'm fairly certain it was what I said it was...but I'll need to find the logs to support it otherwise. And AJ, using something done over 2 years ago to use as your support for my history of lying...really? I'm so happy you're here for comic relief. aiight kewl. with that i am done with this thread. peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fingolfin Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) huh, you're restricting their movement for what reason? I think they should each pick one alliance they're not supposed to join, and join out of spite. That would be pretty funny, just to see what you would do, which is probably nothing. Heh, I'm agreeing, don't see this everyday. Voldorish isn't being ZI'd for nuke roguing our alliance.Voldorish joined VA under false pretenses. As the Sec of AF (2nd in command in military) he was promoted with the current Lord of AF stepping down due to RL issues. With our chain of command, Voldorish was promoted to Lord of AF. I have known Voldorish since our days in CON and we'd never had issues, so to me he was trustworthy. Now, as Brother Kane has confirmed, Voldorish had planned on attacking VA well before he joined us. Before he was added into the Armed Forces staff and before he was promoted. He joined VA with full intention of attacking our alliance. He messaged our members, gained information and used some of it to his advantage when attacking us. Along with that, he sent messages to VA members so that they would leave the alliance. This is why NationReaper was originally given higher reps. Instead he chose self-imposed ZI. Considering his warchest was near 300 million, he could rebuild rather quickly. So, to accept his self-imposed ZI, we accepted 15 million per attacked VA member (5). Is that a dick thing to do on his part? Yeah, sure, very, but I still fail to see "spying", don't paint things in a manner that sheds better light on yourself. You're pissed that he walked in, pulled the silk over your eyes and stabbed you in your sleep and you never saw it coming. On a side note, I sent Voldorish around 400 of his tech I believe, or maybe 500, so in a way I contributed to the damage done in his attacks. Lulz. I'm glad to see you've lifted the restrictions on where they can now go, alliance restrictions have always been in poor taste in my opinion. Better luck to VA in the future. Edited November 12, 2009 by Lord Fingolfin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) seriously, how can you actually be unaware of restricting alliance movement without actually talkin to the alliances involved? honestly, that statement lacks some serious effort to acknowledge the sovereignty of other alliances. Allies with TPF / a member of the Hegemony for too long would be my guess. I respect that Conner said what he did in the OP.. even though in all seriousness i dont think it was something that was needed to be done. I however do not agree to all these disagreements in here.. sure feel free to have an opinion.. but 4 pages of going on and on about how unfair this all is? THEY AGREED TO THE TERMS!!!! and by some of the rogues own words, they were doing fairly well in the attacks, so why agree to something if their actually doing so well ??? so srsly, stop already, its over.. let it be done! \o VA \o VA Allies <3 conner and Erix who have been working so hard on fixing this situation... Erix who has been sick and stayin up all hours to try to make this all work out... say what you will of VA, but at least they appoligised for their mistakes.. unlike some ppl... even AFTER 2 years latter... so please show a bit more respect and stop degrading this Topic.. Legion agreed to their terms, too. GATO did as well. Doesn't mean they were fair terms. Edited November 12, 2009 by Penkala Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 For that I apologize. To all the alliances listed, I apologize on that part. In my haste in writing the terms, I looked at it from the applicants side, not the alliance's side. It was never the intention to tell another alliance they can't accept a member. It was moreso keeping from said nation to going to these alliances.After looking back, it was wrong, hence why Brother Kane and I have agreed to drop that from the terms. So to those that want to continue to harp on that issue, it is dead now. It's still kinda odd how you wanted to prevent them from going to those particular alliances. Regardless, I'm glad to see that particular part dropped. Hello, BK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erixxxx Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Doesn't mean they were fair terms. Fair? By who's definition? The parties involved or un-initiated bystanders such as yourself? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoomzoomzoom Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Wasn't VA one of the alliances that FAN infiltrated back in the day, and had members just walk into government positions? I know it happened to DefCon, but didn't it happen to you guys, too? DefCon never had FAN spies. That would have been Auric Armada. Just wanted to clear that up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWConner Posted November 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 DefCon never had FAN spies. That would have been Auric Armada. Just wanted to clear that up. No no no, AJ said it was definite in DefCOn...don't argue with him. He's always right. We wouldn't want facts to skew his drivel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontcareaboutmyid Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Its all really perspective on terms. By saying to a nation, "you can't join x alliance or we'll go back to war with you", is much different from saying, "hey x alliances, you're not allowed to accept this nation into your alliance" If the term were put into place, there'd be nothing stopping you from accepting the nation into the alliance, but you would be taking on the baggage of a terms violator and them possibly being put into a state of war which would be a diplomatic nightmare which would have been easily avoided by not accepting the person in the first place. 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.