So, uh, Athens...

[kriekfreak]

Are you really that confused about how random my choices might be?

I hope you follow through. I really do. But I'm afraid I will be disappointed once again.

[Bob Janova]

This is an absolute disgrace. It's worse than what the Hegemony did – at least they inflated minor incidents into CBs, instead of just attacking an entire alliance without even bothering with one at all. It's worse even than the Unjust Path, who for all their infamy had raid limits much lower than 40.

I am very disappointed in what I thought were two classy alliances.

I await the inevitable crying when somebody does 'do something about it'.

[AVFC1]

When you and GOONS start to raid 40 men alliances I'll for sure.

If you look to GOONS annoucement that they made some time ago about help tech raiders you will see that I disagree with them, being our allies or no.

And as I said before, while I do not agree with tech raiders I can't enforce everyone to agree with me, even my beloved allies in STA allow tech raid under some conditions I think, and I still love them. But raid an 40 men alliance just because they haven't treaties to defend them is to much for me.

Again, explain why a 10 man alliance with no treaties is fair game, but a 40 man alliance with no treaties isn't?

Not even your patented "boo hoo NPO picked on us a year ago" propaganda will make you look like anything other than the New Athens Order©. "Because we can" will be replaced by "because we thought we could" when you are stuffing your face with humble pie.

Gee, New Athens Order, how witty.

This is an absolute disgrace. It's worse than what the Hegemony did – at least they inflated minor incidents into CBs, instead of just attacking an entire alliance without even bothering with one at all. It's worse even than the Unjust Path, who for all their infamy had raid limits much lower than 40.

I see your logic, tech raiding an alliance is much worse than attacking an alliance for no reason, for weeks, and then forcing them to pay reps at the end of it.

Edited November 14, 2009 by AVFC1

[astronaut jones]

Athens can tech raid who they want to, be it a 40 man AA or a 200 man AA. the consequences of said raids are for Athens to deal with.

You know, that's kind of a !@#$%^&* argument to be making. I think the only reason you're saying that is because it's athens, and they have a "better reputation" then some of the other tech raiding alliances. If someone had brought this up about poison clan, you would NEVER see anyone support them.

But this is athens, and they have a better reputation, so let's give them the benefit of the doubt at the very least? $%&@ that. It's despicable whether this is coming from athens or from someone else. Raiding a 40 man alliance is always cause for concern, especially en masse like they did, which is akin to a declaration of war anyway.

Oh, my bad, it's only a declaration of war, and we're only allowed to raise a stink about it when it's done by an alliance that we can universally dislike? Gotcha.

Edited November 14, 2009 by astronaut jones

[D34th]

Again, explain why a 10 man alliance with no treaties is fair game, but a 40 man alliance with no treaties isn't?

Again, explain where I said a 10 man alliance with no treaties is fair game?

Athens, if you have people like Arrnea, Beatrice, D34th and Alterego rooting against you, you know you are doing it right.

Keep up the good work.

OMG an ad hominem argument! I'll leave this thread now and will cry in my bed.

Edited November 14, 2009 by D34th

[AVFC1]

Again, explain where I said a 10 man alliance with no treaties is fair game?

I never said you claimed it was, though the fact that you haven't !@#$%*ed about any alliances for raiding 10 man alliancesin the way you have on this occasion seems to suggest you at least accept it, if not agree with it. So surely you must make some distinction between the two actions and I would like an explanation as to why you do.

And the community in general seems to accept the raiding of smaller alliances anyway, I mean I haven't seen a thread like this before.

[GuMMyWoRm]

Ugh, i read about 15 pages and got bored of the bawwwing. The point still remains that its ok to raid a 10 member alliance but you add that extra 29 guys and all of sudden its global terrorism.

And maybe i missed it since i only read half the thread but has KoNI responded yet? Seems like everyone cares a hellava lot more about this than they do.

CN has been stale since the karma war. Thats the only reason people would care this much over this. Something actually happened! OMG I HAVE TO START A THREAD ABOUT IT!

[Bob Janova]

Hegemony did not attack people for 'no reason'. It attacked lots of alliances for crappy, overblown reasons in wars which I strongly disagreed with, but even it never descended to the level of 'might makes right' involved in attacking a completely innocent alliance to take their stuff.

'Tech raid' is semantic nonsense. You've update blitzed an alliance, triple teaming and anarchying several of their nations. It walks like a war and quacks like a war. If I attack your top 3 and claim 'Tech raid PM for peace' does that mean I haven't actually attacked you. Don't give me that.

In fact one of the main objections to the GPA war was that it was 'nothing more than a tech raid'. And that was one of the core injustices of the Hegemony! We haven't seen the outcome or peace terms for this war yet, so comparing those is not possible, although if KoN defend themselves I'm sure you'll whine about being nuked and demand reps.

[D34th]

I never said you claimed it was, though the fact that you haven't !@#$%*ed about any alliances for raiding 10 man alliancesin the way you have on this occasion seems to suggest you at least accept it, if not agree with it. So surely you must make some distinction between the two actions and I would like an explanation as to why you do.

And the community in general seems to accept the raiding of smaller alliances anyway, I mean I haven't seen a thread like this before.

As I said before to Jack Diorno I always was against any type of tech raid and always voiced my opinion, if you look to any thread in this forums about tech raid you will see me condemning it if I posted in the thread.

You haven't seen a thread like this before because that never happened before, even NPO used to produce some poor CB to attack someone.

[Lord Rune]

And the community in general seems to accept the raiding of smaller alliances anyway, I mean I haven't seen a thread like this before.

From what I can see from this thread, most of the outrage is not because of the size of the alliance (though tech raiding alliances don't pitch the size of the raidable alliance to be of this size-usually 5, 10 or 15 members), but that this was a coordinated attack. Which does seem to suggest that any retaliation will be met in force.

If the Knights Of NI demand reps for all these raids, will they be met?

[astronaut jones]

Hegemony did not attack people for 'no reason'. It attacked lots of alliances for crappy, overblown reasons in wars which I strongly disagreed with, but even it never descended to the level of 'might makes right' involved in attacking a completely innocent alliance to take their stuff.

'Tech raid' is semantic nonsense. You've update blitzed an alliance, triple teaming and anarchying several of their nations. It walks like a war and quacks like a war. If I attack your top 3 and claim 'Tech raid PM for peace' does that mean I haven't actually attacked you. Don't give me that.

In fact one of the main objections to the GPA war was that it was 'nothing more than a tech raid'. And that was one of the core injustices of the Hegemony! We haven't seen the outcome or peace terms for this war yet, so comparing those is not possible, although if KoN defend themselves I'm sure you'll whine about being nuked and demand reps.

My problem with tech raids has ALWAYS been that the raider assumes it's their right to do, and that the raidee isn't allowed to even so much as complain about it. It's always been standard practice to attack, and even destroy people who so much as mouth off to their raider, attacking back is a death sentence. I've tried to change that, but even in trying to change it, people found new reasons to be "horrified" or "disgusted" at raiding behaviour.

If KoN fights back, then athens will say they're justified in continuing the war.

[AVFC1]

As I said before to Jack Diorno I always was against any type of tech raid and always voiced my opinion, if you look to any thread in this forums about tech raid you will see me condemning it if I posted in the thread.

You haven't seen a thread like this before because that never happened before, even NPO used to produce some poor CB to attack someone.

I don't see you making sigs about other alliances though, my point is that you seem to be against this raid far more than any other.

And I mean I haven't seen a thread like this complaining about raids before which was to backup my point about people accepting raids on smaller alliances.

Hegemony did not attack people for 'no reason'. It attacked lots of alliances for crappy, overblown reasons in wars which I strongly disagreed with, but even it never descended to the level of 'might makes right' involved in attacking a completely innocent alliance to take their stuff.

'Tech raid' is semantic nonsense. You've update blitzed an alliance, triple teaming and anarchying several of their nations. It walks like a war and quacks like a war. If I attack your top 3 and claim 'Tech raid PM for peace' does that mean I haven't actually attacked you. Don't give me that.

Athens launched some ground attacks and offered peace, that's a tech raid. The wars hegemony particpated in for no reason (or for a crappy overblown reason, I dont see why you think thats any better but hey) lasted for a long time, involved CMs, air attacks etc. and caused a lot more damage, and at the end of it they made their victims pay reps.

Now in what backwards world is a quick and relatively non-destructive attack worse than beating on an alliance for a prolonged period of time and extorting more out of them afterwards? (Please note the "relatively" before non destructive)

Anyway, this is getting rather boring and I feel like I am just repeating myself so I'm out.

Edited November 14, 2009 by AVFC1

[Dr. Dan]

Ugh, i read about 15 pages and got bored of the bawwwing. The point still remains that its ok to raid a 10 member alliance but you add that extra 29 guys and all of sudden its global terrorism.

Correct.  Hitting 39 people is worse than hitting 10.

And maybe i missed it since i only read half the thread but has KoNI responded yet? Seems like everyone cares a hellava lot more about this than they do.

Somehow I doubt that.

CN has been stale since the karma war. Thats the only reason people would care this much over this. Something actually happened! OMG I HAVE TO START A THREAD ABOUT IT!

Pretty stupid time to be pulling these antics then, isn't it?  I'd suggest an apology and reparations to KoNi.  It might be time to gather up the losses and turn around, but hey, what do I know?

Edit: Your to the, since you're not in Athens or FoB.

Edited November 14, 2009 by Dr. Dan

[Alterego]

You're like a little Chihuahua Alterego, always yapping at my ankles.

Some people need their ankles yapped at.

[Gobb]

Hello, I have devised this simple questionnaire for You who criticize Athens and FoB for this raid. Please do follow the instructions given for everyone's sanity's sake.

1. Do you think it's absolutely wrong to tech raid?

[ ] Yes

[ ] No

If 'Yes', go to question 2.

If 'No',

2. Do you criticize other raiding alliances with the same fervor as you've criticized Athens and FoB?

[ ] Yes

[ ] No

If 'Yes', carry on.

If 'No', and don't come back until you have. It's not like you haven't had any chances.

[GuMMyWoRm]

Correct.  Hitting 39 people is worse than hitting 10.

So what if u hit 4 alliances of 10 members? That would be cool right?

[Bob Janova]

2. Do you criticize other raiding alliances who attack established alliances with the same fervor as you've criticized Athens and FoB?

Point me at one and certainly. I've not seen such an outrageous noCB war before.

[Dr. Dan]

So what if u hit 4 alliances of 10 members? That would be cool right?

Worse than X does not signify a level of appropriateness.  It merely shows you that it is, in fact, worse than X.  Most people have an issue when alliances tech raid other alliances.  Go figure, eh?

[D34th]

I don't see you making sigs about other alliances though, my point is that you seem to be against this raid far more than any other.

And I mean I haven't seen a thread like this complaining about raids before which was to backup my point about people accepting raids on smaller alliances.

Anyway, this is getting rather boring and I feel like I am just repeating myself so I'm out.

Point me where it happened before and other alliance who did a update blitz fo massive tech raid a defenseless alliance just because they haven't treaties or hability to defend them.

Even alliances like PC do not raid an entire alliance at the same time(well they did it against TPF's protectorade) but my dislike for PC is so big that this is expected and I'll not waste my time making sigs that say they are a bunch of thiefs with no honor, majority of CN already know it. On the other hand Athens(An alliance that I used to like and never expected it comming from them) were one of the alliances who more talked against NPO crimes and how they were immoral and in the end they are doing worse.

Edited November 14, 2009 by D34th

[AVFC1]

Point me where it happened before and other alliance who did a update blitz fo massive tech raid a defenseless alliance just because they haven't treaties or hability to defend them.

Alliances are raided everyday, you completely miss my point. I'm saying that raiding a 40 man alliance is no worse than raiding a 5 or 10 man alliance.

Every raid is on defenseless people.

It's like I'm talking to a brick wall.

[astronaut jones]

Hello, I have devised this simple questionnaire for You who criticize Athens and FoB for this raid. Please do follow the instructions given for everyone's sanity's sake.

1. Do you think it's absolutely wrong to tech raid?

[ ] Yes

[ ] No

If 'Yes', go to question 2.

If 'No',

2. Do you criticize other raiding alliances with the same fervor as you've criticized Athens and FoB?

[ ] Yes

[ ] No

If 'Yes', carry on.

If 'No', and don't come back until you have. It's not like you haven't had any chances.

That's part of the problem. Part of the problem is that people treat raiding alliances differently, as you'd never see anyone complain about NEW or Nueva Vida (who I'm not sure if they raid anymore) even though NEW raided, at one point, more than just about anyone.

The other part of the problem is in the way raiding alliances carry themselves, and the way they act when they're called out. They never take the simple approach of radio silence, or offering up an apology and the gesture of reps when there's a public reaction to what they've done. Raids, if handled properly, will rarely turn out ugly, and over the long run, even offering up reps every now and then, they'll still come out ahead.

They would much rather accuse people of bawwwwing though, as though they're hot !@#$ and a bunch of rebels. Like "oooh, look at me, I don't give a $%&@ what you say, I'm gonna do it anyway! And if you don't like it, screw you guys!" okay cartman. Where's polly prissy-pants?

They don't know how to act, they feel the need to continue on with this !@#$%^&* behaviour even in the face of overwhelming public outcry at their behaviour. They make it worse on them, they make the reactions worse, because they're a bunch of @#$%

Edited November 14, 2009 by astronaut jones

[GuMMyWoRm]

Alliances are raided everyday, you completely miss my point. I'm saying that raiding a 40 man alliance is no worse than raiding a 5 or 10 man alliance.

Every raid is on defenseless people.

It's like I'm talking to a brick wall.

Ahhhh But a brick wall doesnt say anything stupid. It is smart enough to realize it doesnt have anything intelligent to say. So in that case i think you owe all brick walls a formal appology for comparing the two.

Edited November 14, 2009 by GuMMyWoRm

[Lord Rune]

Alliances are raided everyday,

How often are alliances mass raided, like in this instance?

[Dr. Dan]

Alliances are raided everyday, you completely miss my point. I'm saying that raiding a 40 man alliance is no worse than raiding a 5 or 10 man alliance.

Every raid is on defenseless people.

It's like I'm talking to a brick wall.

Your use of everyday injustice does not justify this.  Furthermore, the line in which is being crossed here is far worse than ever before.  The acceptance of this raid signifies that alliances of 40 members or less are not considered "alliances".  Hell if I'll see that precedent established, lest I hear, "Oh, why didn't you stand up to injustice then?" as I am now about 10 man alliances.

[Bob Janova]

True, there is no difference in principle between attacking a small alliance and attacking a larger one. That's why our tech raiding policy is limited to unaligned nations, and why TOP don't allow raiding at all. However, there is a difference in degree. You go after a mass murderer before you go after a one time killer. You have crossed the line between 'bad' and 'an unprecedented outrage'.