Zombie Glaucon Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 (edited) It's a shame you guys won't get to see our pin-up girls. But I guess collecting stats is the next best thing. Hurray peace! Are you familiar with the old robot saying "DOES NOT COMPUTE" ? Never mind, I get it now. TOP is busy doing a "fat kid in school" thing, apparently. Edited November 24, 2009 by Zombie Glaucon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eden Taylor Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 Yes, rogues do have nothing to do with the alliance they come from, and the alliance obviously doesn't have to pay reps for that, but that isn't really what the argument was about. If you had seen the war declarations, it was very suspicious. Basically right after Heracles declared war on Tyga people from Kronos occupied his defensive war slots. It seemed to me that at least some communication between Heracles and Kronos had happened, and I would rightfully be annoyed as STA if a person that went rogue on their leader was not able to be counter-attacked. Then comes White Majik and his DoW, and it all just adds up to some very suspicious circumstances. First, please don't assume I am not aware of what literally happened. Second, you start off here agreeing rogues have nothing to do with the alliance they come from and end up calling these suspicious circumstances. So which is it? Third, I'd be more pissed off if a member of an alliance I was a member of went rogue without telling us so that we couldn't get all the war slots; but maybe that's just me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stumpy Jung Il Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 No, I see that. I disagree with you and Kronos then. Great counter argument, I liked the part where you addressed any of his logic backed by real evidence with anything more than a "no u." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eden Taylor Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 Great counter argument, I liked the part where you addressed any of his logic backed by real evidence with anything more than a "no u." I think that an alliance should not be able to be kept from attacking a member of theirs that goes rogue; didn't really think I'd get anywhere since everyone's mind is probably made up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 First, please don't assume I am not aware of what literally happened. Second, you start off here agreeing rogues have nothing to do with the alliance they come from and end up calling these suspicious circumstances. So which is it? Third, I'd be more pissed off if a member of an alliance I was a member of went rogue without telling us so that we couldn't get all the war slots; but maybe that's just me. The actions of the rogue are not the responsibility of their former alliance. The actions of the remaining alliance members are the responsibility of the alliance. This whole issue was about the actions of the second group, not the first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombie Glaucon Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 Next time I guess they should just let you eat the nukes, huh? I used to look forward to your comments; what happened? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 And so, once again, the world's hopes for a big war end. o/ STA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 Oh Heft. How happy I am with every passing day to not be among people who think like you do. What a !@#$ty world it'd be. Among my kinds of people we reserve equal respect for our MDP partners. We don't trample all over someones right to run their own affairs because we're bigger. May as well just make them a puppet state at that point. Coming from the guy who said "If your morals come before your treaties, we're not interested in being allied with you." something tells me you don't give two !@#$s about how someone tries to run their affairs as long as you can profit from it. How have you never heard of allies negotiating on behalf of each other before? Protectors negotiate on behalf of protectorates, large alliances negotiate on behalf of smaller ones being bullied, etc etc. Of course it's all done with consent and in the best interest of the offended party, but sometimes you need a more effective voice to speak for you depending on the circumstances, who you're dealing with, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 o/ Kronos screwing with the STA just cuz you can Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philp110 Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 I agree with you Hizzy - this wasn't the issue at hand. The issue is that a particular member of TOP did the complete opposite of what Kronos wanted. I assume deliberately. I have no doubt it was done with good intentions, but it was a breach of trust and sovereignity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 "Common enough" meaning "the NPO did it all the time so that means it's okay?" Because, seriously, they're only alliance I can recall ever negotiating a peace deal without consulting the party they were negotiating on behalf of. Unless, of course, you'd care to bring up more examples? I'm really not trying to get into an argument over this, so I'm confused as to how or why my pretty clear words are being so spectacularly misunderstood. Clearly STA was given the impression that Kronos was aware, so what you're talking about is not what I'm talking about. Read Hizzy's post. Or Bilrow's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabonnobar Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 Insert general statement lamenting peace, then another supporting Kronos/TOP. Too lazy to find fancy words atm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 I agree with you Hizzy - this wasn't the issue at hand. The issue is that a particular member of TOP did the complete opposite of what Kronos wanted. I assume deliberately. I have no doubt it was done with good intentions, but it was a breach of trust and sovereignity. Well that's a legitimate grievance, but what they all seem to be upset about isn't how it was done, but that negotiating on behalf of someone is somehow a breach of an alliance's sovereignty in it's own right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowalski Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 I used to look forward to your comments; what happened? You seriously used to look forward to someone else's comments? Sounds to me like you got a life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archon Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Hi there Archon... Oh for ****'s sake. How the hell did I miss that? Time to go wear the dunce cap for an hour... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Oh for ****'s sake. How the hell did I miss that? Time to go wear the dunce cap for an hour... It's ok. I still love you man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Yes, rogues do have nothing to do with the alliance they come from, and the alliance obviously doesn't have to pay reps for that, but that isn't really what the argument was about. If you had seen the war declarations, it was very suspicious. Basically right after Heracles declared war on Tyga people from Kronos occupied his defensive war slots. It seemed to me that at least some communication between Heracles and Kronos had happened, and I would rightfully be annoyed as STA if a person that went rogue on their leader was not able to be counter-attacked. Then comes White Majik and his DoW, and it all just adds up to some very suspicious circumstances. Just wanted to add that one or two (I don't remember exactly) of the Kronos members declared on Heracles before Heracles attacked Tyga. That in itself was what stemmed everything, then add on everything else that happened who wouldn't be suspicious and annoyed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
empirica Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Wow, we are a picky bunch lately. So suddenly, it's not ok for an ally to mediate? Since when? Sometimes it's just easier to have another party help, if the original parties are too frustrated with each other. Or various other reasons. From my quick skim of the thread, STA had every reason to believe they were negotiating in good faith. It also appears TOP's action, while generous and I'd say generally a good idea, was a mistake, which they've claimed. I can believe an honest mistake, it happens to the best of us. I also don't see why there's such argument over paying a token sum for the inconvenience to STA. 300 tech, in the larger scheme of things, is nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingEd Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 I also don't see why there's such argument over paying a token sum for the inconvenience to STA. 300 tech, in the larger scheme of things, is nothing. QFT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 I used to look forward to your comments; what happened? This issue fell too close to home with one of your allies being the one that I'm criticising? Being rogued on is unfortunate but it seems rather silly to me for an alliance to expect to be paid because it hasn't been able to take more nukes than it actually did, particularly given that in this instance Kronos anarchied another of their nations before he could attack STA nations and saved them hundreds of millions of dollars in damages by doing so. Since STA and NpO don't make many bad decisions, I'm sure my comments will be more to your liking again in future Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 (edited) Being rogued on is unfortunate but it seems rather silly to me for an alliance to expect to be paid because it hasn't been able to take more nukes than it actually did, particularly given that in this instance Kronos anarchied another of their nations before he could attack STA nations and saved them hundreds of millions of dollars in damages by doing so. What is silly about wanting to defend a fellow alliance member? You may be happy for others to do your jobs for you as long as it saves you a few bob, Bob, but some of us like to defend our own, and *gasp* eating nukes on behalf of our own is a part of that. Now, it has been stated on more than one occasion that Heracles didn't nuke Kronos nations attacking him but would have nuked STA nations - in doing so potentially using up nukes that otherwise might have been destined for his original target - so with that in mind being able to send our own nations into the fray would have been beneficial as the nukes would run out more quickly and the damage could be spread more evenly. It amazes me that this concept needs to be outlined yet again, but it appears that you still don't get it. Edited November 25, 2009 by Aimee Mann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penguin Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 (edited) This issue fell too close to home with one of your allies being the one that I'm criticising? Being rogued on is unfortunate but it seems rather silly to me for an alliance to expect to be paid because it hasn't been able to take more nukes than it actually did, particularly given that in this instance Kronos anarchied another of their nations before he could attack STA nations and saved them hundreds of millions of dollars in damages by doing so.Since STA and NpO don't make many bad decisions, I'm sure my comments will be more to your liking again in future I do think that Kronos should at least be more careful before tech raiding rogues in the future and coordinating a peace and re-declare in order to get to fight another week. I know I'm not alone in looking forward to the opportunity to defend my alliance in a war with a good reason, and that doesn't happen very often as is. I'd prefer it if tech raiders (in general and not just Kronos) would show some restraint and respect the attacked alliance's desire to defend their own. I don't think this needed to explode into a global war, but I do hope this will be a wake up call nonetheless. Edited November 25, 2009 by Penguin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eden Taylor Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 What is silly about wanting to defend a fellow alliance member? You may be happy for others to do your jobs for you as long as it saves you a few bob, Bob, but some of us like to defend our own, and *gasp* eating nukes on behalf of our own is a part of that. Now, it has been stated on more than one occasion that Heracles didn't nuke Kronos nations attacking him but would have nuked STA nations - in doing so potentially using up nukes that otherwise might have been destined for his original target - so with that in mind being able to send our own nations into the fray would have been beneficial as the nukes would run out more quickly and the damage could be spread more evenly.It amazes me that this concept needs to be outlined yet again, but it appears that you still don't get it. So he chose his target well and you wish you'd had a chance to trick him into wasting a few nukes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jyrinx Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 So he chose his target well and you wish you'd had a chance to trick him into wasting a few nukes? ... what? I think you quoted the wrong post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 (edited) So he chose his target well and you wish you'd had a chance to trick him into wasting a few nukes? I would welcome any opportunity to suck up nukes for any of my fellow members, regardless of which one was the target and whether they were well chosen in your eyes or not. It's a pretty basic obligation to have as a member of an alliance and I take it seriously, which is why I took issue with Bob Janova's post. Edited November 25, 2009 by Aimee Mann 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.