King Mathers Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) It's simple, the coalition of cowards do not want to attack because... well because they are cowards. They pretend to come to the defense of TPF but in reality they go in send a few people, they are to afraid to attack RoK one of TPF's aggressors and come out as heroes in all of it. Edited January 2, 2010 by King Mathers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remaliat Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) So you guys call them cowards because they don't declare for a few days... So you guys call them cowards because they don't declare on all 4 alliances declaring... So you guys call them cowards because they are fighting a war of strategy using the Peace Mode strategy. This is all about strategy, and whether you people would like to admit it or not, we all have our roles to play in this chess match. Edited January 2, 2010 by Remaliat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 One could suspect that their goading the Coincidence Coalition into a full frontal assault is their own strategy... That said I agree with previous posters, that they aren't cowards at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ying Yang Mafia Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 It's simple, the coalition of cowards do not want to attack because... well because they are cowards. They pretend to come to the defense of TPF but in reality they go in send a few people, they are to afraid to attack RoK one of TPF's aggressors and come out as heroes in all of it. Haven't you been told to shut up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 For the last time, we settled on Super Grievances..it sounds cooler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 maybe a dent, but it would not by any means turn the tides, or even cause alarm. You might want to ask your leadership about how eager they are for war with NpO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaiser Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 (edited) For the last time, we settled on Super Grievances..it sounds cooler I think it sounds better too, but I think Supercomplaints is more fitting. Plus Avernite of TOP came up with it, and you gotta have some alliance loyalty Edited January 3, 2010 by Kaiser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fernando12 Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 What kind of defense could they offer to TPF if they get clobbered by causing the activation of treaties RoK has? Then, someone would be in here saying why did they attack RoK and activate all of RoK's treaties, now they can't defend TPF as effectively... anyways, many ways to look at things...the war is not over...you really cannot say that DoWs against RoK wont come when those alliances feel they are good and ready to do it... nothing is clear until the war is over...when it ends and a side is victorious...then can we rehash and see what strategies worked and didn't... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 (edited) Then again, at the same time those others can easily push Athens, \m/ and GOD down.The question is, is sacrificing those alliances worth crushing TPF? Probably not, so declaring on RoK is rather unnecessary. Athens and GOD have significant allies too – including C&G who if countered will bring in Polaris anyway. All you're effectively doing by giving RoK a free reign is allowing TPF (the alliance you're supposed to be entering the war to defend) to be rolled indefinitely, and spreading a bunch of damage around elsewhere. Having said that, the 'DoWs' today are entirely political, the rolling of TPF has not even been slowed down by the very few actual wars declared. So this whole argument is rather moot, since the 'war' is currently being played out (i) on TPF's nuclear-glazed soil (still warm from Karma probably), and (ii) in diplomatic channels and the OWF, not on the battlefield. Edited January 3, 2010 by Bob Janova Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperbad Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Athens and GOD have significant allies too – including C&G who if countered will bring in Polaris anyway. All you're effectively doing by giving RoK a free reign is allowing TPF (the alliance you're supposed to be entering the war to defend) to be rolled indefinitely, and spreading a bunch of damage around elsewhere. It allows for the potential of manipulating the "chains" by guiding additional declarations potentially allowing Polaris to be lined up against equal or greater power(s). Additionally it delays their entry into the war by at least one link thereby buying the CC more time to gather support. If they manage to guide the declarations well enough then I'm sure we'll see some other AAs fighting Ragnarok much sooner. Otherwise they'll probably knock down the ones they're already at war with by a peg before going for Ragnarok and any of its allies not already involved. I'm sure they all see this however and are preparing to minimize such an effect thus how things will turn out is yet to be seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wabooz Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Having said that, the 'DoWs' today are entirely political, the rolling of TPF has not even been slowed down by the very few actual wars declared. So this whole argument is rather moot, since the 'war' is currently being played out (i) on TPF's nuclear-glazed soil (still warm from Karma probably), and (ii) in diplomatic channels and the OWF, not on the battlefield. Exactly, so a quick white peace seems in order. Then everyone can brush themselves off and go about their business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 I really hope the people who have control over this situation see that that is the best outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesius Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 I really hope the people who have control over this situation see that that is the best outcome. Apparently, GLOF runs CN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juslen Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 The most logical explanation is the most simple one. CC went into the war with a whimper.. they barely declared war. It would be foolish for them to jump on RoK because the few nations they have out of peace mode would be juicy targets for "the big bad blue meanie" aka NpO. That is assuming they would activate their MDoAP with RoK right away. Should they have hit Rok and honored their treaties 100%.. sure.. but it also took 5 days to even unleash a few dozen nations. Matter of fact.. I think there were more DOW or DOS threads than there were actual nations declaring war. Maybe that an exaggeration, but not by much. I think we have learned that this war is all about playing is safe or playing it smart. It just so happens the initial wave of wars basically fizzled out making them neither smart nor safe. Unless of course there is some other reason behind it besides PM and Peace Talks. I'm all ears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternos Astramora Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Exactly, so a quick white peace seems in order. Then everyone can brush themselves off and go about their business. This. I think a lot of people on both sides wanted a big war, but not this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Roflcopter Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 I think the reason Ragnarok was not declared on is because they are less guilty of declaring war on TPF than Athens, GOD, or \m/. Sure, all three alliances declared the same night for the same reason at the same time, but Ragnarok is different. Don't question it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kellory Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 I realise there are motivations behind not doing so, but the treaties held by TPF leave little room for interpretation on the matter of mutual defence.Anyone care to elaborate? I cannot speak for any other alliance, but we certainly do not have any sort of mutual defense treaty with TPF. Our obligation to them is what we want it to be. Even though they are our Protector we have no treaty obligation to defend them. None of the General's Protectorates do. We do so because they are allies and friends. When we need help, TPF always just asked what we needed them to do and then they went off and did it. They never just came to us and told us what they were going to do, or did something that they felt would work the best regardless of our feelings or thoughts in the matter. They trusted us to know what we were doing and worked with us to resolve any issue. To me, that is how allies that trust each other do. So to, when TPF has needed help we've gone to them and asked what they wanted us to do. And we did what they asked of us. It was not always easy, often staying out of something is the hardest thing you can do. But we trust in them as much as they trusted in us. We declared on Athens because that was who we were asked to declare on. The larger strategic picture is best left to others. For us, we are simply a part of a larger strategy and as long as it helps TPF in the end and TPF supports it, that is all we care about. It is not about winning or losing, it is about being there for our Protector and them knowing we are there for them. What the rest of the world thinks matters considerably less to me. In any event, we are doing what we are doing, and did what we did, because that was what was asked of us when we asked TPF what we could do to help them in their current crisis. And really, that is all there is to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWAT128 Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 I really hope the people who have control over this situation see that that is the best outcome. TPF already rejected white peace so I doubt this war will be over soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x Tela x Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 TPF already rejected white peace so I doubt this war will be over soon. Would be silly to accept a white peace when they're going to get the lion's share of reparations from those alliances hitting them. Also, yes RoK can absolutely destroy TPF in a prolonged conflict, with no help from the other 3. Guess what? That was going to happen no matter how this war played out. As the original and only alliance in the war on CC's side, TPF was going to end this war with a fraction of their former power. They know this. They accept this. By not declaring on RoK, TPF is no worse and no better shape than they were before. There is only one level of "holy crap, we got owned". The difference is that they have a better shot at coming out of this as a victor this way. They'll be decimated, but they'll be victors. ^ The above is working under the assumption that TPF & CC will win the overall conflict. That remains to be seen, but if you put yourself in their shoes, you should be able to see the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 I think the reason Ragnarok was not declared on is because they are less guilty of declaring war on TPF than Athens, GOD, or \m/. Sure, all three alliances declared the same night for the same reason at the same time, but Ragnarok is different.Don't question it. Or maybe it's because they took into account past wars when it was decided who would declare on Rag. Perhaps too, they took into account counter declarations. Or they just all forgot about Ragnorak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Would be silly to accept a white peace when they're going to get the lion's share of reparations from those alliances hitting them. I don't think even you believe this. I certainly hope the CC (including TPF) aren't basing their decisions on the idea that they're going to win, because unless Supergrievances is spectacularly incompetent, they won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x Tela x Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 I don't think even you believe this. I certainly hope the CC (including TPF) aren't basing their decisions on the idea that they're going to win, because unless Supergrievances is spectacularly incompetent, they won't. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeb the Wise Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Here, let me put my tinfoil hat on... Now i don't have the time to read all these threads and posts, and I'm never on IRC but I think their is another coalition in the works to hit Rok for this "Rish was a spy" bull crap Some of the same from CC and maybe some new ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkphysics Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Here, let me put my tinfoil hat on...Now i don't have the time to read all these threads and posts, and I'm never on IRC but I think their is another coalition in the works to hit Rok for this "Rish was a spy" bull crap Some of the same from CC and maybe some new ones. I would sincerely hope that hitting RoK because of the Rish stupidity was not in the works because that would be a giant face palm of stupidity to the nth degree unless some miracle of proof comes forward linking RoK to Rish's actions. Though with the involved alliances in CC, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it did happen. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mathers Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 So you guys call them cowards because they don't declare for a few days...So you guys call them cowards because they don't declare on all 4 alliances declaring... So you guys call them cowards because they are fighting a war of strategy using the Peace Mode strategy. This is all about strategy, and whether you people would like to admit it or not, we all have our roles to play in this chess match. Umm yes I do call them cowards. They're cowards because they don't want to fight an alliance because of her allies (remember though this is an alliance they're bound by treaties to attack) and the peace mode strategy, normally I would say something but we're using the same tactic so oh well. And yes they're cowards because they didn't declare for 6 days while TPF got stomped. It's not strategy, we all knew it was coming sooner or later, plus it gives it away posting DoW's almost 45 min. before update, taking away any strategy. I mean you need a few days to get a strategy get some targets and let everyone know. Depending on things this takes a day or two maybe 3. 1-3 days, not 6. 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.