Official Announcement from The Order of the Paradox

[SpiderJerusalem]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='01 February 2010 - 02:51 PM' timestamp='1265035886' post='2150453']
You do realise that TOP are your MDP allies and long time friends, right?
[/quote]

I guess it's only ok when it's [i]you[/i] are the one that act like a $%&@tard towards your allies in public. Carry on then


[quote name='tamerlane' date='01 February 2010 - 03:00 PM' timestamp='1265036428' post='2150471']
Wrong, Oyababy is CN's Godliest Military Empire.
[/quote]

I'll prove you wrong when all you immorals have lost your infra and Oya is in my range. I already got your LHV to surrender...

[AirMe]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' date='01 February 2010 - 08:07 AM' timestamp='1265029664' post='2150301']
We didn't assume your alliance would completely fail to understand the very basic principals of politics at work here. Next time maybe we'll assume you guys are stupid enough to let someone manipulate your treaties and dictate whether you fight with your allies based on the timing and sequence of the declarations.
[/quote]

First off, check my AA. After you realize what alliance I am in son, realize I have been playing the politics of this game since before your nation was born. I am fully aware of the politics at work. Only one alliance allowed itself to be blatantly manipulated by someone they put faith in who up until the \m/ conflict hated your guts.

Stop projecting, the only ones who were apparently manipulated are yourselves. The rest is just lashing out.

Oh, and the alliance that you thought I was in when you made your original post, is 100 times more politically skilled than your own. Especially when for 18 months of their existence it was excellence in politics that kept it from being disbanded by your former overlords.

[Bob Janova]

[quote name='SpiderJerusalem' date='01 February 2010 - 04:10 PM' timestamp='1265040623' post='2150575']
I guess it's only ok when it's [i]you[/i] are the one that act like a $%&@tard towards your allies in public. Carry on then[/quote]
Touché ... although I'd like to see the quote where I hailed one of my allies being destroyed. It's no secret that I joined VE for VE, not its allies, though.

[quote name='Haflinger']It's not a poor strategic choice; it's asking us to violate our treaties.[/quote]
Only if you buy into the C&G line that they weren't already involved in any way. Or if you think that you can't still hit the people who are jumping on TOP, IRON and the others without an obligation to do so.

If you'd really 'love to be supporting TOP here' then there are plenty of ways for you to do so. UPN were already engaged on the same side as TOP. Saying you can't join that side because of their MDP is like saying that RIA couldn't join on the raiders' side because of RoK's MDP with NpO.

[avernite]

[quote name='AirMe' date='01 February 2010 - 05:15 PM' timestamp='1265040901' post='2150582']
Oh, and the alliance that you thought I was in when you made your original post, is 100 times more politically skilled than your own. Especially when for 18 months of their existence it was excellence in politics that kept it from being disbanded by your former overlords.
[/quote]

I dunno, I think it's kind of more politically skilled to be one of those ruling the world for that time period, but what do I know? I guess we were just being puppets/vassals/whatever.

I mean, I don't see many people calling our attack, which results in us needing some excellence in politics to win this war, politically skilled.

[neneko]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='01 February 2010 - 05:35 PM' timestamp='1265042126' post='2150607']
Only if you buy into the C&G line that they weren't already involved in any way.
[/quote]
Yeah we worked really hard on that spin. Even managed to hide our DoWs, all of them.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='01 February 2010 - 11:35 AM' timestamp='1265042126' post='2150607']If you'd really 'love to be supporting TOP here' then there are plenty of ways for you to do so.[/quote]
I'm not the leader of Invicta, Bob. I keep on needing to remind you of that.

[Seerow]

[quote name='neneko' date='01 February 2010 - 11:51 AM' timestamp='1265043066' post='2150630']
Yeah we worked really hard on that spin. Even managed to hide our DoWs, all of them.
[/quote]

It's true. I heard Archon gave them to Ninjas to make sure nobody would see them. The man is truly a genius.

[AirMe]

[quote name='avernite' date='01 February 2010 - 11:44 AM' timestamp='1265042688' post='2150618']
I dunno, I think it's kind of more politically skilled to be one of those ruling the world for that time period, but what do I know? I guess we were just being puppets/vassals/whatever.

I mean, I don't see many people calling our attack, which results in us needing some excellence in politics to win this war, politically skilled.
[/quote]

Talk to your boy who threw out the first accusation. There is no political skill needed when you crush anything in your way. And it was Pacifica's political skill that got you there in the first place. You guys just tagged along for the ride.

[Lord Brendan]

[quote name='Haflinger' date='01 February 2010 - 11:51 AM' timestamp='1265043115' post='2150631']
I'm not the leader of Invicta, Bob. I keep on needing to remind you of that.
[/quote]

You could totally coup Jorost and the outside world wouldn't even realize.

[Mussolandia]

[quote name='Saber' date='31 January 2010 - 09:29 PM' timestamp='1264973367' post='2148324']
It seems we have common "acquantances", The Jedi Order
[/quote]

There is no TJO-NSO rivalry and it would be nerdy and stupid if there ever was one.

[TECUMSEH]

[quote]TOP entered the war on UPN's side, in support of your cause, and whoever else in Purple had declared (apart from iFOK), and you all take the excuse of their poor strategic choice of how to do that to bail on them. This goes for anyone in the Polar coalition who are not still there with TOP and IRON, or applying diplomatic pressure to the raiding side to get this front sorted out too. [/quote]

I find myself agreeing with nearly everything Mr. Janova has to say on this matter, which probably means its time for me to go rogue and blow myself to bits. That said, I'm quite sure what UPN would have done but for its MDoAP with ODN. However, ODN has been and continues to be a good friend and ally to UPN -- an ally that was attacked by a number of alliances, including FEAR. It's an extremely "tight spot" for UPN.

And I believe you would concede as much. I believe, e.g., that you have been quite up-front about (A) the fact that TOP/IRON made a poor strategic choice and how that changes the dynamic of the situation; and (B) that TOP/IRON more or less simply eliminated the middleman and hastened what we all knew would have eventually happened -- the notion that CnG were not going to eventually hit TOP/IRON in this conflict is silliness.

There's a lot to be said for pragmatically asserting that (A) doesn't matter in view of (B), but the fact is that (A) is true and I don't think it be discounted.

The above, is of course, only my opinion. I haven't a clue what UPN government will eventually decide.

Anyway, back to the awesome stats of destruction.

[Kzoppistan]

[quote name='TECUMSEH' date='01 February 2010 - 01:06 PM' timestamp='1265043978' post='2150650']
I find myself agreeing with nearly everything Mr. Janova has to say on this matter, which probably means its time for me to go rogue and blow myself to bits. That said, I'm quite sure what UPN would have done but for its MDoAP with ODN. However, ODN has been and continues to be a good friend and ally to UPN -- an ally that was attacked by a number of alliances, including FEAR. It's an extremely "tight spot" for UPN.

And I believe you would concede as much. I believe, e.g., that you have been quite up-front about (A) the fact that TOP/IRON made a poor strategic choice and how that changes the dynamic of the situation; and (B) that TOP/IRON more or less simply eliminated the middleman and hastened what we all knew would have eventually happened -- the notion that CnG were not going to eventually hit TOP/IRON in this conflict is silliness.

There's a lot to be said for pragmatically asserting that (A) doesn't matter in view of (B), but the fact is that (A) is true and I don't think it be discounted.

The above, is of course, only my opinion. I haven't a clue what UPN government will eventually decide.

Anyway, back to the awesome stats of destruction.
[/quote]

It's only a poor strategic decision if they lose.

[TECUMSEH]

[quote]It's only a poor strategic decision if they lose.[/quote]

True. Though I really only see big losers and really big losers in the CnG-TOP battle.

[Lord Brendan]

You can make poor decisions and still win. That doesn't mean they were good decisions.

[Kzoppistan]

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='01 February 2010 - 01:13 PM' timestamp='1265044424' post='2150659']
You can make poor decisions and still win. That doesn't mean they were good decisions.
[/quote]

I knew some one would say that. And it's true, but with two points: winners write the history, and it would be unknown/highly debatable if a preemptive attack was the key factor in their success.

*Edit: A great decision that is poorly executed to the point of loss, no matter how brilliant an idea, is still worse than a win despite poor decisions.

It's conceivable that if they do win, then cutting out the uncertainty of what may have happened had they waited was a smarter decision despite the PR backlash of preemptive attacks than wading into a sea of uncertainty. Going on the attack grants the advantage of trimming down the variables.

Edited February 1, 2010 by Kzoppistan

[Bob Janova]

Even if they win, they would have won by more had they not given some of their coalition an opportunity to bail out, so yeah, it was definitely a poor strategic decision in my opinion.

[quote]That said, I'm quite sure what UPN would have done but for its MDoAP with ODN[/quote]
There are plenty of ways they could help without being directly opposed to ODN ... presumably they were planning for this anyway, since C&G was almost certainly going to counter TOP/IRON wherever they hit.

[quote]Yeah we worked really hard on that spin. Even managed to hide our DoWs, all of them. [/quote]
Because the only way to be involved in a coalition is to have already declared war, right?

[avernite]

[quote name='AirMe' date='01 February 2010 - 05:57 PM' timestamp='1265043479' post='2150636']
Talk to your boy who threw out the first accusation. There is no political skill needed when you crush anything in your way. And it was Pacifica's political skill that got you there in the first place. You guys just tagged along for the ride.
[/quote]

You're the one who said MK is 100 times more politically skilled than we are, if I read you correctly.

TOP- Chooses right ally, wins 3 great wars in a row while being out of nr 4 (which was inbetween) and somewhat on the winning side in nr 5, and is part of the powers-that-be for 3 years.

MK- Is created on the losing side of a great war, loses the next one, and only on nr 3 manages to win and rise to power.

Now, it may be that crappy conditions and bad world situation made them lose, but *100* times more skilled?
Results may be bad as a way to check this skill, but the margin of error is not big enough to justify a 100 times skill difference in favour of the one who kept losing.

[Timmmehhh]

[quote]There are plenty of ways they could help without being directly opposed to ODN ... presumably they were planning for this anyway, since C&G was almost certainly going to counter TOP/IRON wherever they hit.[/quote]
Have you been in some kind of coalition channel or is this just your imagination going wild? Notable CnG alliances such as MK, GR and Vanguard weren't happy at all with the Second Unjust war because they had allies on both sides. Maybe MK was going to come on the \m/ side to settle their grudge with Invicta and purple, but we will never know now. Seriously the kind of paranoia that CnG was lined up to destroy TOP and IRON is what caused the silly pre-emptive DOW in the first place. In the first night you saw that the alliances who were actually lined up to deal with IRON and TOP were mainly MHA, Sparta, Gremlins Fark and the Superfriends.

Edited February 1, 2010 by Timmehhh

[neneko]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='01 February 2010 - 06:22 PM' timestamp='1265044967' post='2150671']
Because the only way to be involved in a coalition is to have already declared war, right?
[/quote]
If it is a wartime coalition then I'd say that it's made of the people that's fighting for it yes.

[Titus Pullo]

[quote name='Timmehhh' date='01 February 2010 - 12:35 PM' timestamp='1265045701' post='2150686']
In the first night you saw that the alliances who were actually lined up to deal with IRON and TOP were mainly MHA...Gremlins...
[/quote]

Does this mean that the Harmlins DoW wasn't actually about the TOP/IRON declaration? It would make more sense, that Harmlins' DoW was a premeditated counter to TOP/IRON's actions whatever they might be, than whatever WCR is trying to sell us on today.

[King DrunkWino]

[quote name='Mussolandia' date='01 February 2010 - 12:01 PM' timestamp='1265043671' post='2150640']
There is no TJO-NSO rivalry and it would be nerdy and stupid if there ever was one.
[/quote]

I completely agree with all of that.

[Timmmehhh]

[quote name='Titus Pullo' date='01 February 2010 - 06:43 PM' timestamp='1265046191' post='2150698']
Does this mean that the Harmlins DoW wasn't actually about the TOP/IRON declaration? It would make more sense, that Harmlins' DoW was a premeditated counter to TOP/IRON's actions whatever they might be, than whatever WCR is trying to sell us on today.
[/quote]
I don't know, but I expect those who immediately counter-declared the night TOP and IRON were lined up to deal with them. It sounds more likely to me than: "C&G was almost certainly going to counter TOP/IRON wherever they hit"
I think most people expected IRON to hit FARK who was a direct MHA ally (MDoAP) that might be why Harmlins was prepared to deal with IRON. In general alliances tend to be war-ready to defend their friends and allies.
I don't really understand the "we take a side" attitude at all. We (FOK) tries to look out for it's direct MDoAP allies, we don't only think in sides and attack uninvolved alliances who aren't hitting our allies at all. We weren't on the \m/ side, quite frankly we don't really care for them at all, we were helping out our ally PoisonClan who was in need of help.

Edited February 1, 2010 by Timmehhh

[Bob Janova]

[quote name='neneko' date='01 February 2010 - 05:42 PM' timestamp='1265046148' post='2150695']
If it is a wartime coalition then I'd say that it's made of the people that's fighting for it yes.
[/quote]
So TOP was uninvolved in the Coincidence Coalition?

[quote]Seriously the kind of paranoia that CnG was lined up to destroy TOP and IRON is what caused the silly pre-emptive DOW in the first place[/quote]
I haven't seen anybody from C&G deny that they were expecting to go to war on the raider side during the entire episode, and the prevailing assumption has been that they would do so, so you'd think they would have denied it if it wasn't true. Pretty much every poster from MK, Athens and FoB through the main part of the war was strongly anti-Polar/pro-raider.

TOP posters have said somewhere that they had strong intel that C&G was slated as their counter, otherwise they wouldn't have picked that spot to attack in the first place. (TOP could have crushed C&G at any time for months pre-Karma; contrary to the current popular belief, TOP don't start wars with people they don't like for no reason.)

Had they not been planning to enter, and TOP/IRON had entered on the other side, C&G's tightly linked bloc Superfriends would have probably lost the war and been destroyed. Any intelligent calculation of the balance of power would have led to the conclusion that C&G would have to do something to support SF in that situation.

So I'm sorry I can't drop the list for the main coordination channel (actually I'm not at all, that would be a gross breach of trust and I wouldn't do it even if I had founders in the channel), but no reasonable person would believe that C&G (possibly except GR who have not said anything for the whole time) would have stayed out had TOP and IRON entered the war anywhere on Polar's side.

[wandmdave]

[quote name='AirMe' date='01 February 2010 - 11:57 AM' timestamp='1265043479' post='2150636']
Talk to your boy who threw out the first accusation. There is no political skill needed when you crush anything in your way. And it was Pacifica's political skill that got you there in the first place. You guys just tagged along for the ride.
[/quote]
I dont agree TOP has been this way since their inception, but since Karma I have to agree. Crymson has near 0 political savvy as evidenced by the slow alienation of most of his allies or potential friends since Karma and of course this move. I've always liked and respected the people I have seen in TOP on an individual level, so it doesn't make sense to me how he continually gets elected. Sparta doesnt even have elections and I'd I've called for someones head long ago if we were in the same situation. I guess most of his inept maneuvers that result in these reactions dont make it to the membership.

Edited February 1, 2010 by wandmdave

[tamerlane]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='01 February 2010 - 06:00 PM' timestamp='1265047217' post='2150735']
I haven't seen anybody from C&G deny that they were expecting to go to war on the raider side during the entire episode, and the prevailing assumption has been that they would do so, so you'd think they would have denied it if it wasn't true. Pretty much every poster from MK, Athens and FoB through the main part of the war was strongly anti-Polar/pro-raider.

TOP posters have said somewhere that they had strong intel that C&G was slated as their counter, otherwise they wouldn't have picked that spot to attack in the first place. (TOP could have crushed C&G at any time for months pre-Karma; contrary to the current popular belief, TOP don't start wars with people they don't like for no reason.)

Had they not been planning to enter, and TOP/IRON had entered on the other side, C&G's tightly linked bloc Superfriends would have probably lost the war and been destroyed. Any intelligent calculation of the balance of power would have led to the conclusion that C&G would have to do something to support SF in that situation.

So I'm sorry I can't drop the list for the main coordination channel (actually I'm not at all, that would be a gross breach of trust and I wouldn't do it even if I had founders in the channel), but no reasonable person would believe that C&G (possibly except GR who have not said anything for the whole time) would have stayed out had TOP and IRON entered the war anywhere on Polar's side.
[/quote]

The reason why nobody is denying that C&G was gearing up for war is because **suprise** we were, but no one knew where we were going. With the way the treaties were falling something may have forced our hand to join but seeing as we hadn't and that there is a distinct lack of credible evidence as to our target and purpose, all of this is conjecture. You are simply equating our preparedness for offensive intent for which there are no lines whatsoever. You are trying to paint the picture white with red paint and its not working. I can tell you that the most intelligent post as to MK's machinations for TOP IRON Purple _____ is Detlevs (jesus christ, what have I done?)

Edited February 1, 2010 by tamerlane