Announcement from The Order of the Paradox

[Chief Savage Man]

I'm past the point of being confused to just amused at the mess I've helped create.

[deathcat]

[quote name='Bad JuJu' date='06 February 2010 - 10:00 AM' timestamp='1265479238' post='2164777']
On a strictly personal level this seems to be the only logical course of action.
[/quote]


OMG.. I'm agreeing with FAN members

Grub and Polar leadership seem to be spinning in cicles so fast.. perhaps while they are dizzy.. they can start blasting away in all directions and declare on more allies that support(ed) them

[Meer Republic]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='06 February 2010 - 06:40 PM' timestamp='1265481604' post='2164839']
No. We've known from the start what the treaty web looked like. We took polaris at their word when we were told they would not be activating that treaty. Just like we took MHA at their word for not defending us, like we took Umbrella for their word. Though both legally had a way to do so, we take people at their word. At least Umbrella was absolutely straight up with us. What you fail to understand is that treaties very rarely mean anything just like people's word in this game. Sad but true, I saw it in Karma, I saw it again during WWE, and now. Treaties are only a means of convenience, and it has just been proven once more. Right now, the only ones doing it right are Gremlins with their singular treaty and FAN with their secret treaties.
[/quote]

Hold your horses there fella, the only people not upholding treaty obligations between us was you folks. You wouldn't be in this situation had you come to our defence when we had 4 or 5 blue alliances on us rather than deciding to chase after Polar instead...or you know not attacked our treaty partner. Don't even hint that we have not upheld our word. If anything following treaties to the letter we should be hitting you for attacking MK.

[Saber]

[quote name='pezstar' date='06 February 2010 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1265475090' post='2164667']
I do, actually. I completely support the war against your alliance for declaring an aggressive and completely CB-less war on one of my alliances closest allies, after my alliance expressly told your alliance not to do so. Why should I, specifically, of all people know better?

I was there. I know what Grub said. I know what STA said. [b]I know that Grub never actually said he wouldn't honor his treaty with MK[/b], but I also know that it was his intention not to do so. It's war. Things change. I don't necessarily like the way many, many things were handled or approached during this very dirty war, but I'm not going to stop supporting the alliance who has stood by our side for years, just because it's current leader has made some mistakes.
[/quote]
[b][22:48] <Crymson[TOP]> Do you acknowledge that you yourself, before our attacks on MK and GR, stated all of the following: your approval of our war plans against those alliances, your intention to not honor those treaties in this instance, and your agreement that our attack was part of the greater war against \m/ and their allies?
[22:49] <AlmightyGrub> correct
[22:49] <Crymson[TOP]> You acknowledge all of the above?
[22:49] <AlmightyGrub> yes
[/b]

And for your part. You told our coalition after finding out about the plan that you will "play dumb" and claim you never knew of the plan. Really honorable STA. I am sure your allies are loving you for this (and will never trust or respect you for this again).

[kahzaa]

[quote name='Bad JuJu' date='06 February 2010 - 01:00 PM' timestamp='1265479238' post='2164777']
[quote]We could all white peace and roll Polaris. Seems like a fitting ending to this migraine headache of a war.[/quote]
On a strictly personal level this seems to be the only logical course of action.
[/quote]

I agree >_>

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='Saber' date='06 February 2010 - 01:53 PM' timestamp='1265482436' post='2164861']
[b][22:48] <Crymson[TOP]> Do you acknowledge that you yourself, before our attacks on MK and GR, stated all of the following: your approval of our war plans against those alliances, your intention to not honor those treaties in this instance, and your agreement that our attack was part of the greater war against \m/ and their allies?
[22:49] <AlmightyGrub> correct
[22:49] <Crymson[TOP]> You acknowledge all of the above?
[22:49] <AlmightyGrub> yes
[/b]

And for your part. You told our coalition after finding out about the plan that you will "play dumb" and claim you never knew of the plan. Really honorable STA. I am sure your allies are loving you for this (and will never trust or respect you for this again).
[/quote]

How many times are we going to see this little log over the course of this conflict? I'm betting 100-150 times.

[Beauty]

Well i guess when you start losing, you gotta find a way to win, so Polaris decided it was better to hop the fence and fight on the winning side, regardless of what they've said and promised.

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Rotavele' date='06 February 2010 - 02:12 PM' timestamp='1265483523' post='2164886']
Well i guess when you start losing, you gotta find a way to win, so Polaris decided it was better to hop the fence and fight on the winning side, regardless of what they've said and promised.
[/quote]

You realize they're fighting on both sides, not just one, right?

[Krack]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='06 February 2010 - 08:56 AM' timestamp='1265468184' post='2164475']
TOP's actions in Karma might not have been perfect,[/quote]

Actually, they sucked. Pretty much all the way around.

[quote]
No Citadel alliance would have put its name to those terms. I guess you folks on that front would have preferred no help at all and eating that many more nukes, huh?)
[/quote]

Revisionist History - if Gramlins didn't participate in the Karma War, they'd be the ones getting rolled by their former tC buddies right now. You knew that then and you know it now. The whole lead-up to the Karma War started when Gramlins decided it had get out of tC and everyone else said to themselves "If we let tC roll any more of the large alliances (particularly Gramlins), there might not be enough remaining collective strength on Planet Bob to repel future attacks." That was literally, a do or die war. And that's why they did participate.

Edited February 6, 2010 by Krack

[Flyin Hawaiian]

war was fabricated to kill TOP and the purple sphere imo.

[Schattenmann]

So, would you say that Grub is, oh, a snake in the grass?

[TheEraser]

[quote name='Rotavele' date='06 February 2010 - 02:12 PM' timestamp='1265483523' post='2164886']
Well i guess when you start losing, you gotta find a way to win, so Polaris decided it was better to hop the fence and fight on the winning side, regardless of what they've said and promised.
[/quote] Let me make this simple for you.

1. We are not losing.
2. We have not hopped any fences, we merely opened up a new front
3. We are still engaged against GOD/VE/Kronos/and the rest of the ankle biters

does that help?

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='06 February 2010 - 09:56 AM' timestamp='1265468184' post='2164475']
TOP's actions in Karma might not have been perfect, but they did not break an express guarantee given by their own alliance a few days before, they did not switch sides part way through and I thought the Echelon terms issue had been resolved long ago. (They were in the right in that, too, although not in the way they went about it. No Citadel alliance would have put its name to those terms. I guess you folks on that front would have preferred no help at all and eating that many more nukes, huh?)
[/quote]
They had a non-nuclear agreement with Echelon, so we still ate all the nukes.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='elborrador' date='06 February 2010 - 02:50 PM' timestamp='1265485811' post='2164947']
Let me make this simple for you.

1. We are not losing.
2. We have not hopped any fences, we merely opened up a new front
3. We are still engaged against GOD/VE/Kronos/and the rest of the ankle biters

does that help?
[/quote]
Would you agree that if you bite someone's ankles enough they'll fall over and then you can bite their face?

[Saber]

[quote name='Chief Savage Man' date='06 February 2010 - 08:11 PM' timestamp='1265483512' post='2164884']
How many times are we going to see this little log over the course of this conflict? I'm betting 100-150 times.
[/quote]
You'll see many more if I get my way.

[Lucius Aerilius]

How fun

[Saber]

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='06 February 2010 - 08:32 PM' timestamp='1265484764' post='2164921']
So, would you say that Grub is, oh, a snake in the grass?
[/quote]
No, that's a honorary title given out to only the greatest members of TOP. Second best is El Diablo.

[boscher]

This is just priceless, seeing TOP crawling all over these forums

[Bob Janova]

Krack, you quoted my post but what you posted was not related to my words. There's no way Grämlins would have agreed to sign terms like those given to Echelon either.

Delta, I'm pretty sure they at least spied away nukes, but even if not, you ate less nukes and took less damage than you would have done without TOP rolling those nations into anarchy and bill lock. It really doesn't make sense to hold against TOP that they assisted you 90% instead of 100% in a war where they had friends on both sides and could easily have helped 0%.

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='06 February 2010 - 03:07 PM' timestamp='1265486849' post='2164976']
Krack, you quoted my post but what you posted was not related to my words. There's no way Grämlins would have agreed to sign terms like those given to Echelon either.

Delta, I'm pretty sure they at least spied away nukes, but even if not, you ate less nukes and took less damage than you would have done without TOP rolling those nations into anarchy and bill lock. It really doesn't make sense to hold against TOP that they assisted you 90% instead of 100% in a war where they had friends on both sides and could easily have helped 0%.
[/quote]
I stopped holding it against them months ago when Crymson stopped raging at us about the war at every opportunity and tried to apologize for it, albeit in a manner that I still don't believe was sincere. I give him points for trying, though, and I'll let it go.

As such, I won't go out of my way to bring it up or continue discussing it if it does get brought up, but that doesn't mean I won't correct people when they make the mistake you just did.

This is, incidentally, the last I will discuss of this matter here.

Edited February 6, 2010 by Delta1212

[Titus Pullo]

[quote name='Meer Republic' date='06 February 2010 - 01:47 PM' timestamp='1265482036' post='2164855']
Hold your horses there fella, the only people not upholding treaty obligations between us was you folks. You wouldn't be in this situation had you come to our defence when we had 4 or 5 blue alliances on us rather than deciding to chase after Polar instead...[b]or you know not attacked our treaty partner.[/b] Don't even hint that we have not upheld our word. If anything following treaties to the letter we should be hitting you for attacking MK.
[/quote]

It really sucks when an ally attacks their allies' ally doesn't it. You should know since Umbrella's been on both sides of that conundrum...

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Titus Pullo' date='06 February 2010 - 03:36 PM' timestamp='1265488581' post='2165046']
It really sucks when an ally attacks their allies' ally doesn't it. You should know since Umbrella's been on both sides of that conundrum...
[/quote]

You realize that doing so is actually against the treaty they held, thus breaking their treaty, right?

[hizzy]

[quote name='Rotavele' date='06 February 2010 - 11:12 PM' timestamp='1265483523' post='2164886']
Well i guess when you start losing, you gotta find a way to win, so Polaris decided it was better to hop the fence and fight on the winning side, regardless of what they've said and promised.
[/quote]

I have high hopes for you being a great comedic asset on these forums if you think declaring war on both sides of the fence is a viable strategy to win. (hint: it's not. it's actually quite the opposite.)

[NoFish]

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='06 February 2010 - 02:51 PM' timestamp='1265485902' post='2164950']
Would you agree that if you bite someone's ankles enough they'll fall over and then you can bite their face?
[/quote]
So what you're saying is that GOD's basically a zombie with one of its legs shot off?

Edited February 6, 2010 by NoFish

[Chalaskan]

[quote name='NoFish' date='06 February 2010 - 12:04 PM' timestamp='1265490275' post='2165106']
So what you're saying is that GOD's basically a zombie with one of its legs shot off?
[/quote]

No, it is a wiener dog. Edit: (What are they called? Dachsunds?)

Edited February 6, 2010 by Chalaskan