Announcement from The Order of the Paradox

[kpcurley]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='06 February 2010 - 01:40 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]

Where does grub say he wont activate any treaties? I don't see it in the OP.

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='Tromp' date='06 February 2010 - 05:42 PM' timestamp='1265499736' post='2165352']
Yeah, I thought the same for a long time, until recently when I found out how TOP works in back channels.
I can't say that I'm sad that our treaty was dropped as a result.
[/quote]
The treaty wasn't dropped because you found out how we "worked" in back channels and no one believed you were sad over the treaty being dropped. It's been known that you've wanted that to happen for some time.

[Moridin]

[quote name='kpcurley' date='06 February 2010 - 03:46 PM' timestamp='1265500010' post='2165358']
Where does grub say he wont activate any treaties? I don't see it in the OP.
[/quote]

Here:

[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, [b]your intention to not honor those treaties in this instance[/b], and your agreement that our attack was part of the greater war against \m/ and their allies?
[22:49] <AlmightyGrub> correct

[Bob Sanders]

[quote name='kpcurley' date='06 February 2010 - 05:46 PM' timestamp='1265500010' post='2165358']
Where does grub say he wont activate any treaties? I don't see it in the OP.
[/quote]
[quote][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, [u][color="#FF0000"][b]your intention to not honor those treaties in this instance,[/b][/color][/u] and your agreement that our attack was part of the greater war against \m/ and their allies?
[22:49] [color="#FF0000"][u][b]<AlmightyGrub> correct[/b][/u][/color][/quote]
Is this really a tough concept? He admitted it in the log, he admitted it in a thread several days ago, its not even in doubt.

[SeraphimJulius]

[quote name='Moridin' date='06 February 2010 - 11:48 PM' timestamp='1265500116' post='2165363']
Here:

[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, [b]your intention to not honor those treaties in this instance[/b], and your agreement that our attack was part of the greater war against \m/ and their allies?
[22:49] <AlmightyGrub> correct
[/quote]



Well, we can only hope that TOP learns from their mistakes the next time something like this happens....

[Lackistan]

Outraged TOP is outraged. So what else is new?

[tamerlane]

[quote name='Bob Sanders' date='06 February 2010 - 11:45 PM' timestamp='1265499922' post='2165354']
I got a better idea, how about 656,436 tech proportionally distributed to every alliance in this war on both sides and then you disband for the betterment of Planet Bob?



The fact that Grub was stupid enough to leave a blanket white peace offer on the table indefinitely means that he deserves every bit of criticism he gets. Words do not describe how idiotic that was, it was nothing but retarded moralistic crap from a leader with no strategic forethought. He moves since then have continued to show and almost suicidal lack of even caring what happens to his alliance or its allies. It doesn't matter if he broke his word or not, he could not possibly have been a worse ally to all of his allies regardless of side. Anyone who holds a treaty with Polar after this war needs their head examined for brain damage.

Note: This does not minimize the stupidity of the mass declaration technique used on CnG. It would have been easy to declare on CnG alliances not allied to STA and Polar and avoid this particular screwup.
[/quote]

Oh Bob Sanders, you commenting on another alliance's diplomatic actions tickles me silly. ALthough I guess Valhalla is the leading expert on subversive diplomacy

[der_ko]

[quote name='The Observer' date='07 February 2010 - 12:54 AM' timestamp='1265500472' post='2165375']
Outraged TOP is outraged. So what else is new?
[/quote]
Apparently TOP and NpO were never friends.

Good thing I wasn't counting on this non-existent friendship to wage a war of aggression against my perceived enemies.

Edited February 7, 2010 by der_ko

[Haflinger]

[quote name='tamerlane' date='06 February 2010 - 07:01 PM' timestamp='1265500907' post='2165406']
Oh Bob Sanders, you commenting on another alliance's diplomatic actions tickles me silly. ALthough I guess Valhalla is the leading expert on subversive diplomacy
[/quote]
Nice [i]ad hominem[/i] there. How about actually reading and replying to his post?

[SunnyInc]

[quote name='Steve Buscemi' date='06 February 2010 - 04:28 PM' timestamp='1265437729' post='2163574']
You are so pathetic Crymson. Be a man and take your beating. You aggressively attacked C&G. Just like NPO did to OV. You can blame only yourself for all the mistakes you've made while leading TOP to it's demise. I'd be speechless as well if you were leading my alliance.
[/quote]

The facts are out on the table for everyone to see and they all point to the one obvious conclusion. Your incredulous accusations against TOP are nothing more than a lame attempt to clear CnG of any responsibility in this conflict.

[Stonewall14]

yeah Grub told me I could join NpO and fight for them and I was in 5 wars for Polar and they rejected my app after their leader told me I could join and fight so this is just par for the course...Stupid me for fighting for STA's allies in good faith...

[Bob Sanders]

[quote name='tamerlane' date='06 February 2010 - 06:01 PM' timestamp='1265500907' post='2165406']
Oh Bob Sanders, you commenting on another alliance's diplomatic actions tickles me silly. ALthough I guess Valhalla is the leading expert on subversive diplomacy
[/quote]
I'm not a diplomat and I have never claimed to be. I know that is not a strength of mine and I stay away from it. I can however recognize when someone has an "Idiot" sign flashing over their head. Your own alliance was happily bragging about exploiting his mistake. My argument is that all of his subsequent "tough situations for Polar" were caused by leaving that offer on the table. It was an amateur move at best and its only purpose was to theoretically get good publicity, too bad he was up against Archon who has shown that he has the balls to win a war.

[uaciaut]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' date='07 February 2010 - 01:38 AM' timestamp='1265499500' post='2165348']
Keep on thinking that Tromp.
[/quote]

Please explain how you were defending polaris from us, their direct ally and an uninvolved party in the war when we never gave support in any way for m/. I really would like to hear that.

[Krack]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='06 February 2010 - 02:07 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.
[/quote]

You said "I guess you folks on that front would have preferred no help at all and eating that many more nukes, huh?" And my point was, you know damn well that Gramlins didn't just hop in to help out its best buddies on that front, they did so because they belatedly came to the same conclusion that everyone else did: If Gramlins didn't participate, the Karma side would definitely lose and the next target would be ... tada ... Gramlins! And at that point, there'd be absolutely nobody to help them.

So it wasn't Gramlins helping because they are the most generous righteous people on Planet Bob, they fought for the same reason everyone else did - because if they didn't, [u]they were next[/u].

Don't get me wrong ... I generally like the Gramlins, and I think they are pretty good people. But you can save the "We came in during the Karma War and saved everyone's behinds out of the goodness of our hearts" bit because if it wasn't for your treaty with FARK (and thus ties to Super Friends), Gramlins would have been the one getting rolled instead of VE/OV in the first place. And FARK and the Super Friends stuck by the Gramlins for the same reason the Gramlins fought in the Karma War, [b]primarily[/b], because if you didn't you were dead anyways and, [b]secondarily[/b], because they are all (SFs+Gramlins+Sparta+VE) relatively good people that get along.

[King Srqt]

This is all priceless, best war ever.

[Earogema]

Eh, simply because Grub intended not to activate the treaties doesn't mean that the situation can't change. NSO wasn't supposed to activate against FOK, but that's precisely what it did.

However it really was foolish to take that for word. I mean, attacking an alliance that Grub is treatied to then and expecting him to not do anything. You are essentially giving him information AND a way of leveling himself against you. I have never heard of such an idiotic thing before.

[heggo]

[quote name='Earogema' date='06 February 2010 - 08:48 PM' timestamp='1265510892' post='2165797']
Eh, simply because Grub intended not to activate the treaties doesn't mean that the situation can't change. NSO wasn't supposed to activate against FOK, but that's precisely what it did.
[/quote]
If you're trying to imply that we declared on FOK sans the behest of Polar, I assure you that you are mistaken.

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='Otherworld' date='06 February 2010 - 01:58 AM' timestamp='1265439493' post='2163719']
TOP: You won't attack us if we help you right?
NpO: Of course not!

2 days later

NpO: We surrender lol. Bye TOP.

3 days later

NpO: Just kidding.. we look bad for quitting.. we'll save you!

3 days later

NpO: Holy bananas batman.. we aren't on the winning side of this war? Quick.. lets bandwagon on TOP, that way the other people attacking them will still like us
[/quote]

Your time line is a bit off more like "2 hours later" then "NpO: We surrender lol. Bye TOP."

[Moridin]

[quote name='Lord Curzon' date='06 February 2010 - 07:15 PM' timestamp='1265512517' post='2165864']
Your time line is a bit off more like "2 hours later" then "NpO: We surrender lol. Bye TOP."
[/quote]

It was one day later. Also, the 'summary' is incorrect in that Polar never surrendered to \m/. \m/ accepted the terms Polar had proposed, not the other way around.

[Earogema]

[quote name='heggo' date='06 February 2010 - 09:06 PM' timestamp='1265511965' post='2165844']
If you're trying to imply that we declared on FOK sans the behest of Polar, I assure you that you are mistaken.
[/quote]
That's the impression I was under. I guess I was mistaken then.

[heggo]

[quote name='Earogema' date='06 February 2010 - 09:24 PM' timestamp='1265513047' post='2165877']
That's the impression I was under. I guess I was mistaken then.
[/quote]
Indeed. That was true only of PC. The general idea, though, was that if anyone besides PC declared on Polar, we would go in.

[Lord Brendan]

That kind of undermines the whole idea that Polar didn't want this to escalate. If NSO entered at their request, they could have had you stay out and kept the war even-sided and small.

[heggo]

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='06 February 2010 - 09:29 PM' timestamp='1265513367' post='2165886']
That kind of undermines the whole idea that Polar didn't want this to escalate. If NSO entered at their request, they could have had you stay out and kept the war even-sided and small.
[/quote]
Well they didn't want it to escalate any further beyond PC: once FOK entered, I guess they decided they might as well continue with the escalation.

[Kortal]

I don't know what the OP is supposed to prove here. Yeah grub is bouncing all over presumably solely to curry favor with the inevitable winners. No this doesn't change that you ran into war with no provocation and are rightfully getting your @#$% handed to you.

So uhhh, kudos on expanding the "grub is a twat" movement beyond their DoW thread I guess??

Edit: I feel like you could have left things as they were with the other thread and not come off quite so much like one pointing out the faults of others to ameliorate your own :< Far be it from me to lecture you on fa though

Edited February 7, 2010 by Kortal

[Lord Brendan]

[quote name='heggo' date='06 February 2010 - 10:34 PM' timestamp='1265513682' post='2165893']
Well they didn't want it to escalate any further beyond PC: once FOK entered, I guess they decided they might as well continue with the escalation.
[/quote]

Seems kind of stupid to me. They had a choice between fighting a roughly 1:1 war (which I think they would have won in the end), or asking you to join, causing a very predictable escalation ultimately leading to the current 3:2 sides.