Invicta Passes Two Million!

[Micheal Malone]

[quote name='Haflinger' date='16 February 2010 - 08:58 AM' timestamp='1266339485' post='2185731']
Polar is still at war, and you're not defending them. If you were, we wouldn't be having a problem.

Instead, you're going off to defend one of your allies who's on the bandwagon.


You know perfectly well this was coming. If you guys had been more receptive to our fairly reasonable requests about zzzptm two years ago, heck, we'd probably have been fighting on your side back then too.

I know that I would have, anyway.
[/quote]
C'mon now Haf, you know better than that. Polar received white peace, everyone shook hands and got off the field. Is it NV's fault that Polar jumped back into the shindig? NV are great allies, and this proves it. Perhaps somewhere down the road we can work closely with them. I personally would like that.

[Locke]

[quote name='Buds The Man' date='16 February 2010 - 03:41 PM' timestamp='1266352864' post='2186072']
It may or may not exist Haf. From what ive heard over the many months since their return, I have heard rumors of an agreement between FAN and Nordreich. There is no issue with NoRs entrance to this with Valhalla. They have been a great and fun oppenent and I do not doubt the legitamacy of their entrance to this war.
[/quote]
I don't think legimaticy is doubted here. They want to declare war? Good for them. What is in doubt is a treaty. Not that they [b]need[/b] one, but regardless, it won't trigger the anti-chaining clause without one.

[M6 Redneck]

So to summerise this thread.


Invicta say they are taking a beating but yet affirm thier commitment to fight to the last.

Some opponents say take our peace offer or it will be the worse for you.

Heads butt.

Seems like we have a stand off.

I suggest those fighting Invicta offer reparations to Invicta to get themselves out of this fight they blatently thought would be easy to win.

M6

[RePePe]

Congrats on the casualties!

o/ Purple

[chefjoe]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' date='16 February 2010 - 10:27 AM' timestamp='1266344869' post='2185848']
FAN was honoring an agreement, just as Nordreich honored an agreement with FAN.

So....no.
[/quote]

Us too.

FAN and Valhalla have an agreement that when one goes to war, the other does too. We are just honoring that agreement and it seems people are irate over it. What honoring things isnt in vogue anymore?

[hizzy]

[quote name='Micheal Malone' date='17 February 2010 - 02:13 AM' timestamp='1266358384' post='2186303']
C'mon now Haf, you know better than that. Polar received white peace, everyone shook hands and got off the field. Is it NV's fault that Polar jumped back into the shindig? NV are great allies, and this proves it. Perhaps somewhere down the road we can work closely with them. I personally would like that.
[/quote]

No, he doesn't know better than that. He wants to pretend he knows what went on between the NV diplomat and the NpO diplomat before NpO redeclared war.

Basically, the rule he lives by is "if I didn't hear it, it didn't happen", therefor, there is no possible way for NV to have agreed to something with NpO beforehand.

BTW, great attempt at making white peace look like a crime. "oh, but they're asking us to abondon our ally... [i]how dare they[/i]... boohoo". I'm not sure if you think our peace terms are going to include us helping your allies who are still at war, but let me just say this; if I see more cases of individuals accepting our lenient individual surrender terms only to jump into peace mode and start sending aid to those still at war, then I'll do my best to see those terms removed and keep those nations in a little black book somewhere. Granted, I'm not active .gov anymore, merely an "Advisor", but you probably don't want to gamble on it.

[Owned-You]

[quote name='Learz' date='16 February 2010 - 02:52 PM' timestamp='1266353578' post='2186103']
And that's where we have a problem. We'll stand by our allies when they need us, it seems you won't. No point in rehashing this point then.


1) They are pleading. Begging might be more like it. See, what we have here is a Pyrrhic victory. Invicta gets crushed, but we sure make things miserable for a [i]large[/i] number of reasons.
2) If they really had Invicta's good fortune in mind, they'd be offering us white peace and be understanding if we didn't accept it. But they aren't.
3) What you're arguing is that other people know what's best for Invicta, and in order to prove that, they have to "drive" some sense into us. WTF? Invicta doesn't randomly run around curbstomping alliances because we know what's best for them and they are just too stubborn to accept it (rather like a certain red alliance perhaps did in the past -- or a certain alliance with the acronym NV).
4) As stated, all of Invicta clearly knows what's happening and is staying. So there's no need to drive sense into the leaders, the members, or anyone else.
5) Due to 1-4, there's no point in rehashing this again, as we are quite firm here and it appears you are equally so (regrettably).
[/quote]

I cannot resist replying to this prior to my fellow Imperator Raasaa does. Firstly, how long had you lived as a recluse? As it appears you have a severe handicap when speaking of politics, or rather the history of it in CN. Nueva Vida has assisted every one of our allies that has asked us too, almost too a fault. Need I cite the No CB War where NV took on IRON, MHA,& RoK (Insert Some Gramlins Too)...far more then your taking now and for reasons far less concrete.

1) NV is the alliance your fighting the majority of your wars with due and we've yet too lose 1 mil NS. Sadly, were not begging for peace nor is our victory Pyrrhic. We've outright crushed you all from the onset of this conflict and will rightly continue to do so until you all deem it otherwise and concede your stances on setting Vidian foreign policy on the subject of this conflict.
2) You were offered lenient terms of surrender. However, we will not allow you all too strategically limit us from assisting any allies whom may require assistance in the future of this global conflict. Lastly, no we don't have your best interests in our hearts. We have our own and our allies.
3) Common sense is what you all seem to lack. Our reasons for entering the war against you, however has nothing too do with that. The reason it continue, however does. Until you wise up and realize that the path your upon will result in the needless destruction of you and your allies you'll be hit. Albeit, I do find it funny you'd label us as an alliance that curbstomps...I suppose NV is now the epitome of evil?[sarcasm] Surely, we've always supported evil acts for our own benefit and orchestrated this entire war for your downfall...History surely supports that...[/sarcasm]
4) We will try, for we are humble and just...Or rather, it's the only thing we can do aside from fighting.
5) Well said, may our pixels continue to rot.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Buds The Man' date='16 February 2010 - 03:41 PM' timestamp='1266352864' post='2186072']
It may or may not exist Haf. From what ive heard over the many months since their return, I have heard rumors of an agreement between FAN and Nordreich. There is no issue with NoRs entrance to this with Valhalla. They have been a great and fun oppenent and I do not doubt the legitamacy of their entrance to this war.
[/quote]
Just for clarity's sake - I wasn't talking about an agreement between FAN and NoR. I was talking about an agreement between FAN and the C&G alliances that IRON attacked.

[quote name='Perkele' date='16 February 2010 - 04:31 PM' timestamp='1266355883' post='2186194']You've put up a good fight, but it's over.[/quote]
Really?

Tell that to opgefokt.

[quote name='Micheal Malone' date='16 February 2010 - 05:13 PM' timestamp='1266358384' post='2186303']C'mon now Haf, you know better than that. Polar received white peace, everyone shook hands and got off the field.[/quote]
This is obviously some new definition of "everyone" that does not include sanctioned Orange alliances.

Or NSO.

[quote name='hizzy' date='16 February 2010 - 07:02 PM' timestamp='1266364920' post='2186487']
if I see more cases of individuals accepting our lenient individual surrender terms only to jump into peace mode and start sending aid to those still at war, then I'll do my best to see those terms removed and keep those nations in a little black book somewhere. Granted, I'm not active .gov anymore, merely an "Advisor", but you probably don't want to gamble on it.
[/quote]
For someone who's fighting on FAN's side in this little branch of a big war, you don't seem to have learned a lot from them.

[Vinzent Zeppelin]

[quote name='Learz' date='16 February 2010 - 02:52 PM' timestamp='1266353578' post='2186103']
To the first part of your post I point to FAN. They got martyred. Twice.
[/quote]

You're completely missing it. FAN was attacked in a war of extermination, agreed to peace, got the rug pulled out from under them, and were subjected to another war of extermination. There was no melodramatic posturing about "honour" and such, and it wasn't about defending an ally -- they were being attacked, end of story. Invicta is choosing to subject themselves to a losing war despite a simple out being available from very early on. Mind the differences.

[quote]
To the second part, does "all parties involved on the opposing side" include TOP and IRON? If not, would you care to rephrase that?
[/quote]

Considering Nordreich and our allies are not at war with those alliances, no, and no I would not.

[quote]
To the third part, lenient terms is relative. But I'm glad y'all aren't calling it "white peace" anymore.
[/quote]

Our terms are lenient by any conceivable metric.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Vinzent Zeppelin' date='17 February 2010 - 12:33 AM' timestamp='1266384816' post='2187155']
Considering Nordreich and our allies are not at war with those alliances, no, and no I would not.
[/quote]
You entered in defense of FAN, who are indeed at war with IRON. I would be very careful about your definition of the word "ally" here.

[Vinzent Zeppelin]

[quote name='Haflinger' date='16 February 2010 - 11:40 PM' timestamp='1266385218' post='2187166']
You entered in defense of FAN, who are indeed at war with IRON. I would be very careful about your definition of the word "ally" here.
[/quote]

Actually, we declared war on Valhalla pursuant to an assistance request from Dark Templar -- so FAN is officially our ally now, even if we do not have a formal, public treaty?

[Haflinger]

Then who is defending FAN?

Please let this not be like the GLOF-57th situation.

[scythegfx]

This is why Invicta is still one of the best alliances in the game.

I slightly miss you guys

[Smacky]

[quote name='Haflinger' date='16 February 2010 - 11:26 PM' timestamp='1266391577' post='2187283']
Then who is defending FAN?

Please let this not be like the GLOF-57th situation.
[/quote]
Your memory sucks. PC declared in defense of FAN because they're cool in our book, DT rolled with PC pursuant to our MADP, NoR was invited to the party through their MDoAP with DT. See? It all makes sense if you use your thinker.

[Choader]

[quote name='Smacky' date='17 February 2010 - 01:21 AM' timestamp='1266398479' post='2187349']
Your memory sucks. PC declared in defense of FAN because they're cool in our book, DT rolled with PC pursuant to our MADP, NoR was invited to the party through their MDoAP with DT. See? It all makes sense if you use your thinker.
[/quote]
Or maybe we have a secret treaty.

Or maybe we don't.

Or maybe we did until it wasn't a secret.

Or maybe we never did but by defending created a presumption of a secret treaty which is now null and void with it's outing even if it never existed in the first place.

Unless it did.

[Starfox101]

I'm glad Invicta isn't surrendering. It's entertaining watching you fall.

Good work NV/NoR/others.

[Nobody Expects]

[quote name='Starfox101' date='17 February 2010 - 10:08 AM' timestamp='1266401281' post='2187374']
I'm glad Invicta isn't surrendering. It's entertaining watching you fall.

Good work NV/NoR/others.
[/quote]

Considering the situation you personally find your [url="http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=265916"]nation[/url] in, I would have thought you could sympathise with Invicta, as you will shortly be ZI, ZT and already have no cash of note.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Smacky' date='17 February 2010 - 04:21 AM' timestamp='1266398479' post='2187349']
Your memory sucks. PC declared in defense of FAN because they're cool in our book, DT rolled with PC pursuant to our MADP, NoR was invited to the party through their MDoAP with DT. See? It all makes sense if you use your thinker.
[/quote]
So you declared on Valhalla because you think FAN is cool, although you had no agreements with FAN. So it was a blatant bandwagon by PC to hit Valhalla while bringing a bunch of their friends at the source of this purple mess.

[Starfox101]

[quote name='Nobody Expects' date='17 February 2010 - 10:33 AM' timestamp='1266402829' post='2187387']
Considering the situation you personally find your [url="http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=265916"]nation[/url] in, I would have thought you could sympathise with Invicta, as you will shortly be ZI, ZT and already have no cash of note.
[/quote]
Really. Well keep watching my nation. I'm not sure who will ZI me, or especially how they will Zero tech me, but I'll be afraid. Besides, your alliance needed an assist from IRON just to stop a 9k nation. Keep tough talking, you're still losing.

[President S O]

[quote name='scythegfx' date='17 February 2010 - 06:25 PM' timestamp='1266395101' post='2187321']
This is why Invicta is still one of the best alliances in the game.

I slightly miss you guys
[/quote]

This is why Scythe is such a great guy. I miss you being on Purple.

come say hello.

[Sigrun Vapneir]

[quote name='Haflinger' date='17 February 2010 - 05:03 AM' timestamp='1266346990' post='2185913']
Valhalla is honorbound to defend IRON against FAN per their treaty with IRON. The Valhalla-IRON treaty has a non-chaining clause, so all the other attackers who are only honouring treaties are optional for Valhalla. [/quote]

[quote name='Locke' date='17 February 2010 - 09:03 AM' timestamp='1266361393' post='2186387']
I don't think legimaticy is doubted here. They want to declare war? Good for them. What is in doubt is a treaty. Not that they [b]need[/b] one, but regardless, it won't trigger the anti-chaining clause without one.
[/quote]

This bit keeps getting repeated so I thought it was worth looking into. Turns out it's simply a lie.

The Valhalla-Iron treaty has no explicit non-chaining clause. NONE.

[url="http://www.cnvalhalla.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=3393"]No Wedge between us[/url]. No non-chaining clause. It is poorly written (self-contradictory on its face) but the only way to get a non-chaining clause in there is to interpret it as necessarily implied by Article II. If you do that then Valhalla was not obligated. If you refuse to do that then Valhalla was obligated and it's effectively a MADPact despite being advertised as an MDOAP. In neither case is FAN in any different category from anyone else at war with IRON at the moment under the words of that treaty.

EDIT for the record regarding the above link: The document has now been changed. I have screenies showing the correct document. I have it from Valhallas own government that they never announced the purported amendment anywhere until *after* I pointed out that the treaty, in fact, didnt say anything like what they were claiming.

Did you really think no one on our side could [i]read?[/i] Seriously, this is insulting.

[quote name='Buds The Man' date='17 February 2010 - 06:41 AM' timestamp='1266352864' post='2186072']
We have put a very reasonable counter offer out there please stop acting like were being $@! hats here. [/quote]

The offer that was made to you was reasonable, the most lenient terms imaginable, and it's a no-haggle price frankly, we came down to the very lowest offer we could possibly make right off instead of asking for more and playing games. Some people thought y'all were good honourable folks that could be dealt with straightforwardly. I guess you taught them eh?

Your "counteroffer" on the other hand is not reasonable at all. The surrendering alliance does not place terms on the alliance they surrender to. I'm sure you all have that speech memorised by now, you just need to make that mental leap to realising that y'all arent so incredibly special that you get to live under different rules from everyone else and then that will suddenly make sense to you.

Edited February 18, 2010 by Sigrun Vapneir

[raasaa]

[quote name='Starfox101' date='17 February 2010 - 05:08 AM' timestamp='1266401281' post='2187374']
I'm glad Invicta isn't surrendering. It's entertaining watching you fall.

Good work NV/NoR/others.
[/quote]
Frankly, i don't see anything entertaining about hammering an alliance.....

[Ashoka the Great]

[quote name='raasaa' date='17 February 2010 - 08:19 AM' timestamp='1266412751' post='2187476']
Frankly, i don't see anything entertaining about hammering an alliance.....
[/quote]
It's still just business. Nordreich has no quarrel with Invicta beyond the current conflict.

It [u]would[/u] be entertaining, perhaps, if Invicta and NoR had a genuine reason to dislike each other. But no, the entertainment comes not from the hammering but rather from the belief by several defeated alliances that they are entitled to dictate what their terms of surrender will be.

I am not in Nordreich's government and have not been for some time, but I do know something of the culture. Until the alliances it's fighting cry "Uncle!" the fighting will continue. It's really that simple. Some could be let go with a handshake and a "Good game, chaps," but not Invicta. They declared war on Nordreich, not the other way around. They surrender or the fighting goes on.

They are, of course, welcome to test Nordreich's resolve in this.

[Learz]

[quote name='raasaa' date='16 February 2010 - 04:26 PM' timestamp='1266355581' post='2186179']
wackydan and Emk123 are the two names that i remember....the others i would have dig up posts :S
[/quote]
Wackydan has been chilling peace mode for some time as a PoW. Unless you're including he sent 1 aid package of "war funding" after surrendering(?). Regardless, he's not Invicta anymore, so not our problem. Emk123 I will look into.

[quote name='hizzy' date='16 February 2010 - 07:02 PM' timestamp='1266364920' post='2186487']
BTW, great attempt at making white peace look like a crime. "oh, but they're asking us to abondon our ally... [i]how dare they[/i]... boohoo". I'm not sure if you think our peace terms are going to include us helping your allies who are still at war, but let me just say this; if I see more cases of individuals accepting our lenient individual surrender terms only to jump into peace mode and start sending aid to those still at war, then I'll do my best to see those terms removed and keep those nations in a little black book somewhere. Granted, I'm not active .gov anymore, merely an "Advisor", but you probably don't want to gamble on it.
[/quote]
It's not white peace >.> kriek's post is an excellent reason why (not to mention being the first post from him I was actually impressed with ):
[quote name='kriekfreak' date='16 February 2010 - 04:30 PM' timestamp='1266355824' post='2186192']
Let's not rehash this "IT IS NOT WHITE PEACE!" discussion please (although I agree with you that it is not white peace ). This white surrender / grey peace (w/e floats your boat) is very lenient, and it will not get any better than this. Invicta made it clear they think it is not in their best interest to accept such proposal at this time. All what is needed to be said is said here. I wish Invicta good luck on the battle field.
[/quote]

[quote name='Owned-You' date='16 February 2010 - 10:34 PM' timestamp='1266377660' post='2186910']
I cannot resist replying to this prior to my fellow Imperator Raasaa does. Firstly, how long had you lived as a recluse? As it appears you have a severe handicap when speaking of politics, or rather the history of it in CN. Nueva Vida has assisted every one of our allies that has asked us too, almost too a fault. Need I cite the No CB War where NV took on IRON, MHA,& RoK (Insert Some Gramlins Too)...far more then your taking now and for reasons far less concrete.[/quote]
The boat's already sailed bud:
[quote name='raasaa' date='16 February 2010 - 11:37 AM' timestamp='1266338273' post='2185692']Practically speaking, i would rather swallow some pride and take peace...only to rebuild and fight another day, when my alliance is better prepared for prolonged war.[/quote]
I dunno what you get out of that, but I read that as "we'll drop our allies if we [b]think[/b] preserving our nations will help in the long run."

[quote]1) NV is the alliance your fighting the majority of your wars with due and we've yet too lose 1 mil NS. Sadly, were not begging for peace nor is our victory Pyrrhic. We've outright crushed you all from the onset of this conflict and will rightly continue to do so until you all deem it otherwise and concede your stances on setting Vidian foreign policy on the subject of this conflict.
2) You were offered lenient terms of surrender. However, we will not allow you all too strategically limit us from assisting any allies whom may require assistance in the future of this global conflict. Lastly, no we don't have your best interests in our hearts. We have our own and our allies.
3) Common sense is what you all seem to lack. Our reasons for entering the war against you, however has nothing too do with that. The reason it continue, however does. Until you wise up and realize that the path your upon will result in the needless destruction of you and your allies you'll be hit. Albeit, I do find it funny you'd label us as an alliance that curbstomps...I suppose NV is now the epitome of evil?[sarcasm] Surely, we've always supported evil acts for our own benefit and orchestrated this entire war for your downfall...History surely supports that...[/sarcasm][/quote]
1) Well, given NV jumped in after we'd pretty much depleted our stockpiles, that's understandable; but I'll let that one go. I should have been more clear, I'm referring to the orchestrators of this war, not alliances being pulled in via treaties. Also, your line about Vidian policy went completely over my head.

2) Indeed, that's where we have a problem. You want to limit us and our allies in this conflict, but not yourselves (which is understandable). However, it should be equally understandable why we may be resisting that.

3) I find it funny you don't deny you're in a curbstomp; not that there's anything wrong with that, just pointin' it out. And also, you didn't respond to my point. Again, you're just saying "we know what's best for you, and we're going to keep punching you until you realize that." Why not read my posts and understand [i]we already heard you[/i], but have decided that what we're doing is for the best. So you can keep punching us, just don't try to crudely justify like that

[quote]4) We will try, for we are humble and just...Or rather, it's the only thing we can do aside from fighting.[/quote]
[url="http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/funny-pictures-this-lolcat-is-for-display-only.jpg"]You could post pics [/url]
[quote]5) Well said, may our pixels continue to rot.[/quote]
...and casualty counts increase!


[quote name='Vinzent Zeppelin' date='17 February 2010 - 12:33 AM' timestamp='1266384816' post='2187155']
You're completely missing it. FAN was attacked in a war of extermination, agreed to peace, got the rug pulled out from under them, and were subjected to another war of extermination. There was no melodramatic posturing about "honour" and such, and it wasn't about defending an ally -- they were being attacked, end of story. Invicta is choosing to subject themselves to a losing war despite a simple out being available from very early on. Mind the differences.

Considering Nordreich and our allies are not at war with those alliances, no, and no I would not.

Our terms are lenient by any conceivable metric.
[/quote]
I guess we disagree then. FAN refused to give in the second time around, and I view it as honor (or pride?) rather then just up and disbanding. Also, terms were not offered to Invicta or her allies from the very start (as far as I know). In fact, terms or negotiations were not even being thought about until I personally made an offhand comment to a certain person which resulted in a convoluted negotiation process slowly starting. The terms, I might add, while perhaps being lenient when compared with most terms during the NPO/Karma eras, should not acquire that label here when compared to the overall picture. But I suspect we'll keep disagreeing on that.

[hizzy]

[quote name='Learz' date='17 February 2010 - 07:01 PM' timestamp='1266418887' post='2187554']1) Well, given NV jumped in after we'd pretty much depleted our stockpiles, that's understandable; but I'll let that one go.
[/quote]

It took you 24 hours to deplete your stock?