Concerning the War of Aggression against C&G

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='lebubu' date='07 March 2010 - 12:47 AM' timestamp='1267944757' post='2216722']
Your entire argument is built on the post of one member. Now listen carefully - you'll be in a position to accuse us of forcing our standards upon others when we actually involve ourselves in other people's business. Until then, I suggest you stop using that word you're so fond of, at least regarding our defensive war. When people crash our party, they play by our rules - it's pretty clear-cut, as you like to put it.



I suggest you re-read your post before saying that we have an 'issue' because we didn't comprehend your nebulous definition.
[/quote]

and my argument was with that one person. just because you came in means nothing. the debate was due to what the person posted and my response was entirely based off of that. i called ya'll hypocrites based off of what he said and ain't denying it. i can understand your confusion though. i am not stating, nor have i ever stated that everyone in MK is saying this. i simply make an argument in order to debate said post.

but in reality, based off of your own argument in this post, i can easily call ya'll hypocrites since you are in fact attempting to enforce your standards on TTDiT. as you stated in this very post, "When people crash our party, they play by our rules". while this is perfectly reasonable given the situation, it is still attempting to enforce your standards on others. so i am unclear how your argument actually debates mine seeing as it is only slightly different from the original post i responded to. in case of the original post it was more about the community as a whole, whereas yours is about CnG or just MK. either way, it is still fairly clear that you are attempting to enforce your standards on others (in this case the losing side).

i did reread it. it stated what i said it stated not what you said it stated. also, yeah, my definition was nebulous all the way... while i admit my first definition was not as specific, it was not nebulous by any means. my second definition (the one given to neneko later on in the same post) was more specific mainly due to it giving an example, but still was the same as the first definition. so you can continue to try and debunk/debate my definition but will fail.

the reason why a preemptive attack cannot simply be called a surprise attack is that a surprise attack can be used in the middle of an ongoing war whereas a preemptive attack is done only at the very beginning of the war. hence why it usually contains an element of surprise. i actually figured on people being intelligent and that i would not have to fully explain what a preemptive attack was but it seems that i should simply not assume that and just fully explain everything lest people start with some inane argument in a some desperate attempt to debate what i state. either way, just because i state an attack has an "element of surprise" does not mean that "zomg, it is a surprise attack"...

[Chalaskan]

The fact that the odds are 9 to 1 nation ratio, is astounding, and probably worse then any previous war. (excluding Kharma)

I am surprised many on the opposing side have not peaced out just out of being decent people knowing they are not really needed. Many regretted joining this war due to being called into it by their allies, yet they remain when they have more then fulfilled their obligations.

I guess staying in can help reduce damage to their current allies, but considering the odds...well they obviously were/are not as regretful as they stated. Unless they are currently speaking this over internally, which I have no idea.

Regardless, the purpose for Kharma was to go against these tactics lead by Archon himself. Now there seems to be a bit of the old hedge showing. Maybe power warps, I dunno.

EDIT: The usual, Chal is a grunt, and not a diplo, or gov...don't speak for TOP.

Edited March 7, 2010 by Chalaskan

[flak attack]

[quote name='shilo' date='06 March 2010 - 08:44 PM' timestamp='1267926544' post='2216486']
Well, I guess we should stop insulting each other with offers then, and get to a point where they don't insult us anymore, right?
[/quote]
Personally, I tend to think of anything less than 100% as an insult and it's still less than what I usually require for an unjustified attack, since I usually require payment of opportunity cost on those aid slots, and opportunity cost on this one would be massive.

[Commisar Gaunt]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' date='07 March 2010 - 02:31 AM' timestamp='1267947363' post='2216730']
and my argument was with that one person. just because you came in means nothing. the debate was due to what the person posted and my response was entirely based off of that. i called ya'll hypocrites based off of what he said and ain't denying it. i can understand your confusion though. i am not stating, nor have i ever stated that everyone in MK is saying this. i simply make an argument in order to debate said post.

but in reality, based off of your own argument in this post, i can easily call ya'll hypocrites since you are in fact attempting to enforce your standards on TTDiT. as you stated in this very post, "When people crash our party, they play by our rules". while this is perfectly reasonable given the situation, it is still attempting to enforce your standards on others. so i am unclear how your argument actually debates mine seeing as it is only slightly different from the original post i responded to. in case of the original post it was more about the community as a whole, whereas yours is about CnG or just MK. either way, it is still fairly clear that you are attempting to enforce your standards on others (in this case the losing side).

i did reread it. it stated what i said it stated not what you said it stated. also, yeah, my definition was nebulous all the way... while i admit my first definition was not as specific, it was not nebulous by any means. my second definition (the one given to neneko later on in the same post) was more specific mainly due to it giving an example, but still was the same as the first definition. so you can continue to try and debunk/debate my definition but will fail.

the reason why a preemptive attack cannot simply be called a surprise attack is that a surprise attack can be used in the middle of an ongoing war whereas a preemptive attack is done only at the very beginning of the war. hence why it usually contains an element of surprise. i actually figured on people being intelligent and that i would not have to fully explain what a preemptive attack was but it seems that i should simply not assume that and just fully explain everything lest people start with some inane argument in a some desperate attempt to debate what i state. either way, just because i state an attack has an "element of surprise" does not mean that "zomg, it is a surprise attack"...
[/quote]


Your definition of preemptive attack is uninteresting and ultimately irrelevant, as Supergrievances is now the leading and unchallenged superpower in CN. With the advent of the New Hegemony we'll make sure you get the proper reeducation you need to survive in our brave new world. You seem to be on the right track with the sheer quantity of posts you've been making but as this is the New World Order 2.0™ we're looking for an improvement in quality as well. As your arguments tend to go "hypocrisy hypocrisy hypocrisy just as bad as them ruining the game hypocrisy", I'll be looking for something fresh and new in the future, as well as something that involves capitalization at the beginning of words.

[maguko]

[quote name='Methrage' date='07 March 2010 - 01:45 AM' timestamp='1267944618' post='2216721']
If CnG was just asking for the 30k tech and all concerns TOP has over slot limits and restrictions on them while paying were addressed correctly I think they would be reasonable. I still think 30k is a lot though.
[/quote]

actually we're asking for 500k tech but thanks for the input

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='maguko' date='07 March 2010 - 05:20 AM' timestamp='1267957526' post='2216784']
actually we're asking for 500k tech but thanks for the input
[/quote]
Well I don't think anyone will expect them to pay that, but good luck with that.

[maguko]

[quote name='Methrage' date='07 March 2010 - 05:22 AM' timestamp='1267957613' post='2216786']
Well I don't think anyone will expect them to pay that, but good luck with that.
[/quote]

welp. I guess that's what you think then.

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Commisar Gaunt' date='07 March 2010 - 05:08 AM' timestamp='1267956818' post='2216781']
Your definition of preemptive attack is uninteresting and ultimately irrelevant, as Supergrievances is now the leading and unchallenged superpower in CN. With the advent of the New Hegemony we'll make sure you get the proper reeducation you need to survive in our brave new world. You seem to be on the right track with the sheer quantity of posts you've been making but as this is the New World Order 2.0™ we're looking for an improvement in quality as well. As your arguments tend to go "hypocrisy hypocrisy hypocrisy just as bad as them ruining the game hypocrisy", I'll be looking for something fresh and new in the future, as well as something that involves capitalization at the beginning of words.
[/quote]
As a formal representative of New World Order 2.0™, I hereby request you using commas in their proper places. Thanks!

Edited March 7, 2010 by Ejayrazz

[neneko]

[quote name='Methrage' date='07 March 2010 - 07:45 AM' timestamp='1267944618' post='2216721']
If CnG was just asking for the 30k tech and all concerns TOP has over slot limits and restrictions on them while paying were addressed correctly I think they would be reasonable. I still think 30k is a lot though.
[/quote]
You forgot a zero.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='neneko' date='07 March 2010 - 09:31 AM' timestamp='1267972548' post='2216844']
You forgot a zero.
[/quote]
I guess whatever numbers you are asking for change all the time, although maguko said 500k tech and you imply 300k range, so what you think you can get has went up a lot since those recent terms which airme posted. I wonder how long you can keep so many alliances fighting for you guys when they know the kind of reps they are supporting in doing so.

[Ashoka the Great]

I feel I should get reps[sup]1[/sup] for being subjected to this endless, pointless bickering.




------

[size="2"]1. Not sure who from, though.[/size]

Edited March 7, 2010 by Ashoka the Great

[neneko]

[quote name='Methrage' date='07 March 2010 - 03:38 PM' timestamp='1267972987' post='2216846']
I guess whatever numbers you are asking for change all the time, although maguko said 500k tech and you imply 300k range, so what you think you can get has went up a lot since those recent terms which airme posted. I wonder how long you can keep so many alliances fighting for you guys when they know the kind of reps they are supporting in doing so.
[/quote]
When I asked if you'd whine less if all the reps went to cng I didn't mean that the ones going to our allies would be removed I meant they'd be paid to us instead. The recent terms we offered weren't even close to 30k. That's why I said you missed a zero.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='neneko' date='07 March 2010 - 10:48 AM' timestamp='1267977173' post='2216870']
When I asked if you'd whine less if all the reps went to cng I didn't mean that the ones going to our allies would be removed I meant they'd be paid to us instead. The recent terms we offered weren't even close to 30k. That's why I said you missed a zero.
[/quote]
It seems I did,

[quote]
[s]300K[/s]200k tech to the Complaints & Grievances Union. [s]Up to 150K [/s]All tech may be purchased by TOP from nations of other alliances at their discretion & coordination.
[s]25K tech to Sparta.
7.5K tech and $105 Million to Dark Fist.[/s]
[s]5K tech to The Brigade.
5K tech to The Resistance.
2.9K tech to Nemesis.[/s][/quote]

200k to just CnG without all the rest and I think it would look acceptable in my opinion. However if you consider everything being asked of IRON, TORN, and TSO by you guys separate not likely to be dropped I realize how hopeless this is.

[Town Drunk]

TOP and IRON have both lost sanction. I think it's fair to say that it's time for this war to end.

[neneko]

[quote name='Methrage' date='07 March 2010 - 05:05 PM' timestamp='1267978216' post='2216880']
200k to just CnG without all the rest and I think it would look acceptable in my opinion. However if you consider everything being asked of IRON, TORN, and TSO by you guys separate not likely to be dropped I realize how hopeless this is.
[/quote]
200k to cng from TOP would have been a acceptable counteroffer imo. It'd be light but acceptable.

Their counteroffer was a direct insult though so they can stay at war until they actually show any interest in getting peace.

Also feel like I should point out that neither me nor maguko have any authority to speak officially for mk. We're just stating our own thoughts on this.

[Trace]

[quote name='Methrage' date='07 March 2010 - 11:05 AM' timestamp='1267978216' post='2216880']
It seems I did,



200k to just CnG without all the rest and I think it would look acceptable in my opinion. However if you consider everything being asked of IRON, TORN, and TSO by you guys separate not likely to be dropped I realize how hopeless this is.
[/quote]

If TOP had offered 200K instead of 50K, odds are we could probably have worked out a figure from there acceptable to both of us, and been at peace already. And they aren't going to be able to buy it all from tech sellers, some of it is going to be their own.

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Trace' date='07 March 2010 - 11:54 AM' timestamp='1267981137' post='2216925']
If TOP had offered 200K instead of 50K, odds are we could probably have worked out a figure from there acceptable to both of us, and been at peace already. And they aren't going to be able to buy it all from tech sellers, some of it is going to be their own.
[/quote]
One offers too high, the other offers too low. I say a third set of negotiations should come soon for both to mediate.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='neneko' date='07 March 2010 - 11:30 AM' timestamp='1267979688' post='2216901']
200k to cng from TOP would have been a acceptable counteroffer imo. It'd be light but acceptable.

Their counteroffer was a direct insult though so they can stay at war until they actually show any interest in getting peace.

Also feel like I should point out that neither me nor maguko have any authority to speak officially for mk. We're just stating our own thoughts on this.
[/quote]
When I say 200k would be acceptable I refer to that covering for TOP/IRON/DAWK/TSO/TORN combined with them working out who should take most of the load and no restrictions on buying it. If you gave them a flexible to pay counter offer of 200k or possibly 300k tech total for them combined to pay they would be likely to accept, although TOP has to much pride to accept both insulting and historically high reps. If you want a surrender you need to know how to deal with your opponent and figure out what will make them surrender, which can vary widely depending on alliance.

[Tulafaras]

[quote name='Ejayrazz' date='07 March 2010 - 05:57 PM' timestamp='1267981347' post='2216932']
One offers too high, the other offers too low. I say a third set of negotiations should come soon for both to mediate.
[/quote]
that idea works only in certain amounts. If you go so low or high that the other side feels insulted chances are your haggling will fail (as in one party walks out/refuses to do buisness at all).

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Tulafaras' date='07 March 2010 - 12:13 PM' timestamp='1267982278' post='2216946']
that idea works only in certain amounts. If you go so low or high that the other side feels insulted chances are your haggling will fail (as in one party walks out/refuses to do buisness at all).
[/quote]
They both seem to almost be at this point which would mean the war continuing for a while, hopefully reasonable heads can prevail and offer TOP a reasonable counter offer to theirs that is likely to be acceptable by them.

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Tulafaras' date='07 March 2010 - 12:13 PM' timestamp='1267982278' post='2216946']
that idea works only in certain amounts. If you go so low or high that the other side feels insulted chances are your haggling will fail (as in one party walks out/refuses to do buisness at all).
[/quote]
Which has happened in both cases.

[AirMe]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' date='07 March 2010 - 09:39 AM' timestamp='1267973081' post='2216847']
I feel I should get reps[sup]1[/sup] for being subjected to this endless, pointless bickering.




------

[size="2"]1. Not sure who from, though.[/size]
[/quote]

Blame EJ and Doch. They revived this thread when it was all but dead. And here we all are......

[Tick1]

[quote name='Ejayrazz' date='07 March 2010 - 05:23 PM' timestamp='1267982899' post='2216955']
Which has happened in both cases.
[/quote]

I'd assume it'd be more beneficial for TOP & friends to get a deal to go through. Seeing as they are taking quite a large beating from this endeavor. I do agree that C&G is also taking a hit politically and physically, but I still think they'll come out ahead of TOP & friends if they don't ever decide upon surrender terms.

[shilo]

[quote name='Tick1' date='07 March 2010 - 06:43 PM' timestamp='1267984082' post='2216972']
I'd assume it'd be more beneficial for TOP & friends to get a deal to go through. Seeing as they are taking quite a large beating from this endeavor. I do agree that C&G is also taking a hit politically and physically, but I still think they'll come out ahead of TOP & friends if they don't ever decide upon surrender terms.
[/quote]
What I don't quite get is why anyone thinks it's about TIDTT getting out of this ahead of CnG. That will never be the case, we have all been soundly defeated in this war, who is there to debate this?

However, it's up to CnG to decide whether they can start rebuilding completely unhindered tommorow, and get tech/money on top of that from us, or if they will always have nations fighting them, and don't get any tech/money at all.
Because after this, CnG definitely won't be competing with us anymore, it'll be with other groups. And they can already rebuild right now, and in some cases got reps already.

It's that rationale that I don't quite get, because of the buthurtness so many from CnG still whine about.

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Tick1' date='07 March 2010 - 12:43 PM' timestamp='1267984082' post='2216972']
I'd assume it'd be more beneficial for TOP & friends to get a deal to go through. Seeing as they are taking quite a large beating from this endeavor. I do agree that C&G is also taking a hit politically and physically, but I still think they'll come out ahead of TOP & friends if they don't ever decide upon surrender terms.
[/quote]
They are not too thrilled with rebuilding their enemy. Whether the terms given were lenient or not is irrelevant; it is clear TOP isn't so 'involved' with their stats as some believe them to be. TOP are beasts at nation building, it would be interesting to see them disband, form a new name and gathering, and start off at a clean slate; they neither need to pay for their actions nor rebuild their enemy. The real community is the community itself, the name in which they call themselves is changeable.

Though I admit this is a little far-fetched, it is best for all to move on. The best way is to acquire as much money as possible instead of getting nothing to further help your alliance. Recount the offer with 100k tech. Maybe lenient, but at least your getting both political points and some sort of reparations which progression will occur quicker.

Edited March 7, 2010 by Ejayrazz