FOK Declaration of War

[jstep]

[quote name='Crazy Carrot' date='23 February 2010 - 03:19 PM' timestamp='1266956364' post='2199446']
...and the reason we are now forced to use it. The victim complex doesn't suit you.
[/quote]

I don't believe anyone if forcing you to use anything, You've made your choices and nothing will change that

[AirMe]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='23 February 2010 - 03:00 PM' timestamp='1266955239' post='2199391']
Fully bought into C&G I see. You'd think you could have excluded TOP since there are, by this DoW even, five other over-subscribed alliances to pile onto.
[/quote]

Wouldn't have to worry about your disappointment if TOP and co. wouldn't have preempted in the first place.

Good luck FOK! I love watching your blitzes though the lack of slots prevent a real nice looking blitz

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' date='23 February 2010 - 02:21 PM' timestamp='1266956494' post='2199449']
I don't complain about it, I'm explaining why its difficult for CnG to fight you by ourselves, and why so many people are on you. You guys haven't been engaged in wars and have built your nations quite big as a result. Thus, many people are needed to take you down. Its not a complaint, its just a statement of what I thought was obvious.
[/quote]

While I know you are not complaining about it, to be fair it isn't all about navigating the political waters and avoiding wars. We do take pride in maximizing our efficiency during peace time. There are plenty of alliances (see neutrals and other various alliances) that have avoided almost all the last few major wars and still had no where the peace-time building efforts we undertook. At least give credit where credit it is due. MK takes pride in their ability to spam polls, blow this medium up, and generally keep it "lulzy" for lack of a better word and build some military nations very well. We do take pride in our ability to build nations that are primed for war.

Edited February 23, 2010 by LiquidMercury

[ikMark]

A lot of respect for FOK. You don't hide for responsibility, and will stand behind your allies. It's sad, but I fully realize that this was necessary, and the right thing to do.

o/ FOK

To those who pretend to be mad, and disappointed: Please look in the mirror. How can you think that attacking a direct ally of FOK, and aiding a direct enemy of FOK is oke.. and when FOK stands up for their ally.. it isn't?

Edited February 23, 2010 by ikMark

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='AirMe' date='23 February 2010 - 02:23 PM' timestamp='1266956632' post='2199457']
Wouldn't have to worry about your disappointment if TOP and co. wouldn't have preempted in the first place.

Good luck FOK! I love watching your blitzes though the lack of slots prevent a real nice looking blitz
[/quote]

To be fair, that isn't a completely valid statement. It is quite possible that this may have happened had we taken an alternative route into the war i.e. IRON/NSO route. Since that scenario never played out, we will never know. Either way we'd still have ended up fighting a large portion if not all of CnG due to the treaty lines falling where they would and it is quite possible that FOK may have done this/felt the need to do this/wanted to do this regardless of how we entered the war. As I've said, there just is no way to know but lets at least not be close-minded about possibilities. It's possibilities and speculations that make things so interesting.

[Consul of Monkeys]

Unbelievable. The treaty cancellation was hard enough to take but this just shows lack of class/respect/honesty/integrity...god the list could go on forever.

For everything we did for you over the years, this is just pathetic. I hope people see you for who you truly are. Don't come running back to us when your new friends get bored in the future.

Good luck and all that jazz.

[Bob]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='23 February 2010 - 03:24 PM' timestamp='1266956672' post='2199458']
While I know you are not complaining about it, to be fair it isn't all about navigating the political waters and avoiding wars. We do take pride in maximizing our efficiency during peace time. There are plenty of alliances (see neutrals and other various alliances) that have avoided almost all the last few major wars and still had no where the peace-time building efforts we undertook. At least give credit where credit it is due. MK takes pride in their ability to spam polls, blow this medium up, and generally keep it "lulzy" for lack of a better word and build some military nations very well. We do take pride in our ability to build nations that are primed for war.
[/quote]
I apologize LM, I didn't mean to state that you guys are not quite competent nation builders or have my statements be interpreted as such. I was more trying to explain why we have so many alliances, which I would directly attribute at least part of to TOP's impressive ability to build your nations.

[tamerlane]

[quote name='Yir Yoronti' date='23 February 2010 - 08:16 PM' timestamp='1266956203' post='2199438']

What's the problem MK you still having problems fighting us? Scared for your stats so you need more meatshields to defend you?
[/quote]

Problems fighting you? No. Scared for our stats? Uhh. nope. God Emperor Owabie is always watching out for us.

Just keep in mind that no one forced you guys to attack us and that doing so activated all involved MDPs. I feel sorry for FOK given the position you put them in.

[mhawk]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='23 February 2010 - 12:19 PM' timestamp='1266956349' post='2199444']
In military planning I think about the strategy and number analysis behind things. For the most part, I leave the political aspects to other people (one reason Karma worked so great is due to Archon's ability to maneuver in the political realm and help make the military strategy and numbers work with minimal political fall-out). Though to be fair, I truly felt as though the pre-emp wouldn't have had the political fall out to this degree. I was obviously wrong.
[/quote]
I told y'all it was a bad idea One thing I've learned in all my time fighting CnG is give them nothing to complain about. Once you get them going it's like starting one baby crying in a overcrowded nursery.

[Timmmehhh]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='23 February 2010 - 09:10 PM' timestamp='1266955833' post='2199424']
I'm sorry to see this happen. Now I'm even up in the air about whether a paperless route is the route to go. I thought friendships could exist even without, and maybe this is notice that we have no friendship amongst us, I do not know honestly. I for one would of protested any declaration of TOP hitting FOK in any arena and will continue to do my best to see both parties regain our friendship? I'm just kind of speechless on this one. To me this is the same as Umbrella, Argent, or Gremlins hitting us. Something I never, thought possible. I suppose I'm naive though.

That being said, I wish FOK the best of luck and I suppose I'm still sacrificing my pixels for people I hold in the highest regard, even if they are being sacrificed towards those people. Again words escape me, and I must say the only thing appropriate here is, I'm sorry. Both as a TOP member that has allowed our friendship to degrade to this point, and as the person who proposed a pre-emp attack on your treaty partners. I truly am sorry that you are in the position you are in, due in large part to my own actions.

o/ FOK.
[/quote]
I am also sad to see this has happened. FOK's only interest in this front is only to aid our allies who requested our help, when they don't longer need us our armies will depart the field. I wish you guys good luck and I know you will bounce back quickly after this war.

o/ TOP

[Seth Muscarella]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='23 February 2010 - 01:21 PM' timestamp='1266956499' post='2199450']
That would insinuate that CnG alone would be the destruction of us. Last I checked there are not 21 alliances in CnG. (I'm really not good at this, o/ MK for being a lot better at it, in particularly oyababy (I still feel the need to bring his name up once a week)).
[/quote]
Well allies should always be something to consider when attacking a bloc of 7 alliances. If they practiced isolationist theory, you might be in a much different place

[Hiro Nakara]

[quote name='Tushar Dhoot' date='23 February 2010 - 08:11 PM' timestamp='1266955888' post='2199425']
21 alliances later they still need help taking us down.

Epic is an understatement.
[/quote]

You only have so many slots that can be filled? Whats the problem? Makes sense to rotate whos hitting you, does it not? But I'm guessing if it was you doing it, then it would be a genius tactic.

Edited February 23, 2010 by Hiro Nakara

[jaaku]

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' date='23 February 2010 - 03:15 PM' timestamp='1266956126' post='2199433']
You did have 66 nations over 100k.. its rather hard to deal with that, coupled with the other alliances, we don't have the nations to take on your upper tier that still remains.
[/quote]
I'm calling that one an admission of our epicness. Thanks for the compliment.

Can't say I'm happy to see this FOK. But do what you must I suppose.

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' date='23 February 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1266956903' post='2199469']
I apologize LM, I didn't mean to state that you guys are not quite competent nation builders or have my statements be interpreted as such. I was more trying to explain why we have so many alliances, which I would directly attribute at least part of to TOP's impressive ability to build your nations.
[/quote]

To me the amount of alliances on us is at least in part a matter of respect. I'd like to think this differs then the NPO scenario due to the fact that how we have built our alliance requires this many alliances against us while NPO just pissed off enough people (and it would of been plenty more had we just let everyone who wanted to hit them do so) to warrant 17 alliances against them. Granted, it could be that we have failed so much that we truly have just generated this much animosity towards us. I like to think it's because we built the alliance right though and people have less animosity towards us then they did NPO. Is this a new record by the way for most alliances against a single alliance that are having actual wars and not just ghost DoWs? I'm not sure if UJW or GWIII saw more, if someone could refresh my memory that'd be great.

[Corinan]

I imagine Archons lap must be getting pretty crowded by now, huh?

[tamerlane]

[quote name='mhawk' date='23 February 2010 - 08:29 PM' timestamp='1266956942' post='2199472']
I told y'all it was a bad idea One thing I've learned in all my time fighting CnG is give them nothing to complain about. Once you get them going it's like starting one baby crying in a overcrowded nursery.
[/quote]

Well this brings me back to a time when the NPO sneezed, everyone pulled out a tissue.

Edited February 23, 2010 by tamerlane

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' date='23 February 2010 - 02:31 PM' timestamp='1266957066' post='2199480']
You only have so many slots that can be filled? Whats the problem? Makes sense to rotate whos hitting you, does it not? But I'm guessing if it was you doing it, then it would be a genius tactic.
[/quote]

Yet not all slots are filled. And no we wouldn't tout it as a genius tactic. To me it's just a normal tactic that must be instituted due to the current mechanics involved in the war system. I for one don't blame you, begrudge you, or admonish you for doing it and take it as a personal sign of respect that you do allocate so much NS towards us. Though it may not be insinuated as such I like living in dream world

[AirMe]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='23 February 2010 - 03:31 PM' timestamp='1266957099' post='2199483']
To me the amount of alliances on us is at least in part a matter of respect. I'd like to think this differs then the NPO scenario due to the fact that how we have built our alliance requires this many alliances against us while NPO just pissed off enough people (and it would of been plenty more had we just let everyone who wanted to hit them do so) to warrant 17 alliances against them. Granted, it could be that we have failed so much that we truly have just generated this much animosity towards us. I like to think it's because we built the alliance right though and people have less animosity towards us then they did NPO. Is this a new record by the way for most alliances against a single alliance that are having actual wars and not just ghost DoWs? I'm not sure if UJW or GWIII saw more, if someone could refresh my memory that'd be great.
[/quote]

I am beginning to dislike you more and more every day.

[Bob]

[quote name='jaaku' date='23 February 2010 - 03:31 PM' timestamp='1266957074' post='2199481']
I'm calling that one an admission of our epicness. Thanks for the compliment.

Can't say I'm happy to see this FOK. But do what you must I suppose.
[/quote]
Well no !@#$ its a compliment. I even directly complimented you in the reply to LM

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='23 February 2010 - 03:31 PM' timestamp='1266957099' post='2199483']
To me the amount of alliances on us is at least in part a matter of respect. I'd like to think this differs then the NPO scenario due to the fact that how we have built our alliance requires this many alliances against us while NPO just pissed off enough people (and it would of been plenty more had we just let everyone who wanted to hit them do so) to warrant 17 alliances against them. Granted, it could be that we have failed so much that we truly have just generated this much animosity towards us. I like to think it's because we built the alliance right though and people have less animosity towards us then they did NPO. Is this a new record by the way for most alliances against a single alliance that are having actual wars and not just ghost DoWs? I'm not sure if UJW or GWIII saw more, if someone could refresh my memory that'd be great.
[/quote]
I would think so as per GWIII, and UjW I'm not sure. In regards to the rest of your post, I agree with it completely.

[quote name='Corinan' date='23 February 2010 - 03:32 PM' timestamp='1266957129' post='2199484']
I imagine Archons lap must be getting pretty crowded by now, huh?
[/quote]
Archon lets people sit on his lap? archon why wasn't i invited

Edited February 23, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='23 February 2010 - 08:19 PM' timestamp='1266956349' post='2199444']
In military planning I think about the strategy and number analysis behind things. For the most part, I leave the political aspects to other people (one reason Karma worked so great is due to Archon's ability to maneuver in the political realm and help make the military strategy and numbers work with minimal political fall-out). Though to be fair, I truly felt as though the pre-emp wouldn't have had the political fall out to this degree. I was obviously wrong.
[/quote]

As the OP shows (and other DoWs for that matter, swing alliances, etc), method of execution effects politics, and politics can and undoubtedly will effect the numbers, which in turn effect the strategy. So in a way, it was being stuck between a rock and a hard place with the IRON entry or the prempt, and while being pigeonholed into the IRON entry would have had much of the same destructive result, it certainly would have been less a bit less, or at the very least a bit less sad then what we have here. However, meh, whats done is done, just a shame to see.

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='AirMe' date='23 February 2010 - 02:34 PM' timestamp='1266957270' post='2199490']
I am beginning to dislike you more and more every day.
[/quote]

Just trying a new tune. It's honestly not as much fun. I still like you though AirMe. I do notice though that my persona on IRC is much more enjoyable then my one here which is why I do so try to avoid here.

[Hiro Nakara]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='23 February 2010 - 08:33 PM' timestamp='1266957219' post='2199488']
Yet not all slots are filled. And no we wouldn't tout it as a genius tactic. To me it's just a normal tactic that must be instituted due to the current mechanics involved in the war system. I for one don't blame you, begrudge you, or admonish you for doing it and take it as a personal sign of respect that you do allocate so much NS towards us. Though it may not be insinuated as such I like living in dream world
[/quote]

You guys should take it as a compliment your nations are of quality, that is obvious.

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' date='23 February 2010 - 02:36 PM' timestamp='1266957378' post='2199493']
As the OP shows (and other DoWs for that matter, swing alliances, etc), method of execution effects politics, and politics can and undoubtedly will effect the numbers, which in turn effect the strategy. So in a way, it was being stuck between a rock and a hard place with the IRON entry or the prempt, and while being pigeonholed into the IRON entry would have had much of the same destructive result, it certainly would have been less a bit less, or at the very least a bit less sad then what we have here. However, meh, whats done is done, just a shame to see.
[/quote]

I absolutely agree. Definitely a rock and a hard place, I'm not sure which one I chose haha. And sadly there's no way to play it all out again. The interesting point would be that there would be zero debate in regards to your side thinking this is a separate war from the Polaris war. At least that argument could of been avoided and all the ad naseum related to it.

[Rush Sykes]

Having as many friends within TOP as I have...I can appreciate FOK's position. You have once more, earned my eternal gratitude. Hopefully this will expedite bringing this war to a close.

[merlin]

I am sorry to see further orange on orange violence. I can only hope that FOK's entrance into the war will help speed it to a quick and fair conclusion.