Who's Tech Dealing With The Gramlins

[the masheen]

[quote name='amad123' date='23 April 2010 - 10:28 AM' timestamp='1272040111' post='2272090']
Oh now I think someone has opened a can of worms. So here we have the first instance of a nation providing aid to nations belonging to an alliance at war. Since the alliance at war is IRON you and/or the attacking nations assume that this is a perfectly acceptable action to take.

Well before I suggest that all nations sending aid to Gramlins are open for attack lets wait a few days and see what develops. Unlike Gramlins, nations in DAWN and IRON are free to come and go as they please. So anyone assuming a nations that leaves IRON/DAWN is a deserter had better check with the alliance they joined and left.

Attacking a suspected ghost who isn't a ghost may not be the brightest move, but then again one has to consider if these events are random or are they some sort of PR campaign. Only those that are invited into the back rooms are privy to what's really going on in CN. Ninety eight percent of the players are just pawns being played for the amusement of others. DAWN has no back room on our forums, all our members are treated equally and all know exactly what is happening. I look forward to an interesting potentially eventful weekend.
[/quote]


[quote name='Bob Janova' date='23 April 2010 - 12:45 PM' timestamp='1272048285' post='2272198']
So there you have it folks, Grämlins agree that sending aid to an alliance at war is an act of war. They can't possibly complain about having their tech supplies restricted by force now
[/quote]

Who are the war mongers now?

[Fallen Fool]

[quote name='shilo' date='23 April 2010 - 06:31 AM' timestamp='1272018666' post='2271901']It's not your alliance or your ally being forced into such a war by a bunch of nutcases, so sorry if I do more than just spout general wise statements out to make myself look above the "pettiness" that is the OWF, though since you do seem the need to post in the OWF to show you are above it, you clearly aren't.[/quote]I never denounced pettiness. I denounced the faulty logic being used to perpetuate an argument which bores me so that, hopefully, something more interesting can come along.

Rather a petty motivation on my part to be honest.

[quote]Just to inform you though: if you really want to make a strong statement about you not caring for this conflict, why not simply refrain from participating in a thread solely dedicated about the very conflict which doesn't interest you?[/quote]For the better part of the last three weeks I've silently sat and watched as the same people moaned and groaned about the same set of issues they have with the same alliance. It's worse then watching paint dry. Again, all I'm trying to do right now is to undercut the nonsense being used as a justification for decrying Gremlins in the hopes that, by defeating those arguments, the anti-Gremlins chorus will finally let these topics die and the OWF as a whole can be granted the opportunity to move on to another drama which I will hopefully find more interesting.

[quote] That said, considering the possible length of this conflict, the about 5000 tech total shipped to gRAMlins in less than a month are a significant amount, more than 1% total of gRAMlins tech, and this means more damage to us over the course of the conflict, it means we need to invest more money to reach their nations, and that is very much so significant - of course only for us poor souls fighting the conflict.[/quote]I believe Moridin quite adequately explained the lack of logic behind the "4750 tech is going to really hurt us!" argument, but just for !@#$% and giggles I'll go ahead and point out again that every nuke destroys a bare minimum of 50 technology, which pretty much ensures that any technology received will inevitably be destroyed.

Also just going to point out that Gremlins have not launched more than 3 aggressive wars since April 3rd. Just food for thought.

Edited April 24, 2010 by Fallen_Fool

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Alterego' date='23 April 2010 - 03:04 PM' timestamp='1272049468' post='2272216']
The war is over this is something else carried over from the war that’s either an extermination or an attempt to occupy IRON indefinitely without the use of a viceroy. Its an illegal occupation that’s not supported by most of the world and if the jokers who won the war think they can permanently ban aid to or from IRON forever because this is a continuation of that war they can kiss the collective @%& of everyone on the losing side.
[/quote]
My response was to those aiding Gremlins, though it still kinda goes both ways.

[supercoolyellow]

[quote name='scutterbug' date='23 April 2010 - 05:37 AM' timestamp='1272019003' post='2271905']
Can we all point and laugh at the hypocrites yet?

Don't see Gre complaining DAWN/IRON's allies are aiding them now do we. If its fit for one its fit for the other. Whilst IRON/DAWN may be defenders those chosing to aid them with cash/tech are also commiting an offensive act of war should Gre view it as such. So yeah look to yourself before complaining about other peoples behaviour.
[/quote]

Your definition of hypocrisy is foolish. If that's your definition you would be a hypocrite in the last war if you only attacked members of other alliances, and not members of MHA,

For Shilo to be a hypocrite he would have to be sending tech to an alliance that is keeping another alliance in eternal war/ war with mystery reparations.

Edit: Used a word I didn't think the mods would like.

Edited April 24, 2010 by supercoolyellow

[flak attack]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='23 April 2010 - 02:45 PM' timestamp='1272048285' post='2272198']
So there you have it folks, Grämlins agree that sending aid to an alliance at war is an act of war. They can't possibly complain about having their tech supplies restricted by force now
[/quote]
I'm too lazy to look, but I'm pretty sure they've agreed with this statement in this thread.

[Mushroom Man]

[quote name='amad123' date='24 April 2010 - 02:28 AM' timestamp='1272040111' post='2272090']
Oh now I think someone has opened a can of worms. So here we have the first instance of a nation providing aid to nations belonging to an alliance at war. Since the alliance at war is IRON you and/or the attacking nations assume that this is a perfectly acceptable action to take.

Well before I suggest that all nations sending aid to Gramlins are open for attack lets wait a few days and see what develops. Unlike Gramlins, nations in DAWN and IRON are free to come and go as they please. So anyone assuming a nations that leaves IRON/DAWN is a deserter had better check with the alliance they joined and left.

Attacking a suspected ghost who isn't a ghost may not be the brightest move, but then again one has to consider if these events are random or are they some sort of PR campaign. Only those that are invited into the back rooms are privy to what's really going on in CN. Ninety eight percent of the players are just pawns being played for the amusement of others. DAWN has no back room on our forums, all our members are treated equally and all know exactly what is happening. I look forward to an interesting potentially eventful weekend.
[/quote]
Are you really the brightest IRON has to offer?

Edited April 24, 2010 by Mushroom Man

[Bob Janova]

[quote]I believe Moridin quite adequately explained the lack of logic behind the "4750 tech is going to really hurt us!" argument, but just for !@#$% and giggles I'll go ahead and point out again that every nuke destroys a bare minimum of 50 technology, which pretty much ensures that any technology received will inevitably be destroyed.[/quote]
You should drop in on that GOONS thread – or even the one where they declare on CSA – if you think that just because the aided material doesn't make a significant addition to the damage, it doesn't count as a hostile action.

Yes, it will end up destroyed [i]eventually[/i], but every 50 tech is an extra 1% of base damage, that's 1.5 infra per nuke [b]per day[/b] until the receiving nation reaches ZT or the war ends (as well as the tech, land, and damage from other attacks). If the war goes on for another 2 months then each single 50 tech packet is responsible for probably around 120 infra, 150 land and 50 tech in extra damage (if it's to a nation that's engaged of course).

But that's really rather irrelevant because aiding alliances at war has long been considered to be wrong on principle, even if you're aiding nations in peace mode and therefore by definition not causing direct harm to the enemy.

[Wabooz]

[quote name='Mushroom Man' date='24 April 2010 - 06:01 AM' timestamp='1272106852' post='2272916']
Are you really the brightest IRON has to offer?
[/quote]

Clearly he is... That's why he's in DAWN.

[StevieG]

I'm going to try to use some simple logic here.

All the tech that Gramlins large nations are getting through tech deals is helping to them to keep IRON and DAWN under their boot. Why? Well, IRON and DAWN large nations that are in peace mode are unable to complete tech deals while Gramlins nations are free to keep dealing. Yes the peace mode nations can still receive tech, but this requires other banks to fund the deals. Without outside help, or the large nations themselves funding it, it gets a little harder to fund. Add to the equation that Gramilins upper tier is still significantly outnumbers IRONs and DAWNs. Even adding in Gramlins dropping nations, it is still not unrealistic for IRONS and DAWNs success to feasibly require a significant amount of time without outside intervention.

Now lets just say that IRON and DAWN do win the war by slowly building, engaging, rebuilding then reengaging to bring down Gramlins nations one at a time. They will then require a massive rebuilding effort and then still need to pay significant Reps to the AAs that defeated them in the previous war.

Looking at all that it becomes quite clear that C&G, MHA, and their power spheres are indirectly holding IRON and DAWN in terms for a unparalleled amount of time by retaining treaties and not actively looking to "call Gramlins off". That last statement, I admit contains a little bias, but I'm sure you can see my point.

[StevieG]

[quote name='Fallen_Fool' date='24 April 2010 - 04:02 PM' timestamp='1272078131' post='2272681']
I believe Moridin quite adequately explained the lack of logic behind the "4750 tech is going to really hurt us!" argument, but just for !@#$% and giggles I'll go ahead and point out again that every nuke destroys a bare minimum of 50 technology, which pretty much ensures that any technology received will inevitably be destroyed.

Also just going to point out that Gremlins have not launched more than 3 aggressive wars since April 3rd. Just food for thought.
[/quote]

And if they hadn't received that tech, then they would be 50 tech less off, limiting their damage.

It doesn't matter if there arent any aggressive wars right now. When the time comes that these nations engage they will be able to cause more damage do to people sending them tech, thus indirectly damaging IRON and DAWN.

[Arthur Blair]

[quote name='StevieG' date='24 April 2010 - 12:26 PM' timestamp='1272111961' post='2272933']
I'm going to try to use some simple logic here.

All the tech that Gramlins large nations are getting through tech deals is helping to them to keep IRON and DAWN under their boot. Why? Well, IRON and DAWN large nations that are in peace mode are unable to complete tech deals while Gramlins nations are free to keep dealing. Yes the peace mode nations can still receive tech, but this requires other banks to fund the deals. Without outside help, or the large nations themselves funding it, it gets a little harder to fund. Add to the equation that Gramilins upper tier is still significantly outnumbers IRONs and DAWNs. Even adding in Gramlins dropping nations, it is still not unrealistic for IRONS and DAWNs success to feasibly require a significant amount of time without outside intervention.

Now lets just say that IRON and DAWN do win the war by slowly building, engaging, rebuilding then reengaging to bring down Gramlins nations one at a time. They will then require a massive rebuilding effort and then still need to pay significant Reps to the AAs that defeated them in the previous war.

Looking at all that it becomes quite clear that C&G, MHA, and their power spheres are indirectly holding IRON and DAWN in terms for a unparalleled amount of time by retaining treaties and not actively looking to "call Gramlins off". That last statement, I admit contains a little bias, but I'm sure you can see my point.
[/quote]

Our treaties with grämlins are canceled.

So any alliance that didn't already surrender to us in this war, go ahead. Show me your resolve.

[StevieG]

[quote name='Arthur Blair' date='25 April 2010 - 02:45 AM' timestamp='1272116694' post='2272964']
Our treaties with grämlins are canceled.

So any alliance that didn't already surrender to us in this war, go ahead. Show me your resolve.
[/quote]

Do you speak for C&G Gov?

Gramlins - MHA - Fark - C&G

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='21 April 2010 - 05:36 PM' timestamp='1271885779' post='2269585']
Well, at least you guys have made it totally clear: you are backing up Grämlins and enabling their actions by preventing anyone from helping IRON/DAWN, even though Grämlins are clearly in the wrong at this point.
[/quote]

Completely agreeing with this. Sad to see considering how much CnG's side often accused anyone allied to NPO in the past as "supporting" all their actions. Hypocrisy at its finest.

[Lord Brendan]

[quote name='StevieG' date='24 April 2010 - 10:44 AM' timestamp='1272120267' post='2272996']
Do you speak for C&G Gov?

Gramlins - MHA - Fark - C&G
[/quote]

I don't believe he does, but what he stated was publicly available information. The Gremlins no longer have any treaties other than The Harmlin Accords.

[SirWilliam]

No, MK membership does not speak for MK nor for C&G (that's traditionally the role of governing parties). And no, MK membership cannot state one way or another what MK would do with regards to Grämlins (again that's traditionally the role of governing parties).

[Aurion]

Dear god, this is retarded.

[StevieG]

Pretty empty statement then. In addition to pretty much only neutral alliances not being under terms or on "your" side of the last war.

[Arthur Blair]

[quote name='StevieG' date='24 April 2010 - 11:54 PM' timestamp='1272153264' post='2273510']
Pretty empty statement then. In addition to pretty much only neutral alliances not being under terms or on "your" side of the last war.
[/quote]

Everything I said was entirely true and every fact can be verified through public information.

[Lord Brendan]

[quote name='StevieG' date='24 April 2010 - 07:54 PM' timestamp='1272153264' post='2273510']
Pretty empty statement then. In addition to pretty much only neutral alliances not being under terms or on "your" side of the last war.
[/quote]

Without doing a very thorough search, at least UPN, NEW and NSO are free of restrictions.

[StevieG]

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='25 April 2010 - 06:16 PM' timestamp='1272172560' post='2273949']
Without doing a very thorough search, at least UPN, NEW and NSO are free of restrictions.
[/quote]

Hence why I used "pretty much". My point still stands.

[StevieG]

[quote name='Arthur Blair' date='25 April 2010 - 05:56 PM' timestamp='1272171398' post='2273914']
Everything I said was entirely true and every fact can be verified through public information.
[/quote]
Oh god, I said it was an empty statement, not an inaccurate one.

[shahenshah]

[quote name='shilo' date='23 April 2010 - 03:48 PM' timestamp='1272019663' post='2271908']
you can see gRAMlins complaining, and many clearly inviting gRAMlins to act on that complaint or possible CB, I myself am among those supporting a fair treatment of all in this conflict.
[/quote]
Hey, it'll take us one step closer to knowing what the damn CB is!

[Arthur Blair]

[quote name='StevieG' date='25 April 2010 - 01:19 PM' timestamp='1272201544' post='2274257']
Oh god, I said it was an empty statement, not an inaccurate one.
[/quote]

Would it be fuller if I was government? I'm sure I can weasel myself into some sort of position rather quickly, but then I expect a bunch of alliances to declare on grämlins on my say-so. My statement will be so full and rich with meaning and undertones...

[Lord Brendan]

[quote name='StevieG' date='25 April 2010 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1272201468' post='2274256']
Hence why I used "pretty much". My point still stands.
[/quote]

Any of those three alliances (except NSO, they probably don't have much of an upper tier at the moment) could swing the war completely in IRON's favor.

[StevieG]

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='26 April 2010 - 03:32 AM' timestamp='1272205955' post='2274288']
Any of those three alliances (except NSO, they probably don't have much of an upper tier at the moment) could swing the war completely in IRON's favor.
[/quote]
And subject themselves to a beatdown due to not only the majority of their friends being in terms. I fail to see where you are going with this as it seems you are taking it further and further off course. Dont even know what we are debating here anymore, just debating for the sake of it, it seems.