Ragnarok Declaration of War

[Deezznutts]

[font="Arial Black"]Oh dont get it twisted Im not running or refusing to fight. Im all in and doing work. NSO FOR LIFE keep it coming we can take anything you throw at us!![/font]

[Ashoka the Great]

[quote name='Deezznutts' timestamp='1281335003' post='2406864'][font="Arial Black"]Yeah I said it.[/font][/quote]

You and the NSO truly deserve each other.

[PotFace]

[quote name='Deezznutts' timestamp='1281335229' post='2406883']
[font="Arial Black"]Oh dont get it twisted Im not running or refusing to fight. Im all in and doing work. NSO FOR LIFE keep it coming we can take anything you throw at us!![/font]
[/quote]


THERE you go. THAT'S the spirit !! For a minute there you were starting to sound like a deserter. Now pick up your helmet and strap it tight !! And get back out there with the rest of the team !!

[Deezznutts]

[font="Arial Black"]This message is for my little stalker, Stop sending me messages I know what your trying to do.[/font]

[Alvis]

Give'em hell RoK!

As for the rest of the thread ... meh, just give'em hell RoK!

[Banksy]

[quote name='iamthey' timestamp='1281331513' post='2406615']
I like how Rok's protectorate seems to be better at war than rok. Rok attacks in the middle of the afternoon, their protectorate attacks closer to update. Way to show those skills.[/quote]
What a gem. Firstly, of course, update attacks on the initial night are inefficient for (nuclear) warfare. Secondly, it was a response to the NSO's jump into PM.

[James IV]

Yet another Order centered war.

[Caleb279]

[quote name='PotFace' timestamp='1281334442' post='2406810']
Yeah yeah, I know how to do it. But MAN that would be painstaking. Also,

[/quote]

It is...unless you know how to work transparency.

[uaciaut]

I'm getting a kick out of NPO&co calling this out to be a poor CB and a predictable curbstomp. Back in the day even people who hated you would't have argued with this sort of CB when NSO plainly asked for it by accepting a rogue AND sponsoring him before the situation got cleared up.
Hell let's see some linkings to your curbstomps, i want to compare and laugh it out.


On a sidenote i actually didn't want many alliances to go against NSO just because i wanted to see the sith war machine in action in a close isolated situation.

[Dilber]

[quote name='uaciaut' timestamp='1281339017' post='2407053']
I'm getting a kick out of NPO&co calling this out to be a poor CB and a predictable curbstomp. Back in the day even people who hated you would't have argued with this sort of CB when NSO plainly asked for it by accepting a rogue AND sponsoring him before the situation got cleared up.
Hell let's see some linkings to your curbstomps, i want to compare and laugh it out.


On a sidenote i actually didn't want many alliances to go against NSO just because i wanted to see the sith war machine in action in a close isolated situation.
[/quote]


I thought MK fought so that wouldn't happen again ;)

[uaciaut]

[quote name='Dilber' timestamp='1281339061' post='2407054']
I thought MK fought so that wouldn't happen again
[/quote]

When did MK promise to play world police and enforce equal sidings in wars? Hell that sounds more like playing god than police.

Also i thought this was alterego when i read it lol

[Dilber]

[quote name='uaciaut' timestamp='1281339472' post='2407068']
When did MK promise to play world police and enforce equal sidings in wars? Hell that sounds more like playing god than police.

Also i thought this was alterego when i read it lol
[/quote]


I actually don't care either way on it, but I felt somebody was going to say it so I did first.

[Vol Navy]

Pretty sure when we got jumped back around Christmas by a couple of these same alliances we were also told that diplomacy wasn't an option and the DoW had to be rushed by a day because we had a few nations hit PM.

The same song plays on an on, I will say this, RoK and SF were solid enforcers of the old Hegemony and really haven't changed at all. So at least they are consistant.

[Earogema]

I really don't get NSO's policy for the alliance petitioning the removal of a member. Shouldn't NSO check the nation themselves, not have them present proof? It seems like they just hope the rogue they're accepting will just be forgotten about and go scot free.

NSO should have checked his status. If you don't want to work at getting rogues protection then don't accept rogues. Unless you want trouble, which NSO wanted. So there we have it.

Also I really don't get why on earth you'd aid a person being accused of being a rogue while they are getting attacked. I can understand not giving into Rok's pressure, but you don't just aid the goddamn nation. You go to Rok and say "Why are you attacking this nation? You have yet to provide proof (as stupid as having Rok provide that proof is)." Hell, NSO could have had their own CB if they weren't stupid.

Now for the whole: "4k NS is too small for this war to even matter argument." Why not just let him get ZI'ed then? 3 million rebuilds 4k NS easy, or hell, just click on "Search wars" then aid the two guys the rogue attacked with 3 million (he did much less damage, but anything less is just a waste of a slot anyway). Problem solved.

Even if one concedes that Rok had plenty of ways to prevent the war, NSO had just as much ability to prevent the war without being cowardly about it. They decided to do something ballzy and got hit for it.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Earogema

[Alfred von Tirpitz]

I am sure if it had been RV instead of Heft, or Linty instead of Heft or even Lennox instead of Heft... We would still be having beer and watching the game in our nations. Hell even Dopp can see over his dislike of us and not do something so .... i dunno, Heftish?

So now we are at war.


And no NPO, this was not meant for you, this is something that was not supposed to happen and in a sane world would not happen. Just because someone decided to play at brinkmanship, here we are.

[Hydro]

[quote name='Earogema' timestamp='1281342019' post='2407152']
I really don't get NSO's policy for the alliance petitioning the removal of a member. Shouldn't NSO check the nation themselves, not have them present proof? It seems like they just hope the rogue they're accepting will just be forgotten about and go scot free.

NSO should have checked his status. If you don't want to work at getting rogues protection then don't accept rogues. Unless you want trouble, which NSO wanted. So there we have it.

Also I really don't get why on earth you'd aid a person being accused of being a rogue while they are getting attacked. I can understand not giving into Rok's pressure, but you don't just aid the goddamn nation. You go to Rok and say "Why are you attacking this nation? You have yet to provide proof (as stupid as having Rok provide that proof is)." Hell, NSO could have had their own CB if they weren't stupid.

Now for the whole: "4k NS is too small for this war to even matter argument." Why not just let him get ZI'ed then? 3 million rebuilds 4k NS easy, or hell, just click on "Search wars" then aid the two guys the rogue attacked with 3 million (he did much less damage, but anything less is just a waste of a slot anyway). Problem solved.

Even if one concedes that Rok had plenty of ways to prevent the war, NSO had just as much ability to prevent the war without being cowardly about it. They decided to do something ballzy and got hit for it.
[/quote]

NSO has always maintained a policy of allowing CN's "villains" to enter the alliance- just because someone doesn't like him from another alliance isn't enough to stop him from getting accepted into the Order. And how would letting one of their own nations get ZIed not be bending over to RoK? Any half assed decent alliance will protect its members and that's precisely what the NSO did here by ensuring its member could fight its wars and win.

[delendum]

[quote name='Hydro' timestamp='1281343048' post='2407169']
NSO has always maintained a policy of allowing CN's "villains" to enter the alliance- just because someone doesn't like him from another alliance isn't enough to stop him from getting accepted into the Order. And how would letting one of their own nations get ZIed not be bending over to RoK? Any half assed decent alliance will protect its members and that's precisely what the NSO did here by ensuring its member could fight its wars and win.
[/quote]

The fact that NSO accepted that person into its ranks doesn't absolve said person of the consequences of his actions. The NSO isn't some miraculous get-out-of-jail free card for douche bags, it's an alliance. If they chose to readily accept rogues, they must be willing to deal with people that still want to collect.

I don't see how anybody is required to play by the NSO's terms just because their recruitment process is... hasty. If nothing else, it's the NSO that should show some willingness to find a solution, other than saying "we don't care, he's our member now, we'll protect him". Which, mind you, they're entirely entitled to say. In which case you'll get alliances like RoK replying with "well we don't care either, we'll still attack him".

[Earogema]

[quote name='Hydro' timestamp='1281343048' post='2407169']
NSO has always maintained a policy of allowing CN's "villains" to enter the alliance- just because someone doesn't like him from another alliance isn't enough to stop him from getting accepted into the Order. And how would letting one of their own nations get ZIed not be bending over to RoK? Any half assed decent alliance will protect its members and that's precisely what the NSO did here by ensuring its member could fight its wars and win.
[/quote]
Well yes, but here's the thing- They should probably check/know how villainous this person is before accepting them. I had to personally work to get CZ off a ZI list (TORN's) so that he could join NSO. That was for spying. Granted, my attempt wasn't a very good one, but CZ did eventually get off that list and only then was he allowed membership. So I know NSO has standards for the acceptances of rogues/villains of any type- unless they dropped those, which could have possibly happened because I do recall a short stint where Moldavi did say they would no longer accept rogues.

So this whole "Rok has to present proof" is BS to me. NSO could have easily done it themselves.

As for not bending over, that's just it though. What I'm saying is basically NSO should have done this:
1. Ask Rok why they are unfairly attacking a nation that they were told to back off to.
2. Tell allies about the situation.
3. Keep Rok engaged with diplomatic conversation, watch their new member. He's only 4k NS, you can do PLENTY at that level to win/do well in a 3v1.
4. Tell Rok that they are attacking an NSO nation, and that NSO considers those attacks an act of aggression and thus of war.
5. NSO declares on Rok

It would have been so easy too.

They decided to aid a 4K NS nation way too early. It was stupid.

EDIT: That second sentence was really ugly

Edited August 9, 2010 by Earogema

[Hydro]

[quote name='delendum' timestamp='1281343592' post='2407181']
The fact that NSO accepted that person into its ranks doesn't absolve said person of the consequences of his actions. The NSO isn't some miraculous get-out-of-jail free card for douche bags, it's an alliance. If they chose to readily accept rogues, they must be willing to deal with people that still want to collect. [/quote]

I find this ironic considering Chickenzilla is in your alliance in large part because of the NSO. I digress though.

[quote]I don't see how anybody is required to play by the NSO's terms just because their recruitment process is... hasty. If nothing else, it's the NSO that should show some willingness to find a solution, other than saying "we don't care, he's our member now, we'll protect him". Which, mind you, they're entirely entitled to say. In which case you'll get alliances like RoK replying with "well we don't care either, we'll still attack him".
[/quote]

Looks like the NSO [i]did[/i] make attempts at diplomacy, but were rebutted by RoK so that really isn't the case. Let's be perfectly frank here though...this war has nothing to do with a pissant nation of 2k NS and everything to do with NSO's treaties.

edits for accuracy

Edited August 9, 2010 by Hydro

[Letum]

[quote name='delendum' timestamp='1281343592' post='2407181']
If nothing else, it's the NSO that should show some willingness to find a solution, other than saying "we don't care, he's our member now, we'll protect him". Which, mind you, they're entirely entitled to say. In which case you'll get alliances like RoK replying with "well we don't care either, we'll still attack him".
[/quote]

You are skewing the situation somewhat; NSO did in fact show some willingness to find a solution, requesting evidence that the nation in question had initiated aggressions. Furthermore, NSO did not engage in active protection (i.e, attacking RoK nations), but rather sent 2 aid packets. And finally, RoK's reply was not "we'll still attack him", but "we will roll your entire alliance for 6m".

[Earogema]

I should also mention that of course, even if NSO had declared that they would have obviously still lost, but I think it would have been pretty cool.

EDIT: [quote name='Letum' timestamp='1281344263' post='2407196']
You are skewing the situation somewhat; NSO did in fact show some willingness to find a solution, requesting evidence that the nation in question had initiated aggressions. Furthermore, NSO did not engage in active protection (i.e, attacking RoK nations), but rather sent 2 aid packets. And finally, RoK's reply was not "we'll still attack him", but "we will roll your entire alliance for 6m".
[/quote]
See, I really don't get why Rok has to present that evidence when anybody can check it, including NSO. Also 6 million is a huge amount at 4k NS. In fact, I'd say that 6 million is MUCH greater protection at 4k NS than 2 helper nations at the same level.

EDIT2: Actually upon further review, 4K NS is a bit bigger than what I remembered. 6 million is a pretty big help, but I'm not certain I'd take it over 2 nations at that size. I probably would, but still.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Earogema

[Wabooz]

Have fun everyone.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Wabooz

[Kalasin]

Look, the Cyberverse as a whole is currently in the process of rebuilding, including SuperGrievances (but especially C&G, who did the heavy lifting in the last war.) I've spoken to people in ODN about the possibility of war and I *know* that we didn't want war until later, so that we could build up warchests and stuff. The idea that we orchestrated this war to hit Pacifica is absurd. If we did something like that, it would wait until later.

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='Hydro' timestamp='1281344087' post='2407192']
Let's be perfectly frank here though...this war has nothing to do with a pissant nation of 2k NS and everything to do with NSO's treaties.

edits for accuracy
[/quote]

Sure lets be perfectly frank, you are wrong. Its very simple, NSO committed an act of war against Ragnarok. Again to be frank, they had the opportunity not to do so, the choice was theirs they made it and here we are. No amount of spin is going to change the fact this had literally nothing to do with NSO treaty partners, so your edits for accuracy are correct for 1/2 of your sentence. It dosent have much to do with the pissant nation, it has to do with the NSO committing an act of war.

Want to edit it again for complete accuracy?

[Hydro]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1281345648' post='2407220']
Look, the Cyberverse as a whole is currently in the process of rebuilding, including SuperGrievances (but especially C&G, who did the heavy lifting in the last war.) I've spoken to people in ODN about the possibility of war and I *know* that we didn't want war until later, so that we could build up warchests and stuff. The idea that we orchestrated this war to hit Pacifica is absurd. If we did something like that, it would wait until later.
[/quote]

It's always nice if you can isolate them from their allies and push them in directions they don't want to go though, no? Dunno that anyone said anything about drawing them into war...

[color=#1C2837][size=2][quote]Sure lets be perfectly frank, you are wrong. Its very simple, NSO committed an act of war against Ragnarok. Again to be frank, they had the opportunity not to do so, the choice was theirs they made it and here we are. No amount of spin is going to change the fact this had literally nothing to do with NSO treaty partners, so your edits for accuracy are correct for 1/2 of your sentence. It dosent have much to do with the pissant nation, it has to do with the NSO committing an act of war.

Want to edit it again for complete accuracy? [/quote][/size][/color]
[color=#1C2837][size=2]
[/size][/color]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]My edits were done to the previous statement that I made. I stand by the part you quoted.[/size][/color][/size]

Edited August 9, 2010 by Hydro