Objective of the War on NSO?

[Raider]

[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1281431035' post='2409393']
There has been a viceroy from an SF alliance, thought you should know. [b]Infact a significant proportions of viceroys in history have been from alliances that fought against NPO's side in Karma, thought you should know this too.[/b][i][/i][u][/u][/quote]
*Ahem*
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Viceroy

Of the 9 viceroys there have been 6 were imposed by the NPO. The only Karma alliance to have imposed a viceroy is Ragnarok, of the remaing 2 viceroys one was imposed by the NpO and one by the old GOONS. So much for "significant proportions" of Karma alliances huh?

[Matthew Conrad]

[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1281522818' post='2411020']
Humility through humiliation does not works, just like an apology with the gun on your head.

Regarding history lessons, so one man's words hold you to what you should or should not do? its the words you dont agree with, I dont see how you can be concerned about it. Boosting his ego right here lol.
[/quote]

What? Where did I say his words should be the guiding factor in what happens in this war? I said that's the only thing that would change if this war were ended early with an apology and the nominal 6mil reps.

Humility through humiliation does work, actually. Granted, not for everyone. Also, I doubt the main goal of RoK is to get an apology out of this. Most people go to war to spite their enemy for their actions and not to get them to repent, despite what some moralists will have you think.

[Seth Muscarella]

If it hasn't already been said, RoK will peace when Sedrick is at ZI

But seriously, this should be seen as a lesson to NSO that there are consequences to harboring people under a sentence from another alliance. I know the reasons for war etc wasn't as clear cut as that, but that was the very base issue.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='William Bonney' timestamp='1281430014' post='2409372']
You do know that Viceroys are no longer able to be used by [u]anyone [/u]due to the terms of service, yes?

As for the op, I think everyone needs to sort out the logistics of how this whole war got started (the timeline of events concerning sedrick are still a bit fuzzy)
[/quote]

Hurr durr. You aren't allowed to have viceroys [OOC: if it affects OOC property]. You can still have a viceroy, just has to not have any bearing against [OOC: OOC personal property]. Get creative.

[mrwuss]

[quote name='SpacingOutMan' timestamp='1281559050' post='2411496']
Hurr durr. You aren't allowed to have viceroys [OOC: if it affects OOC property]. You can still have a viceroy, just has to not have any bearing against [OOC: OOC personal property]. Get creative.
[/quote]

Yes you can have them.

I am currently the viceroy of GOONS and GOONS installed me into GOONS.

Sooo.

[commander thrawn]

The objective is obviously to roll brown. Watch out GATO you are next.

[Jrenster]

[quote name='commander thrawn' timestamp='1281565734' post='2411640']
The objective is obviously to roll brown. Watch out GATO you are next.
[/quote]

I know this is just a joke, but there's also some truth to it. With the NSO-GATO relationship broken, Brown is pretty much split. Thanks GATO!

[Moe Szyslak]

When NSO disbands, the war will end. I'm for this.

[Ashoka the Great]

[quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1281568300' post='2411697']
I know this is just a joke, but there's also some truth to it. With the NSO-GATO relationship broken, Brown is pretty much split. Thanks GATO!
[/quote]

This assumes that the NSO is some kind of 'player' in the world , which really is a joke.

[shahenshah]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1281619200' post='2412620']
This assumes that the NSO is some kind of 'player' in the world , which really is a joke.
[/quote]

In context of Brown, they're among the most significant alliances, on other side you have GATO, which seems to be going through a PR nightmare.


[quote]Humility through humiliation does work, actually. Granted, not for everyone. Also, I doubt the main goal of RoK is to get an apology out of this. Most people go to war to spite their enemy for their actions and not to get them to repent, despite what some moralists will have you think. [/quote]

I dont think NSO is the kind of alliance on which humiliation would work, as for the rest, I actually agree, repenting and stuff is extremely stupid, you have your dear moralist friends in Gramlins as an example.

Edited August 12, 2010 by shahenshah

[Jrenster]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1281619200' post='2412620']
This assumes that the NSO is some kind of 'player' in the world , which really is a joke.
[/quote]

I don't think I said that at all, nor does my post imply that. Thanks for taking something and turning it into complete horse!@#$.

[Gobb]

Install a viceroy to ensure NSO would have a competent leader in the future as he passes his knowledge and skills on to a Sith.

[Alfred von Tirpitz]

It is clearly to inflict a regime change. To bring back Moldavi. And to recruit Lintwad into RoK.

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='Thunder Strike' timestamp='1281431287' post='2409397']
1. With NSO's surrender.
2. When NSO surrenders.
[/quote]

While I'm not entirely sure how accurate my info is anymore (I'm not quite on NSO's love list) from what I understand they've been ready to surrender from day 1. So I'd have to guess this is false.

[quote name='commander thrawn' timestamp='1281565734' post='2411640']
The objective is obviously to roll brown. Watch out GATO you are next.
[/quote]

Considering Brown has an alliance in tight with CnG, an alliance in tight with SF, and an alliance that basically ties ex-Heg all together it'd be interesting to see how a roll Brown campaign would turn out.

[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1281619435' post='2412623']
[b]In context of Brown, they're among the most significant alliances, on other side you have GATO, which seems to be going through a PR nightmare.[/b]




I dont think NSO is the kind of alliance on which humiliation would work, as for the rest, I actually agree, repenting and stuff is extremely stupid, you have your dear moralist friends in Gramlins as an example.
[/quote]

Actually we were connecting Terra Cotta and Silence/Nexus/the little guys that were close to SF before we canceled on NSO. We don't honestly have a two sided brown civil war thing going on, because we're not close to the people on the other side of TCP.

[Chief Stubbs]

The objective of the NSO tech raid? Wreck shop, I believe.

[shahenshah]

[quote name='Raider' timestamp='1281537574' post='2411109']
*Ahem*
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Viceroy

Of the 9 viceroys there have been 6 were imposed by the NPO. The only Karma alliance to have imposed a viceroy is Ragnarok, of the remaing 2 viceroys one was imposed by the NpO and one by the old GOONS. So much for "significant proportions" of Karma alliances huh?
[/quote]

My bad, mixed up NpO with Karma, right now, they are on that boat. Outside NPO, you got 3, +1 NPO viceroy going Karma. 4/9 is a significant proportion.

Its good to see that there isn't 'two sides' to Brown, that sphere needs stability and time to grow.

Anyway back to topic, so if NSO is willing to surrender from early, whats or, who is causing the delays?

One thing that is floating around in different discussions is that an offer of peace was rescinded because some people didnt like the way NSO was posting on forums? Is there any truth to this?

Edited August 13, 2010 by shahenshah

[loannes]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1281429807' post='2409370']
I don't expect to see a Viceroy or anything like that either. SF aren't [b]NPO.[/b]
[/quote]

This is a record for mentioning NPO in something that has nothing to do with them. Eight minutes.

I believe it will end when NSO admits they were wrong, apologizes, and hands Sedrick over to RoK. I think the result will be some light reps. RoK won't try to extort them, that would be massively bad PR, and they know it.

[Aurion]

The [i]surrender[/i] will likely be a bit of a sticking point.

Again.

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1281673794' post='2413913']
While I'm not entirely sure how accurate my info is anymore (I'm not quite on NSO's love list) from what I understand they've been ready to surrender from day 1. So I'd have to guess this is false.[/quote]


[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1281711097' post='2414313']
Anyway back to topic, so if NSO is willing to surrender from early, whats or, who is causing the delays?[/quote]

The Sith aren't interested in surrendering.


[quote name='Drakedeath' timestamp='1281711906' post='2414327']
This is a record for mentioning NPO in something that has nothing to do with them. Eight minutes.

I believe it will end when NSO admits they were wrong, apologizes, and hands Sedrick over to RoK. I think the result will be some light reps. RoK won't try to extort them, that would be massively bad PR, and they know it.
[/quote]

I do not like or demand reps, to be honest. I personally have not requested reps since the NoCB War, which was well over two years ago.

[Ashoka the Great]

[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1281711097' post='2414313']One thing that is floating around in different discussions is that an offer of peace was rescinded because some people didnt like the way NSO was posting on forums? Is there any truth to this?[/quote]

I haven't heard this stated by anyone who actually meant it, but I hope it's true.

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1281712806' post='2414347']
I haven't heard this stated by anyone who actually meant it, but I hope it's true.
[/quote]


While it has been pointed out that we find it counter-productive for the Sith to be engaged in peace talks with us, all the while bashing us and making it out like we are in the wrong ... it isn't the reason peace talks have stalled.

I find the repeated posts stating that it is the reason to be the worst spin I have possibly ever seen.

[Jrenster]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1281712402' post='2414338']
The Sith aren't interested in surrendering.
[/quote]


Oh, we aren't? Did I miss something in the past few days? Didn't we just send you a list of negotiable terms which included "NSO surrenders"?

To be clear, we are not the ones stalling this peace process with our obstinacy.

Edited August 13, 2010 by Jrenster

[Heft]

We have not yet offered anything that explicitly says "we surrender." We also have not yet refused any such term, either.

[Jrenster]

[quote name='Heft' timestamp='1281713963' post='2414371']
We have not yet offered anything that explicitly says "we surrender." We also have not yet refused any such term, either.
[/quote]

Ah. My mistake then.

But it is true that we have not refused these terms. So my point to Hoo still stands.

Edited August 13, 2010 by Jrenster

[Ashoka the Great]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1281713112' post='2414353']
While it has been pointed out that we find it counter-productive for the Sith to be engaged in peace talks with us, all the while bashing us and making it out like we are in the wrong ... it isn't the reason peace talks have stalled.

I find the repeated posts stating that it is the reason to be the worst spin I have possibly ever seen.
[/quote]
Can I still [i]hope[/i] it's true. Pweeze?

(Man, you're the worst evil overlord-type ever.)