The Best Friend an Alliance Could Have

[NoFish]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1284250310' post='2450311']
[color="#0000FF"]Doesn't change the fact it was obvious within the month before the war who was going to lose. People knew Polaris was getting rolled months in advance, and it wasn't hard to hide the fact that people were turning against the NPO.[/color]
[/quote]
VE had a very legitimate grievance against NpO, as you may recall. Polaris attacks a VE ally without giving VE more than a couple hours of notification.

The notion of VE turning against NPO is absurd, since OV [i]was targeted in an attempt to take out VE.[/i]

[Opethian]

If a friend is in trouble, you aid them as best you can. However, if a friend has done something foolish or just plain [i]wrong[/i] you aid them only in so far as they are willing to correct their mistake.

I don't need treaties for this. I just use common sense.

Edited September 15, 2010 by Opethian

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1284501270' post='2453953']
I always find it interesting to see people commenting for stuff which they weren't even around for and know absolutely nothing about. For the record, all of the CoC entered the war, and secondly, and TPF fought just as long in that war as anybody did, they made the decision early on that they wouldn't accept peace until Pacifica did, and they didn't.[/quote]
I was there and I remember it well. Mhawk (the leader of the alliance mind you) left TPF out of disgust for their participation in the mass cancellation on NPO. Mhawk left, reformed his old alliance (Elysium if I remember correctly) and was going to fight for his allies in spite of TPF's betrayal. It was only once TPF realized that they would lose much more than NS if they did not fight that Mhawk rejoined, and it was by Mhawk's word that TPF stayed in until the NPO received peace. Any negative feelings towards TPF's loyalties are well warranted. Please don't make me post this same thing in this thread for a third time. Your revisionism sickens me.

[memoryproblems]

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1284532246' post='2454576']
I was there and I remember it well. Mhawk (the leader of the alliance mind you) left TPF out of disgust for their participation in the mass cancellation on NPO. Mhawk left, reformed his old alliance (Elysium if I remember correctly) and was going to fight for his allies in spite of TPF's betrayal. It was only once TPF realized that they would lose much more than NS if they did not fight that Mhawk rejoined, and it was by Mhawk's word that TPF stayed in until the NPO received peace. Any negative feelings towards TPF's loyalties are well warranted. Please don't make me post this same thing in this thread for a third time. Your revisionism sickens me.
[/quote]

Well, thats where you are mistaken. mhawk was not the leader of TPF at the time of the cancellation, Beernuts was, and he handed leadership of TPF off to mhawk the next day upon his return to TPF. Perhaps checking your facts before you make such claims would be advantageous..

You know, good people make bad decisions, and one person does not make an alliance. And your claim of it was by mhawk's word that tpf stayed in, reminds me of a quote in the thread of democracies in CN where the members vote with their feet. The members of TPF followed mhawk and backed up his desires to stay in the war, so perhaps it wasn't by his word alone?

And to be honest, sickening you doesn't make me feel bad in the least, frankly its rather enjoyable, considering the poor logic you utilize on these forums.

Edited September 15, 2010 by memoryproblems

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1284532560' post='2454579']
Well, thats where you are mistaken. mhawk was not the leader of TPF at the time of the cancellation, Beernuts was, and he handed leadership of TPF off to mhawk the next day upon his return to TPF. Perhaps checking your facts before you make such claims would be advantageous.[/quote]
Just for you, I went back to check, and I was right. Mhawk quoted this log in his post where he left and appointed Beernuts leader of TPF:

[quote][21:03] <mhawk> moo
[21:03] <Moo-cows> what?
[21:03] <mhawk> tpf is canceling, but I am not
[21:03] <mhawk> I'm resinging
[21:03] <mhawk> and fighting[/quote]

Obviously Mhawk was in the alliance when TPF decided to cancel. It says it right there. Just because Mhawk left before the actual cancellation was posted on the forums (by a matter of ten minutes mind you) does not make anything I said false or inaccurate.

[quote]You know, good people make bad decisions, and one person does not make an alliance.[/quote]
In TPF's case it certainly seemed like it. Without Mhawk, they canceled the NPO treaty and were not going to be involved at all. Once he returned, they fought until NPO received peace. So are you telling me that it's more likely that the entire alliance had a sudden change of heart? Or is it more likely that Mhawk's decision as leader of the alliance played the biggest part?

[quote]And to be honest, sickening you doesn't make me feel bad in the least, frankly its rather enjoyable, considering the poor logic you utilize on these forums.[/quote]
Nice ad hom. Try attacking the argument at hand instead of the person making the argument. I speak from a place of fact and reason. Always have, always will.

[memoryproblems]

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1284533491' post='2454589']
stuff
[/quote]

Captain Flinders, I'd like to tell you a little story.

During the Karma War, I was a member of Echelon, whose government structure has two 'directors', who are recognized as the sovereign leaders of the alliance. When the Karma war started to unfold (a night I foolishly decided to head to bed before update) with the numerous DoW's against NPO, our MADP partner at the time, one of the two directors made a rash decision to cancel the MADP. His decision was in no-way respective of the alliance's will, in fact much of the alliance was ready, willing, and committed to going to war regardless of the circumstances. A few hours later, the other director came around, conferred with the Prime Minister and righted the wrong of the other director and entered the war.

Sometimes when things come about in a strange fashion, people make poor decisions in haste. I can't speak for TPF because I don't know what the situation was, but I'm sure there was a lot of haste in their decision-making and in the end they made the wrong decision. As players, we are human, and as humans, we are fallible. As with Echelon, TPF made the correct decision in the end, and while I'm at it, I might as well tell you that the individual who decided to cancel the Echelon-NPO MADP is now a government member of one of your alliance's MDoAP allies.

Even when TPF came around and entered the war (what was it, like 12 hours later?), TPF's membership did not bolt to save their own ass, they followed mhawk's lead and fought until after NPO received peace. If the TPF membership were the kind of cowards that you seem to think they were, why didn't they desert mhawk and walk away from the alliance? The manner in which mhawk handled the Karma war proved that he was dedicated to his allies, and the membership of TPF backed him on that stance. Several months ago they had a change in leadership, and I've had alot of personal experience with their new leadership and I've got no doubt what-so-ever that their dedication to their allies has not wavered with the change. Recently, we've see alliances such as IRON trying to reposition themselves and throwing away ties to the people who stood for them for so long, I see nothing of the sort with TPF. I think its indisputable that being close to NPO is somewhat of a hazard at this point, yet TPF had zero qualms about resigning their treaty with their good friends.

I wonder why.

Your free to think whatever you would like, really. Unlike alot of those listed in this poll who seem to be receiving alot of votes, TPF entered into a war which they knew they were going to lose, and they fought for over 3 months. I know that I consider TPF to be a friend of my alliance, and I acknowledge that I'm biased as they protect Sanitarium, but from working with them for the past half year, I'm convinced that they are the absolute best protector I could have chosen, and I'm convinced that the next time any of their allies asks them to enter a war, they'll be there prepared to do whatever it takes, regardless of the outlook. I'm sure that you could ask any of their allies and they would tell you the same thing.

[empirica]

Our allies that were with us in NoCB have been the best friends anyone could have. Then we had the privilege of adding OSA and Ronin to the list. We've been fortunate with our allies over the years.

[StevieG]

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1284545676' post='2454649']
Recently, we've see alliances such as IRON trying to reposition themselves and throwing away ties to the people who stood for them for so long,
[/quote]

It may seem like that, but the reality is, thats not at all what it is. So please dont just assume/believe what people are telling you without any basis.

[mythicknight]

FEAR, Valhalla, MK, BAPS, PC, NoR, IRON all come to mind.

[Chief Savage Man]

I'm writing in Poison Clan.

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1284545676' post='2454649']
-boring story-
[/quote]
The bottom line is that this poll was looking for the "best" friends an alliance could have. The fact is that when war came to their doorstep TPF blinked. That lapse in judgment obviously brings their loyalty into question, clearly eliminating them from being the very best.

[quote]If the TPF membership were the kind of cowards that you seem to think they were, why didn't they desert mhawk and walk away from the alliance?[/quote]
Many, many have.

[Uralica]

I've been thinking, and I have to wonder if this poll would be better suited to individuals as opposed to entire alliances.

Because there are some alliances with individuals you could bank on going to ZI with you, [i]and[/i] individuals whom one would want to keep a close eye on for fear they might stab you in the back or bail on you when the going gets tough.

[memoryproblems]

[quote name='StevieG' timestamp='1284571879' post='2454841']
It may seem like that, but the reality is, thats not at all what it is. So please dont just assume/believe what people are telling you without any basis.
[/quote]

Perhaps, but I mean, how long ago was it that they canceled on 7-8 of their allies at the same time, and how many of those 7-8 allies entered the last war primarily in defense of IRON? Some of those treaties were only a few months old as well.

[flak attack]

=LOST=

This post has more than one word.

[Rocky Horror]

[quote name='Horatio Longworth' timestamp='1284079959' post='2448247']
Good sir, why isn't The Phoenix Federation on this list?
[/quote]In respect of the people who remember '07, boyo.

[Prime minister Johns]

The best friends an alliance can possibly hope to have is loyal members in their own alliance.

Other alliances have their own interests to take into consideration, and while these interests may run parallel to another alliances interests for a while it is not always the case. But a member's interests are intrinsically tied in with the interests of their alliance so it would make sense for a member of an alliance to be a good friend of their own alliance.

As for what alliance is the best friend for another alliance ... well this depends on the alliances in question and the political circumstances of the time. And this is different for every alliance so it is impossible to give a definitive answer for who is the best in general for this reason.

[Louisa]

[quote name='Prime minister Johns' timestamp='1284725270' post='2456540']
The best friends an alliance can possibly hope to have is loyal members in their own alliance.
[/quote]

So . . . the best friend you can have is yourself? Well then let us all disunite in selfishness, you Alliances out there!




([i]bonus "oh I wish it was '07 (but a bit different)" from me as well[/i])

[memoryproblems]

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1284578176' post='2454922']
The bottom line is that this poll was looking for the "best" friends an alliance could have. The fact is that when war came to their doorstep TPF blinked. That lapse in judgment obviously brings their loyalty into question, clearly eliminating them from being the very best.


Many, many have.
[/quote]

When you look at the poll, almost all the alliances have something or other that would put their status into doubt. A few examples would include:

Listed in the poll are several who have made severe and drastic changes in foreign polices in the time between two major wars that moved them to the would-be-winner.

Listed in the poll are a few alliances who have blatantly violated treaties or rashly canceled treaties in times of war.

Listed in the poll are several alliances who could be called untested. Its easy for an alliance to be loyal when the outlook is positive, its a different story for an alliance to enter a war that they know they are going to lose. While I'm sure most of those would enter such war, until it happens, you simply don't know. I believe Nordreich would fall under this category.

Listed in the poll are a few alliances that have entered into the losing side of a war, but when they did, they surrendered after a very short period while those they entered for continued to get beaten down.

So who does that leave? Keep pimping that logic of yours, but realize that there is some sort of logic that could be used for virtually every entry on this poll to say that they don't deserve the title of "best".

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1284803834' post='2457144']
When you look at the poll, almost all the alliances have something or other that would put their status into doubt.[/quote]
That's super cool. But it still doesn't change anything I've said about TPF. You can try to redirect the focus all you want, but some people don't forget.

[quote]Listed in the poll are several alliances who could be called untested. Its easy for an alliance to be loyal when the outlook is positive, its a different story for an alliance to enter a war that they know they are going to lose. While I'm sure most of those would enter such war, until it happens, you simply don't know. I believe Nordreich would fall under this category.
[/quote]
If you really believe that then you must not be aware that the Nordreich government is largely composed of members who governed the first Nordreich and Norden Verein. Both being rather battle hardened alliances. And I'm more than certain that the NoV/Continuum war tested the will of our people quite well.

[memoryproblems]

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1284807120' post='2457156']
That's super cool. But it still doesn't change anything I've said about TPF. You can try to redirect the focus all you want, but some people don't forget.


If you really believe that then you must not be aware that the Nordreich government is largely composed of members who governed the first Nordreich and Norden Verein. Both being rather battle hardened alliances. And I'm more than certain that the NoV/Continuum war tested the will of our people quite well.
[/quote]

Its not about trying to redirecting focus in any way what-so-ever. Your sitting over there contending that TPF doesn't deserve consideration in this topic, I'm merely saying that by your logic of focusing on finding reasons to discount them, virtually everybody that is on the poll or has been mentioned thus far could be said to be a poor candidate for being the "best" friend an alliance could have.

Frankly, I don't care if you forget or not, I doubt that TPF does either.

As for what Nordreich is composed of, its rather irrelevant, it doesn't change the fact that in the current form, you have no history of entering a war where the odds don't suit you. Sure, you would probably do it, and someday that'll likely be tested, but until you do, I simply can't know for sure, and on that grounds alone I couldn't say that Nordreich has earned the right to be called "the best friend an alliance could have" any more then any other alliance on the poll.

[Carfre Inpor]

STA are the best. No questions asked!

[rrkilledme]

[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1284584749' post='2455026']
=LOST=

This post has more than one word.
[/quote]
MK.

do smileys count as a word?

Edited September 18, 2010 by rrkilledme

[Raider]

[quote name='DragonsPhyre' timestamp='1284081843' post='2448283']
There's precious few alliances that are truly worthy of the notion of being a friend even unto death, and the absence of one of them on this poll does them a grave disservice. The Imperial Assault Alliance fought for the Global Alliance until the point came for them to disband, forever earning a lasting admiration from us. I could ask for no better group of friends and even now, I am humbled by the memory.

The Commonwealth of Sovereign Nations and United Sovereign Nations are also alliances worthy of inclusion, as they chose to honor their treaties to enter the same war, despite facing overwhelming odds and certain defeat. The CSN was honoring the cancellation clause at the time and the USN came in on behalf of CSN. Both are, as IAA, true to their word and worth every ounce of respect I hold for that.
[/quote]
I have to echo this. While I understand you cannot add more than 25 alliances IAA, CSN, and USN all deserve recognition for honorably upholding their treaties in face of what was a curbstomp.

[Cataduanes]

[quote name='Raider' timestamp='1284837323' post='2457367']
I have to echo this. While I understand you cannot add more than 25 alliances IAA, CSN, and USN all deserve recognition for honorably upholding their treaties in face of what was a curbstomp.
[/quote]
I also wish to echo that!!

[alyster]

GATO has more votes than each Fark, IRON, FOK, TOP and TPF.

WTF is wrong with planet Bob?