A Dark Templar Announcement

[The Trail]

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1297885584' post='2635835']
Err, maybe for you guys sure, but you don't win coalition wars by cherry-picking targets like you did here. You don't take heat off of your allies by taking the target that gives you the highest opportunity for success. Maybe you should re-think that strategy if you don't want people calling you opportunistic, and then treating you like an opportunistic alliance who they want to punish for hitting the 'easy' target.
[/quote]

actually that is the way you take heat of your allies. Its why Goons is being attacked. Once GOONS is out of the picture they can focus on the other alliances in the war.

some examples on exploiting weaknesses / oppertunities
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/weak+point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flanking_maneuver

that said somebody already stated that legacy definatly wasnt the easiest target for DT to take, I have to agree with that

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1297887921' post='2635868']
I run the military for the alliance kicking the snot out of your buddies.

Your 'years of war organization' obviously have not led to many successes it appears. Years of experience at losing and accepting losing must make you very good at losing.
[/quote]


I find that sorta funny. the first bit not the second bit

Edited February 16, 2011 by The Trail

[Tromp]

[quote name='raasaa' timestamp='1297884829' post='2635825']
Someone from LoSS just cleared that up....stating LoSS had no idea TIO was getting peace within a week. If they had known, they would not have asked DT to help them with Legacy.
[/quote]
If you refer to CGB's post, I read that as him saying TIO wasn't yet ready to go out yet.
That doesn't however mean they weren't made aware of the offer.

All in all, this all looks like a big communication failure to me. Something that you wouldn't expect to happen between close allies. Whether on purpose or not, it has lead to a complicated situation.

[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1297884920' post='2635827']
In a war, you generally attack those who give you the highest [b]opportunity[/b] for success.
[/quote]
So... this means you should have attacked CSN, if I am to believe some of the people from DT/LoSS? Please make up your minds.

But alright, it seems you do believe there was a bit of opportunism involved. I guess I don't have to bother arguing that further.

[Joseph Black]

[quote name='AuiNur' timestamp='1297891029' post='2635913']
Loss said it many times in this thread that they requested help with legacy. And fortunately we are not at the point where people tell full blown lies, I would hope. For now, it is apparently just the constant spinning of arguments.

We expected the counter from csn and we knew what we were doing. MDPs and ODPs after all, are still both [b]defense pact treaties[/b]. The only difference is the single word in front of them, and only a fool would think that neither contained honor nor friendship.
[/quote]

I agree with you 100%, I was simply giving my 2 cents on it, if you read all of my post you know that I also made the same comment as to the ODP/MDP comment, personally I think we should have way more ODP's than MDP's and even fewer MDoAP. Because of the nature of 99% of treaties a MDP is optional anyway, it would be better for both alliances to sign ODP's and limit MDP's for those alliances who have proven their commitment, take your allies in Valhalla for example, this wouldn't be an issue if they put their full support behind you.

Alliances shouldn't ignore or choose to not activate MDP's, regardless of the reason, a Mutual Defense Pact is just that a defense pact, don't sign them if you can't uphold them, they should be honored no matter what the reason, and an ODP solves the issue of alliances that aren't willing to commit to ever possible situation. Personally I would be personally offended were I in your shoes and a MDP partner chose to not come to my aid.

Edited February 16, 2011 by Muddog

[MaGneT]

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1297887921' post='2635868']
Your 'years of war organization' obviously have not led to many successes it appears. Years of experience at losing and accepting losing must make you very good at losing.
[/quote]
Just noticed this garbage that you're implying. I'm not one for chest puffing, but if you think that losing is my specialty, well, you've clearly never met me nor anyone associated with me. Anyway, back to the topic.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1297889153' post='2635887']
Really? You accepted a surrender from my alliance? What was your role in that surrender, again?[/quote]

GOD was defeated along with the rest of the Unjust Path by "~" a coalition that contained NoV, which was formed in the Interregnum period between the old and new Nordreichs. That could be the reference.

[quote]With an attitude like that, it's no wonder [b]your[/b] alliance tucked its tail and surrendered to an alliance it was soundly beating at the mere mention of GOD joining your front.[/quote]

I think it's funny how you think NoR is afraid of your alliance...it's not, and neither are its allies.

[chefjoe]

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1297889153' post='2635887']
Really? You accepted a surrender from my alliance? What was your role in that surrender, again?
With an attitude like that, it's no wonder [b]your[/b] alliance tucked its tail and surrendered to an alliance it was soundly beating at the mere mention of GOD joining your front.
[/quote]

LOL

hey toughguy, why dont you go 1v1 with NoR?

Because they would stomp a MUDHOLE in your ass. Only way GOD would EVER fight NoR is with friends......lots of em

So NO, whatever NoR's reasons for peacing out that front were, being afraid of GOD isnt one of them.

Edited February 16, 2011 by chefjoe

[EViL0nE]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1297892299' post='2635942']
GOD was defeated along with the rest of the Unjust Path by "~" a coalition that contained NoV, which was formed in the Interregnum period between the old and new Nordreichs. That could be the reference.

I think it's funny how you think NoR is afraid of your alliance...it's not, and neither are its allies.
[/quote]
I understand the history of my alliance. I'm questioning his statement that he accepted a surrender from my alliance. As far as I can tell, he had no part in surrender negotiations.

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1297892404' post='2635947']
LOL

hey toughguy, why dont you go 1v1 with NoR?

Because they would stomp a MUDHOLE in your ass. Only way GOD would EVER fight NoR is with friends......lots of em

So NO, whatever NoR's reasons for peacing out that front were, being afraid of GOD isnt one of them.
[/quote]
...and yet they surrendered to an alliance they were soundly defeating the minute rumors started to circulate that GOD may enter their front.
Talk all the lol1v1 trash you want, the facts are fairly simple. NoR surrendered in a battle it was winning.

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='The Great One' timestamp='1297889391' post='2635890']
Ad hominem I see. I take it that is your method of admitting defeat?
[/quote]

No its my way of saying you are so out of touch with reality I could ask you what color the sky was and you'd say pink.

Its my way of saying your posts are such garbage I'd have to pay extra to get the trash man to take them away.

Its my way of saying that your arguments and positions are so ridiculous as to not even merit reply.

Its my way of saying you are a waste of time and effort and moving on.

Was that specific enough for you?

[Monster]

[quote name='The Trail' timestamp='1297891439' post='2635919']
actually that is the way you take heat of your allies. Its why Goons is being attacked. Once GOONS is out of the picture they can focus on the other alliances in the war.

some examples on exploiting weaknesses / oppertunities
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/weak+point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flanking_maneuver

that said somebody already stated that legacy definatly wasnt the easiest target for DT to take, I have to agree with that




I find that sorta funny. the first bit not the second bit
[/quote]


How will GOONS be out of the picture? How does it free anyone up when goons are in a certain range and the others aren't? It was the same thing with the iFOK maneuver and they didn't even really break iFOK.

[Centurius]

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1297893890' post='2635980']
I understand the history of my alliance. I'm questioning his statement that he accepted a surrender from my alliance. As far as I can tell, he had no part in surrender negotiations.


...and yet they surrendered to an alliance they were soundly defeating the minute rumors started to circulate that GOD may enter their front.
Talk all the lol1v1 trash you want, the facts are fairly simple. NoR surrendered in a battle it was winning.
[/quote]

...and yet you comment on matters you have no knowledge of. Start talking about it when you actually were in the backrooms, the risk GOD might DoW was known well before Nordreich entered. Nice try boosting your ego though.

[chefjoe]

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1297893890' post='2635980']
I understand the history of my alliance. I'm questioning his statement that he accepted a surrender from my alliance. As far as I can tell, he had no part in surrender negotiations.


...and yet they surrendered to an alliance they were soundly defeating the minute rumors started to circulate that GOD may enter their front.
Talk all the lol1v1 trash you want, the facts are fairly simple. NoR surrendered in a battle it was winning.
[/quote]

Call it lol1v1 all you want, it still boils down to the fact you will never accept such a challenge as NoR without bringing a brigade of followers for back up.

As for NoR's exit, even in your own words they were 'winning', so try and downplay that fact all you want by crying out they surrendered. In my book exiting a battlefield with no reps or terms basicly after !@#$@#$ up ones opponents soundly isnt exactly a embarrasing moment you try and paint it as.

Edited February 16, 2011 by chefjoe

[EViL0nE]

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1297895133' post='2636002']
Call it lol1v1 all you want, it still boils down to the fact you will never accept such a challenge as NoR without bringing a brigade of followers for back up.

As for NoR's exit, even in your own words they were 'winning', so try and downplay that fact all you want by crying out they surrendered. In my book exiting a battlefield with no reps or terms basicly after !@#$@#$ up ones opponents soundly isnt exactly a embarrasing moment you try and paint it as.
[/quote]

...wait, I thought the losing side usually considered "and xxx shall not reenter the war" a term and thus not really white peace? That changed?

Edit: Changed "your side" to "losing side"

Edited February 16, 2011 by EViL0nE

[Coloradia]

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1297893959' post='2635982']
No its my way of saying you are so out of touch with reality I could ask you what color the sky was and you'd say pink.

Its my way of saying your posts are such garbage I'd have to pay extra to get the trash man to take them away.

Its my way of saying that your arguments and positions are so ridiculous as to not even merit reply.

Its my way of saying you are a waste of time and effort and moving on.

Was that specific enough for you?

[b]tldr: I have nothing of value and my argument has no basis in fact. Therefore I must resort to attacking the poster because I know I have nothing to stand on.[/b][/quote]
Added the tldr for you. You're welcome. Now if you can actually backup anything you've said, or refute my point please do. Otherwise it's just more VE trash posting that is so terrible it doesn't even count as spin or propaganda. Now you could be a man and admit you are wrong, or you can continue to look like a clueless bumbling fool, which as accurate as it may be, surely is not what you are aiming for.

[chefjoe]

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1297895484' post='2636009']
...wait, I thought the losing side usually considered "and xxx shall not reenter the war" a term and thus not really white peace? That changed?

Edit: Changed "your side" to "losing side"
[/quote]

Wow, are you really trying to reach that deep to try and find fault with what I said? lol

Well since you put in so much effort trying to find the 'chink' in my armor, ill go ahead and answer your riposte'

notice I said 'basicly'. so yes they have a no rentry clause. Ohnoes the world is ending.......they still $%&@ed up their opponents(in your own words since they were winning) and exited the battle. Also heres a pro-tip, when someone exits a battlefield its generally with the intent of not returning so the clause isnt much of a clause.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1297885584' post='2635835']
Err, maybe for you guys sure, but you don't win coalition wars by cherry-picking targets like you did here. You don't take heat off of your allies by taking the target that gives you the highest opportunity for success. Maybe you should re-think that strategy if you don't want people calling you opportunistic, and then treating you like an opportunistic alliance who they want to punish for hitting the 'easy' target.
[/quote]

we did not cherry pick. Legacy was the alliance giving LoSS the most issues. So we hit the toughest opponent against LoSS. not sure how that is cherry picking? and again, i understand ya'll need some propaganda points but ya'll keep calling Legacy and easy target, weak, and so on and so forth. while it is amusing, i honestly wonder how Legacy feels at being continuously insulted by their own side.

[quote name='sammykhalifa' timestamp='1297888016' post='2635870']
Of course nobody KNOWS when the peace is going to happen specifically, any time. I wasn't involved in the talks personally, but I do kinda have a stake in this so I have been following things pretty closely. More and more fronts were closing by the day. It was pretty easy to see how things were going and realize that it was going to get there rather quickly barring complication (IMO). Dragging more allies into a fight when your stated goal is to get your allies out of the fight seems pretty counter-intuitive.

I love though that--depending on who you listen to--Legacy is either an insignificant and helpless tech-raid target or some sort of Unstoppable Death Machine.
[/quote]

well i do agree some with your first point, let us also point out that since we have established that peace is never certain, then why suffer more damage? why should LoSS have to take an even larger beating while wondering when TIO would peace out? if it had occurred a month later, what good would that have done LoSS? absolutely none. So LoSS asked for help against their toughest opponent, your alliance Legacy. DT answered the call.

also, i do love it as well. i admire ya'lls fighting skills and the reason my NS was halved was due to ya'll. the CSN opponents i faced off against were almost all useless. they hit me well sometimes but usually that happened only after my Legacy opponents had hit me.

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1297888817' post='2635879']
You may have 'credentials' but you lack 'math skills', in that VE has fought more wars in this conflict than any alliance on either side, and is fighting alongside no one bigger. But if we're riding FOK/iFOK/PC's coattails, I'd be honored, because those are some pretty badass alliances to be tailing behind.

It is my opinion that how wars end is solely of the business between the parties. Would I be pushing reps on DT right now? No, probably not, but that CSN/Legacy are doesn't take anything away from them as alliances. They have every right to ask for what they think is fair, just as you have every right to not accept them.
[/quote]

just one correction- CSN is pushing the reps. Legacy wants white peace and no reps.

[quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1297888945' post='2635884']
I apologize for the misnomer that they are a protectorate, I've yet to see a screen shot (possible I've not read it) of LoSS specifically asking for DT to hit Legacy. However, without said information, I drew that conclusion based on that you didn't attack anyone else, you only attacked Legacy. Instead of defending LoSS against all aggression you specifically chose Legacy. For bad or good, I would call that being opportunistic, and not merly defending an ally, as a blanket Declaration of War would have done.
[/quote]

LoSS has repeatedly stated they asked us to come in against Legacy. as for not hitting every alliance (CSN and the Brain as well) well that is simply put, math. DT at the time had 47 nations. numerically, were we to hit every alliance involved in hitting LoSS, that would not allow us to concentrate on Legacy. We also knew that CSN would most likely declare on us, so we already basically had that covered anyways. they in fact did DoW us that very night.

also, you speak of Blanket DoWs and yet, don't criticize the other side since none of them have done a blanket DoW. hell all of CnG rode in on Legion and only Legion, despite several alliances hitting GOONS that CnG could have DoWed as well due to the LOST-GOONS treaty, then there are all the alliances hitting MK that CnG could have DoWed, and so on. but then there is also CSN who did not Blanket DoW every alliance hitting their own allies. they hit LoSS firstly without a single treaty to enact and then DT using a treaty this time.

so, it is obvious that a blanket DoW is usually not a good strategy to use as it does not let you concentrate where you are needed most.

[Tromp]

Just to correct that one thing Doch, I don't believe people have claimed Legacy is [i]weak[/i], rather they've been called the [i]least connected[/i].

There is a difference.

[EViL0nE]

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1297895851' post='2636015']
Wow, are you really trying to reach that deep to try and find fault with what I said? lol

Well since you put in so much effort trying to find the 'chink' in my armor, ill go ahead and answer your riposte'

notice I said 'basicly'. so yes they have a no rentry clause. Ohnoes the world is ending.......they still $%&@ed up their opponents(in your own words since they were winning) and exited the battle. Also heres a pro-tip, when someone exits a battlefield its generally with the intent of not returning so the clause isnt much of a clause.
[/quote]
It seems rather.. odd that an alliance who has only fought against a single alliance and was winning would accept a term preventing them from reentering when they have several allies still at war or with a potential for war, don't you think?

I'd also guess that at least a few alliances who have exited their battlefield without being given that stipulation either already have intentions of reentering when/where needed or could easily be brought back in if needed. Why do you suppose those alliances weren't given a term of not reentering?

[MaGneT]

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1297896315' post='2636028']
Just to correct that one thing Doch, I don't believe people have claimed Legacy is [i]weak[/i], rather they've been called the [i]least connected[/i].

There is a difference.
[/quote]
All 3 alliances that attacked LoSS were connected only via LoSS. They're all equally unconnected to the crux of the conflict (though CSN's presence in SF makes me wonder how they ended up on this front).

[Sarmatian Empire]

[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1297896624' post='2636036']
All 3 alliances that attacked LoSS were connected only via LoSS. They're all equally unconnected to the crux of the conflict (though CSN's presence in SF makes me wonder how they ended up on this front).
[/quote]
I believe Tromp means in the way of treaties....not quite sure what you said, you lost me

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1297896315' post='2636028']
Just to correct that one thing Doch, I don't believe people have claimed Legacy is [i]weak[/i], rather they've been called the [i]least connected[/i].

There is a difference.
[/quote]

some have true and that i can agree on. but most have actually stated they are a soft target which does not imply that they are simply the least connected.

[MaGneT]

[quote name='Sarmatian Empire' timestamp='1297896794' post='2636040']
I believe Tromp means in the way of treaties....not quite sure what you said, you lost me
[/quote]
Making sense is a bit difficult when I haven't eaten yet today :|
I just meant that the only people they were fighting was LoSS. That means that no target was inherently more valuable for some treaty related reasons. We chose you guys, and now CSN is demanding that we pay them for attacking you.

Great government they have over there.

[Tromp]

[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1297896624' post='2636036']
All 3 alliances that attacked LoSS were connected only via LoSS. They're all equally unconnected to the crux of the conflict (though CSN's presence in SF makes me wonder how they ended up on this front).
[/quote]


[quote name='Sarmatian Empire' timestamp='1297896794' post='2636040']
I believe Tromp means in the way of treaties....not quite sure what you said, you lost me
[/quote]

This is true!

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1297896944' post='2636042']
some have true and that i can agree on. but most have actually stated they are a soft target which does not imply that they are simply the least connected.
[/quote]
From what I can tell both DT and Legacy have a fairly good reputation and stats, so it'd be an unfortunate statement to make.

[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1297897017' post='2636044']
Making sense is a bit difficult when I haven't eaten yet today :|
I just meant that the only people they were fighting was LoSS. [...]
[/quote]
Treaty connections of Legacy, not the wars they are fighting.

[MaGneT]

After an entire pie of pizza... I do believe you make more sense now.

[The Catalyst]

i think i should get 50k tech from umbrella tbh.....dnt ask me why

EDIT: to give this post some meening.... hows the war going everyone?

Edited February 16, 2011 by The Catalyst

[AuiNur]

[quote name='The Catalyst' timestamp='1297898909' post='2636077']
i think i should get 50k tech from umbrella tbh.....dnt ask me why

EDIT: to give this post some meening.... hows the war going everyone?
[/quote]

No do tell is. It's bound to be a better reason than csns