Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
  • entries
    2
  • comments
    43
  • views
    1432

The real (current) Terminus Est.

Prefontaine

1740 views

With Caecus writing several entries about TEst a couple weeks ago, I figured I'd create my own little blog to write about the real TEst. First things first, the TEst I lead is different than the real TEst. Jodo and ElPinchazo (and probably Phiney) can only be the leaders of the real TEst as they've lead the alliance during the longest periods of time. The real TEst is slightly less concerned about the world around them and more willing to throw caution to the wind and march to their own beat. The TEst I lead is similar to that but I'm a bit more pragmatic and keep more channels of communication to other alliances. Neither is superior to the other, I simply took what I could from TEst and and added it to what I see as my strengths as a leader. Combine my strengths with TEst's play style as best as you can and you have the current Terminus Est.

 

My goal for this alliance is simple, give the members what they want. TEst has been involved with 4 (5 if you count Arrgh) wars since I took over, Alpha, GPA, Pantheon, and TFP. All four of those alliances were targeted for a combination of reasons. First, one thing all four have in common is being atop our "who do we want to fight", poll. It's funny when you look at those threads because it's less about wanting to fight someone because you dislike them, and vastly more about who would be a good fight. At the time of each, really, all of those alliances had the one of the most impressive top tiers at the time. When we decided on Alpha, about a month later we felt reason was given enough through that whole debacle with Sparta and the fake logs drill which resulted in a plan to roll TEst by several alliances, which resulted in those Rose forum leaks about them getting the impression they wanted to roll TEst regardless. That combined with being atop of our bingo list, we attacked. We teamed up with Syndicate who also had their own reason for attacking which kept them engaged much longer than us, as TEst often leaves shortly after the conventional warfare wraps up.
GPA and TFP we hit because they had big neutrals, and TFP was right after Pantheon so it made it easier to just do it then since everyone was still itching for more fighting. Pantheon was hit for two reasons, like Alpha they were atop out bingo list (the list gets re-voted after every war with the previously rolled alliances excluded) and second we were paid. I'm not going to say who paid but someone took us up on this thread.

 

It's really an interesting thing, how we operate. We don't fight for political reasons, except to maybe make some new friends through bloodshed. We really don't take things too seriously and are an alliance that keeps their word. We willing to work with most anyone if they've something worth fighting for, money in some cases and shared interests in others. We're just here to have fun, so feel free to stop by and shoot the shit with us. https://discord.gg/z2BWuzV

 

"Prefontaine and his band of merry idiots" - Hereno

  • Upvote 13


37 Comments


Recommended Comments



I didn't think Steve was going to ask his allies to sit out. I thought your allies jumping in to the fight would result in some of them leaving being your allies after the fight though. I imagine Steve thought the same thing and that's why he asked them to sit out. If anything I thought it would result in politically isolating Alpha a bit giving them less ammo to come after us without a CB. 

 

You don't think I should have thought TEst was gonna get rolled hard? Look at the last two times a paperless alliance supported tS in a major war, Roz Wei got railed hard because there was no penalty/counters for hitting them. Arrgh had that happen against UPN and friends before that. Not hard to think that TEst would be viewed as the low risk target due to less counters. 

 

To your "isn't TEst straddling two spheres" comment. Yes and no. We're willing to work with anyone who's goals line up with ours. If our goal is fighting x alliance for x reason, and another alliance wants to fight alliance x for y reason that'll work. We will work with alliances who help give us what we want. We will also fight for a cause we deem worth while, even if it doesn't benefit our political aspirations. Sometimes a cause is enough, sometimes personal gain is enough, sometimes just doing it for fun is enough. We straddle two sides because there are only two sides that contain most of the players in this game. If we didn't we'd limit who we're working with and we make it clear to people we're working with what's going on. We don't try to play both sides, we try to benefit whatever side we find ourselves on at the time, or whatever cause we find ourselves behind. 

 

Also, woo 2 pages.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Uhm... that wasn't the issue for us. It was the breaking of one's word.

 

Weve been over this bud.

 

So when you said your alliance would defend Pantheon from aggressors, you weren't breaking your word? Granted, I didn't read the treaty, but like almost all treaties, I assume it had a mutual defense clause. I don't know what would be in there otherwise. 

 

Again, Steve should have had a closer relationship so that you don't feel "betrayed" when Alpha came in on the side of Rose in the 168 Day War, we've been over this bud. 

 

To your "isn't TEst straddling two spheres" comment. Yes and no. We're willing to work with anyone who's goals line up with ours. If our goal is fighting x alliance for x reason, and another alliance wants to fight alliance x for y reason that'll work. We will work with alliances who help give us what we want. We will also fight for a cause we deem worth while, even if it doesn't benefit our political aspirations. Sometimes a cause is enough, sometimes personal gain is enough, sometimes just doing it for fun is enough. We straddle two sides because there are only two sides that contain most of the players in this game. If we didn't we'd limit who we're working with and we make it clear to people we're working with what's going on. We don't try to play both sides, we try to benefit whatever side we find ourselves on at the time, or whatever cause we find ourselves behind. 

 

So, why is Alpha's "straddling of spheres" a bad decision? It obviously works with TEst. Is it because the "straddling" used two paper treaties instead of backroom channeling? 

Share this comment


Link to comment

So when you said your alliance would defend Pantheon from aggressors, you weren't breaking your word? Granted, I didn't read the treaty, but like almost all treaties, I assume it had a mutual defense clause. I don't know what would be in there otherwise. 

 

Again, Steve should have had a closer relationship so that you don't feel "betrayed" when Alpha came in on the side of Rose in the 168 Day War, we've been over this bud. 

 

 

So, why is Alpha's "straddling of spheres" a bad decision? It obviously works with TEst. Is it because the "straddling" used two paper treaties instead of backroom channeling? 

 

We were perfectly fine with you entering in Roz Wei. We were not okay with you entering on SK after you had promised the former. Keep trying though.

 

As for Pantheon: I was not government at the time and have not been involved in coalition planning. I'm afraid I therefore do not know enough of what happened in backchannels to be able to say much about it. You're better off contacting tS govt for that.

Share this comment


Link to comment

We were perfectly fine with you entering in Roz Wei. We were not okay with you entering on SK after you had promised the former. Keep trying though.

 

As for Pantheon: I was not government at the time and have not been involved in coalition planning. I'm afraid I therefore do not know enough of what happened in backchannels to be able to say much about it. You're better off contacting tS govt for that.

 

So what you are trying to say is Alpha broke its word, but you never did and when Pantheon got rolled, you technically didn't break your word because you had nothing to do with it? 

 

It sounds like if your ass was on fire, you would be the last to know in your alliance. I totally believe that a former gov member would be entirely excluded from "coalition planning." Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that tS wrote down on a sheet of paper to defend Pantheon and then wiped its ass with the treaty in the Silent War. You can't stand at a moral high ground when your alliance violates the first damn clause of the treaty. 

Share this comment


Link to comment

So, why is Alpha's "straddling of spheres" a bad decision? It obviously works with TEst. Is it because the "straddling" used two paper treaties instead of backroom channeling? 

 

Because both sides expected you to fight for them, or at least not fight against them and their allies. With TEst we're free to support any cause we want. Neither side expects our support unless it was already promised. I'm not stupid enough to promise my support to both spheres during a war.

 

You were constantly in both spheres. We're in neither sphere. You view these things as the same, they are not.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Because both sides expected you to fight for them, or at least not fight against them and their allies. With TEst we're free to support any cause we want. Neither side expects our support unless it was already promised. I'm not stupid enough to promise my support to both spheres during a war.

 

You were constantly in both spheres. We're in neither sphere. You view these things as the same, they are not.

 

But this conflicts with what Partisan just posted. You are essentially saying that the papered treaties force us to remain in the confines of "both spheres." But Partisan just said that tS at the time was ok with Alpha entering on the side of Rose against Roz Wei, so it is obviously a more flexible arrangement. 

 

"Neither sphere" and "both spheres" is a matter of semantics. Of course, I would still argue that requires a more intimate relationship than Steve had. In fact, I would argue that papered treaties give a more valid CB, since you would be citing the first clause and not randomly jumping in out of the blue. Though, I suppose it does mean that Alpha could not directly engage either Rose or tS because of the treaties, but that limitation is not too relevant for alliance interests anyway. 

 

Also,

 

 

Also, why isn't this blog showing up on the dashboard anymore? 

Share this comment


Link to comment

I didn't think Steve was going to ask his allies to sit out. I thought your allies jumping in to the fight would result in some of them leaving being your allies after the fight though. I imagine Steve thought the same thing and that's why he asked them to sit out. If anything I thought it would result in politically isolating Alpha a bit giving them less ammo to come after us without a CB. 

 

You don't think I should have thought TEst was gonna get rolled hard? Look at the last two times a paperless alliance supported tS in a major war, Roz Wei got railed hard because there was no penalty/counters for hitting them. Arrgh had that happen against UPN and friends before that. Not hard to think that TEst would be viewed as the low risk target due to less counters. 

 

I finally found it. God, it was buried under all that shit. https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/12330-press-release-from-the-syndicate-on-alpha-and-recent-events/?p=232159

 

My memory from the Rose leak was actually a little hazy. I thought only Rose wasn't going to fight, but the leak alluded to VE and UPN being hurt by the demilitarization as well, which meant that your alliance was probably looking at a Mensa HQ/tS/TEst vs. Alpha/NPO fight at the worst case scenario, a match up that would have been roughly 2 to 1 membership-wise. Not to mention one side is more militarized than the other. That's got to be easier than a weakened Pantheon v. TEst/Roz Wei/Arrgh. Asking allies to sit the war out was the only good option, in light of our situation. 

Share this comment


Link to comment

But this conflicts with what Partisan just posted. You are essentially saying that the papered treaties force us to remain in the confines of "both spheres." But Partisan just said that tS at the time was ok with Alpha entering on the side of Rose against Roz Wei, so it is obviously a more flexible arrangement. 

 

"Neither sphere" and "both spheres" is a matter of semantics. Of course, I would still argue that requires a more intimate relationship than Steve had. In fact, I would argue that papered treaties give a more valid CB, since you would be citing the first clause and not randomly jumping in out of the blue. Though, I suppose it does mean that Alpha could not directly engage either Rose or tS because of the treaties, but that limitation is not too relevant for alliance interests anyway. 

 

 

Shocking news, I'm not Partisan. Maybe that's your problem. You think we all have the same outlooks on thing just because we both think you're obscenely ill-informed. Where did I say I was okay with you entering against Roz Wei? You don't get to tell me what my views on things are. You should have done nothing that war. Because you handcuffed yourself by signing both spheres. You couldn't honor one side without hurting the other. Attacking any alliance on a side of a war weakens all alliances on that side of the war because one front is now under more pressure causing resources to shift all around this making the side weaker. By attacking ANYONE in that war you would have hurt one of your allies. That's why signing both Rose and tS was the worst move anyone could have ever made in Alpha. You put yourself in two spheres at the same time. TEst does not do that. That's why we don't straddle two spheres. Read. Understand. Learn.

 

 

 

I finally found it. God, it was buried under all that shit. https://politicsandw...vents/?p=232159

 

My memory from the Rose leak was actually a little hazy. I thought only Rose wasn't going to fight, but the leak alluded to VE and UPN being hurt by the demilitarization as well, which meant that your alliance was probably looking at a Mensa HQ/tS/TEst vs. Alpha/NPO fight at the worst case scenario, a match up that would have been roughly 2 to 1 membership-wise. Not to mention one side is more militarized than the other. That's got to be easier than a weakened Pantheon v. TEst/Roz Wei/Arrgh. Asking allies to sit the war out was the only good option, in light of our situation.

Again, you're grossly ill-informed. I spoke to several gov members of various alliances allied or allied to allies of Alpha. Every response I got was "we will honor our treaty" which either meant they would be directly supporting you, or they would have been supporting an alliance supporting you in the case of allies of allies. Those statements in some cases were followed with "we will likely be leaving them after the war", though. Your continuing to speak without knowing things. Please stop. Your assessment of nearly everything is entirely wrong. You are wrong an amazing amount of the time it's understandable why you're still in Alpha.

 

Your stupidity has hit a breaking point. You've reached the point where you no longer get spoken to nicely. You've rambled on failing to make reasonable points for too many posts now. You're now classified as incompetent and will be treated as such. If you continue to post replies to me with such pointless drivel you will no longer be given any courtesy. You will be mocked. You will be insulted. You will be treated with the disrespect you show towards reasonable thought and logic. Continue to pointlessly flail your idiotic narrative at your own masochistic peril. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

TEst vs. Alpha before = fun.  tS-Alpha, maybe fun.  Dogpile = not fun nor any sort of challenge for anyone.  You didn't want a fun war. You wanted to destroy us because you dislike me, Pre.  And that dislike comes from a variety of reasons, none of which you ever admit and even pre-date Alpha-tS tensions.

 

The line of thinking that says, "only sign sphere people" is flawed and leads to huge stagnations in the game.  It's the cross-sphere treaties that usually bring more fun to the game.

 

But when one sides views you as a meatshield, the cross-sphere isn't the problem - it's just the relationship, irrespective of what spheres they lie in.  If one ally didn't attack the other, it's not a problem Pre. I should've known that tS/TEst didn't view Alpha as a friend. They only befriended Alpha because they needed us for that war in Oktoberfest.  Mea Culpa.  And it's sad to see people try to revise our roll in Oktoberfest as a way to try to justify using us as their meatshield.

Share this comment


Link to comment

It always makes me laugh how tS keeps saying we "betrayed" them in the same war that they attacked our direct and only other ally.  A war in which Alpha only honored MDPs or responded to aggression.

 

Secondly, we never said we would only engage Roz Wei.  The log Partisan uses doesn't even say that.  If someone can show me saying, "We will only attack Roz Wei under any circumstances" be my guest.  It doesn't exist. It's not even implied from the log he brings out each time.  All it says is we had every right to hit Roz.  At that time, its' all we were engaging.

 

The war changed, more people declared.  Alpha adapted to that change.  Just as The Syndicate and any other alliance adapts to new DoWs with their own new DoW's

Share this comment


Link to comment

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.