Prefonteen

I think you're racially profiling my kind now.

let's call it Roger.

ParaCovinum Evanesco! *points staff*

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.

Uhm... that wasn't the issue for us. It was the breaking of one's word. Weve been over this bud.

Actually, the relationship beween myself and Steve wasn't bad at all prior to 168. It is the conduct within that (war) period which aggravated relations and ultimately led to our bad break. I'd rather not get into much detail this time since I don't feel like another WoT-battle.

I do not believe that that CB would have been in any way beneficial to Pre/TEst in the political environment at the time. Specifically because he could not have done anything with it without prematurely smothering his own ambition in its crib unless The Syndicate+sphere were to act. There was too much risk of failure. The plan would also strain TEst-ParaCov/Alpha relations (if it was as you intended). Given that TEst victory would be dependent on tS cooperation/initiative, TEst in its relatively isolated position at the time could not afford to risk being targeted without immediate, tangible benefit. There's also the following hole in your assertion: - You assert that Pre's rise was a calculated move to the top. - Shredding PR to place your numerically small, upper tier-centric alliance in the vanguard of what might be the catalyst to a global war is a surefire way to incur proportionally higher losses than the rest of your own coalition. - Provided that this was all part of that plan to rise to he top, Pre would have known that following the final defeat of paracov, he as a third party would be more likely to find himself at odds with us (naturally speaking). - With that in mind, it would be a sign of incompetence for pre to deliberately place himself in harms way to roll Alpha, weakening his own position moving forward, when he might as well sit around and hope for us to shred one another in time (which had a decent chance of happening, given relations between us).

Manthrax?

Reset? Reset. We've been having our disagreements roq, but like Manthrax I can appreciate an attempt at leaving that Shit behind. I'm happy to reciprocate.

Let's look at this particular situation (past days). I was drawn out of the woodworks because you were *constantly* referring to last war and claiming it was all about (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). You have consistently pointed out that 'tS' own leaders literally told us that they'd hit NPO an/or Alpha allies on the (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) forums as retalliation'. Even though that is inherently false (as I have proven just now in this thread). You then skip-dodge and move subject while altering your general narrative to exclude communication about what used to be the core of it. You evolve it to be able to (supposedly) stand on its own without requiring the refuted points. So again: Manthrax is correct. My posting is a direct response to your references to and interpretations of my actions and decision because they seem intellectually dishonest to me.

Here's the issue with your logic: You randomly attribute my will to find the optimal situation for tS (what you call 'Dominate' ) to some kind of attempt at compensating for (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) is irrelvant for my decision in the aforementioned scenarios. I'm not that hard to understand: I weigh risk-reward and go for the best move for tS while trying to keep things dynamic. Once a decision is made, I will move to mitigate risk and maximize benefits. Tell me why correct leadership is supposedly tied to the hip to (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). Should I purposefully lose? Should I have taken extreme risks without chance for payout just for the sake of 'loldifferent things'? No. I took the risks without a need to make them (sticking with VE would have been a tougher pill to swallow in terms of relations for various reasons at the time, but the option was there. Paragon could have easily dominated Covenant at that point, leading to an immediate hegemonic structure).

\ Political radio silence in the post-yas era.. The OWF is irrelevant.

Just going to hop in and highlight this: So we now have a situation where neither Roy nor I has made a direct threat to NPO PW on the (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) Forums following a crossover DoW of a party that is *not even NPO*. NPO has interjected themselves into that situation and interpreted two off-hand acknowledgement in another game directed towards a different entity as direct threats to NPO in PW. Even after explanations from both Roy and Myself, NPO has harped on for months on end about Roy and I's supposd game crossover. Given that NPO's narrative has to a large degree revolved around these two comments, and given that our explanations on that particular topic have been ignored consistently, I am going to have to call a spade a spade and conclude that you are in fact, deliberately obfuscating facts and painting a crossover narrative because it allows you to absolve yourself from the responsibility of your own political failures within the PW realm through excessive self-victimization. Please knock it off.

This.

-> makes outrageous claim about me -> Has claim refuted -> Moves on to new topic for trolling Carry on auctor. Please stick to comics

Ah yes, let's cover that too since its been at the center of your narrative. The DoW in question was: The RP in the DoW was a direct style copy of the style of 'The Pen', my (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) persona. "For Steve" was a direct reference to PW events. At the time of the DoW and at the time of my reply, no CB's had been provided for the hit in that game. Moreover, various parties *on your side in PW* had begun probing and panicking about "What tS would do". That in itself was strange: First you use crossover in a DoW, absent any other given CB's (not arguing you had none- I later received a elaboration, but by then my post was made), and then you immediately start panicking about tS. My reply: The RP in question was little more than a "THE PRINCESS IS IN ANOTHER CASTLE" reference, written in similar style as a reply to the OP *in that game* as well as a direct troll reply to NG's "For Steve" reference. Read: 1. NG uses the rallying cry "For Steve" in another game, as if they are defending their PW alliance. 2. My reply essentially calls them out for attacking in the wrong world (the world where they have a hegemoney and can thus win an easy victory), while their damsel is held in another. I then remark that they seal their own fate by prompting the forceful collision of worlds (remark made in proper apocalyptic style as has become trademark of "The Pen". *Nowhere* in that post do I explicitly mark that anyone will be attacked, and *nowhere* do I even mention the NPO. I merely make a remark about the sealed fates, which could be construed as entirely in-character for that world. In following posts, NG (James) immediately jumps on my case in an attempt to implicate me for game crossover: You can clearly see emphasis being laid on my reply here while completely ignoring the direct cross-reference of the OP (which was the direct cause for my reply). At that point I replied: This in turn is followed by the writer of the DoW clarifying his stance and discussion on legitimacy of new CB's brought forth. NPO and Alpha then both began pushing the narrative that 'Partisan is crossing worlds and tS is coming after us because of (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)' while ignoring a series of PW events which led up to the DoW and which were far more likely causes for our movements. NPO mixing into this conversation is especially interesting because no direct reference was made towards NPO in my post. That was all you interpreting it as such and making a run with it. Not me. So what we have here is: - NG makes troll DoW without CB, directly referencing PW in what can be construed as a crossover DoW. - I reply in kind with a tongue-in-cheek troll post in which I call NG out for their cross-reference - James (NG/Alpha) gets on my case and accuses me of mixing worlds - I call him out - Original Poster of DoW comes out an clarifies - I enter discussion about legitimacy of (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) DoW with various parties - NPO/Alpha begin pushing a PW narrative of tS crossing games and 'looking to take revenge'. - NPO/Alpha are refuted on various occasions and given PW-related motivations and explanations - NPO/Alpha refuse to believe it and continue pushing the (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) narrative. That's either deliberate spin out of political convenience or simple self-delusion. I hope you're happy now.

tS at the time would not even have had the financial resources to make an arrgh raid on NPO viable. Our finances went to the war effort and rebuild. I think it's safe to say that at this point, the arrgh theory has long been debunked (with Arrgh themselves stating that it was not tS). If it was a misconception, that's fine. The backchannel accusations and mistrust led to soured perceptions within tS govt however: It looked like there was a deliberate campaign being pushe against us to implicate and isolate us. couple that with treaty movements and voila. I don't fault you for your loyalty. But it did make you look more aggressive/threatening to us than your peers, and in turn we took note. I hit UPN within 14 days of Hans' ascension. Your point is moot. Moreover, i was waiting for signals, proof, evidence. Things to confirm my suspicions before I pulled the trigger since going in, we fully intended it to be a political suicide on our part. Incorrect. tS was already milled up. at the time. Alliances like BK, Guardian and TKR did not start seeing a spike until the 9th. DoW was at daychange. Might explain the overlap with 13/14. And yes, we did have BK ready to hit you, they were blueballed etcetera. You guys were a tier below Mensa and one of the most milled up alliances. Taking you down was strategically viable. VE/Rose were both still out of spec and we anticipated them to need at least 1 - 2 days more than you. VE also could not be hit because that would have !@#$ed over Pantheon. And as you stated, we had the most legit reason re: UPN/NPO (your movements). Re: NG stuff- i'm pretty sure chim was hoping for escalation, yeah. He was no more than a member though. Here's the thing: There was a brief period after the NG DoW where it looked like a direct and immediate crossover due to the way the DoW was presented and the absence of *any* CB. During that time, roy and i both posted about the muddling of OOC lines. We also spent a lot of time hearing out CB's in private to figure out whether there actually was crossover or not. NG's inability to communicate their CB in a (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) DoW which directly referred to PW is the crux of this. That's not on us, it's on them. The fact that it took me personally seeking out involved parties to gain access to an actual CB to ensure that my alliance was not being punished in another game for events in this game is an annoyance in itself. The gall to then attribute (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) motivations to my PW actions becaus I called people out on such crossover is quite simply insulting to my intelligence. Lastly: feel free to compile the quotes. We've already talked about this elsewhere but: - As tS head official, I represented the official stances and policies of tS at the time. These were supported by government. - You (and others) have often attributed the actions of other alliances in our sphere to tS --> Every action taken by people in our sphere according to this rationale ultimately stems from tS. We are the enablers and we call the shots (if we are to believe you those who follow this rationale). - We are generally held accountable for these actions, and earn the ire of your sphere because of it. .. - You now, rather than referring to my personal motivations and statements in my capacity as tS head of FA, use comments from people in my sphere and alliance to attribute motivations to our DoW - Yet, if tS supposedy makes the final call, and I make the FA call in tS, then their opinions are moot: My rationale should not be discarded. You can't have it both ways. Either our sphere is a homogenous entity led by tS and my word is law (and so, my reasons should be considered, rather than those of my allies) OR we are a heterogenous entity and tS is perhap not the evil puppetmaster you (and various others) make it out to be. tS at the time would not even have had the financial resources to make an arrgh raid on NPO viable. Our finances went to the war effort and rebuild. I think it's safe to say that at this point, the arrgh theory has long been debunked (with Arrgh themselves stating that it was not tS). If it was a misconception, that's fine. The backchannel accusations and mistrust led to soured perceptions within tS govt however: It looked like there was a deliberate campaign being pushe against us to implicate and isolate us. couple that with treaty movements and voila. I don't fault you for your loyalty. But it did make you look more aggressive/threatening to us than your peers, and in turn we took note. I hit UPN within 14 days of Hans' ascension. Your point is moot. Moreover, i was waiting for signals, proof, evidence. Things to confirm my suspicions before I pulled the trigger since going in, we fully intended it to be a political suicide on our part. Incorrect. tS was already milled up. at the time. Alliances like BK, Guardian and TKR did not start seeing a spike until the 9th. DoW was at daychange. Might explain the overlap with 13/14. And yes, we did have BK ready to hit you, they were blueballed etcetera. You guys were a tier below Mensa and one of the most milled up alliances. Taking you down was strategically viable. VE/Rose were both still out of spec and we anticipated them to need at least 1 - 2 days more than you. VE also could not be hit because that would have !@#$ed over Pantheon. And as you stated, we had the most legit reason re: UPN/NPO (your movements). Re: NG stuff- i'm pretty sure chim was hoping for escalation, yeah. He was no more than a member though. Here's the thing: There was a brief period after the NG DoW where it looked like a direct and immediate crossover due to the way the DoW was presented and the absence of *any* CB. During that time, roy and i both posted about the muddling of OOC lines. We also spent a lot of time hearing out CB's in private to figure out whether there actually was crossover or not. NG's inability to communicate their CB in a (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) DoW which directly referred to PW is the crux of this. That's not on us, it's on them. The fact that it took me personally seeking out involved parties to gain access to an actual CB to ensure that my alliance was not being punished in another game for events in this game is an annoyance in itself. The gall to then attribute (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) motivations to my PW actions becaus I called people out on such crossover is quite simply insulting to my intelligence. Lastly: feel free to compile the quotes. We've already talked about this elsewhere but: - As tS head official, I represented the official stances and policies of tS at the time. These were supported by government. - You (and others) have often attributed the actions of other alliances in our sphere to tS --> Every action taken by people in our sphere according to this rationale ultimately stems from tS. We are the enablers and we call the shots (if we are to believe you those who follow this rationale). - We are generally held accountable for these actions, and earn the ire of your sphere because of it. .. - You now, rather than referring to my personal motivations and statements in my capacity as tS head of FA, use comments from people in my sphere and alliance to attribute motivations to our DoW - Yet, if tS supposedy makes the final call, and I make the FA call in tS, then their opinions are moot: My rationale should not be discarded. You can't have it both ways. Either our sphere is a homogenous entity led by tS and my word is law (and so, my reasons should be considered, rather than those of my allies) OR we are a heterogenous entity and tS is perhap not the evil puppetmaster you (and various others) make it out to be.

Here's the thing: During my time leading tS FA, my word was the official stance of tS. The general lines of the political decision I made were supported and echoed by the rest of tS government: That is how we operated. Our members were free to maintain their own worldviews and opinions, but they did not represent The Syndicate in any official capacity. Why do I stress this? Because you have had a habit of attributing the statements and opinions of members to my Foreign Policy, and that has led to severe misconceptions on various occasions. I digress though, as this is not too relevant to the core conversation. For the past months, you and various NPO members/govt have consistently pushed a narrative in which you were attacked by the Syndicate for (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)-related reasons (OOC grudge). My point addressed that notion and provided you with my rationale for war. You are free to disagree with it. You are free to dislike me for it. But it seems disingenous to push the 'omg OOC' narrative when there has been a pile of PW-related motivations and reasons for me to pull the trigger on you. It shouldn't be new to anyone, and I do feel like im spelling out the obvious to people who have paid attention. Yet.... here we are, and i'm still replying to a stubborn NPO narrative of 'OMG OOC' when reasons have been laid out clear for all to see over and over, and when anyone with a brain could have seen that war coming in preceding months by virtue of the impact your movements would have on tS' alertness.Fostered resentment is not relevant to this conversation and is also a seperate argument as it delves into a 'he-said, she-said' per instance. Let's not get into that this time around. I do not see how me weighing risks of new arrivals is a problem in this instance. It's called prudence. I've already outlined my motivation behind leaving you be at the time.. Re: pre-empt. You were one of the most militarized parties on the other side in that war as well. i sent out general feelers and this led to a development of a working relation with your regent. How in the world does that signal 'no interest' to you? Come on man. This touches on a point though. Let's look at the situation: - You form - tS sends out feelers and begins working on relations. This was initiated by tS, not by NPO. - tS FA guy goes poof for a bit. Jasmin equally goes poof for a bit (not sure about the 'when' on this one). Talks die off. - When I come back, communications are dead. I literally check back in with NPO. - NPO now continues to hammer on the notion that 'tS supposedly showed no real interest in amiable relations' You could have put in the work yourself. We are not obligated to lick your heels, nor are you entitled to our advances. We made an effort to coexist. You- less so. You then made a series of moves which could be construed as hostile. You have the right to do so, but every action has a reaction. As for third sphere: You may have had the intention. We may have had the hope you would. That's not relevnt to what i'm saying though: - You kept your cards close to the chest and treated us with mistrust (radio silence) for some period. This is by your own admission on the OWF - This gave us no way of reading your motivations. - You increasingly consolidated into a sphere hostile to us. The problem is that you gave us every reason to believe that you were up to something, and this is ultimately why we acted. Whether you did so intentionally or unintentionally has no bearing on the fact that you did position yourself as a threat. Moreover, if as you state, the attempt at a third sphere failed, this means that according to your own logic the world was to remain bipolar. So you then made the choice to sign with UPN, effectively picking a side in this bipolar dynamic. This means that you defacto chose to oppose us, and ties directly into the reason why you were attacked. Again, mental gymnastics. Loans were quite possibly a better idea. We weren't aware you had them though and did make the offer for your benefit. The paragraph was not essentially "NPO is too small to matter yet so we're not concerned". You're putting words in my mouth again. I literally stated that I hoped you would grow into a major player who would provide an extra layer to PW politics, and I literally stated that I wanted to give you the chance to develop and base my stance towards you on your own actions. Seriously, are you purposefully Obtuse? I understand your rationale in this paragraph. That does *not* change the fact that the specific set of treaties signed by you made you look awfully suspicious and turned you into a threat. If you signed with various tS adversaries and expected to remain entirely off our radar, you were being naive. Basically: Your reason has no bearing on our reason for war. We perceived you as a threat based on a combination of your words, your actions and your political movements. Even moe frankly: You have at multiple points referred to comments I made to NPO in private about being concerned over your consolidation. This means that I literally gave you warning signals. Instead of taking advantage of that and soothing those concerns (if you wanted peace) you continued to consolidate. Not only that, but you chose to interpret my concerns as a threat (and later used that false interpretation against me on the OWF). I understand how a group perceived it in hindsight. That was not what was conveyed to us at the time. We spent many months working on relations, both in public embassies and in private government channels. These months started out with accusations and mistrust thrown back an forth, eventually progressed to closure and agreement to disagree on some matters and very slowly transitioned to tentative building of trust. It never got to leave that final stage. Thing is: When we are told that things are okay. When we are told that ODP offers are pretty much ready to go and not much more than a formality, we are going to assume that the alliance in question has its ducks in a row internally. When a fomer leader who still holds a grudge then comes out with the post we received, riling members up and calling us their 'gravest enemy' based on historic events months past which we had thought we moved on from, and when that former leader manages to force the treaty off the table only to then get elected shortly thereafter; and finally, when that leader's first move is to put the final nails in the framework of a consolidated opposition agains tS (paracov+NPO), we're going to take note. Yeah, as I mentioned before- I think I made it pretty clear privately towards the end that I was wary of NPO's political movements. Let me ask you this: Do you really think that if I was hell-bent on killing you off because of (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), I would signal my intentions to you by letting you know that i'm wary of your movements? If it had been the case, you would not have seen a gradual progression of relations from amiable to hostile. You would have simply been strangled without warning when you had not consolidated a base yet and were more vulnerable. My commentary was an explanation of my rationale for war. Abbas is known to come back every now and then, plot a little and then go inactive again (as much as I like the guy OOC haha). His inclusion of NPO in a plan centered around defeating tS put us on edge. When you receive stuff like that you don't act immediately but you do keep your eyes open for further movements.

My worldwalls will bloth out the sun.

It's your good right to continue your fight, don't get me wrong. It's the notion that your fate came to be because of '(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) events' which both amuses and slightly annoys me. You see, I am the Syndicate official who ultimately made every Syndicate decision concerning you (whether it be action or inaction at the time) right up until I retired after your first war. This includes the decision to strike you. If it is thoughtful and reasonable responses you wish, I'll try to provide you with one by outlining my thoughts on your alliance and the development of my stance towards you as major events occurred. I hope that this will help you get a better understanding of why you were attacked. You formed a bit after Oktoberfest. Oktoberfest was the war in which UPN attacked us and in which we ultimately beat covenant. This defeat led a severely weakened DEIC to move towards more isolationist FA policies. It was also followed by government turnover in UPN, with the new government actively (and slowly) working with us on burying the hatchet. While this ultimately did not pan out for various reasons, I think both emmad and victor can attest that the attempt was there over an extended period of time, for both parties. I'm noting this specific bit of information because tS was in a position of relative strength over covenant as a singular entity at the time. Our only concern was the tie between VE and UPN, and the looming threat of both parties (after both suffering defeat, one in proxy and the other in oktoberfest) joining hands to take us out. This was not an immediate concern as both UPN and VE were war-torn. The only party which was a potential threat while UPN/VE rebuilt was a fresh rose who sat out oktoberfest and profiteered, creating a disproportionate upper tier. That breather technically gave me the wiggling room to move in on other parties if I had wanted to. I didn't for a variety of reason, amongst which 1) the expectation of being hit in the future by that joint force and 2) not really seeing anyone worth taking out. So, moving back to your DoE: I've witnessed NPO in other games and yes, I do know what you are capable of organisationally speaking. I also am aware of your staying power and you experience, as well as te ambitions you've had in other worlds. I did not however, view this as a threat: You came in with a bunch of fresh nations who would not be able to effectively operate at our tier for a long time. To put it frankly: You had no way of directly competing or threatening tS unless you had backup from a grand coalition which included upper tier nations. You also looked like a potentially interesting player who could add spice to a world which was increasingly moving towards a bipolar structure (with paracov increasingly consolidating into one entity to take on our sphere). I like interesting. Those who worked with me closely (on an opsec level- looking at you, Roy/Thrax/Jess!) can attest that I have a tendency to throw out the whackiest of scenarios; constantly. All of them with political benefits and considerations of their own. Most of them out-of-the-box and potentially game-changing (if pursued and worked out). The majority ends up in the bin. Some of these ideas are implemented. To me, you looked like exactly that. So I invested in amiable relations (particularly with Jasmin) while refraining from ever trying to actually pull you into my sphere or ally you. My hope was that you would 1) develop into a major player over time and 2) end up creating a sphere of your own. One of the two came to be. To that end, there was a point where I offered you economic deals similarly to the deals Guardian offered tS when we founded. Cash up front for resources over time. Time value of money would be the determining factor which you would profit from (as you did not really have large nations yet). You ended up getting a bunch of loans iirc, and those talks never really left the 'pitching' stage. Understandable. My point being: I knew who you were, understood your potential and chose to let you sit out wars, chose to let you make your first diplomatic moves without pushback and chose to simply wait for you to grow and position yourselves. My intent was to leave (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and let your actions dictate my attitude towards you. Now, as we move on I realize that you might not know me well. I consider myself a pragmatist. There are various events which eventually led me to consider you a future enemy, and that led to the decision for war: - After you sat out the 168 day war, Vanguard merged into you. This gave you a (ravaged) small upper tier base and propelled you up the rankings. You became more relevant and thus more primed to start making waves. - You simultaneously came out of protection by signing a series of treaties in February 2016. The following treaties were signed (on February 18/19) 1. NPO-SK ODP 2. NPO-TKR MDoAP 3. NPO-VE MDoAP 4. NPO-Alpha MDoAP Simultaneously, an Alpha-VE MDoAP was signed. With VE and UPN already tied together prior to oktoberfest, we now had VE-Alpha-NPO creating a defacto threeway. While VE-tS relations had been improving since the retirement of their previous leader, Impero, fact remained that the VE-tS relationship had been a rocky one, and VE had been one of tS' primary adversaries since our respective alliances fell out. Similarly, tS-Alpha relations were at an all-time low (at least...at the time. It arguably got worse ) coming out of the 168-day war (Hi Steve, i'm trying to just provide perspective. Let's refrain from diving into the specifics again, shall we?). This was Alpha's first move following our cancellation on them. We took this move with mixed feelings: On one end we had NPO tieing itself somewhat to a few alliances on our side. We also had NPO tieing itself to one adversary of tS and one ex-ally of tS whom we believed to have betrayed us. VE became the lynchpin that could technically rally the entirety of paracov + NPO/Alpha. We could take this in a few ways: 1. You were looking to create your own NPO-centric powersphere and were trying to break alliances off of existing spheres. 2. You were trying to straddle the pre-existing spheres for as long as you could in order to catch up in city-count and nation builds, profiting off of your status as "new guy" 3. You were clueless and randomly signing away 4. You were using the SK-and TKR treaties to safeguard you from any aggression while you positioned yourself to (long-term) set up a combined ParaCov+NPO/Alpha sphere to take out tS (this could include trying to convince SK/TKR to break off). Time was your friend due to the necessity for NPO to both catch up and build a warchest, as well as due to the need for ParaCov to recover its war-torn nations and morale. Over the following weeks/months, minors were signed (Valkyrie, Fark, Polaris etc.)- not alarming in itself, but still an accumulation of power. As Jasmin went inactive and I took a small hiatus, NPO-tS communication went quiet. Our joint channel similarly went quiet (I was surprised when I came back). On March 7th, about three weeks after your moves, UPN and Rose signed a MDoAP. We now had: UPN-Rose UPN-VE VE-NPO VE-Alpha Alpha-NPO This move defacto merged Paragon and the Covenant. NPO's direct ties to both Alpha and VE meant that in case of an escalation to war, NPO would have a strong, strong pull to assist ParaCov. Moreover, we simply noticed a trend of consolidation. Around this period, we were also in various discussions with UPN govt regarding a pending ODP (which was to be signed on April 1st and then was delayed to April 10th), and we had previously had ODP discussions with VE which died down around 168. Both revolved to a large degree around wanting to 'break' the constant tS v paracov war cycle. To us, this consolidation was a bit of a mixed signal: On one hand we had a bunch of old adversaries who had (after each war they lost; in proxy, in oktoberfest and now in 168) claimed to want to move past our issues. On the other hand, we had these same old adversaries signing increasingly intertwining treaties. Were we supposed to view this as threatening? We were offered explanations for the UPN-Rose treaty which I will not delve into, but which we were understanding of. So, our VE ODP had died in its crib. Our UPN ODP suffered the same fate after Hans returned to activity. We received a screenshot of the post in which he revealed the pending treaty to the UPN public (given that we had been told the ODP was a go, we assumed UPN membership had been somewhat aware). This post contained very strong language and a specific anti-tS narrative: We were UPN's gravest enemies (quote), we were not the be trusted. The reps levied half a year earlier in oktoberfest had not been forgotten, etcetera. We kept our knowledge of this post/rhetoric close to our chest and continued to try and soothe relations, to no avail. Ultimately, the treaty was torpedoed. Shortly thereafter, Hansarius would be (re)elected as the leader of UPN. The aforementioned intel left us no illusions: Hansarius considered us an enemy and was likely to shift gears. We would see UPN wary of us once more and our diplomatic work undone at best. We would see UPN return to actively opposing us at worst. This left us with a bleak outlook: - Rose, UPN and VE looked united via intertwining treaties. DEIC being as close to UPN as it is was going to be along for the ride no matter what in our estimations. Alpha-tS relations were a cluster!@#$ with animosity on both sides (note: we believed Alpha to be plotting against us). NPO had tied itself to A hostile Alpha and a lynchpin in VE (of whom we weren't sure of their motives at that point). Paracov was slowly recovering from wounds incurred in the previus war. NPO was slowly growing and building its warchest. UPN, Rose and VE all claimed not to want war. This left us with the consideration of whether this was a legitimate desire to bury the hatchet, or whether these alliances did not want war *at the moment* due to aforementioned morale- and physical losses incurred in the previous war (which had not been recovered yet)? Would their stance change when they came back to full capacity? Simultaneously, NPO kept its cards close to the chest: Radio silence on the OWF, quiet private channels. Just the moves they made and steady growth. Would you plan something? Or would you be content coexisting? We had been receiving various tidbits of information concerning Alpha's movements. A bunch of logs we received are at this point public commodity and viewable on the OWF if you search for them. Long story short: We'd received logs from months back in which Abbas outlined a plan to let NPO head up an anti-tS coalition (with rose intending to profit off of it). This log too is on the forums somewhere in the hundreds of alpha vs tS pages. We also received various reports Alpha spreading rumors that tS had paid arrgh to hit NPO around 168. Something which was blatantly false (and which Ogaden has since confirmed to be false. Also on the OWF). It ended up being an additional factor in our decision to go after Alpha. I digress. Some logs detailed that Alpha would send NPO to weaponize the supposed intel that 'tS paid arrgh to roll NPO' in an attempt to drive a wedge between tS and TKR-SK. This in itself alarmed us. We naturally took steps to mitigate the impact of an such efforts. Moreover though, it was a reason for us to be wary of you. Moving on: at the onset of the Alpha-tS war, we received various signals: VE, Rose and UPN all in their own way privately voiced dissent with Alpha's behavior and/or voiced a desire for peace. Regardless of how things played out: We received intel that NPO had been ready to defend Alpha. Moreover, NPO had supposedly been pissed at Alpha for asking them to stay out. While I can respect the loyalty, if I am being pragmatic, this made you look like more of a threat than say, a Rose who had screenshots leaked in which they considered dropping Alpha. You supported Alpha unconditionally in what we felt was directly aggressive behavior against tS and its sphere. This further put you on our radar. So the Alpha war continued. Alliances like Rose and VE agreed to a mutual decommissioning of troops with our allies (as the entire world was in a state of high alert, all built up, while tS/Alpha slugged it out- a defacto cold war). NPO refused to decommission. In this case, it was your right to do as you pleased, but it again sent a message to me: NPO just became a bigger blip yet. On June 1st, Hansarius was officially elected to UPN government (or unofficially; in an case, greatkitteh brought out the news that day). This marked a turning point: As discussed earlier, I could not ignore the intel which showed Hansarius stating that he considered tS his gravest enemies along with a series of accusations as well as what looked like a clear maintenance of a grudge for our extraction of reps in oktoberfest (a war in which Hansarius had lied to us about his intentions to hit us, and launched an aggressive attack). We had no reason to trust his word or his intentions, given all that had transpired; UPN became an enemy state in my eyes, and I planned accordingly. On June 8th, UPN and NPO signed their MDoAP, officially completing the unification of ParaCov+NPO: You were one sphere now and to me, it was clear that UPN and NPO had both made the choice to ultimately pursue direct opposition to The Syndicate. To a lesser degree, I viewed VE and Rose equally complicit by virtue of their continued support of this unification. I think it's reasonable to conclude that your FA lads are smart enough to realize that such a unification would eventually result war with tS (if only by virtue of the bipolar structure it perpetuated). On June 13th, the UPN announced the inclusion of NAC and Polaris in the Covenant. On June 14th, The Syndicate opened fire on UPN and NPO. We struck two alliances for strategic purposes: Given the overwhelming numbers on the other side, we needed to take at least two of the main hitters within the opposing coalition out of the fight. We considered UPN as one of the more competent mass alliances on the other side. We considered NPO to be a wildcard. We banked on VE/Rose to botch their counters. We anticipated that if NPO was given the room to pull off a blitz, they could theoretically give Mensa problems by virtue of tier matchups due to NPO's cohesion in the lower tiers. We also chose NPO because frankly, you positioned yourself as a threat to us. Big enough of a threat to warrant military action. Similarly, a factor in choosing UPN as an entry point was Hansarius' positioning of UPN as a threat to tS. VE was safeguarded because we did not want to place our unsuspecting allies in Pantheon in a tough predicament. The entire operation was a hail mary pre-empt of what we believed to be an inevitable war. We knew that you were not ready. That you needed time. We figured our best bet was an immediate strike. So we moved quickly. Now, many of you have brought forth that NPO was supposedly hit because of (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). I'll put that one to rest: - NG (Alpha) struck MI6 (an alliance from which an at this point small/dwindling contingent of tS members (and govt) stem) on June 7th, 2016. The DoW included defacto support from NG's (dominant) allies in NPO, among others. - The DoW directly referenced Steve (Placentica) with the rallying cry "for steve". The DoW also contained direct satire of the writing style of "the pen", a persona which I embraced some time ago in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). It's essentially a shitposting persona. In other words: The DoW directly referred to tS' war on Alpha (Steve) and made a direct appeal to me (though I am pretty much retired/inactive in that game). It was later (after various inquiries) explained that there were (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)-related CB's. This was not however, clear from the start. Whether those CBs are/were legit is irrelevant to me, as I do not care for the fate of (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). Given the direct reference to myself as well as PW, I did respond in kind on the (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) forums with similar "The Pen" doomsday trolling. - a few days after that DoW, I was handed a screenshot of a thread from another NPO branch. This thread was a rallying call/recruitment call which leveraged a PW-related screenshot of Chimaera (controversial (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) leader in MI6 and primary opponent of NPO there; inactive shit in tS in PW who never did a thing politically, and who just sat around) supposedly threatening NPO members with war (read; Being eradicated from the game). Image: "The Politics and war NPO branch would like your support for its survival in a potential upcoming conflict. The Alliance has been threatened by people wishing to wipe NPO because of its existence and success in cybernations". Upon receipt, I inquired into the logs and acquired context: Given context, the ominous threat presented in the recruitment thread became a simple matter of chim shooting the shit with a few NPO members. Moreover, the 'you'll get killed off' comment is a direct reply to the NPO member's suggestion for chim to join NPO. He replies with his personal take on the world. Reiterating that he was politically inactive (and known to be so) in PW. The 'ominous chim' narrative had apparently also been spread in backchannels. All of NPO's movements, in combination with the screenshot gave us the impression that NPO was actively spinning a narrative against us and positioning itself to take u out. The framing of tS as a boogeyman based on an offhand comment by an inactive tS member who happens to be a well known (and despised by NPO) figurehead of MI6 in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) was, in our eyes, deliberate in nature. This prompted me to call NPO out on the PW forums on June 10th. So, the june 10th callout was a direct (and immediate) reaction to the receipt of the screenshot. In hindsight, I probably should not have made the callout as it would not have given you the option to spin a PR-narrative around "OMG THIS IS BECAUSE OF (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)". That's hindsight talking though. My decision to treat the NPO as an enemy however gradually came to be as a consequence of your own political manouvering and your own decisions. I do not fault you for manouvering as you did, but similarly it would be naive for me not o take precautions. The pragmatic reaction to the identification of a threat is the neutralization of said threat. Closing off with a timeline including militarization of allied alliances. tS will be discounted as we saw no notable change due to our alliance already being milled up from the Alpha war (thanks to yosodog for letting me use his parcer to gather data): June 1st: Hansarius is elected --> tS internally begin seriously considering a pre-empt, discusses with select allies in following days June 7th: The (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) DoW --> Trolling occurs. No militarization is seen yet June 8th: NPO-UPN MDoAP signed --> We make the decision to roll out June 8th: Mensa military begins to spike (somewhat, they were already running a high build) June 9th: BK military begins to spike June 9th: Chola military begins to spike June 10th: TKR military begins to spike June 10th: Guardian military begins to spike June 10th: Partisan calls out NPO for received screenshot June 13th: Covenant inclusion of NAC/Polar June 14th: War Military buildup was prompted by the treaty. Not by the (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) events. The callout was also made *after* militarization had begun. I hope that I have given you a clearer idea, and I hope we can finally put this (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) nonsense to rest. For the prevailing NPO narrative of this all being about (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) is either a grand delusion or a deliberately crafted self-victimization.

I am being owned? I demand more information.

What is an NS? I fart in your general direction.

AM I COOL TOO NOW