Roquentin

The way I interpreted is you were saying it as NPO would think surrendering at war is possible e.g. like war is peace. Don't be obtuse. I mean you're flamebaiting for sure here, so glasshouses.

it's not really a stretch. Thalmor and the other creators at the very least seemingly felt Western values were being undermined by Islamization in Europe. Then the sort of box was opened and all kinds of far right people went in just because that sweetener was there. Once you starting get the helicopter meme people( see Colonia Dignidad), then it's not a big leap to Hitler. You do know what the remove kebab meme is from right? Afrika Korps on the other hand, I go in and first thing I see is: It's totally possible they could all be closet case nazis and it's just hidden, but it's just seemed to be a very misguided theme. The Migraine guy has pushed the limits though. Alex has been inconsistent in terms of what German themes are appropriate and not.

No. In the last war, the other side said it was fine with that one but disputed the others. They agreeing to surrender when the final terms are agreed upon. Don't twist my statements into some sort of orwellian thing. This is kind of the lack of understanding here. It's not supposed to be a bargaining chip in our opinion. You can agree to admit defeat but negotiate on the other things. The last few times you've had no interest in admitting defeat, so nobody wants to fight on that. I don't think you've been around long enough to know what is behind our insecurity or not. The stuff I say that is dismissed as paranoia are at least contingency plans and there is a basis for acting. You did say they were light. I mean there's no way to prove what you did or didn't say but you said you heard they were light but that it set a bad precedent to surrender with the damage stats. I don't record people without their knowledge, so yeah, this won't be verifiable either way.

Where are you getting this? Basically cooper or someone else said on the hope radio show that he had an idea of what the terms are but that you didn't want to surrender. I'm not at liberty to disclose them, but you could look at the Ming or NP as models and not be too far off. Of course they're subject to change.

You're agreeing to it being a term of the final agreement, not finalizing the agreement right away. There wouldn't be an armistice or peace until we reached a final agreement, yeah. In terms of the Central Powers, they didn't have much of a say in their terms as it was mostly negotiated without them as a factor. The terms only would become binding once they are all accepted. These aren't the real terms btw. Term 1: Admission of Defeat/Surrender You: Okay. Fighting doesn't end Term 2: Adrienne switches to guinea pig avatars. You: No. Fighting continues Me: How about a week? You: ok. Peace is finalized So to give an example, we lost in Silent and we were willing to admit defeat but the thing we were fighting on was the reps and their size and that was the only thing we fought on.

No you'd be surrendering on x conditions and you'd be able to accept or reject the other terms until we finished a final agreement. Any terms wouldn't be binding on you unless you agreed to them. So let's say "okay we have the admission of defeat out of the way, so next term is TKR has to rename to the The Knights Rodent and put a guinea pig on its flag." You could say no at that point and we'd either have to drop it or talks would stall out until someone gave in.

You'd be agreeing to surrender/admission of defeat as one of the terms. You wouldn't be formally surrendering at that point. The guarantees you have is that you aren't agreeing to any of the other terms in advance and the other terms that you'd be able to negotiate on would have guarantees. The Japanese for instance had to accept unconditional surrender as part of the Potsdam declaration which meant the the Japanese armies had to obey commands from the allies and SCAP could do whatever they wanted in terms of reorganizing the country. This is some awkward wordplay if you insist on continuing this line of thought.

You don't know what unconditional surrender is, so stop using it. It's like some Princess Bride shit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconditional_surrender Here you go buddy. Come back when you've read up.

It's not an unconditional surrender to begin with as you are not laying down arms. You'd be approaching us as a defeated party and acknowledging defeat. You would be abel to negotiate on the other points and would have no obligation simply from agreeing to the first one to agree to the rest. Unconditional surrender would be us requiring you to turn over control of your militaries and internal workings and then implement whatever terms we have and you wouldn't know about. The rest of your post is just subjective bs where you're the good guys objectively. How I see it is the complete opposite. You've done plenty of questionable cbs and won yourselves. For me, it's ultimately you are the traditional winners and you don't want to eat some humble pie. Your side raised the stakes with its apocalyptic proclamations. You gave us essentially a blank check by saying we'd have to completely smother you and dominate or be hunted to the ends of the earth. Um, so again, this is entirely your subjective perception. I simply saw the wholesale dismemberment of the BKsphere as being dangerous for us. We would have no ability to resist a similar sized coalition on our own and our only major alliance treaties were tenuous and based on a leader who vanished. This wasn't an easy war even with us going in, so all this claptrap about killing the game is laughable. You're the ones who made the decision to pool the majority of traditional elites into two spheres that made up your side. You just wanted to win and you felt entitled for history to repeat itself and you could get back to winning and smashing mid tier people you don't like. We at one point completely operated in a sea of darkness surrounded by your hegemony in a very isolated capacity. The fact that you can't handle losing isn't my problem.

Eh. I think this is kind of missing the point. Thalmor was going for a certain thing when he made the alliance and it was bound to attract people more radical than he may be. The post-Thalmor leaders like Keegoz who don't traditionally imbue their alliances with RL poliitcal views have had the challenge of balancing the fact that it will get them negative attention and alienating their memberbase by going too "PC". I don't know what their own personal views are ultimately, but the imagery curu cites is the most prominent with regards to the KT theme. By contrast there was a knights templar themed alliance in CN, and it never had these political associations because it was a much different political climate at the time it was made and it didn't try to attract people based on their RL political views. To give some examples, there was a person with a British Union of Fascists flag with Tsumugi from K-On on it. There's also a hyperborea theme nation which comes with all the associated issues the alliance had since you know Hyperborea is supposed to be the mythical homeland of the Aryan race. I was very disgruntled with the Hyperborea theme and BK's association with it for a long time. There's also that guy who did the lynching reference and his ruler name and nation name was specifically mocking of blacks/muslims to begin with. There's also Rhodesia forever nation as well and you know it means it's someone who sees white minority rule as ideal.

well they could also have it overthrown by a CIA-backed coup.

I did nazi this coming. Kosmo out of nowhere bam.

Oh, well, then I'm going to have to shut up. I don't want more secret surrender terms.

BK are awful people especially since they associate with people like TheNG and Malal who also relish in player deletions and I can't accept this. Shame on GOONS.

Not all of these are Soviet. Communist/Socialist parties existed before the Soviet Union. With USN they say anyone left of center would be okay so they aren't particularly ideologically rigid. If you just dislike socialism in general, that's another thing altogether. This one has Soviet symbology but for the most part the motifs are just the easiest ones to use. The reason the Communist stuff doesn't have the same stigma as Nazism is because Communism/Socialism doesn't say you should be treated worse for your ascribed characteristics. No one is being said to be innately inferior to a master race and condemned for their genetic lineage. You can hate the violent means taken by regimes like the USSR and the killings they did, but it's a major difference. We specifically avoid actual identification with Communism as the motivations behind it and what we do are entirely different as the economic factors in the game aren't the same as RL and we don't try to spread our stuff beyond our alliance besides just telling people why it's not as bad as they make it out. The reason NPO does what it does is because a united alliance is better to us than a spread out one in terms of how we want to play the game. It's a fixed set up in-game and all the production factors are accessible so the local knowledge problem doesn't exist. The average person who just has it as a casual game where they blow stuff up isn't going to look at things from a wider perspective so having a centralized set up avoids a lot of the pitfalls of a do as you please set up. It allows for alliance goals to be set. Communism is ultimately about direct democracy applied to economics, so the two are very different as we have no desire or expectation of deciding everything we do by vote. We don't expect every single person to have the same level of investment in the game as the leadership, so it is better for things to be decided autocratically. It is merely an absolute monarchy that extends to economics as well, which is the main difference between it and the other autocratic/dictatorial set ups that are predominant in the game.

So glad we can keep fighting you. By the way, there's nothing really conspiratorial in the above, and fyi the pollyannish picture I was being sold is you could just be rolled all by yourself after you rebuilt as long as it didn't help BK and avoided hurting Chaos so keep huffing and puffing about me all you want. Not by choice on both occasions. They hit you and then you used them to discharge boredom because you didn't want to hit BK on your own. I'd say we'd be about equal by now. We can drag the war out enough so we surpass you, though. Um you're saying they planned it both before and after Surf's Up. The 3-1 advantage is usually based on nationcount and the nationcounts of actual involved alliances in this war were shown earlier to not be reflective of that level of advantage. The plans you already had to cooperate earlier in the year which have been previously acknowledgedI. The main premise is that BK would be out of the way and it is easier to win against one than against both. I'm using tone for some conversations and outright plans/concepts for other ones. It doesn't matter if it's this war or right after. It's simply easier to divide and conquer by having one down first. There were also the original leaks of you maintaining ties with TCW from your own forums which were seen as suspect. They were handwaved away super fast. In the Sphinx leaks, the motivations instead of minispheres appear to be that your main dispute at the time was with IQ alliances rather than CoS which SRD had. TCW not accepting the covert alignment wasn't planned yeah, but that was based on them not wanting to be a secret partner. Well the way the people that interacted with you at the time took it was you expected to win with Chaos and that it was a winning move. The screenshots that showed up later also seemed to indicate that in terms of seeing it as your best opportunity to turn things around rather than it being a huge gamble. If you saw it differently at the time, then it wasn't evident. The idea wasn't exclusive to this war. It could have been peace out and then turn around similar to Surf's Up since you'd have the momentum. it could be either. I don't know of the exact details you gave to anyone you interacted with as I wasn't involved in the talks anyone had with you but if you just said this war, it's easy to skate around.

Actually, per the secret surrender terms we've had to accept from the Covenant, I was reprogrammed to shitpost to fit in more with Memesphere.(shhh)

You didn't go to war with just your sphere. The screen released was from May, so if your justification is based on them plotting to hit you before Surf's Up, then that's something else to say they'd hit you right after as well. You haven't revealed any insider knowledge of BK and co planning to hit you that wasn't tied to Rainbow. When I'm talking about less potent militarily, I'm referring to it vs your coalition KETOG/Chaos/Rose together. A large inexperienced group that hasn't coordinated together won't really do well if it's on the defensive, and that has always played out. As far as I saw in the original plan leaked, they didn't see it in the terms you describe as a 3 on 1 gangbang, so obviously they're self-aware and know the limitations of their capacities. It was not really much of an assurance to me given it'd be the 2nd time you've worked with them in the same year. It was an easy of a win as you could get. Your infra was low and you could use that to fight on a much better terms against full infra lower city opponents. I don't know your timetable for escalation but more than one person that interacted with you directly detected a palpable hostility and they had no reason to mislead me about you or rile me up because they had no ill will towards you. The idea has always been if you could get BK locked down and out of the way, there'd be nothing stopping you and whoever your co-conspirators would be from doing it. There is no reason to trust you. You've been super confident since you formed Chaos and the suspicious circumstances surrounding it and the FA in the lead up has made it clear you had certain objectives in mind. It's your right to do whatever you feel is in your interest, but I don't have any reason to enable you to win outright. There is simply nothing else out there realistically that could have happened short of the two spheres breaking up into smaller parts themselves or a different curbstomp on one of them which would have been the same thing they hoped to avoid. There is a limited field for potential action and the biggest target out there would be us in the event of a BKsphere loss. Anything else would be hopelessly naive to assume. You can take it personally, but we have no reason to trust anyone in KETOG either, you just gave the most reason in terms of outward expressions of hostility and there were more common contacts between us while they were relatively quiet so it comes down to a choice in target selection. We had no common goals with either of you, so conflict was always more likely.

Yeah Smith, you sick freak. Get your mind out of the gutter.

Six months pfft. It also applies retroactively.

It doesn't. Having less on paper allies while being able to build a large coalition if needed historically has been a way to justify ganging up on people who have more paper but are less potent militarily.

The reason it's not really that believable is because unifying "minispheres" to hit another sphere isn't exactly conducive to maintaining minispheres. It would make more sense if one truly believed in them to just take the losses on their own. The intuitive answer is you wanted to beat down an alliance or alliances at all costs and get a win.

It was just to fit in the song lyric reference but either way good chunks of your bloc were willing to give up a lot they held dear in terms of principles to go for a win. Not sure what else it'd be.

I'm not talking about sentimentally. The actions we take are more important than anything we say. It would be ideal if it changed but we have all tacitly approved regardless of our individual gripes. It's just the difference is unlike Chaos we don't poise ourselves for long-term alignment with a group some of them call "slursphere" and don't claim to uphold the high ground in this regard. They traded their passion for glory.

Are we Coalition B or Memesphere? This pigeon however knows the Art of the Deal inside and out and we are seeing the results right here. This is the type of dynamic politics Orbis has been craving.