[Coalition A is trying to do something very obvious]

26 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

That's a non-answer. You are being called out on your entire narrative for the past months having been absolute bullshit, and it's supported by a large amount of your internal logs.

 

That's what's going on. The rest isn't really relevant to the conversation atm.

We would have been more amiable if things were different. There's nothing inherently contradictory in there.

You can only even come close to pinning anything on us as of the surrender topics. Rest is all you(collectively).

There's nothing else to say. 

 

 Roquentin10/24/2019, 10:52:14 AM like i normally wouldn't be like 'haha they're quiting'

Roquentin10/24/2019, 10:52:19 AM but since they were super toxic

Roquentin10/24/2019, 10:52:23 AM it's good riddance

 

 

 

[Coalition A is trying to do something very obvious]

Just now, Prefonteen said:

Are you denying that there are multiple logs of you and your coal B gov colleagues calling for not just extension of the war, but destroying us, forcing attrition, making people quit and so on?

 

Because we've all seen 'em.

If your framing wasn't loaded and taken at face value, then even then we're not destroying any communities or trying to do that. It's your own decision to not be able to take the heat and leave. If you show the "we deserve to win or we'll quit" mindset, it will be blood in the water.  If you intentionally avoid intensive wars and you show the weakness of having members who won't be able to tolerate hardship, then that's still not us destroying the community. 

[Coalition A is trying to do something very obvious]

9 hours ago, kalev60 said:

Roq please, if even slightly possible I´d prefer to leave GPA out of the current shitfest, a  long time ago rebranded AA because it got constantly rolled, can not be your reasoning for the current permawar shit-fest.  

It doesn't have to be GPA, just any AA they rolled for  funsies. We can count the countless micros KT had snuffed out and laughed at on their alliance page. Was that destroying a community? The point was that this humanitarian argument about how people need to be left alone to pixel hug and ditch their allies was utter crap. That was just the example where people didn't tolerate a neutral alliance being left alone. The comment in the logs buorhann posted was that  Asierith said we destroyed their community because we didn't let them just ditch us and be with tS who were hostile towards your own bloc/allies. The argument is if your community can't handle people getting hit because of pixel hugging schemery and pixel hugging schemery not working out, it's not much of a community.

Buorhann tried to be a moralist with his "destroying communities" shtick and it's not a good look on him. Plenty of the logs show me saying how it benefits KT/TGH to have a political atmosphere where peripheral alliances back down to them easily. That is what I have sought to combat. Plenty of wars have occurred where smaller alliances back down and let the main AAs take the heat and this type of thing works solely in the favor of people like Buorhann,  KT,  TKR, tS, etc. 

 

[Coalition A is trying to do something very obvious]

5 minutes ago, CandyShi said:

How do you have the audacity to define what is a community and what isn’t?
 

 

So GPA could have said they were just a peaceful community and rolling it was ruining it? That's stupid. Your in-game stats don't constitute a community sorry.

It is in Buorhann's interest to have a bunch of farmville players bend the knee to people like him, so this type of mentality is beneficial and he preys on it

He didn't accommodate neutrals or anything like that before. 

[Coalition A is trying to do something very obvious]

3 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

What peace talks?  lol.  It’s been very clear between multiple leaks that Coalition B has full intention on trying to force us out of the game.
 

———————

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:19:50 AM
the issue is they wouldn't stay in for our leverage

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:20:01 AM
so if they won't stay in and can't be cajoled

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:20:03 AM
then they have to die

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:20:12 AM
pretty simple

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:20:32 AM
not sure why we'd tolerae people who freeride joining ts' sphere to prosper

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:20:50 AM
like asierith told keshav we were killing the carth community

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:20:58 AM
and it's like good because it's trash

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:24:52 AM
because it's just  a bunch of trash micros that stacked

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:24:56 AM
not a community at all

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:25:16 AM
like if their evaulation of their leadership is based on how fast the leadership can pull them out of a war

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:25:17 AM
then

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:25:23 AM
iit shouldn't exist

Roquentin11/4/2019, 10:25:31 AM
they can all play in vm mode

Keshav11/4/2019, 11:12:42 AM
I mean that abusive partner line

Keshav11/4/2019, 11:12:47 AM
Absolutely astounds next

Keshav11/4/2019, 11:12:50 AM
Me

Keshav11/4/2019, 11:13:01 AM
Shitheads are shittier alliance.

Keshav11/4/2019, 11:13:54 AM
We told _everyone_ up front

Keshav11/4/2019, 11:13:55 AM
We’ll hit you if you peace

Keshav11/4/2019, 11:13:57 AM
And maintained that as much as we could

Keshav11/4/2019, 11:13:57 AM
What did they expect.

Keshav11/4/2019, 11:14:02 AM
Honestly I definitely don’t want to peace them ever

Leo the Great11/4/2019, 3:29:02 PM
Well they didn’t expect us to kill t$

Leo the Great11/4/2019, 3:29:07 PM
That was their trump card

Leo the Great11/4/2019, 3:29:17 PM
They knew they couldn’t just peace

——————

You’re being led by a group of shitlords who want to destroy communities.

lol. You clearly aren't reading the actual logs. It says right there if their community is based on pixel hugging and ditching during a war, then we don't care because it's not a community. Just because it benefited doesn't make it logical to say getting rolled for ditching is destroying a community. You're the one who insisted on not surrendering earlier on the premise of getting these alliances to break. Keep that in mind.

[City unlocks and destroying your own cities]

27 minutes ago, Frawley said:

What are you talking about, the NPO never forced anyone to hand over tech.

Eh, it did in 2008 but a much smaller amount. It's not on the scale EM is suggesting of a billion and setting anyone back permanently. He's just doing his usual anti-NPO thing and it's a fabrication. The highest reps were on NPO and it was 350k tec which did set it back for a long time.

[Letttttts play a game]

15 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

You weren't going to play ball in the first place. As proven by the logs and your actions.

 

For future reference- if you don't want people to call your shit, you have to realize that when you leave them no options there's no reason for them not to do it.

I was talking about the Gorge situation in that he couldn't have actually expected trading the logs for anything to work or making threats based on them. There was just no reason for us to be extorted.

How you feel about the war situation is entirely up to you and the decisions of your coalition partners lead to any stances you describe having issue with.

[Letttttts play a game]

Also btw, for future reference if you're going to blackmail people into doing stuff so you don't release sensitive info, then you have to realize there's no reason for them to accept it as you can keep blackmailing them with more and more demands. It'll never be worth succumbing to blackmail even if the stuff we said makes us look bad. Once you played that card, no one was going to play ball.

[An Announcement from Coalition A Regarding Peace Talks]

2 hours ago, MCMaster-095 said:

The thing is that they were never talking to Partisan in the first place. If these threads close, the status quo will be restored, which means that Partisan still won’t be negotiated with. While these threads certainly aren’t helping peace, they aren’t really hurting either, since either way there would be no negotiations.

I mean he or another representative will get negotiated with when they have actual terms for his group. That's it. These term ideas had been around for 4-5 months on a maybe basis with some of them only being actualized in response to the surrender topic. You could always talk about the ones you have currently in terms of the 1st one and not accept until later.

He took on the role of janitor when it was all fun and games for him before and he has to deal with it as is rather than trying to drastically change it unilaterally. Not really our fault they caused issues. His alliance wouldn't be in this situation if they had been the least bit diplomatic with their own ally. If he wants to take it as us trying to make tS disband, then that's his prerogative.

 

[Letttttts play a game]

Just now, Avakael said:

One thing that is clearly missing, mind you, from George's first dump- everything Yoda ever said. Low key my favourite part is y'all telling him off non stop for being a whiner. Was he kicked?

Nah. I mean a lot of less experienced  people have had similar issues and we'd prefer to work them through. 

 

[Letttttts play a game]

19 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

While we are on the topic of logs, I have some more logs for you to delete.

Well he had a wrong impression since affiliates was added later on. Either way my decisions are final and I overruled that public stance.

I also don't recall anyone saying we wanted to disband GOB

Most of those posts reflect Keshav's initial desire to appease Sisyphus/tS but they were no longer tenable as no compromise could be reached and I overruled him due to the military situation deteriorating  totthe point where it would be too much of a risk not to hit your side and let the BK end go down with you dominant. Anyway have no intent = not doing it ever. Once it became clear the other side had no way of coming back without intervention, it was done as letting them get killed was stupid.

Note I said two days before. So they didn't know where we'd enter until 2 days before as I didn't make a final decision until then. I made the decision  to use the TKR cb that had been available to avoid it being a direct expansion on KETOG.

I'm glad you can remind us that the alternative was you and TKR reigning supreme.  Some people seem to forget how it would have turned out.

[Letttttts play a game]

1 minute ago, Prefonteen said:

"How dare you peace out after we broke our word. Let me go delete all all posts which prove I broke my word"

 

Is that roughly how it went?

Nope. I never promised not to expand and I informed them of our upcoming hit 2 days before. They did lie while palling around with KERTCHOGG that they didn't know we'd do it, though.  A lot of the stuff in there would be more harmful to their innocence narrative, so it's bad I didn't save it.

[Letttttts play a game]

50 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

As honest as that time when you pre-emptively whiped a full channel of discussions when t$ was still allied to you. Discussions which conveniently pertained communications surrounding your entry?

I wasn't preemptive. It was in response to the peacing out without informing and ghosting of us by your gov. We longer had any reason to trust them with the info and I wiped it because they wouldn't respond after that betrayal. Was it hasty? Yeah, but when you're fighting an entire coalition and your ally leaves the war and ignores you and tells other people all kinds of misinfo then yeah, I did it as a rapid response.

 

[A plea to all]

58 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

...my..... revisionist history? holy crap man hahaha

1. Oktoberfest: Reps were demanded in that war, yes. There were large differences between the nature of that war and this one however:

- We were not caught plotting a war while the other party was busy fighting a second party. We were directly hit with a CB which was unfounded/had no supporting evidence presented. In the case of KETOG etc- BK clearly plotted to hit, as has been proven over and over.

- Our war had not been dragging on for half a year. It lasted (in total) from 15 October - 7 November 2015. That's including negotiations.
- We presented our terms the moment UPN/DEIC decided to surrender. As soon as possible. We did not stall for over a month with bollocks excuses.

- We did not prepare a document of (reportedly) 65 different terms. Or is that rumor unfounded?

- Finally, we did not deliberately drag out the war. You are clearly doing so right now.

 

The point wasn't about CBs.  It's that you went for punitive terms even though there was considerable attrition and knowledge it would set the alliances back for a long time so no game health concern entered into the equation in any of those wars. It was a longer war for its time.

Again like I said fast burn vs slow burn.

Quote

 

 

2. With regards to the "perpetual rolling" situation you claim existed from the end of Silent to IQ:  The only major war between IQ and Silent was Papers please, which did not involve your side whatsoever. Paper's please was a war against TEst which had taken the opportunity to hit syndi/emc allies during silent, and had been rather aggressive with small matchups in general while growing a very sizeable upper tier. That war was a given. Even @Prefontaine acknowledged this. The VE war never occured. "contemplated" means "did not happen", so let's scratch that off the list. That leaves us with the SK war as the only war which was baseless aggression (and which I cede to you) before papers, please.

In the light of no opposition, hits on smaller alliances were done with no eye to political change. Whether there were reasons or not, people were happy were happy in their consolidation. The vision the people had for the game did not include competitive wars. The side seized full advantage as much as possible and added many alliances despite having no serious competitors.

Quote

 

That's a markedly different picture than:

 

3. The underperformance occurred from scratch, while paracov etc. were in advantageous positions. They were often down to mismanagement, rather than member incompetence. Paracov was behind the curve on military innovations and coalition warfare (entering one at a time, focusing on navy and nukes in early wars, not realizing air was king etc. etc.)- member flush only might've started playing a role in the last two or so wars, at which point paracov was supplemented by alliances like NPO and Alpha (which was large at the time). You ae once again bullshitting.

I'm not. In many cases, the blitzes on one side weren't as impactful as the others in addition to the things you mentioned along with leaks.  You outblitzed Rose in multiple wars.

 

Quote

4. BK breaking off in itself is already one of the largest alliances breaking off from syndisphere, thus syndisphere splitting. What the rest thought on the matter is irrelevant to he assertion that syndisphere did split the moment it became dominant. (on a side note, at the time I was in HW and in talks with IC about the possibility of TKR linking up with us in a hypothetical split. t$ had gone paperless. Mensa was boring itself to death (literally). All major powers in "dominant" syndisphere were either on their way out, went paperless, or were looking outwards. Your argument is completely baseless.

It's not irrelevant because it was dominant for a while rather than immediately and it wasn't the intention for the majority. It's not a split when it's one side. It doesn't matter if he dilly dallied with the motion, it's been confirmed that TKR didn't actively pursue it because they felt comfortable in their position. tS went paperless and kept some treaties paperlessly. 

Quote

 

So when you make claims like

...you better back it up.

The point was fundamentally your side has a lot of people who have had their hand on the driver's wheel. They chose to operate in a certain way when they had power and the only thing you can point to is literally one of the most maligned alliances on *our* side now.  So let's just be clear your side has certain advantages that are a product of its historical ascendance and they make it a much different animal.

Quote

Yes, yes. Might makes right. I get it. GOONS is in this with a different perspective. There's a lot of historical contradictions at play which neither involve nor seem to interest your alliance. I'm not certain what you are trying to point out. We're aware of our bargaining position. Freel free to try to impose what you wish, we'll go from there.

We're simply not willing to *both* be spat in the face *and* be held responsible for that.

Erm, the other side held out for months and made it as heated of a conflict as possible. The only impetus for the sudden change of heart  it seems is you have more stuff to lose so you want to end it. You're  an addition with a different set of circumstances.

[Letttttts play a game]

3 minutes ago, Avakael said:

I look forward to seeing your authentic versions, so we can find out specifics about what is missing or not in order.

 I didn't save the logs and it's all gone now.  I mean, if I actually said something I'm not about to deny it. I've always tried to be as honest as possible within the constraints of the medium. 

[Letttttts play a game]

5 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

Thank you for pre-emptively confirming that the leaks are likely to be authentic. Saves us trouble explaining when people inevitable start screeching "OMG FAKE".

I don't think it will change NPO or BK's mind, no. But I do appreciate being given evidence which disproves various lies on a multitude of subject and vindicates my alliance as well as others from the baseless accusations of certain parties.

It doesn't mean they're entirely authentic. There were people who noticed that some of the other ones had things missing or not in order. I don't know if there'll be any manipulation.

[Letttttts play a game]

1 minute ago, George (James T Kirk) said:

I figured my topic made was good enough. I have no issue what so ever with you "gunning back" and publicly leaking the dump was not a plan i had. However there is a difference with lieing and gunning back. 

 

 

Not sure where it says "Gorge conspired with Cynic to take the BC bank"  The idea behind bringing it up is that you're not 100% morally pure and that gave you involvement with it since you didn't want to give it back. If I said you conspired with him and premeditated it then that wasn't a correct retelling of events, yeah, but the intent wasn't to say something false. It just fit with the Pantheon thing too.

[Letttttts play a game]

2 minutes ago, George (James T Kirk) said:

Actually was not going to but /shrug at this point idc

So you made a topic specifically gunning for me and two other people with no intentions to dump actual info? That doesn't make any sense. It's kind of odd if you didn't expect the people you targeted to fire back.

[Letttttts play a game]

So you're going to leak stuff you were going to leak anyway but want more attention? I don't really need help getting downvotes lol

[A plea to all]

Just now, George (James T Kirk) said:

LMFAO, i had nothing to do with Cynic stealing the bank what so ever, i did not even know he was going to do it. Can we cut the shit Roq? Like really, you guys are amazing at the way you just try to pin shit on people. 

 

The cynic incident was merely me stating we should keep the BC bank, i had nothing to do with the planing or the actual part of doing it. In fact the first I spoke to him about it was after the fact as shown here: https://prnt.sc/q5toqb

 

So yes im guilty of not wanting to give it back, I however am not the one who plotted to or helped steal it, so GTFO of here with that absolute bull shit. 

You wanted to keep it on his behalf and thus an accessory. Distinction without difference. Don't care man.

[A plea to all]

1 hour ago, Prefonteen said:

No, that situation did not exist. The notion that it did is a fabricated narrative you conjured up to victimize yourself. A bunch of wars were fought, the majority of which your side or paracov before you was aggressive in. The majority of these wars were also anyone's game (often with your/paracov's side having the advantage) and were only won by syndisphere because of critical errors and underperformance by the opposing forces. The moment syndisphere became sort of dominant, it split and the outcome was IQ, which immediately proceeded to plot against ex-syndisphere/EMC. In this new set up, you got a few losses and then *again* parties previously affiliated with the winning side split off to help you finally take down TKR. You were never given extreme terms nor were you prevented from negotiating your surrender at any point in time.

There are significant differences in EMC's approach as a victor and the scorched earth policy your side is displaying here.

 

The situation did very much exist from the end of Silent to IQ.  Fairly sure there were reps demanded in Oktoberfest and no one cared how many members those alliances lost.  Underperformance was symptomatic of the imbalance between the forces as one was comprised of casual players who flushed out under repeated losses and the other of "git gud advocate" The last war between Syndicate and Paracov was a last ditch effort and the numbers were not really on Paracov's side. Anyway what actually happened is EMC in light of having virtually no opposition spent months adding more and more alliances, did treasure island to get rich, rolled SK/Valyria,  did Papers Please, contemplated rolling VE/HBE and then BK broke off. The rest were openly saying they had no desire for any change whatsoever especially Buorhann. There were then multiple attempts to roll IQ out of existence. Knightfall was a lucky break, yeah, but that's it. People were back to business as usual after.

 

Your revisionist history to fool naive new people will always be false.  

Again, it's a difference in marketability than substance. Easy and fast kills that accomplish more destruction and setbacks = good.  Slow burn requiring more patience and endurance that at best would even best be a temporary setback = bad PR. 

Hit BK/GoG/etc. because they rebuilt = insane amounts of economic damage = good.

Long war against rich alliances that will at most result in decreasing the gap somewhat = bad.

[A plea to all]

2 hours ago, Keegoz said:

Still going for the revenge angle. Abbas told me a while ago that you're someone who always will hold a grudge, no matter how long. Guess it was proven correct.

Remembering something done in 2018 is holding a grudge forever? I'm not exactly sure how this is supposed to be payback because 1. your infra was low for the most part. 2. I haven't even said anything indicative of that. The only comments I made were that past actions indicate you would swing towards vulnerable parties if given the chance.  I was usually not in favor of targetting you when it was just KT-TGH-Empyrea-Oblivion  with one of the reasons being the level of drama it'd induce not being worth it. The KETOG thing was not my idea originally and it was intended to be a shorter-length conflict and not intended to cripple but more of a team-building exercise for the sphere.

To the last part, how ironic. 

2 hours ago, Kaz said:

Hey Roq, why not address the central points George made about the nonsense of this continuing war?    It’s not like anyone here really has any love for him, but most of his points have some merit    

No one is being forced to leave the game.  With EM and Gorge, it'd have just been depriving them of the enjoyment of gains seen as ill-gotten. If you're sympathetic to gorge wanting to run around with his 45 cities from investing Pantheon's stuff then feel free or EM using Yakuza to get to 50 cities and his obsession with being the biggest and perpetually growing, then whatever man. 

Nothing was ever said along the lines that we could just roll a few alliances forever and never lose. Ironically such a situation existed before. Right now there are two sides: one is traditionally people who have lost and have less stuff overall, the other is mainly traditional winners who have a lot, so the war isn't hurting them that much. A weakness some alliances have is when they don't fight intensively for a long time, their members start to drop. However, there is no way this war no longer how long it lasts can produce an absolutely one-sided like Gorge describes. The other side is numerous, rich, and robust enough to continue to exist.  Their cities or banks aren't going away.

Historically alliances have ditched their allies because they see them as less robust and capable than the other side and that they can get a better deal by leaving them. That is what happened here. The alliances that left didn't do so as an act of protest at genuine risk. They believed their actions would be shielded.  Force has been the motivator either way: fearing the opposing sides ability to harm them or believing more the other side has more staying power than a burned ally left on the battlefield. As it gave motivation to the other side for those alliances to ditch for greener pastures, it was simply a repetition of the past where alliances would whittle down on on side and the norm of fleeing to pixel hug being perpetuated.

There is no indication we're going after Fark as Fark hasn't done anything to anger anyone. The NAP with Fark will be honored and we have no intentions of doing anything to them.

Again, for the last part, there is no way these alliances can be destroyed in earnest. Throughout the war, they have shown a level of confidence never seen in a losing side and that's because they're aware of all the aforementioned factors going in their favor. 

2 hours ago, Kaz said:

Your deflecting to his wrongs to IQ is doing nothing more than highlight BK’s own banking ineptitude for the rest of us to see.  Handle that matter internally and nobody is going to care one way or the other.  Now kindly stick to the initial points, and keep rolling George on the side until his score is low enough where I can hit him too.  Might be the only place in this war where we agree.  

It's more that it's very important to highlight Gorge's things as he is repeating the normal route of selling us out to curry favor as he sees us as weak enough to go for such a move. If we were as strong as he's saying, he'd give into any demands.  Same as people like Alexio and other assorted traitors on your side.

[Solution to remove the ability to pid down players forever]

11 minutes ago, Bartholomew Roberts said:

Both sides, including your alliance, have scripts to automate warfare while being minimally "legal" within @Alex's ruleset. I would even suspect many people are utilizing multis.

So no, it doesn't really take much effort or coordination anymore.

 

I agree with @durmij though. The war mechanics themselves need to be reworked so that people can't be blitzed so hard. A persistent browser game needs to be able to allow people to log in within 24 hours and defend themselves. If 3 aussie nations/late-nighters get the jump on me overnight, my airforce is gone the next day when I wake up.

Casualties per attack, daily buying limits, unit cost, score calculation, resistance, and war declaration range all need to be revisited and reworked.

Also yeah warfare never has been auttomated. wtf.

This was never an issue until now. It took five years for these people to complain this much about the time stuff.

I remember a lot of people who lived inconvenient time zones  for update would complain and they would just get told too bad. 

You can't suddenly ask for these changes after everyone chased away the casual players much earlier on and laughed with "git gud".

[A plea to all]

Just now, Sketchy said:

I mean, is Gorge really competent enough to even pull of a bank heist?

And what does that say about the people who let him do it lmfao if true.

If I was BK i'd be ashamed to admit the guy who merged into Cornerstone also stole my bank.

Well I was talking about Pantheon and the Cynic thing before that. This was more of embezzlement to settle other debts. You do have a point there. -\ 

[An Announcement from Coalition A Regarding Peace Talks]

4 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

Logs I've seen contradict your point re: ketog being the one dragging it out. I can post them if you want and prove the above to be bullshit. Or would you then turn around and call me out for "leaking" again? 

 

As for the rest... How dare we as a coalition refuse to let you guys dick us around seperately. Shame on us I Guess? 

It's been a tit for tat response. One side feels it's in a good position to hold out  doesn't want to concede and then the other doesn't either. 

Your informant can probably find a log where EM shows a convo with a Rose milcom detailing their side's strategy though.