The Mad Titan

I don’t care about public relations. The important stuff is private and that’s going just fine.

Still works, doesn’t it?

That’s a convenient line to push when it’s your side on the bottom, isn’t it?

As extreme as “you can’t spin your way out of this. Your time is up. Scorched earth. Anyone tied to NPO and BK will sink with the ship”? Don’t get indignant about extremes when it’s your side that pushed it there.

One is the prelude to the other. You must say that you lost and it is not up for debate in the eventual document. Our own personal time? If we are going to do the dance for four weeks we can do the low intensity fighting rather than run circles in peace servers. Theres no attempt to save face, at this point I think its perfectly clear we care absolutely zero about what you think. However if you can't understand the difference between unconditional surrender and what we are asking, then it's only fair to educate you.

All we want is for there to be an agreement that Coalition A is negotiating peace that will eventually result in the surrender. The reason for this is your side refuses to admit defeat, and we have no interest in discussing who won this war. We are more than happy to discuss any other term that will be presented, but if you look at your sides leaderships past peace talks it will be four weeks before even agreeing to say "we lost", and we have no interest in wasting our time. As for the second part, your side's leaders made it clear what would happen to us if we were in your shoes, we have no interest in a "greater good" which translates to "you give we take". Considering your side's public and stated goal was to end BK and NPO, wanting those same people to simply admit they lost is hardly an egregious escalation.

All that is needed is that it is accepted that there will be an admission of defeat in the final peace and that is a non-negotiatable term.

You really are quite dense. All that is being asked is that and admission of defeat is an agree upon term prior to talks starting, when the others will be discussed. You won't be any more "uNsUrrEnDerED" than how in Knightfall talks were ongoing while fighting was still occurring. Thanks for admitting it.

You joke but that's literally all it would take.

It was part of the surrender terms.

May NPO bless this marriage.

Yea let’s just take away the only way to beat larger nations.

I mean if you convert this wars total damage against what Alex has credits valued as (15 mil) this war would cost $23,500 in credits to repair all damage. Obviously not realistic but the conversion is there.

No, no, no. We FORCED them to work for Nazis. So really it’s our fault that they are working with Nazis.

BK in this case is literally worse than Hitler.

As long as he stops troop creation too

How is it a golden oppurtunity to be hit by the number two alliance in the game who has multiple top 10 alliances while fighting a war? T$ was only countered once they attacked BK and brought multiple allies in on them making it apparent you were supporting the enemy side.

When you decide to get involved and meddle in a war generally being proactive is on the ones interfering. TEst was at war with us hitting them was justified.

It’s entirely true that the only interest is for BK and NPO to fight while no upper tier alliances truly commit. It’s obvious informal connections are still there when you see Rose being low paper, Rose opting in, ketog chaos collusion, t$/Kerchog collusion, etc.

I’m not here to say if you not responding was for a valid reason or not, but the point was T$ did not have any communications with us till we were forced to reach out to someone in IA. That made it apparent it wasn’t a serious concern for T$.

The only bearing OWR and Carth have was highlighting how T$ was intentionally ghosting us during negotiations. Their head of FA had multiple week gaps but was fully capable of two new M-level treaties indicating they were not negotiating in good faith.

No terms have been given other than that for talks to start it must be acknowledged that a surrender will be part of them.

No the idea was to dominate the game through informal relationships.

No no no. Fark totally should forget the multiple undeserved rollings in order to hit people that have not done anything to them.

And by protecting a hostile alliance you were joining the war yourself in an aggressive manner. No one is questioning your right to attack BK, but it was clearly an aggressive action.