Jump to content

Press release from The Syndicate on Alpha and recent events


Prefonteen
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Frawley

Just got conformation that Pfeiffer never threatened NPO and the closest thing he might have said to the subject was he wanted to fight alongside them and not against them.

This is false, I was advised after being raided on Christmas day that in order to avoid it happening again, we must sign an ally of thiers, luckily for us we were already in discussions with our friends at SK at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is false, I was advised after being raided on Christmas day that in order to avoid it happening again, we must sign an ally of thiers, luckily for us we were already in discussions with our friends at SK at the time.

 

A powerful alliance attempting to cull a known-to-be-powerful-on-other-worlds group before it can be a threat?

 

Sounds like a move you could respect tbh :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Frawley

A powerful alliance attempting to cull a known-to-be-powerful-on-other-worlds group before it can be a threat?

 

Sounds like a move you could respect tbh :P

Oh I dont care about it, been playing these games for a decade, seen much worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is false, I was advised after being raided on Christmas day that in order to avoid it happening again, we must sign an ally of thiers, luckily for us we were already in discussions with our friends at SK at the time.

 

Which most certainly doesn't mean that if you don't sign with an ally of ours, you'll get raided.

 

You can't possibly expect an alliance to prohibit its members to raid nations they have no diplomatic relation to. Unless of course said alliance prohibits raiding at all..

  • Upvote 1

☾☆

Priest of Dio


º¤ø„¤¤º°¨ ø„¸¸„¨ ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸
¨°º¤ø„¸ GOD EMPEROR DIO BRANDO¨°º¤ø„¸
¨°º¤ø„¸ DIO BRANDO GOD EMPEROR¨°º¤ø„¸
¨°º¤ø„¤¤º°¨ ø„¸¸„¨ ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which most certainly doesn't mean that if you don't sign with an ally of ours, you'll get raided.

 

You can't possibly expect an alliance to prohibit its members to raid nations they have no diplomatic relation to. Unless of course said alliance prohibits raiding at all..

heh

 

don't worry about it, that RGE alliance literally goes around warring people as a recruitment method and nobody gives a shit

 

just keep it on the DL and don't do it to the people you know everybody wants to suck off because they've spanned multiple games for over a decade

 

e: as for this thread: good - i hope both ts and alpha die in a fire of their own creation

Edited by Hereno
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like that post with the tissues. Because it could be for Steve's tears as Partisan and Roy just beat him around the head and face...but I like to think it's for cleaning up after Rose finishes on his forehead.

 

This thread was great, I'm glad I was able to (in some small way) contribute to the events leading to its creation.

  • Upvote 2

☾☆ Chairman Emeritus of Mensa HQ ☾☆

"It's not about the actual fish, themselves. Fish are not important in this context. It's about fish-ing, the act of fishing itself." -Jack O'Neill

iMZejv3.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is absolutely incorrect and you know that.  We didn't have to join the war to help out tS and your alliance, TEst.  It would've been much more profitable to just sit out and make $300m, lol.  As it turned out I wish I had.  UPN/DEIC weren't the threats I thought they may be and tS didn't really value our relationship either.  Memph can attest that when we were doing targetting for UPN we felt we might even have to just go suicide nuking into UPN to do any dmg.  But when we did targetting we realized we might have a shot conventionally and Guardian and Alpha did just that successfully.

 

I considered Partisan and tS my friends and signed with them because of a long-established relationship with Partisan.  But their ally Mensa, aggressively attacked Vanguard and my ally Rose chose to defend them.  tS chose to oA into the conflict onto my ally.  I was 100% upfront with tS that we supported Rose, who I feel was defending a friend, just like we defended TEst, a paperless friend (shame to see that go in the wind too, but I guess it is what it is, I get it that you don't like Alpha or me).  But when one ally goes aggressive against another, we'll take the side of the defensive ally.  tS attacked Rose and defended Mensa aggression.  Just what were we supposed to do?  Attack Rose with tS, lol.  Not sure why you'd argue that silly point.

 

This is just more bullshit. Like 4 people in Mensa raided Vanguard. We ordered the raids to stop, they stopped. Vanguard declared war. Was Vanguard "reacting to raids" by declaring war? Sure. Does that mean that Mensa declared on Vanguard and everyone else lined up to defend Vanguard against us? No. Get it straight. Actual facts don't seem to have much value in the world-according-to-Steve's-imagination, but hopefully other people are starting to get the point that you don't know which way is up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not going to comment on whatever issue tS/Alpha seem to have. @Placentica: This is not the first time you have been hypocritical in regards to treaty chains. You attacked UPN without any treaty to do so -- yet you have an issue with someone going in on an oA/helping their own friends that they don't have an official tie to? For someone who is so bothered about the various technicalities, you surely don't apply them when it comes to your own actions. 

 

And I don't have an issue with you doing it. The issue is that you have an issue with others doing it, but clearly disregard your own 'values' as it pertains to you and your own alliance. That's something I have never understood about you, in all the time that I have known you.

  • Upvote 1

200px-UPN.svg.png

Second in Command of UPN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is false, I was advised after being raided on Christmas day that in order to avoid it happening again, we must sign an ally of thiers, luckily for us we were already in discussions with our friends at SK at the time.

 

This is not the same thing as "sign with tS or be rolled." It sounds like someone was explaining our raiding rules to you, which bar raids on allies of allies and various other restrictions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not going to comment on whatever issue tS/Alpha seem to have. @Placentica: This is not the first time you have been hypocritical in regards to treaty chains. You attacked UPN without any treaty to do so -- yet you have an issue with someone going in on an oA/helping their own friends that they don't have an official tie to? For someone who is so bothered about the various technicalities, you surely don't apply them when it comes to your own actions. 

 

And I don't have an issue with you doing it. The issue is that you have an issue with others doing it, but clearly disregard your own 'values' as it pertains to you and your own alliance. That's something I have never understood about you, in all the time that I have known you.

 

I have being pointing out hypocrites for a while and well that isn't a point considering who this involves. Its only really a point to someone who hasn't being a hypocrite can make and well the chances are most people have being hypocrites so its not a point. 

Edited by Clarke

IpHGyGc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is just more bullshit. Like 4 people in Mensa raided Vanguard. We ordered the raids to stop, they stopped. Vanguard declared war. Was Vanguard "reacting to raids" by declaring war? Sure. Does that mean that Mensa declared on Vanguard and everyone else lined up to defend Vanguard against us? No. Get it straight. Actual facts don't seem to have much value in the world-according-to-Steve's-imagination, but hopefully other people are starting to get the point that you don't know which way is up. 

If you're really interested in rehashing that: the actual initial Mensa-Vanguard talks broke off at an impasse so there was no reason to believe raids would stop. You may have decided to stop raids internally after the talks broke off and after Mensa nations had started raiding en masse, but it was only after a bunch of nations were beiged and no communication of it was given so there was no reason to believe they would stop.  No one externally decided to attempt  a diplomatic resolution until the initial week of war was up and the threat of outside intervention by Rose was looming. Given other mass raids have been responded to with recognition of hostilities and weren't perceived as offensive declarations, it's really not as black and white as you put it. If you tell alliances that they are are subject to perma-raids if they don't sign with a top 10 alliance or one of your allies, it's easily perceivable as a de facto state of war.

 

I'm sure by now your policies have been adjusted for handling those situations, but if we're going to be on this subject, it's best to clarify. People who were in Vanguard don't have the OWF presence nor care to come out en masse against the posting gallery out here to constantly repeat this argument, but this has always been the point of view from the other side of that war. It's not particularly relevant to the current situation aside from Steve mentioning that situation briefly, but it's simply not as clear cut as how you were summarizing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's cause Hat didn't want to talk and wasn't responsive. But yea ok whatever.

☾☆ Chairman Emeritus of Mensa HQ ☾☆

"It's not about the actual fish, themselves. Fish are not important in this context. It's about fish-ing, the act of fishing itself." -Jack O'Neill

iMZejv3.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're really interested in rehashing that: the actual initial Mensa-Vanguard talks broke off at an impasse so there was no reason to believe raids would stop. You may have decided to stop raids internally after the talks broke off and after Mensa nations had started raiding en masse, but it was only after a bunch of nations were beiged and no communication of it was given so there was no reason to believe they would stop.  No one externally decided to attempt  a diplomatic resolution until the initial week of war was up and the threat of outside intervention by Rose was looming. Given other mass raids have been responded to with recognition of hostilities and weren't perceived as offensive declarations, it's really not as black and white as you put it. If you tell alliances that they are are subject to perma-raids if they don't sign with a top 10 alliance or one of your allies, it's easily perceivable as a de facto state of war.

 

I'm sure by now your policies have been adjusted for handling those situations, but if we're going to be on this subject, it's best to clarify. People who were in Vanguard don't have the OWF presence nor care to come out en masse against the posting gallery out here to constantly repeat this argument, but this has always been the point of view from the other side of that war. It's not particularly relevant to the current situation aside from Steve mentioning that situation briefly, but it's simply not as clear cut as how you were summarizing it.

 

I understand Vanguard's reasoning (I'd say most do). You were well within your right to recognize hostilities. The problem is that defense v offense partially overlaps and becomes a grey area. We found ourselves in that grey area: As explained in the OP, Rose refused diplomacy at the time, and was retroactively pushing the CB of 'Mensa hit Vanguard' (retroactively being, after we were poised to demilitarize from the TLF incident and roughly a few weeks after the vanguard RoH). Rose did not have a treaty with vanguard and no 'official' obligation to defend you (that's the risk of running paperless). That they chose to defend you as you are their friends is understandable. The timing is a bit off but oh hey, it can be construed as politically more convenient. Their entry on Mensa however, due to the above, can be construed as an Optional entry (akin to an ODP) at best. Ergo, The Syndicate's treaties were triggered and our defense was legitimate.

 

One should also note that *even* in the instance where Rose had had a treaty with Vanguard and was obligated to defend you, the Alpha-Rose pact has a clear non-chaining clause. Rose's defense of Vanguard would make Alpha's defense of Rose optional at best. With that in mind, the entire history becomes far less "boo t$ supported aggression" and far more "boo Alpha just wanted to fight Mensa and chose to back rose with a blatant disregard for how it would impact t$".

 

And i'll quote Saru as he makes a fine point. There was hypocricy involved:

 

 

I'm not going to comment on whatever issue tS/Alpha seem to have. @Placentica: This is not the first time you have been hypocritical in regards to treaty chains. You attacked UPN without any treaty to do so -- yet you have an issue with someone going in on an oA/helping their own friends that they don't have an official tie to? For someone who is so bothered about the various technicalities, you surely don't apply them when it comes to your own actions. 

 

And I don't have an issue with you doing it. The issue is that you have an issue with others doing it, but clearly disregard your own 'values' as it pertains to you and your own alliance. That's something I have never understood about you, in all the time that I have known you.

 

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Words are weapons of the terrified. Lots of words going around.

so that explains it

x0H0NxD.jpg?1

 

01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine

01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port
01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you

01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is false, I was advised after being raided on Christmas day that in order to avoid it happening again, we must sign an ally of thiers, luckily for us we were already in discussions with our friends at SK at the time.

 

I'm gonna go with Avruch on this. It sounds like someone explained our raid rules to you and you took it in the wrong light. If you are interested most often new alliances contact us after or during a raid and we let them know how to get on the list that avoids us having to speak again about our raiders. But if you seriously don't think that's how it happened then feel free to send me logs if we are really in the wrong I don't have a problem apologizing and working on fixing any wrongs.

  • Upvote 1

☾☆

Priest of Dio


º¤ø„¤¤º°¨ ø„¸¸„¨ ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸
¨°º¤ø„¸ GOD EMPEROR DIO BRANDO¨°º¤ø„¸
¨°º¤ø„¸ DIO BRANDO GOD EMPEROR¨°º¤ø„¸
¨°º¤ø„¤¤º°¨ ø„¸¸„¨ ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸

6m0xPQ1.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile in 'How to Decommission One's Military' by Alpha:

 

Chapter One: Bluster on the OWF

 

Chapter Two: Buy Thirty New Nukes

 

Chapter Three: ????

 

At least 16 of those nukes were from a Spartan leaving to join Alpha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sheepy can confirm from my inactive nation which was about to delete today, I log in to see a log dump from my name after prefontaine messages me to ask about them. I see it and then i remember what it's about, it's a log dump from right after last war when eumir was handling milcom in rose and wanted to be more involved with rose. I guess I was discussing rose fa with the wrong person, This is a slack conversation between Eumir and I discussing how to handle rose FA and how to raise up spirit in rose cause of the demoralizing war we had recently come out of. This took 3 months too late to leak so I guess it's all good to post now since we are looking for anything that sticks. I have resigned from my position over 2 months ago and none of the things mentioned in the logs ever happened cause they couldn't mainly due to the over exaggeration of plenty of claims made in those logs, even at the time of this conversation I wasn't active and just talking with eumir to get him more involved and active. 

 

 

As far as this whole ts-alpha show is concerned, you guys were very close and this is not how I imagined this relation will look months down the road but if this is how you guys wanna deal with the post war drama then it's very petty. Alpha helped the side it closely associated with, they didn't know who was the winning side or the losing side, they just went with the side they felt was more right than the other. tS was made fully aware of how rose wanted to deal with the whole vanguard issue and they even knew when rose was suppose to go in which kudos to them they took full advantage of in oAing us massively. I don't see how you guys want to gun for alpha now when looking back at the owf I only see constant alpha bashing. You want to roll them cause they chose the other side over you? If that's the only reason you have for rolling people than I am sure all our mutual allies will be concerned about this behaviour. We still haven't managed to conclude that Alpha was even indirectly planning to hurt tS. 

 

 

As for the whole rhetorical you have managed to maintain during my inactivity, tS didn't demilitarize from the tlf issue until you showed up after tlf paid over 150 million in reps. Those reps were largely paid by rose since we recognized that what tlf did was an act that required reparations to be paid. Your alliance leadership ignored tlf for over 2 days and everyone knew tlf was getting rolled all the way in arrgh. The Rose-tS nap was still in effect and target lists were already made about bk and tkr attacking ve. When tim felt this was the wrong way to go about things right after she had stopped smearing rose in front of our mutual allies and friends, Booty had contacted her to seek a more diplomatic route. Rose itself was already involved in trying to negotiate vanguard's war and the rampaging raiding mensa was performing. So we honestly believed resolving the tlf issue peacefully while mensa issue is ongoing would help get a swift diplomatic resolution for vanguard. Mensa's reply to vanguard to end the war was to go treaty tS and get allies. After partisan came online and sorted things out, tim resigned and partisan settled in his previous position, everything was explained to partisan regarding the mensa issue. I am not going to e-lawyer my way into claiming how rose attacking mensa was defensive or offensive. Everyone in orbis witnessed it and is quite aware that Vanguard and Rose shared a long history since their foundation, even your own foundation. Rose coming in to defend vanguard from unnecessary and bullying provocations from mensa was in my own opinion one of the biggest things we have done. Rose has owed it's survival and it's loyalty to the membership of vanguard for their efforts in defense of Rose. For us to leave vanguard hanging in a time when they needed us most would be disgraceful on our part. If someone is gonna argue rose pursued no diplomatic measures to resolve this then I would say they are lying since there were over a week long discussions with not just tS members but other allies of mensa to resolve the issue peacefully. Rose in the end after a lot of diplomatic head banging, with the blessing of it's allies concluded that the best way to go forward would be to do a limited strike on mensa and no one else. We had good relations with sk and ve-ts relations were great, we had no ambitions to drag the whole circus out and when tS did bring everyone to the party, we called on our allies and friends to help. All i see tS doing now is posturing and diverting the conversation back to alpha when they were only secondary elements in the last war. The only involvement they had was after rose came to them for help. To claim there is a grand conspiracy to take down tS at the cost of it's allies is absurd and baseless. Diplomatic venues are still open but since we are posting everything in public now, let's make this clear here. 

  • Upvote 4

 

I am not a member of Guardian p&w

f2VouKU.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that was a more readable piece

  • Upvote 3

x0H0NxD.jpg?1

 

01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine

01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port
01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you

01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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