An announcement from Valyria/White peace has been reached

[vonnorman]

This is my statement to sk, (in regards to being competent at all with or without a badass gov or even knowing what may come before hand.) Be militarized and nothing will suprise you except for maybe winning a war.

[Bambino]

This is my statement to sk, (in regards to being competent at all with or without a badass gov or even knowing what may come before hand.) Be militarized and nothing will suprise you except for maybe winning a war.

 

Probably the best thing that's been said in this entire thread.

[Calvin Coolidge]

Good effort, good job standing up to a powerful entity to keep a protection agreement

[Betulius]

Good effort, good job standing up to a powerful entity to keep a protection agreement

 

Half the people I fought fled the alliance, and another is in vacation mode (as is one of the people that fled)

[Rob Semloh]

Nope, no sarcasm at all.

 

People can criticize SK all they want, but the fact that they were mobilizing and preparing to go in against overwhelming odds shows they are a good friend to Valyria.

[Bambino]

Good effort, good job standing up to a powerful entity to keep a protection agreement

 

I would say good (albeit reckless) effort by Jakeman4 to protect one of their protectorates.  Other than that, no, no good jobs were done.

[Buorhann]

Nope, no sarcasm at all.

 

People can criticize SK all they want, but the fact that they were mobilizing and preparing to go in against overwhelming odds shows they are a good friend to Valyria.

I wasn't just criticizing SK, although it quickly went in that direction. It was how they handled it and the lack of war prep.

 

Members of SK, however, are the most experienced with situations like this. Or should be.

[WISD0MTREE]

Good effort, good job standing up to a powerful entity to keep a protection agreement

My spy target went into VM. Does that count as standing up to a powerful entity? 

[Calvin Coolidge]

My spy target went into VM. Does that count as standing up to a powerful entity?

It's a bold strategy cotton, let's see if it pays off

[Kastor]

I mean, I can see a lot of smack talking from the victors here naming Valyrias allies as basically worthless, I'd like to remind you all that the conflict lasted what, 3 days? that was just enough time to get a decent military, but not enough to get strategies together, considering for 1.5 days most of the other alliances in the sphere were not going to get involved at the request of Valyria. Yes, there was a LOT of talks about escalating the conflict but in the end, the GoT sphere decided against it. 

 

Take that as you will, but don't act as if nothing was being done by Valyrias allies.

 

You're from Lordaeron so your opinion is invalid.

[seabasstion]

>WTF ever doing anything

Oh and like it's so real when you play coy bite your lip and thrust your chest out...

[Chapsie]

Reliability my foot.  0 spy attacks on any member of TEst from ANY of their MD level partners.  0 declarations on members of TEst.  No communication (as far as I know) from SK (or Polaris for that matter) telling us their displeasure or even attempting to intervene and help broker peace.  Only a moderate buildup of forces.  I'm not saying that they wouldn't have come to Valyria's defense, only that response time here is....slow and appears (from my view) to be half hearted.  Maybe they expected this to happen (a quick white peace) and so felt it was to better have their allies continue to be thrown to the wolves for a few more days.  Maybe I'm not privy to the high FA game going on here.  But from my perspective, I see nothing of any real merit happening.

 

I guess you didn't smell the sarcasm.

[Charles Bolivar]

Not defending SK and so on but I certainly hope everyone pointing out the flaws of Valyria's allies were as vocal during the last war when Pantheon was attacked by TEst.

 

Most of the reasoning employed by SK and so on echoes what was said both publicly and privately in regards to assisting Pantheon with particular reference to tier ranges, preparation and being asked not to come to the attacked party's assistance. Would be tad bit hypocritical to make a distinction between the two despite the two circumstances being somewhat similar.

 

And before anyone wants to start throwing shade, I supported coming to Pantheon's assistance last war.

Edited December 8, 2016 by Night King

[Buorhann]

Not defending SK and so on but I certainly hope everyone pointing out the flaws of Valyria's allies were as vocal during the last war when Pantheon was attacked by TEst.

 

 

I was extremely vocal about that (mostly on IRC), fwiw, but this is a slightly different situation.

 

Pantheon's allies were mostly involved in war already when they were hit.  Valyria's allies were not.

[Charles Bolivar]

I was extremely vocal about that (mostly on IRC), fwiw, but this is a slightly different situation.

 

Pantheon's allies were mostly involved in war already when they were hit.  Valyria's allies were not.

 

Hence why I said somewhat similar

 

Saying that, I believe Pantheon's allies would have fared better against TEst last war than Valyria's allies would have coming to Valyria's assistance in response to this latest attack. 

Edited December 8, 2016 by Night King

[Prefontaine]

Hence why I said somewhat similar

I disagree. Had we hit Pantheon in the same manner as hitting Valyria, we would have been countered without question. The only thing that is similar is that we hit someone who had M-level treaties. The hit on pantheon went on for the same length of time as Valyria, one round (minus ace).

[Doktor Avalanche]

Crap war.

Lack of targets.

All I did was espionage.

[Prefontaine]

Maybe TEst needs to set its sights on bigger fish then

yes, because it's entirely up to us who provoked us. Next time try thinking before you speak.

[Charles Bolivar]

I disagree. Had we hit Pantheon in the same manner as hitting Valyria, we would have been countered without question. The only thing that is similar is that we hit someone who had M-level treaties. The hit on pantheon went on for the same length of time as Valyria, one round (minus ace).

You have misunderstood my post, it is not your actions I am referring to but the reasoning employed by pantheon's allies last war and now SK's allies during this recent skirmish which share similarities.

Edited December 8, 2016 by Night King

[Prefontaine]

correct me if I'm wrong, but this 'war' - if you can even call it that - started because a TEst member raided a protectorate of Valyria. If that's the case, then I would be inclined to say that TEst were the provokers in this conflict. So, by that thinking, TEst should instead raid a protectorate of an alliance that is actually worth their time.

Valyria acted without even contacting TEst or OOS. Valyria didn't bother to look into the situation before acting, which is what started this war. This is me correcting you about being wrong.

[Prefontaine]

You have misunderstood my post, it is not your actions I am referring to but the reasoning employed by pantheon's allies last war and now SK's allies during this recent skirmish which share similarities.

As someone deeply involved with both scenarios I can tell you how very different they are even in that regard. From a surface level they can appear to be similar though.

[Charles Bolivar]

As someone deeply involved with both scenarios I can tell you how very different they are even in that regard. From a surface level they can appear to be similar though.

I know you are the reason they needed assistance from allies in the first place but I am just shocked to know that you also helped both pantheon's and valyria's allies in reaching a similar reasoning as to why they were unable to assist their allies.

 

Like I said before, I'm not interested in TEst's actions or involvement, I'm pointing out the similarity of the reasoning used by both pantheon's and valyria's allies.

 

Not everything is about TEst, or you for that matter.

[Charles Bolivar]

Valyria acted without even contacting TEst or OOS. Valyria didn't bother to look into the situation before acting, which is what started this war. This is me correcting you about being wrong.

Funny that, I bet you wouldn't have been so quick to attack Valyria if they had been allied to OO or syndisphere. I presume you would have taken the time for diplomatic talks then

 

Unless of course their allies had been involved in a large scale war and were unable to provide much immediate assistance. Then of course we would all expect the usual opportunistic action to occur on TEst's behalf.

Edited December 8, 2016 by Night King

[Prefontaine]

I bet you wouldn't have been so quick to attack Valyria if they had been allied to OO or syndisphere. I presume you would have taken the time for diplomatic talks then

Unless of course their allies had been involved in a large scale war and were unable to provide much immediate assistance. Then of course we would all expect the usual opportunistic action to occur on TEst's behalf.

Try me.

 

https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=3767

Edited December 8, 2016 by Prefontaine

[Prefontaine]

I know you are the reason they needed assistance from allies in the first place but I am just shocked to know that you also helped both pantheon's and valyria's allies in reaching a similar reasoning as to why they were unable to assist their allies.

Like I said before, I'm not interested in TEst's actions or involvement, I'm pointing out the similarity of the reasoning used by both pantheon's and valyria's allies.

Not everything is about TEst, or you for that matter.

>helped pantheons/Valryias allies reach a decision

>talking about decision

>not talking about TEst or me

 

So I helped move the situation to a result, as you said, the result of which being the point you're trying to make, yet it's not about me at all? Look, I get it, you're upset because I disagreed with you. That doesn't mean you have to abandon logic and reason. Because you left the sense train behind my friend. The results were reached under different circumstances, as I said before they may seem the same on the surface but when you look at the reasonings behind them beyond the surface you'll find that your assessment is wrong. I apologize for trying to inform you.

Edited December 8, 2016 by Prefontaine