BK recognition of hostilities

[Placentica]

[to avoid repeating]

It is commendable to want to shake things up.  But I also think that it's also perfectly fine to keep the status quo.  You guys had earned it fair and square.

 

But if you did want to shake it up truly, and that means warring different people at it's core, I don't think keeping the Syndi-treaties jives with that.  Overall, I think the whole backstab angle is maybe a bit overdone and ultimately we all know it won't matter if you win this war.

 

But your desire to emerge on top, post shake-up, and not telegraph this war was more at the heart of your decision to keep the treaties.  It was a strategic gamble, one that Syndi-side will play up and one you will play down.  I think we tend to make moral judgements on what are merely strategic decisions.  Can't really fault you for that.

[Guest Curufinwe]

You've yet to hit SK.

And they've yet to hit Pantheon. We're both rather busy ATM.

 

RIP Inquisition. Good luck explaining your blunders to your allies lmfao

With that in mind, feel free to resume your shitposting.

tl;dr

> we were bored coz we were no where near our bloc buddies TKR on any aspect and wanted to do something new (

> but we also have a fear what if syndi rolls us thats why we kept those treaties to get a bit of breather and then later decided to attack syndi

now what I think personally is your first point of getting bored and wanted to do something different is not wrong even mensa signed rose and they didn't pre empt. on syndi in 1 month. you wanted to have new ties thats not wrong but going to betray your long time allies is certainly wrong. And trust me the bloc bk is part of shouldn't be named as IQ it's" TRAITAROSPHERE"

And here is your new flag

You misspelled 'traitor.' Also, IQ is more catchy. Good effort though.

 

We were definitely open to sphere splits for the sake of keeping the game fun, as t$ had stated in gov coalition chans with our allies in the past. We promoted transparency on the subject when it came up before the DONG WARS / paperless. Open discussions on such concerns are healthy. I for one certainly understand the game stagnation argument. The purpose of games is to have fun; so do what is fun. And as we said then and as I'll say now, we only needed to be approached on the subject and we would have understood.

 

That's a valid point, Chaunce, and I will say that tS (or at least Zed, who I primarily spoke to there) was the most willing to hear out our position. Unfortunately, as the tone of much of the comments here suggest, others weren't as open to the idea of change and we didn't think any proposal to do so would achieve a favourable consensus from the sphere as a whole (as proved to be the case). So we opted to act first and then work to ease concerns afterward. Obviously, that didn't work out

Edited April 15, 2017 by Curufinwe

[Spaceman Thrax]

I understand the goal of making the game interesting all too well, and I share some sense of frustration at Syndisphere alliances for not taking a heavier hand in it (Hell, it's part of why I made my own alliance!)

 

That said, I am far less than convinced that signing into a bloc that contains virtually every nation in your tier range, then signing more treaties on top of that makes Black Knights champions of game-changing dynamism.

Edited April 15, 2017 by Spaceman Thrax

[Roquentin]

I understand the goal of making the game interesting all too well, and I share some sense of frustration at Syndisphere alliances for not taking a heavier hand in it (Hell, it's part of why I made my own alliance!)

 

That said, I am far less than convinced that signing into a bloc that contains virtually every nation in your tier range, then signing more treaties on top of that makes Black Knights champions of game-changing dynamism.

Thing is, it looks like they already tried to pursue something before this and it didn't go so well.

 

So if everyone else in Syndisphere wanted to keep it together forever, then there is no other logical move, as wanting to do something different will necessitate an alternative allybase. I don't see how it's any different from Syndicate splitting from Paragon and building its sphere with Guardian and Mensa while having the OO alliances as MDs/prots.

 

The other main players had all the time in the world to make changes. In fact, many people resented BK but when it became clear it wasn't BK that was keeping the same dynamic going despite our direct confrontations, it was a natural fit.

Edited April 15, 2017 by Roquentin

[Spaceman Thrax]

Thing is, it looks like they already tried to pursue something before this and it didn't go so well.

 

So if everyone else in Syndisphere wanted to keep it together forever, then there is no other logical move, as wanting to do something different will necessitate an alternative allybase. I don't see how it's any different from Syndicate splitting from Paragon and building its sphere with Guardian and Mensa while having the OO alliances as MDs/prots.

 

The other main players had all the time in the world to make changes. In fact, many people resented BK but when it became clear it wasn't BK that was keeping the same dynamic going despite our direct confrontations, it was a natural fit.

 

Hi Roq!

 

There's plenty of differences, but I'm sure BK can manage to speak for themselves. Go post a DoW/CB?   

[Sans]

I think Zoot's point is more that many of us in BK felt that the current concentration of power in the Syndi-OO bloc was unhealthy to the game, which in turn motivated us to try to alter the existing unipolar dynamic that had emerged, since following the defeat of TEst there wasn't really anything interesting left to do except stack pixels and roll the same old AAs every few months. However, we also recognized that any move in this direction could be perceived as a threat by people who were invested in the status quo, so we tried to take measures to ease those concerns. That's the reason, for example, that we offered TKR a successor treaty to OO, since we thought it might calm the fears on your side that change automatically translates into conflict. That's also the reason that we opted to retain our ties to tS and Mensa, refrained from building up when TKR and its allies did so following the signing of the NPO treaty and the formation of IQ and generally did our best to ease the paranoia regarding our intentions on your side (including the mutual decom offer I alluded to in another thread). Now, like Zoot, I realize that I'm not going to change your mind or sway you from the narrative that IQ is a grand conspiracy to knock TKR off its pedestal, but I think it's worth pointing out that your decision to treat us as an adversary has helped create a self fulfilling prophecy. Your paranoia fed our paranoia to the point where we felt we had no option but a preemptive war, since we figured you were coming for us in a few days anyways. Perhaps we were mistaken and your intentions were utterly benign, but it didn't look that way from the outside and that's what we based our decision on. In any case, the TLDR is that, yes, BK thinks unipolarity is unhealthy but, no, we didn't retain our treaties as a 'shield' to attack you - actively warring you guys didn't emerge as a serious option until we felt there was no other option but to do so.

 

With that in mind, feel free to resume your shitposting.

 

 

Ya see this is why people call you out on the bs. You wanted to change they dynamic of the game and not have it concentrated in a unipolar sphere but retained your ties to said unipolar sphere. That makes absolutely zero sense. How did you see this new dynamic going down? Syndi and Inq sphere would just sit by into eternity, everyone would be a happy family? No, you wanted conflict and war and the only logical direction that goes to is war on the same allies you decided would be a good idea to retain a tie to. Those ties were offered to calm down the tensions, kinda like how a prisoner gets a last supper before he is put down. If what you said is true and you wanted to settle the fears of conflict between the two spheres, then there would never be another war ever again. 

 

Either you wanted to change the dynamic and war your allies or you didn't want to change the dynamic and the entire reasoning for your move was a lie. 

 

Choose one. 

 

There was no self fulfilling prophecy here, only the logical result of a series of moves made at BK's behest. 

 

Folks were open to the idea of changing up the dynamic just not on board with doing some last minute behind the scenes dealing. We gave you our idea of dynamic change, one that wouldn't make us force to choose one ally over another, but that wasn't good enough you just had to try to roll them. If anything the choice to dogpile tS and this offensive war is indicative of the fate you wanted for Syndi if we had gone with you isn't it?

 

Don't try to play your selfish desires and shady cloak and dagger fa off by tying it to the health of the game. Its insulting. Just be honest like Zoot. 

[greatkitteh]

tl;dr

 

> we were bored coz we were no where near our bloc buddies TKR on any aspect and wanted to do something new (

> but we also have a fear what if syndi rolls us thats why we kept those treaties to get a bit of breather and then later decided to attack syndi

 

now what I think personally is your first point of getting bored and wanted to do something different is not wrong even mensa signed rose and they didn't pre empt. on syndi in 1 month. you wanted to have new ties thats not wrong but going to betray your long time allies is certainly wrong. And trust me the bloc bk is part of shouldn't be named as IQ it's

" TRAITAROSPHERE"

 

And here is your new flag

 

 

We like this flag better

 

 

 

 

 

[Best Leader]

We like this flag better

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do you really want to talk about how you assumed that your 4 month old untested treaty superseded a bloc alliance that had been around for 9 months and in multiple wars together? Ignoring the fact that the Obsidian Accords tied our alliances together in a way that made it impossible to declare war on one another? 

[Bhuto]

@greatkitteh you should have noticed the NAP condition in the oo treaty.  
would have made your life a lot easier 

[Cheedows]

I'm truthfully quite surprised at, well to put for lack of better words, the immense amount of salt, hypocrisy and blatant disrespect that's being flung around on the forums with the war. I mean, I will admit all this wartime drama like usual is quite entertaining, but it's just odd how things have taken a complete 180 after a couple of months. I mean, whatever happened to the bantering a few months ago how we would love to be able to war each other, which we all know would've been an equal and entertaining fight that we haven't truthfully had in awhile. Were those words just meant to appease the opposition back then, that we as a whole weren't trying to kill the game with an imbalanced power structure on top, even though once this opportunity arose it's pretty clear those intentions weren't true? 

 

And I mean, you can call whatever names you want for us here to BK, but how exactly could this move have been selfish for Curu? Selfish in the sense of wanting a changed game dynamic, ultimately that has lead to today's war of an balanced and undecided outcome okay. But what does he, or BK really, have to possibly gain gamewise from moving away from the status quo of literal pixel farming for months and logging in once a day to refill your food. It really is a self fulfilling prophecy, honestly prior to me even bother reading the OWF for this war I've still held respect for our former allies in Mensa, TKR and tS. As alien as this might seem, it is entirely possible to respect your adversaries and opposition for their skill and coordination in war. But the quickest way to lose that respect, is with a public callout and what seems like a release of months of built up transgressions for your former allies. You claim that no one respects you, and yet it seems like you're trying to lose that respect as quickly as possible to make that claim true. 

[Sans]

Public callout is what happens when you roll half of your allies buddy. What I don't understand is how BK could feel any sort of self righteousness or vindication regarding anything that is happening at the moment. You'd expect the allies who you planned to roll to be all sunshine and rainbows at the fact they're getting dicked over? Lol. 

 

But that doesn't matter because BK got to change the dynamic right fam. 

 

If you didn't want to be ridiculed you shouldn't have literally planned and executed an aggressive war your allies. 

Edited April 15, 2017 by Kayser

[Eumirbago]

I'm truthfully quite surprised at, well to put for lack of better words, the immense amount of salt, hypocrisy and blatant disrespect that's being flung around on the forums with the war. I mean, I will admit all this wartime drama like usual is quite entertaining, but it's just odd how things have taken a complete 180 after a couple of months. I mean, whatever happened to the bantering a few months ago how we would love to be able to war each other, which we all know would've been an equal and entertaining fight that we haven't truthfully had in awhile. Were those words just meant to appease the opposition back then, that we as a whole weren't trying to kill the game with an imbalanced power structure on top, even though once this opportunity arose it's pretty clear those intentions weren't true?

 

And I mean, you can call whatever names you want for us here to BK, but how exactly could this move have been selfish for Curu? Selfish in the sense of wanting a changed game dynamic, ultimately that has lead to today's war of an balanced and undecided outcome okay. But what does he, or BK really, have to possibly gain gamewise from moving away from the status quo of literal pixel farming for months and logging in once a day to refill your food. It really is a self fulfilling prophecy, honestly prior to me even bother reading the OWF for this war I've still held respect for our former allies in Mensa, TKR and tS. As alien as this might seem, it is entirely possible to respect your adversaries and opposition for their skill and coordination in war. But the quickest way to lose that respect, is with a public callout and what seems like a release of months of built up transgressions for your former allies. You claim that no one respects you, and yet it seems like you're trying to lose that respect as quickly as possible to make that claim true.

These are the posts of the defeated. Stfu and show the proof that you guys said you had about Syndicate and friends coming in to clap dat ass. Or you can stop lying and come clean and say that you guys were being idiots and were basing all of this shit on stupid assumptions.

[The Mad Titan]

Folks were open to the idea of changing up the dynamic just not on board with doing some last minute behind the scenes dealing. We gave you our idea of dynamic change, one that wouldn't make us force to choose one ally over another, but that wasn't good enough you just had to try to roll them. If anything the choice to dogpile tS and this offensive war is indicative of the fate you wanted for Syndi if we had gone with you isn't it?

 

Don't try to play your selfish desires and shady cloak and dagger fa off by tying it to the health of the game. Its insulting. Just be honest like Zoot. 

 

Your idea was terrible, and had no realistic method of implementation. It was designed to placate us with an empty thought of change when it would never actually work.

[Boony]

I love BK

[Kastor]

Ya see this is why people call you out on the bs. You wanted to change they dynamic of the game and not have it concentrated in a unipolar sphere but retained your ties to said unipolar sphere. That makes absolutely zero sense. How did you see this new dynamic going down? Syndi and Inq sphere would just sit by into eternity, everyone would be a happy family? No, you wanted conflict and war and the only logical direction that goes to is war on the same allies you decided would be a good idea to retain a tie to. Those ties were offered to calm down the tensions, kinda like how a prisoner gets a last supper before he is put down. If what you said is true and you wanted to settle the fears of conflict between the two spheres, then there would never be another war ever again. 

 

Either you wanted to change the dynamic and war your allies or you didn't want to change the dynamic and the entire reasoning for your move was a lie. 

 

Choose one. 

 

There was no self fulfilling prophecy here, only the logical result of a series of moves made at BK's behest. 

 

Folks were open to the idea of changing up the dynamic just not on board with doing some last minute behind the scenes dealing. We gave you our idea of dynamic change, one that wouldn't make us force to choose one ally over another, but that wasn't good enough you just had to try to roll them. If anything the choice to dogpile tS and this offensive war is indicative of the fate you wanted for Syndi if we had gone with you isn't it?

 

Don't try to play your selfish desires and shady cloak and dagger fa off by tying it to the health of the game. Its insulting. Just be honest like Zoot.

 

Can I ask what your idea of "change the dynamic" was?

[Guest Curufinwe]

I understand the goal of making the game interesting all too well, and I share some sense of frustration at Syndisphere alliances for not taking a heavier hand in it (Hell, it's part of why I made my own alliance!)

 

That said, I am far less than convinced that signing into a bloc that contains virtually every nation in your tier range, then signing more treaties on top of that makes Black Knights champions of game-changing dynamism.

The only treaty that BK has signed recently, other than protectorates or upgrading protectorates, is the agreement with NPO - IQ itself is the continuation of preexisting treaties and didn't result in any new paper. As for your point regarding game changing dynamism, our decisions in the past month have led to the most dynamic FA environment PW has seen since Silent, so obviously we've had some impact - aside from the occasional DoE or new micro there wasn't really much going on prior to March as I recall.

 

Ya see this is why people call you out on the bs. You wanted to change they dynamic of the game and not have it concentrated in a unipolar sphere but retained your ties to said unipolar sphere. That makes absolutely zero sense. How did you see this new dynamic going down? Syndi and Inq sphere would just sit by into eternity, everyone would be a happy family? No, you wanted conflict and war and the only logical direction that goes to is war on the same allies you decided would be a good idea to retain a tie to. Those ties were offered to calm down the tensions, kinda like how a prisoner gets a last supper before he is put down. If what you said is true and you wanted to settle the fears of conflict between the two spheres, then there would never be another war ever again. 

 

Either you wanted to change the dynamic and war your allies or you didn't want to change the dynamic and the entire reasoning for your move was a lie. 

 

Choose one. 

 

There was no self fulfilling prophecy here, only the logical result of a series of moves made at BK's behest. 

 

Folks were open to the idea of changing up the dynamic just not on board with doing some last minute behind the scenes dealing. We gave you our idea of dynamic change, one that wouldn't make us force to choose one ally over another, but that wasn't good enough you just had to try to roll them. If anything the choice to dogpile tS and this offensive war is indicative of the fate you wanted for Syndi if we had gone with you isn't it?

 

Don't try to play your selfish desires and shady cloak and dagger fa off by tying it to the health of the game. Its insulting. Just be honest like Zoot.

 

Zoot's Danish - that Viking background makes him a little bloodthirsty. I think it's something to do with the possibility of loot.

 

As for the rest, our gov had numerous reasons for deciding to dissolve OO, not the least of which was TKR's attitude (including your own during your tenure in FA) that Syndisphere had effectively won the game and innovative actions weren't really needed anymore. I mean, perhaps I missed some important TKR proposal during our time together, but the most daring move you guys proposed in the wake of the Paperless war was an ODP with NK and a possible tie to HBE, neither of which would have resulted in anything but further consolidation. When combined with your tendency to regard Orbesian politics in a binary fashion (as was the case when your allies proposed treatying AAs that you deemed 'enemies,' like WU or Lord) and we realized that TKR wasn't really interested in seeing any substantive changes in FA for the foreseeable future. And, really, that's fine - you guys worked hard, made first place and then *really* wanted to stay there, even if the result was a stagnant FA environment and a relatively uninteresting game. As Zoot pointed out earlier, just being on top for the sake of being on top isn't something BK was interested in - if it was we would have stayed in OO and sleepwalked through months of stacking infra until it was time for another one-sided curbstomp. We didn't want that and you appeared to be fine with it, so here we are. I'm sorry​you appear to find that fact we disagreed on that so upsetting and immediately jumped to the conclusion that policy disagreement is the equivalent to treason, but trying to boil down our motives for breaking up with TKR to a desire to war tS and Mensa is simplistic and fundamentally mistaken. Once again, it was your paranoia following our breakup as much as our reaction to it that led us to this situation, regardless of whether or not you are willing to acknowledge it.

 

With that in mind, feel free to resume shitposting.

[Guest Curufinwe]

shitposting

With that in mind, feel free to resume shitposting.

[Eumirbago]

 

shitposting

With that in mind, feel free to resume shitposting.

You can keep posting that, you'll still be held accountable for the "proof" that you guys had lmfao.

[Kastor]

When combined with your tendency to regard Orbesian politics in a binary fashion (as was the case when your allies proposed treatying AAs that you deemed 'enemies,' like WU or Lord) and we realized that TKR wasn't really interested in seeing any substantive changes in FA for the foreseeable future.

Yeah, so you guys basically lied to us when you told us you weren't telling your allies this? Hah

[Sans]

Your idea was terrible, and had no realistic method of implementation. It was designed to placate us with an empty thought of change when it would never actually work.

And BK's plan to betray its allies is better in comparison I suppose. Guys seem pretty content with it. 

 

 

Can I ask what your idea of "change the dynamic" was?

You can ask sure. 

 

As for the rest, our gov had numerous reasons for deciding to dissolve OO, not the least of which was TKR's attitude (including your own during your tenure in FA) that Syndisphere had effectively won the game and innovative actions weren't really needed anymore. I mean, perhaps I missed some important TKR proposal during our time together, but the most daring move you guys proposed in the wake of the Paperless war was an ODP with NK and a possible tie to HBE, neither of which would have resulted in anything but further consolidation. When combined with your tendency to regard Orbesian politics in a binary fashion (as was the case when your allies proposed treatying AAs that you deemed 'enemies,' like WU or Lord) and we realized that TKR wasn't really interested in seeing any substantive changes in FA for the foreseeable future. And, really, that's fine - you guys worked hard, made first place and then *really* wanted to stay there, even if the result was a stagnant FA environment and a relatively uninteresting game. As Zoot pointed out earlier, just being on top for the sake of being on top isn't something BK was interested in - if it was we would have stayed in OO and sleepwalked through months of stacking infra until it was time for another one-sided curbstomp. We didn't want that and you appeared to be fine with it, so here we are. I'm sorry​you appear to find that fact we disagreed on that so upsetting and immediately jumped to the conclusion that policy disagreement is the equivalent to treason, but trying to boil down our motives for breaking up with TKR to a desire to war tS and Mensa is simplistic and fundamentally mistaken. Once again, it was your paranoia following our breakup as much as our reaction to it that led us to this situation, regardless of whether or not you are willing to acknowledge it.

 

With that in mind, feel free to resume shitposting.

 

This is not a question of complacency vs discontent. It is about common decency with regards to the people you make a commitment with. Bk was content to plan to roll half its allies. Thats the bottom line. You can make up excuses in order to legitimize the idea, but thats a fact you cannot deny, we're fighting in it. Suck it up and own it. Trying to backpedal and make it seem its all worth because dynamic change isn't going to cut it. A shit move is still a shit move. 

[Spaceman Thrax]

The only treaty that BK has signed recently, other than protectorates or upgrading protectorates, is the agreement with NPO - IQ itself is the continuation of preexisting treaties and didn't result in any new paper. As for your point regarding game changing dynamism, our decisions in the past month have led to the most dynamic FA environment PW has seen since Silent, so obviously we've had some impact - aside from the occasional DoE or new micro there wasn't really much going on prior to March as I recall.

 

I was thinking of mostly CKD. Which is a 50 person alliance. They've entered for you, as opposed to their other 4 protectorates from earlier, so I think it's a fair point that you were extending your treaty base.

 

Again. The dynamism? I just don't think it's as much as you think it was. You guys joined Paracov, everyone stared at each other for a while and signed a bunch of treaties, then war. You'd have accomplished the same thing better by dropping treaties at the same time (IE: the ones you had no intention of actually honouring), but I guess you were too risk averse?

 

Risk aversion and dynamism are mutually exclusive, imo.

[Kastor]

And BK's plan to betray its allies is better in comparison I suppose. Guys seem pretty content with it. 

 

 

 

You can ask sure. 

 

 

 

This is not a question of complacency vs discontent. It is about common decency with regards to the people you make a commitment with. Bk was content to plan to roll half its allies. Thats the bottom line. You can make up excuses in order to legitimize the idea, but thats a fact you cannot deny, we're fighting in it. Suck it up and own it. Trying to backpedal and make it seem its all worth because dynamic change isn't going to cut it. A shit move is still a shit move.

 

Syndisphere was going to roll IQ, Mensa themselves attacked SK and Lordaeron within the past 6 months and hit TEst. It's safe to say that Mensa and friends were going to come after IQ again. Your side has militarized way more times while we didn't. Syndi itself militerized when IQ went up. You guys have been so trigger happy and would've attacked IQ the first chance you got.

[Eumirbago]

Syndisphere was going to roll IQ, Mensa themselves attacked SK and Lordaeron within the past 6 months and hit TEst. It's safe to say that Mensa and friends were going to come after IQ again. Your side has militarized way more times while we didn't. Syndi itself militerized when IQ went up. You guys have been so trigger happy and would've attacked IQ the first chance you got.

Lordaeron is irrelevant, and as you have seen this war, so is SK.

[Kastor]

Lordaeron is irrelevant, and as you have seen this war, so is SK.

What were you doing in an irrelevant alliance then?

[Eumirbago]

What were you doing in an irrelevant alliance then?

 

Trying to empathize/sympathize with weaklings. I found out that I can't so I went back and continued embracing winning.

Edited April 15, 2017 by Jacob Moore