Jump to content

Global War Peace Terms - Discussion


Ripper
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 1/27/2019 at 3:20 PM, Nizam Adrienne said:

For the record, TKR's only term was for you to reveal which of our members was leaking information to you. The term you're referring to was TRF's, which they chose to drop.

Lmfao here we go again

You might not have been the ones who came up with the terms, but you spent the better part of a month arguing for their merit as if they were yours.

By the last few weeks of that war, TCW was barely fighting, like less than 10% of all wars were TCW, TRF was getting jumped and dicked repeatedly by us as their activity waned and we had flipped their stats into the negative. TKR was the one doing all the work. At any point you could have chosen simply to drop those terms because you had all of the bargaining power.

The only reason those terms ever got dropped is because TCW and TRF lacked the stamina to maintain them and none of you lacked the ability to argue with me for their merit (probably because there was none, as we all saw thanks to that Alex/Queen M thread).

Its simple really, when you are the primary negotiator or a large and integral part of a coalition, and therefore have a large amount of leverage, you don't get to hide behind your smaller and less important allies when they try and push terms you supposedly don't support.

I do find it ironic that according to multiple members of TKR and TCW, TGH was majorly responsible for the 6 month NAP with IQ you guys all complained about, despite being a smaller alliance in a wider coalition, with no leverage (what we gonna say, "If you peace out with a 6 month NAP, we'll.....peace out?"  lmfao). Yet TKR apparently bares no responsibility for the terms their allies tried to push (they only failed because your allies were shit), despite making up like 70% of the coalition size, doing all the legwork, not even being allied to one of them, and being in the dominant position in the war.

Have you learned nothing?

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Buorhann said:

I'm actually curious as to why people are upset about it.

.

Probably for similar reasons it aggravates me. In general principal nobody cares if some fools kill themselves, right up until it starts inconvencing them. I just happen to get more and more annoyed the longer that occurs.

Normally I wouldn't let it stop me, but I'm a micro. And that means I am largely at the mercy of the world as to my capabilities. Even in peace I'm restrained because I have a protector through whom such major plans must run, let alone if the world insists on being on fire. 

Congratulations, you're an ambitious and active person in a position of power within a major alliance within it's own small sphere. The lists of things that can put a damper on your abilities to act is quite short. On the other hand, I too am ambitious and active but my seat is not in any Bloc nor major alliance, and the list of things capable of stopping my ability to act includes my own existence as a micro, which due to the politics of the game must be protected or otherwise die to endless legions of Invaders. 

Hopefully my somewhat rambly diatribe explains why anyone with a shred of vision or action in them at the lower levels especially is increasingly unamused with the continuation of this shitshow. It's a further addition of restraints to somebody already being restrained. I just happen to be a particularly restless and !@#$y loudmouth about it. 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Sketchy said:

You might not have been the ones who came up with the terms, but you spent the better part of a month arguing for their merit as if they were yours.

You wanted the negotiations to take place between me and you, which was understandable. But that means I was the sole negotiator for our side. From my viewpoint, at least while I was talking to you, my personal thoughts on any of the terms besides our own was irrelevant. My job was to represent TCW and TRF's viewpoints to you, which is what I aimed to do to the best of my ability.

11 hours ago, Sketchy said:

Its simple really, when you are the primary negotiator or a large and integral part of a coalition, and therefore have a large amount of leverage, you don't get to hide behind your smaller and less important allies when they try and push terms you supposedly don't support.

I suppose this is the disagreement. We don't see our allies/coalition mates as less important regardless of their size and while I understand where you're coming from with this, we aren't one to steamroll them into agreeing with our viewpoint. Regarding the 6 month NAP, sure, people were upset about that but I don't think anyone blames TGH exclusively for the entire thing when you were part of a large coalition. I certainly don't.

BrOQBND.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

You wanted the negotiations to take place between me and you, which was understandable. But that means I was the sole negotiator for our side. From my viewpoint, at least while I was talking to you, my personal thoughts on any of the terms besides our own was irrelevant. My job was to represent TCW and TRF's viewpoints to you, which is what I aimed to do to the best of my ability.

I suppose this is the disagreement. We don't see our allies/coalition mates as less important regardless of their size and while I understand where you're coming from with this, we aren't one to steamroll them into agreeing with our viewpoint. Regarding the 6 month NAP, sure, people were upset about that but I don't think anyone blames TGH exclusively for the entire thing when you were part of a large coalition. I certainly don't.

I think it's a bit late to be arguing the optics of that war, no? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you guys wanted a declaration of defeat and have us put something stupid in a surrender post, this war would have ended after 30 days, but you want to do shit like dictate what my alliance is called, and how we conduct our FA, yeah you can go pound sand, and we will drag it out.

I find it the height of hypocrisy that IQ would complain about this since they dragged a war out because they refused to admit they lost. 

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

If you guys wanted a declaration of defeat and have us put something stupid in a surrender post, this war would have ended after 30 days, but you want to do shit like dictate what my alliance is called, and how we conduct our FA, yeah you can go pound sand, and we will drag it out.

I find it the height of hypocrisy that IQ would complain about this since they dragged a war out because they refused to admit they lost. 

The difference is that in our case the war was more or less a stalemate. Your alliance members, however, have resorted to zeroing out their militaries and resources and largely aren't even fighting back anymore.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Edward I said:

The difference is that in our case the war was more or less a stalemate. Your alliance members, however, have resorted to zeroing out their militaries and resources and largely aren't even fighting back anymore.

U mads cuz some of us stopped funding your 5:1 gang bang? :)

u-mad-bro-ubojmf.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boofy said:

U mads cuz some of us stopped funding your 5:1 gang bang? :)

u-mad-bro-ubojmf.jpg

I believe he actually finds it humorous that you talk about dragging out a war when you follow up with a post like this. Dunno though

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/30/2019 at 2:43 PM, Nizam Adrienne said:

Regarding the 6 month NAP, sure, people were upset about that but I don't think anyone blames TGH exclusively for the entire thing when you were part of a large coalition. I certainly don't.

While I believe you in this, I’ve had multiple people blame me for it directly when I’ve had nothing to do with it.

Thats off topic here though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

If you guys wanted a declaration of defeat and have us put something stupid in a surrender post, this war would have ended after 30 days, but you want to do shit like dictate what my alliance is called, and how we conduct our FA, yeah you can go pound sand, and we will drag it out.

I find it the height of hypocrisy that IQ would complain about this since they dragged a war out because they refused to admit they lost. 

People stopped listening to the suicidal guy on the roof like he had any sense to him a looooooong time ago, Ronny. Quit talkin and just jump already, since that seems the only way you're comin down.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/31/2019 at 1:54 PM, Sean Anthony said:

What happened to The Commonwealth? Oh wait...they are just dropped down a lot.

Quite the contrary just sent out our rebuilding aid.
hqdefault.jpg

Unfortunately the same can't be said for your political career in PW.

On 1/31/2019 at 1:59 PM, TheRebelMan said:

First off. TCW is better than any of ur failures. 

Secondly, that's rich, coming from you.

Ty mate, tCW was sent back to the stone age but we'll return to the top 10 one day.

Edited by Sphinx
  • Like 3
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.