Popular Post Shiho Nishizumi Posted July 18, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted July 18, 2019 (edited) 21 hours ago, Roquentin said: 1. I mean, it's a risk that happened since they didn't see it as a credible threat that there would be KERTCHOGG retaliation for the GOB/Guardian hit. Ihe alternative was getting rolled as a minisphere and risking people quitting it anyway. I didn't feel as a minisphere it could handle fighting the entire KERTCHOGG coalition on its own. We had cut a lot of our ties to other groups so our ability to influence people was severely limited if we ended up in a situation where we'd need the help as I expected no assistance. It felt like people were insufficiently concerned about the other spheres or had some friendships they preferred to keep even if it was risky. If it does that, it's ultimately based on how people reacted. My initial intention was just to try to balance the war but the rhetoric has made this into a quasi-death match. I already went over that on the past Great Fire (where Frawley failed to address my points when I brought up to him that KERCHTOG hitting N$O during or right after this war was simply unfeasible) ; to sum up those points again, a midwar hit would've made no sense for securing and ending this war, since it would be a massive contingent that would be added, and which would need to be dealt with both in the war itself and on peace talks. A postwar hit would've also been unfeasible because this war was going to invariably last at least two months. That, combined with Surf's Up, for most of KERCHTOG it would've meant nearly 3 months of fighting. Simply put, people would've wanted a break before doing anything, whatever that might have been. We aren't even factoring the economic aspect, which would also dictate against such war. Furthermore, I would definitely expect BK and friends to step in if we did, for whatever odd reason, hit N$O, if nothing else to "get even" with whatever the outcome of this war would've been if no new additions had been made. Assuming that also didn't happen, the natural long term outcome would've been you two teaming up to hit us in your own respective revenge wars. In no situation it would've made sense for us to hit you unprovoked. There's also the matter of you seemingly treating KERCHTOG as some sort of permanent or long term matchup, which, well, no. The Grumpy-CoS animosity is well known, Manthrax likes to take potshots at us basically whenever given the chance, back and forth ill feelings between ex TRF people and KTGH, etc etc. KERCHTOG was simply born out of necessity as a result of the leaks, and it would've been dismantled after this war under such scenario. 21 hours ago, Roquentin said: 2. On our own, definitely. The combined coalition would have the momentum and energy to do it with the low infra upper tier nations. You do realize that this is something that can be had at any moment, correct? Especially since BK and NPO have set the trend to sell down to 1100 and lower, in this very same war. It goes from being an "unique benefit" from the position we were coming off of Surf's Up, which at the very best was a very lacking silver lining compared to the other problems we had (Chaos not being full strength, depleted spies, partially used economic assets, etc), to being a potential bog standard practice. 21 hours ago, Roquentin said: 3. It was basically that Adrienne thought we were complicit no matter what and that we'd get hit either within the war or some point after as the main thing was to have Bk secured. It was basically we'd get pursued for it or some other grievance. Refer to my points on my response to 1). Beyond that, my response is basically that of ArcKnox and Manthrax. Especially since no worthwhile logs were provided to support that notion. Now, before it gets misconstrued, I'm not saying you must release them. I'm simply saying that not doing so is going to result in it not being believable (especially in a game that by default goes like "logs or didn't happen" in these cases), particularly when it has you do the same old song and dance, as again, Manthrax pointed out. As for your other 3), it is basically a bit of a reiteration of 1) alongside some of the first 3), so again, back to 1)'s response. 21 hours ago, Roquentin said: There's been a lot of indignation about the Sphinx leaks when it's known most of the other coalition had wanted to roll BKsphere for quite some time. Two side wanting to roll each other is something normal. For me the concern in this war is what would happen if people were less prepared on one side and it deteriorated into a situation where one side could be held down. That's why I don't put a lot of weight into the moral highground people are claiming. I can't help but think that this is some massive projection from your own MO. By default, IQ likes to drag it regardless of the potential outcome; if losing, out of spite and to nuke turret some more, and if winning, to essentially do what you state is your fear of what would've happened if you didn't step in. The only exception to that MO was AC where the only reason it had been cut short were concerns over TKRsphere having a bunch of free revenue and leapfrogging economically. Meanwhile, Knightfall went for 3 months and a half due to a bunch of peace table shenanigans, which did sound about right considering the chicanery that happened in GGF/ToT. 21 hours ago, Roquentin said: Chaos wanted to beat up BK and so did Rose and the others. There's bad blood there and general dislike for the treaties they hold. The new claim that I told low gov about a plan to roll two spheres while they were at war is weird since it never happened and Kayser's plan for doing a no-animosity war with KETOG was not meant to follow a war on Chaos as he did not anticipate they would intervene. If you're referring to Buo, I think he meant it as a general PSA based on tCW's leak. I don't think he was saying you in particular but you as a general. He can correct me if he was talking about you in particular. At any rate, it's interesting that you note that Kayser wanted to hit us (KETOG) in a "no hard feelings" fashion. Given that lack of animosity was a reason given for deeming a BK-NPO conflict to be off the table, what reason would there be to pursue a beef-less war with KETOG in contrast? Aside from "upper tier consolidation" which was cited as a permanent "CB" of the sorts later on in the t$ thread, that is. Isn't it awfully convenient that a lack of leader or AA level grudge didn't matter when suggesting/planning to hit KETOG, the smaller sphere, but it did matter when your former ally (which quite frankly you all but admit to at the very least be your buffer if you read in between the lines) was brought up as a potential opposing match up? 21 hours ago, Roquentin said: The whole paperless treaties argument flies in the face of all the "cooperation" done by the alliances involved without paper in the past, like Rose's non-existent ties to either KETOG/Chaos but tons of personal connections. One side has all the powerful personal connections through former leaders maintaining ties and personal connections are often more powerful than treaty ties as evidenced by people leaving the war who were allied. Ayyslamic Crusade was another example of these coming into play. You've had t$, Rose, CoS, and many other AA's assist you in Knightfall, in spite of those AA's and/or leaders having had historical relationships with the people they hit. Grumpy and Guardian were happy to fight TKR and others in Surf's Up, in spite of having fought alongside each other in Knightfall. Granted, part of it was CoS, but those are still cases where the personal connections were not enough of an impediment, if an impediment at all. Also, why exactly is it that when TKR and friends got trashed in Knightfall, the reason for the coalition that formed against them was born out of realpolitik (which I don't contest as being the case for that coalition forming), but in this war, BK having an ad hoc coalition form against them as a result of a leak (and therefore also realpolitik, especially since Chaos and KETOGG were fighting each other up until that point) is crazy talk, while the idea of KERCHTOG being this backdoor, all high octane govt and ex govt being buddy buddy, and rubbing elbows with each other while smoking cigars and chugging Brandy somehow makes more sense than a simple cause-effect scenario? Now, I'm not denying that personal connections exist. They obviously do exist. However, they aren't monopolized by one side either. For instance, I have no doubt that you and Leo still have a strong personal connection. And to be frank with you, it'd be weird if that wasn't the case. I have no doubt that similar connections branch out to other high profile govts across the board on your side. Also, I do have to contest this idea of KERCHTOG having the strongest connections, when such connections on your end are without a doubt the primary reason why, at the very least, BK and NPO showed no intent of fighting each other, while those existing in Chaos and KETOG didn't stop Surf's Up from happening. Not to mention KERCHTOG forming only after a bombshell leak, while NPO had to scramble logs pertaining to a political entity that was presumably defunct to somehow justify its flimsy CB so to have an entry. This isn't even considering the fact that the latter's personal connections tie up the majority of the game, but I digress. You mention the people who quit. Bar TFP (whose involvement was already controversial due to paper ties to Rose and Ming), most of the people took a way out because it was a simple WP offer, rather than any leveraged connections. As for Rose (they got mentioned directly), because it is worth mentioning this; we ourselves were unsure whether they would be a part of our coalition until about a day before the blitz. Their involvement came as a result of their entire govt structure's deliberation on whether to join in or not. Their membership announcement (posted by Mhearl a couple of weeks ago, if memory serves me right) more or less covers their FA stance. Edited July 19, 2019 by Shiho Nishizumi Minor adjustments. 2 8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesterTheSheep Posted July 21, 2019 Share Posted July 21, 2019 On 7/17/2019 at 3:21 PM, Sir Scarfalot said: NPO entered the war on my birthday. It was the best birthday present they’ve ever given me, and frankly it’s sad when you feel that war isn’t something to celebrate and have fun with. I mean, who doesn’t play games on their birthday? Sad people is who. Why would I want a reminder of all that I lost on my birthday? Of course I'm going to play video games: just video games that aren't PnW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted July 21, 2019 Share Posted July 21, 2019 6 hours ago, JesterTheSheep said: Why would I want a reminder of all that I lost on my birthday? Of course I'm going to play video games: just video games that aren't PnW. All that you lost? What's to lose, infrastructure? Resources? Mate if you're not having fun with P&W then you sincerely should re-evaluate why you're playing it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post kalev60 Posted August 1, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted August 1, 2019 Back to OP, as stated in another recently locked topic many think war mechanics are "broken" allowing for long ass global wars, while I think that is true to a large degree, leaders/people are "broken" also- grudges, delusional thinking of equalising the "damage gap", more damage done being the only thing deciding the winner, soon there be harsh reps, willingness to drag shit on in hopes the other side looses more members then you, meaningless or not a treat alliances getting hit just because lulzs, unwilligness to put your membership first and give diplomacy a chance, stubbornly demanding ludicrious shit from the loosing side as peaceterms, neutralism similar to racisism only directed at neutrals, huge egos just not able to let shit go, hegemony building - Orbis has seen it all. There used to be wars here, even big ones, that were done in a month some conflicts even lasted under 5 rounds and stuff got handled, AAs could go back to normal peacetime shit, now that´s impossible and yes over all amount of resources plays a role but so do the people and memberships of AAs that are willing to accept long boring conflicts just in hopes the "other side" will give up first... So in closing this war I totally can see lasting till Christmas or New Years, maybe even longer... 1 7 Charlie Chaplin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AkAk Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 4 hours ago, kalev60 said: Back to OP, as stated in another recently locked topic many think war mechanics are "broken" allowing for long ass global wars, while I think that is true to a large degree, leaders/people are "broken" also- grudges, delusional thinking of equalising the "damage gap", more damage done being the only thing deciding the winner, soon there be harsh reps, willingness to drag shit on in hopes the other side looses more members then you, meaningless or not a treat alliances getting hit just because lulzs, unwilligness to put your membership first and give diplomacy a chance, stubbornly demanding ludicrious shit from the loosing side as peaceterms, neutralism similar to racisism only directed at neutrals, huge egos just not able to let shit go, hegemony building The definition of toxic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zei-Sakura Alsainn Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 8 hours ago, AkAk said: The definition of toxic. Sad part is, his own leader is one of the worst about it. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 15 hours ago, Akuryo said: Sad part is, his own leader is one of the worst about it. whatever you say there chief 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sphinx Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 (edited) On 8/1/2019 at 11:14 PM, AkAk said: The definition of toxic. Mate you realise that's Kalev right? He's almost 101% trolling you, or drunk....... or both. 19 hours ago, Akuryo said: Sad part is, his own leader is one of the worst about it. Pot calling the kettle black. I don't think I'm that toxic. ;,p Edited August 2, 2019 by Sphinx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 (edited) 23 hours ago, Akuryo said: Sad part is, his own leader is one of the worst about it. Gonna have to call this one out actually, Sphinx isn't anywhere near the worst. Unless you're making the point that the leader in question is actually Roq or Leo. In which case double burn ? Edited August 2, 2019 by Sir Scarfalot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zei-Sakura Alsainn Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 13 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said: Gonna have to call this one out actually, Sphinx isn't anywhere near the worst. Unless you're making the point that the leader in question is actually Roq or Leo. In which case double burn ? I mean there's only 3 real options for it anyway, so. The guy screaming perma war as loud as he can regardless of the negative effects to the entire game, seems like a good choice to me. Besides, a real general wanting to restore his military honor wouldn't want to be bailed out anyway. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 (edited) 1 minute ago, Akuryo said: I mean there's only 3 real options for it anyway, so. The guy screaming perma war as loud as he can regardless of the negative effects to the entire game, seems like a good choice to me. Besides, a real general wanting to restore his military honor wouldn't want to be bailed out anyway. Right, so Leo/Roq. Gotcha. Edited August 2, 2019 by Sir Scarfalot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zei-Sakura Alsainn Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 Just now, Sir Scarfalot said: Right, so Leo/Roq. Gotcha. And Sphinx, he just doesn't say it on the forums like Roq does his mods as a weapon. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowthrone Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 14 hours ago, Akuryo said: I mean there's only 3 real options for it anyway, so. The guy screaming perma war as loud as he can regardless of the negative effects to the entire game, seems like a good choice to me. Besides, a real general wanting to restore his military honor wouldn't want to be bailed out anyway. You do realise those screaming perma war publicly have literally been Scarf, and Sketchy who claims to want to salt the earth, and watch us burn etc. We've never said that, and no one in our coalition has publicly come out with the idea of perma war lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasky Darkfire Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Shadowthrone said: You do realise those screaming perma war publicly have literally been Scarf, and Sketchy who claims to want to salt the earth, and watch us burn etc. We've never said that, and no one in our coalition has publicly come out with the idea of perma war lol. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zei-Sakura Alsainn Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 29 minutes ago, Pasky Darkfire said: inb4 that one doesnt count because akuryo bad or sphinx was drunk. Glad he left on his own, boy never ponied up the logs he promised. I don't rent for free. >:( 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowthrone Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Pasky Darkfire said: I mean I can't speak for @Sphinx, but the NPO and BK haven't argued for perma-war and I don't think there has been a serious discussion within the coalition about peace yet lol. But I mean, sure, if you wan't to keep arguing that Roq/Leo argued for perma-war, I'd call bullshit. But given how Sketchy/Scarf and a loud bunch from KERTCHOGG wanted to salt the earth and have us disband/killed, I doubt there's much sympathy for a quick/easy end to the war right away Edited August 3, 2019 by Shadowthrone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sphinx Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said: I mean I can't speak for @Sphinx, but the NPO and BK haven't argued for perma-war and I don't think there has been a serious discussion within the coalition about peace yet lol. But I mean, sure, if you wan't to keep arguing that Roq/Leo argued for perma-war, I'd call bullshit. But given how Sketchy/Scarf and a loud bunch from KERTCHOGG wanted to salt the earth and have us disband/killed, I doubt there's much sympathy for a quick/easy end to the war right away @Akuryo @Pasky Darkfire Aku you should realise by now not to take what I say on the RON server (Unless its clearly marked as official) to heart. I love shit talking on that server, especially with you, which you should obviously know. Also the difference between what I said and what Scarf and Sketchy said, is their intent towards who they directed it to. S&S, were clearly directing their talk of 'disbanding us' towards anyone even remotely close to BK/NPO, which happens to include the entire coalition to some degree. I merely spoke of Aku's group and those tied with them, (That doesn't include Chaos or KETOG etc) which is a small portion of your side. Regardless I've got no interest in seeing an alliance disband (After all Orion has a loan with you, why would I want a customer to disband?). But considering this is attempt number 4001 of KERCHTOGG trying to sway the narrative, gotta give you guys brownie points for trying. Looking forward to seeing what new topic attempt number 4002 will be. The war's still very fun for my members and I, so we're continuing for however long we need to secure victory. Edited August 3, 2019 by Sphinx Fixes 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasky Darkfire Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 14 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said: I mean I can't speak for @Sphinx, but the NPO and BK haven't argued for perma-war and I don't think there has been a serious discussion within the coalition about peace yet lol. But I mean, sure, if you wan't to keep arguing that Roq/Leo argued for perma-war, I'd call bullshit. But given how Sketchy/Scarf and a loud bunch from KERTCHOGG wanted to salt the earth and have us disband/killed, I doubt there's much sympathy for a quick/easy end to the war right away Hey. Don't be shifting goalposts here. You said no one on your side. 2 hours ago, Shadowthrone said: no one in our coalition has publicly come out with the idea of perma war lol. See? Right here. Which was false. Don't try to ruin my Gotcha post with your shenanigans I know I've seen Leo say it somewhere. But I can't remember and don't care enough to search. Roq.. Well. The only people I'd assume Roq wants to perma-war is TKR. So, I'll chalk that one up to whatever. 2 minutes ago, Sphinx said: @Akuryo @Pasky Darkfire Aku you should realise by now not to take what I say on the RON server (Unless its clearly marked as official) to heart. I love shit talking on that server, especially with you should obviously know. Also the difference between what I said and what Scarf and Sketchy said, is their intent towards who they directed it to. S&S, were clearly directing their talk of 'disbanding us' towards anyone even remotely close to BK/NPO, which happens to include the entire coalition to some degree. I merely spoke of Aku's group and those tied with them, (That doesn't include Chaos or KETOG etc) which is a small portion of your side. Regardless I've got no interest in seeing an alliance disband (After all Orion has a loan with you, why would I want a customer to disband?). But considering this is attempt number 4001 of KERCHTOGG trying to sway the narrative, gotta give you guys brownie points for trying. Looking forward to seeing what new topic attempt number 4002 will be. #IStandWithNorthPoint 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sphinx Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 5 minutes ago, Pasky Darkfire said: #IStandWithNorthPoint Sure you don't want to take a seat? You'll be standing an awfully long time. ;,p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasky Darkfire Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 1 minute ago, Sphinx said: Sure you don't want to take a seat? You'll be standing an awfully long time. ;,p I work security and go Hiking. I can stand for a very long time. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowthrone Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 2 minutes ago, Pasky Darkfire said: Hey. Don't be shifting goalposts here. You said no one on your side. See? Right here. Which was false. Don't try to ruin my Gotcha post with your shenanigans I know I've seen Leo say it somewhere. But I can't remember and don't care enough to search. Roq.. Well. The only people I'd assume Roq wants to perma-war is TKR. So, I'll chalk that one up to whatever. Let's break it up shall we, now that Sphinx cleared up what he said? No one on our side has *seriously* argued for perma war, or disbanding alliances here in public or in private on our coalition servers. Here is Sketchy publicly announcing with serious intent that he's out to kill BK/NPO and anyone tied to us: Not only did he post that with serious intent, he even got upvoted and support from folks with regards to his intent. Then there is the Scarfalot meltdown thread where he claims we're literal cancer and need to die to save the game. I ask you to pull posts of equivalent nature of intent from either Roq/ Leo (specifically mentioned by Scarf and Aku a few posts above) or any specific coalition leader who has argued for the same with the same serious intent portrayed above. I'd say you'd find nada. If you do, then those coalition leaders won't have my support, and I'll let them know in private that being shitheads with the intent of disbanding alliances is not something that'd have my support. With regards to assuming that Roq or Leo wants to perma-war anyone is funny. I doubt Roq and the NPO has ever had any intention in perrma-warring TKR lol. The only alliance we did ever seriously consider perma-warring was BK back during Silent. Alas, here we are a couple of years later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 29 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said: But given how Sketchy/Scarf and a loud bunch from KERTCHOGG wanted to salt the earth and have us disband/killed, I doubt there's much sympathy for a quick/easy end to the war right away Source needed of a high gov claiming this please. Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowthrone Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 Just now, Buorhann said: Source needed of a high gov claiming this please. Read the previous post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 I did. That’s actually pretty funny. Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowthrone Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 1 minute ago, Buorhann said: I did. That’s actually pretty funny. Yes, it's funny to have folks claim to want to burn anyone related to NPO/BK. Got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts