Jump to content

How long will this war go on for?


Kastor
 Share

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

I'm certain that it was beneficial for Chaos to preempt BK at half strength and virtually no spies, yes. I'm also positive that they very much appreciated getting looted the way to hell and back. Especially SK.

With Rose assistance and then easy street for rebuilding mil with counters being handled, it wasn't that bad. I don't really remember SK getting upset with people for beating them up. When TKR did it, they liked them more for it. As far as i've heard SK's future was in doubt too just because of general apathy.  So they were going to orient Chaos to oppose KETOG because of the looting? Don't think so.

It was more beneficial for Chaos to be low infra than not and at half strength, though, especially if there was a possibility of losing significant numbers of nations to other alliances if the war were to be peaced with no follow up.

I don't know. It's just too much of a coincidence a screenshot from May got posted in June when people start to look for new homes and that led both blocs to declare on the alliances they actually already hated.

Edited by Roquentin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

With Rose assistance and then easy street for rebuilding mil with counters being handled, it wasn't that bad. I don't really remember SK getting upset with people for beating them up. When TKR did it, they liked them more for it. As far as i've heard SK's future was in doubt too just because of general apathy.  So they were going to orient Chaos to oppose KETOG because of the looting? Don't think so.

It was more beneficial for Chaos to be low infra than not and at half strength, though, especially if there was a possibility of losing significant numbers of nations to other alliances if the war were to be peaced with no follow up.

I don't know. It's just too much of a coincidence a screenshot from May got posted in June when people start to look for new homes and that led both blocs to declare on the alliances they actually already hated.

Except the constant flood of daily reinforcements kept the people that were afloat busy for the duration that that was happening. Chaos' recovery was neither complete, nor as fast paced as you seem to think it might've been. And that doesn't change the fact that our prospect before the entire thing wasn't looking particularly appealing. That BK and friends folded as badly as they did came as much of a surprise to us as it might have to you.

They weren't really amused by the looting. Soup in particular had some things to say about that. Feeding your enemy resources is never a good idea, and I'm quite sure that SK had it's ear pulled in private the same way Polaris did for their own bank being looted.

No it wasn't. Especially given the examples of mass-sold infra in this war. As for the latter half of your sentence, I presume you mean Surf's Up? I'm positive they would've kept that show going for a little bit longer than it did.

The real coincidence  is you joining in the benefit of your former ally, with screenshots from even earlier than May, to declare on the same old alliances you've historically fought, and to reinforce the patterns of the old. I'm aware of the reasons cited. I don't particularly care for them. Both because of the actions themselves speaking louder than the written text, and because Keshav already said that those logs were gathered after the fact, and for the purpose of conveying that you didn't trust TKR, more than being the CB itself. 

Since I'm already posting, your personal ties narrative is inherently flawed. If our ties, assuming they existed, were as strong as you claim them to be, we wouldn't have needed to wait for a log to drop for us to hit BK. One that dropped in the middle of our own war, at that. One that dropped after BK and friends tried to butt in several times, and showed clear hostile intent, as SRD did point out a while back. We would've hit them outright. That war, no matter it's nature, also starkly contrasts the behaviour on your end, one which was of "we won't fight each other because it'd be boring". Even though you were happy to hit Grumpy and Guardian in spite of the "nothing personal" pretense. In hindsight, it's all quite obvious.

Either way, I'm not one to believe in coincidences to that degree. I'm certain you aren't either. Unfortunately for you, the "coincidences" on your side are far more numerous, and have plenty less counter examples to compensate for them. I'm positive that you're aware of that, hence why you need to try to claim that we're doing the stuff that you yourselves are doing. It is a way to cover your own tracks after all. 

Edited by Shiho Nishizumi
  • Like 1
 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

and because Keshav already said that those logs were gathered after the fact, and for the purpose of conveying that you didn't trust TKR, more than being the CB itself. 

Gathered after the fact we hit? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Yes. I guess I should've been clearer on my redaction.

I have made no such claim. So that'd be categorically false. Unless its the TKR plotting on IQ, which was collected around similar times of our entrance etc. But that isn't why we hit. Nor the logs relating to our CB.

Edited by Shadowthrone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

I have made no such claim. So that'd be categorically false. Unless its the TKR plotting on IQ, which was collected around similar times of our entrance etc. But that isn't why we hit. Nor the logs relating to our CB.

It's in relation to the logs that were actually presented. Obviously, I can't say a thing regarding the ones that were not disclosed. I can't even tell whether they exist or not. As such, I default to "didn't happen", in the "logs or didn't happen" question. Simply because otherwise anyone can declare on anyone by claiming stuff without ever reasonably backing it up. And before my point gets misconstrued, I'm not saying you must disclose them. I'm saying that not doing so carries it's own set of consequences. 

 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

It's in relation to the logs that were actually presented. Obviously, I can't say a thing regarding the ones that were not disclosed. I can't even tell whether they exist or not. As such, I default to "didn't happen", in the "logs or didn't happen" question. Simply because otherwise anyone can declare on anyone by claiming stuff without ever reasonably backing it up. And before my point gets misconstrued, I'm not saying you must disclose them. I'm saying that not doing so carries it's own set of consequences. 

I mean the logs/chats haave been disclosed to enough people who are involved. I don't need to burn the person with a public disclosure anyway. The IQ/ Sphinx peeling off from TKR to help peel IQ allies away while maintaining a close relationship with TKR logs were more an icing on the cake and was something we believed was planned for. We've reasonably backed up our entrance to this war, pointing out in a complex set of walls of texts our reasoning for the same through out this thread. The conversation Adrienne had with people was a confirmation that made it clear on how things were going to play out, so yeah I mean it's beyond reasonable doubt for us that TKR were a threat and the conversations that existed proved that we'd be best placed to hit now. Our actions stem from needing to secure ourselves and nothing else. The fact that we received specific information around when BK was hit, meant that was an active goal and we delayed our entrance given that we shared the intel with those who required it, to have a conversation regarding it. 

The logs that we did share, while a bit older, was to showcase a plan by TKR/Chaos originally to have Sphinx/tCW to peel away BKsphere and weaken IQ and turn around to hit them. The point behind that was to showcase TKR's behaviour not with just IQ as an actor but the idea of having tCW as some sort of Benedict Arnold, which combined with a litany of other information and the logs we received, ensured that our best option was to enter during this war. Those logs are often misconstrued as our CB, when they are not. 

Also fyi, just following Buorhann's advice regarding revealing our sources/logs

unknown.png

 

 

 

Edited by Shadowthrone
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Pasky Darkfire said:

Damn. Using a facetious Buorhann post out of context to help your point. Low blow.

ec4.jpg

I mean Buor's clear, it benefits him not to reveal his source/ logs. Why should the standard be any different for us? Or am I mistaken that standard only applies to your side now? 

Edited by Shadowthrone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Shadowthrone

You saying that you told others is as worthless as telling us that an undisclosed person passed you the supposed info, no matter how much you may repeat it. Just like how you haven't, nor will be persuaded by what Nizam says, no matter how much she repeats it. 

Dio's post wasn't misconstrued as being the backbone for the CB. It was presented as such. It was after the heavy scrutiny they received that we started hearing of the legendary anon source, your post, and "collusion".

As for Buo's quote... That doesn't contradict what I said. I said that not disclosing means that it has it's own set of consequences. I didn't think I'd need to be so painfully obvious about it, but that means people won't believe it. Buo was saying he didn't care whether Kriegs believed him or not on his Vanguard leak as a result of his non disclosure. The difference between both is, though, Buo isn't devoting his daily time to convince people on the OWF of his leak being legit. You on the other hand, are still arguing ad nauseam on a topic that had substance to be argued on for two weeks max, not two months. Another difference is that Buo plainly accepts the consequence of his non disclosure (to be fair, it's not a particularly harsh penalty), while you don't and feel the need to, again, discuss about this two months after the fact because you want to have your cake and eat it too.

Edited by Shiho Nishizumi
  • Upvote 4
 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

I mean Buor's clear, it benefits him not to reveal his source/ logs. Why should the standard be any different for us? Or am I mistaken that standard only applies to your side now?

Well. in the context of your lovely screen grab there, Y'all, and I say y'all because I wasn't getting involved in that nonsense, no horse in that race or whatever, were still hot in the debate about your side saying they wouldn't "Burn their contact" or actually produce logs, iirc. But this is a good attempt at using it to your advantage.

And I'm going to take a page right out of your book and say I wont answer a pointed question like that for a future gotcha post.

  • Like 1

Bottom_Border Siggy.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

You saying that you told others is as worthless as telling us that an undisclosed person passed you the supposed info, no matter how much you may repeat it. Just like how you haven't, nor will be persuaded by what Nizam says, no matter how much she repeats it. 

Dio's post wasn't misconstrued as being the backbone for the CB. It was presented as such. It was after the heavy scrutiny they received that we started hearing of the legendary anon source, your post, and "collusion".
 

There's wasn't a legendary source, it was outlined in Roq's DoW originally. Dio's post and the importance of it lay in the last set of screen shots. The rest was to showcase the actions of TKR that confirmed for us their intent, specifically with regards to trying play folks with regards to tCW. 

7 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

As for Buo's quote... That doesn't contradict what I said. I said that not disclosing means that it has it's own set of consequences. I didn't think I'd need to be so painfully obvious about it, but that means people won't believe it. Buo was saying he didn't care whether Kriegs believed him or not on his Vanguard leak. The difference between both is, though, Buo isn't devoting his daily time to convince people on the OWF of his leak being legit. You on the other hand, are still arguing ad nauseam on a topic that had substance to be argued on for two weeks max, not two months. Another difference is that Buo plainly accepts the consequence of his non disclosure (to be fair, it's not a particularly harsh penalty), while you don't and feel the need to, again, discuss about this two months after the fact because you want to have your cake and eat it too.

Just because Buor does not feel the need to defend his point, does not mean we all don't have to. If there are narratives on the forums, we're free to counter it, and that's the point in an exchange of opinions. Also given that you're still here posting and almost everyone from your side is still questioning it, we're free to defend ourselves, even if you find it annoying or tiresome. I don't post here to please you, and I don't particularly care if you believe me or find me annoying. I do counter the spin that's found on these forums, to offer the context/ logic behind our decisions so that folks who do want to give it a read, are free to. 

 

7 minutes ago, Pasky Darkfire said:

And I'm going to take a page right out of your book and say I wont answer a pointed question like that for a future gotcha post.

I mean your non-answer answer is as much as an answer already :P But glad folks are learning!

Edited by Shadowthrone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

I mean the logs/chats haave been disclosed to enough people who are involved. I don't need to burn the person with a public disclosure anyway. The IQ/ Sphinx peeling off from TKR to help peel IQ allies away while maintaining a close relationship with TKR logs were more an icing on the cake and was something we believed was planned for. We've reasonably backed up our entrance to this war, pointing out in a complex set of walls of texts our reasoning for the same through out this thread. The conversation Adrienne had with people was a confirmation that made it clear on how things were going to play out, so yeah I mean it's beyond reasonable doubt for us that TKR were a threat and the conversations that existed proved that we'd be best placed to hit now. Our actions stem from needing to secure ourselves and nothing else. The fact that we received specific information around when BK was hit, meant that was an active goal and we delayed our entrance given that we shared the intel with those who required it, to have a conversation regarding it. 

The logs that we did share, while a bit older, was to showcase a plan by TKR/Chaos originally to have Sphinx/tCW to peel away BKsphere and weaken IQ and turn around to hit them. The point behind that was to showcase TKR's behaviour not with just IQ as an actor but the idea of having tCW as some sort of Benedict Arnold, which combined with a litany of other information and the logs we received, ensured that our best option was to enter during this war. Those logs are often misconstrued as our CB, when they are not. 

This is another example of the “paranoia” tag that people give NPO. You guys claim it’s OOC, but it’s posts like these that fuel the narrative that you guys are paranoid.

In reality, I don’t think it’s paranoia - I believe you keep spewing out things that are untrue on purpose.

Example: IQ broke up before tCW officially split with TKR. Chaos was founded April 1st and IQ dissolved Shortly thereafter. Commonwealth had not yet signed a different treaty with anyone else and was under Chaos protection. We didn’t know they were signing with BK until right before they did, if we had known I doubt we would have granted them 2 months protection. This makes your story rather hard to believe. Sure there were likely talks with tCW to hit IQ, but it would have been before IQ dissolved. It’s hard to hit something that doesn’t exist.

You have made TKR to be “the big bad” for a long time, when in reality they weren’t the major voice in Chaos leading up to where we are now. Either your narrative is full of fallacies or you are lying through your teeth.

 

(OOC: I realize this is a game, and that’s part of it. Even if NPO is lying, I hope we can realize that it’s RP and not get all butthurt IRL about it. Due to the recent concerns of toxic behavior, I feel it is necessary for us to take a step back and understand this is a game. No need to be actual asshats.)

Edited by Kevanovia
  • Upvote 5

image.gif.d80770bf646703bba00c14ad52088af9.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

I mean your non-answer answer is as much as an answer already :P But glad folks are learning!

Everyone's penchant knack for using the opinions of one person to completely sum up the opinions of everyone on the other side makes pleading the fifth on such a case the best option.

  • Like 1

Bottom_Border Siggy.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kevanovia said:

In reality, I don’t think it’s paranoia - I believe you keep spewing out things that are untrue on purpose.

 

Aww that breaks my heart @Kevanovia :(  But if doing threat perceptions and having information regarding intentions, and in generally seeing how things play out after long years at this makes one cautious, and therefore predicates action based off that caution, I don't think its paranoia. There's enough information to go off with when running general intra-governmental threat perception arguments, and how we're going to plan for the next few months/years and how we're going to position ourselves. 

6 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

In reality, I don’t think it’s paranoia - I believe you keep spewing out things that are untrue on purpose.

If things were untrue, I doubt I'd be posting about it :P 

6 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

IQ broke up before tCW officially split with TKR. Chaos was founded April 1st and IQ dissolved Shortly thereafter. Commonwealth had not yet signed a different treaty with anyone else and was under Chaos protection. We didn’t know they were signing with BK until right before they did, if we had known I doubt we would have granted them 2 months protection. 

I mean the logs are simple enough to read. Sphinx was asked to peel away folks and those are logs that are there. Chaos existed before IQ split, and Sphinx and the extended protection to find new allies, wasn't a means for clean split. It backfired when he decided to break out on his own and take tCW on a different non-TKR route. I have no idea on the interior workings of the tCW-BK treaty, I just knew it was happening and was as surprised as anyone else. 

8 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

You have made TKR to be “the big bad” for a long time, when in reality they weren’t the major voice in Chaos leading up to where we are now. Either your narrative is full of fallacies or you are lying through your teeth.

Still struggling to see how any of that information is false. I wish TKR was our big bad. Honestly, the only thing I do care about is NPO's security, and if there's information out there that we're planning to be hit in the near future, I sure as hell would have to relay that info and as a government we'd have to act. Or else we're failing our duty of running the alliance. 

2 minutes ago, Pasky Darkfire said:

Everyone's penchant knack for using the opinions of one person to completely sum up the opinions of everyone on the other side makes pleading the fifth on such a case the best option.

I mean pleading the fifth is fine. Tbh that screenshot is ironic to me, and I remembered it was said literally when I was responding to Shiho lol. Just find it funny that the questions one set of folks face are inherently different to what others face. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

I'm certain that it was beneficial for Chaos to preempt BK at half strength and virtually no spies, yes. I'm also positive that they very much appreciated getting looted the way to hell and back. Especially SK.

In fairness, that happens to SK in most wars regardless of the state in which they enter.

 

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

There's wasn't a legendary source, it was outlined in Roq's DoW originally. Dio's post and the importance of it lay in the last set of screen shots. The rest was to showcase the actions of TKR that confirmed for us their intent, specifically with regards to trying play folks with regards to tCW. 

"Word" and "reports" don't really outline much, y'know.

The last series of screenshots are one from IQ times (again, any and all plans regarding IQ died when IQ publicly disbanded), one from June which was... Thrax showing skepticism about your split? A blacked out one which basically means it could've been forged by anyone. And then a Nizam quote saying that hitting you in the middle of this war would've been idiocy (which it would've, ftr). Not exactly the most steadfast bits.
 

41 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

Just because Buor does not feel the need to defend his point, does not mean we all don't have to.

That speaks louder than I think you realize.

41 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

If there are narratives on the forums, we're free to counter it, and that's the point in an exchange of opinions.

I wouldn't say many have been presented as opinions, per se.
 

41 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

Also given that you're still here posting and almost everyone from your side is still questioning it, we're free to defend ourselves, even if you find it annoying or tiresome.

Assuming it's a personal "you", I haven't really said much for weeks if not months now. I just felt the need to make a sarcastic remark the page prior. As for tiringsome, I meant it in general in a two-way street.
 

41 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

I don't post here to please you, and I don't particularly care if you believe me or find me annoying. I do counter the spin that's found on these forums, to offer the context/ logic behind our decisions so that folks who do want to give it a read, are free to. 

I understand for the former (where pleasing may be concerned). There's a reason why I haven't said much. I've already said much of what I had in mind, and invariably been met with silence after a while. I see no purpose in repeating it to death. As for the rest of your sentence, that's mildly entertaining. Let's just put it that way.

Edited by Shiho Nishizumi
  • Like 1
 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just FYI Keshav (Why the hell haven't you changed your name yet?), I'd lose far more by revealing my source to Krieg than what I would've gained over a pretty irrelevant topic.  That's why I didn't continue on that discussion, let alone reveal the logs I have about it.  It would've done me no good.

While in this situation, your whole entry to the war was something dastardly that TKR supposedly plotted about.  Which is a pretty relevant topic, a major one at that.  One that would easily have alliances question TKR if it was true, let alone their own membership would have some stuff to say about it knowing them.

 

NPO's entry into the war is one of the major turning points of this conflict.  It's a pretty solid area of contention considering all the supposed "We're not tied to BK/Cov" "IQ doesn't exist" etc.  And the fact that KEGOEWORUIPOGIUOIPUSDOIRE basically straight up told your leadership that N$O isn't being held accountable for the TCW leak.

So having N$O enter the war for whatever made up reasons, well, why trust anything that N$O says now?  Unless you have something substantial of dispelling all of those questions.

Huge difference between this situation and the situation I had with Polaris over a year or so ago.

Edited by Buorhann
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buorhann said:

Just FYI Keshav (Why the hell haven't you changed your name yet?), I'd lose far more by revealing my source to Krieg than what I would've gained over a pretty irrelevant topic.  That's why I didn't continue on that discussion, let alone reveal the logs I have about it.  It would've done me no good.

While in this situation, your whole entry to the war was something dastardly that TKR supposedly plotted about.  Which is a pretty relevant topic, a major one at that.  One that would easily have alliances question TKR if it was true, let alone their own membership would have some stuff to say about it knowing them.

 

NPO's entry into the war is one of the major turning points of this conflict.  It's a pretty solid area of contention considering all the supposed "We're not tied to BK/Cov" "IQ doesn't exist" etc.  And the fact that KEGOEWORUIPOGIUOIPUSDOIRE basically straight up told your leadership that N$O isn't being held accountable for the TCW leak.

So having N$O enter the war for whatever made up reasons, well, why trust anything that N$O says now?  Unless you have something substantial of dispelling all of those questions.

Huge difference between this situation and the situation I had with Polaris over a year or so ago.

If you wouldn't out a source over something miniscule then why expect someone to out a source for something major?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

If you wouldn't out a source over something miniscule then why expect someone to out a source for something major?

The same reason that I don’t confront my neighbor for his dog periodically taking a crap in my yard, but will confront him if a branch falls off his tree and hits my car.

  • Upvote 3

image.gif.d80770bf646703bba00c14ad52088af9.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buorhann said:

Just FYI Keshav (Why the hell haven't you changed your name yet?),

ec4.jpg&key=0f24dc0fed2d20f0b314ea921b2a

:It's fun being questioned who am I, on an almost daily basis here on the forums. 

1 hour ago, Buorhann said:

I'd lose far more by revealing my source to Krieg than what I would've gained over a pretty irrelevant topic.  That's why I didn't continue on that discussion, let alone reveal the logs I have about it.  It would've done me no good.

It's not an irrelevant topic. It's about a CB used during another war. The fact that you'd consider irrelevant is your call, but its a CB, for a war, that was based around a leak test. You were claiming otherwise, by your own argument requires you to drop the said logs.

2 hours ago, Buorhann said:

While in this situation, your whole entry to the war was something dastardly that TKR supposedly plotted about.  Which is a pretty relevant topic, a major one at that.  One that would easily have alliances question TKR if it was true, let alone their own membership would have some stuff to say about it knowing them.

  

NPO's entry into the war is one of the major turning points of this conflict.  It's a pretty solid area of contention considering all the supposed "We're not tied to BK/Cov" "IQ doesn't exist" etc.  And the fact that KEGOEWORUIPOGIUOIPUSDOIRE basically straight up told your leadership that N$O isn't being held accountable for the TCW leak.

However major one that is, revealing our source to me has more for us to lose, than attempting to make you believe us. It's simpler to not get into a "he-said/she-said" argument given how the said logs are relevant solely to our security and nothing else. 

2 hours ago, Buorhann said:

So having N$O enter the war for whatever made up reasons, well, why trust anything that N$O says now?  Unless you have something substantial of dispelling all of those questions.

Huge difference between this situation and the situation I had with Polaris over a year or so ago.

As you said, I don't particularly care if you believe me or not. It's clear you do not, and my posts aren't for you to magically believe me. We're in a war with you, and I don't think my job here is to convince you deserve to be hit. I doubt even the most rock-tight of CB's has that effect, given how your very own CB is from May, and you made zero effort to check if BK still had those plans etc. So I mean it's an effort in futility with far more to lose for me and our relationships with people, than to dump them for your perusal. 

This isn't a court of law, I don't particularly have to submit proofs for your adjudication. I do have to submit this information to specific people to whom I have, as was required and discussions were held regarding the information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shadowthrone said:

It's not an irrelevant topic. It's about a CB used during another war. The fact that you'd consider irrelevant is your call, but its a CB, for a war, that was based around a leak test. You were claiming otherwise, by your own argument requires you to drop the said logs.

The Polaris/BC bit was irrelevant.  It had nothing to do with TGH despite my source showing me stuff about the internal chats regarding that situation, and it has nothing to do with this current conflict.

 

 

 

Feel free to re-read the thread again.

Edited by Buorhann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

However major one that is, revealing our source to me has more for us to lose, than attempting to make you believe us. It's simpler to not get into a "he-said/she-said" argument given how the said logs are relevant solely to our security and nothing else. 

As you said, I don't particularly care if you believe me or not. It's clear you do not, and my posts aren't for you to magically believe me. We're in a war with you, and I don't think my job here is to convince you deserve to be hit. I doubt even the most rock-tight of CB's has that effect, given how your very own CB is from May, and you made zero effort to check if BK still had those plans etc. So I mean it's an effort in futility with far more to lose for me and our relationships with people, than to dump them for your perusal. 

This isn't a court of law, I don't particularly have to submit proofs for your adjudication. I do have to submit this information to specific people to whom I have, as was required and discussions were held regarding the information.

You are correct in your assessment.  You don't have to, but goodluck on your quest to prove your validity behind it.

But thank you for admitting that you simply wanted NPO to be in a war no matter what cockeyed excuse you wanted to give.

You're also right, I don't trust you or any other NPO member.  You've basically spit in the faces of all the attempts multiple of us tried to play nice with you (This isn't even a KETOG situation either, you did it to Syndicate/HS in just this conflict alone too for another example!).

 

We did check into those BK/TCW plans.  Pretty sure Adrienne already covered that a few times.  Militarization, pushing out check-ins, etc.  There was no demilitarization, no efforts to leave the conflict alone (In fact the opposite, they kept pestering both sides about joining to dogpile one or the other side), and other various stuff.  Feel free to talk to her again, if you missed it the previous times.

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

If you wouldn't out a source over something miniscule then why expect someone to out a source for something major?

I have posted multiple major logs throughout my history.  Revealing a miniscule source removes the potential of getting something bigger later, so if you're going to post something - make sure it's a juicy one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

You are correct in your assessment.  You don't have to, but goodluck on your quest to prove your validity behind it.

But thank you for admitting that you simply wanted NPO to be in a war no matter what cockeyed excuse you wanted to give.

You're also right, I don't trust you or any other NPO member.  You've basically spit in the faces of all the attempts multiple of us tried to play nice with you (This isn't even a KETOG situation either, you did it to Syndicate/HS in just this conflict alone too for another example!).

I mean reading helps. The NPO needn't have been in this war if it played very differently, let alone not having you and Chaos decide to combine. But we looked at other solutions to the problem and entering was our best one, so here we are. There's no cock-eyed excuse, but a decision based on a variety of information/facts, none of which you care about, since well we're hitting you, so I don't really have to sell it to you tbh. 

I don't particularly care if you don't trust me. I spat on no one's face, given that playing nice with us, essentially meant having us meatshield for you. If you do ever have an actual serious offer, and not a half-hearted attempt, you can always send it our way. I mean we aren't here to be your damage sponge, while you'r'e busy having it easy raking in the dough in the upper tier. Our decision to defend our sovereignty might be hard to buy for a few, but at the end of the day an alliance is sovereign and has the right to defend itself when a threat presents itself. tS/HS/NPO and it's relationship isn't for you to assume on, and an interesting attempt to pivot there, but sorry, our communications/relationship are private. 

49 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

We did check into those BK/TCW plans.  Pretty sure Adrienne already covered that a few times.  Militarization, pushing out check-ins, etc.  There was no demilitarization, no efforts to leave the conflict alone (In fact the opposite, they kept pestering both sides about joining to dogpile one or the other side), and other various stuff.  Feel free to talk to her again, if you missed it the previous times.

Haven't seen her covered it. But if you believed they were a clear threat, go for it, I don't begrudge you for that. What I find it funny is how you turn the clear and present threat for you guys, as a valid CB, but it somehow isn't for the NPO. If we believed TGH specifically presented a clear threat to the NPO, we'd have entered there if the information was such. It was not. It was related to TKR and so we hit. I mean in hindsight, even posting a DoW was useless, since somehow you've conflated the threat TKR posed to us from the information/actions to somehow our threat perceptions about TGH. If anything, of all of the alliances there, we probably trusted your word/KT's word over most others.

But thanks for your "chances" and here, no thanks for it too. If you want to conduct serious FA, hit us up. If you want to keep going on and on about this entitled shtick of "chances" like somehow we've always been on the clock with y'all, I'm not particularly interested. I don't have to prove anything to you, but if we do have common interests, I'm always up for it. 

People somehow think you're entitled to the NPO to prove something to y'all and its funny. It's like ever since we entered this game, we're constantly having to prove something or the other, while none of you have to do the same. I mean inb4 someone claims I'm playing a victim card, but all of you keep quoting "chances". I've never once said I've given TKR a chance and they blew it as some sort of spin. So it's nice to see we're always on the clock, great way to engender any trust. Seeing how its a constant theme over months even before this war, you can see why we're not particularly interested in your chances. Either we're partners, or we're not. We're fine either way. 

Edited by Shadowthrone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

Haven't seen her covered it. But if you believed they were a clear threat, go for it, I don't begrudge you for that. What I find it funny is how you turn the clear and present threat for you guys, as a valid CB, but it somehow isn't for the NPO. If we believed TGH specifically presented a clear threat to the NPO, we'd have entered there if the information was such.

Do I need to go back and link to the posts and post up my own chats with people about the talks centered around this?

Both Syndicate and NPO denied knowing about the plan (Which later was revealed that NPO did know of it, but Syndicate and House Stark weren't aware still supposedly), so we took your word for it and clearly stated we wouldn't attack you for someone else implicating your alliance.

Feel free to go back to the initial DoW threads (Pretty sure it's in the Endgame thread or the one Sketchy posted) and re-read the course of the war.

2 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

If you want to conduct serious FA, hit us up.

No thanks, we learned our lesson.

Edited by Buorhann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Alex locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 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.