Jump to content
Kastor

How long will this war go on for?

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

It's purely revisionist to claim TCL had been a super active leader and that Kayser hadn't been doing 90% of the talking for TKR before he was replaced by you, making the Prince/cess the de facto leader. If you are really going to try to fight on this, we could just say it was a TCW/TKR action.

I never said he was super active at the time. However, you're implying that in both situations, TCL didn't still have final say over the direction of the alliance, which wasn't the case and shows a fundamental lack of understanding for how we work. I did not have the power to declare war without his go ahead. The decision for TKR to participate in that war was his.

 

27 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

So you agree they didn't do it because of the previous war you did. Great. Why would you be at war regardless at that point? As far as I know you simply were "OH MY GOD" when the rainbow screen leaked according to your reactions on here.

I was referring to being at war with KETOGG here, not BK.

 

27 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

That isn't being a victim. It's showing we have to balance against you if you come together. A victim waits for things to happen. People do stuff to avoid being victims. What would have been a victim is waiting around to get hit at a later date. 

I could point out the specific issues and practicalities with everything you mentioned but given you are not operating on good faith with more or less treating 3-5+ years connections as equivalent to randomly talking to people or alliances that deliberately only treaty into places that have a ton of upper tier as being easy obstacles to overcome.

It is when you make it out like you don't have a choice in actions because of what other actors are doing. You've had chances to start to form relationships with people, if that's what you wanted. I've already shared my perspective on things as leader, of starting out with more connections with people traditionally on your side. I've made more connections with people on this side and slowly had some of my connections to your side severed through the actions of your alliance/some of your allies. Before you run away with this statement, I'm not saying we were your saving grace or anything, but rather that that's one example of you deciding not to utilize connections you would have had otherwise. As others have pointed out, you are the common denominator. You've had people reach out to try and work with you and you didn't take it. But it's our fault somehow.

Edited by Nizam Adrienne
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

I never said he was super active at the time. However, you're implying that in both situations, TCL didn't still have final say over the direction of the alliance, which wasn't the case and shows a fundamental lack of understanding for how we work. I did not have the power to declare war without his go ahead. The decision for TKR to participate in that war was his.

He avoided stepping in unless it was absolutely necessary. I don't have to go into it further to say how it was associated with you either way. No one treated it as lacking continuity between it and your coronation as Queen.

1 minute ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

 

It is when you make it out like you don't have a choice in actions because of what other actors are doing. You've had chances to start to form relationships with people, if that's what you wanted. I've already shared my perspective on things as leader, of starting out with more connections with people traditionally on your side. I've made more connections with people on this side and slowly had some of my connections to your side severed through the actions of your alliance/some of your allies. Before you run away with this statement, I'm not saying we were your saving grace or anything, but rather that that's one example of you deciding not to utilize connections you would have had otherwise. As others have pointed out, you are the common denominator. You've had people reach out to try and work with you and you didn't take it. But it's our fault somehow.

The issue is the terms on which they wished wish to cooperate were ones that weren't always beneficial and in some cases even injurious to us and did not satisfy our concerns.  There was no common vision nor any common interests. When there is no common vision, there is no basis for anything other than a one-sided relationship.  With you in particular, it's a unique situation owing to the circumstances surrounding the dynamics of TKR.  Had you been in any other alliance, it might have turned out differently and it is hard to blame us but yet you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TGH got involved in Knightfall due to you paying for those members, Roq.

But thank you for confirming another moment where we fought TKR again.

Gee, I wonder where this “trajectory” BS came from.  It couldn’t have possibly come from you holding a bias on us, would it?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

TGH got involved in Knightfall due to you paying for those members, Roq.

But thank you for confirming another moment where we fought TKR again.

Gee, I wonder where this “trajectory” BS came from.  It couldn’t have possibly come from you holding a bias on us, would it?

Mercs weren't solicited by me personally. I did cover the costs, however when it was made clear they were available. Did they not have an incentive to fight based on the prior war? Would they have gone in anyway? Could you see justin hitting TKR if TKR hadn't rolled you?

It was confirmed you were willing to work with TKR  a few months after Knightfall.

I do have suspicions. You strengthened your bloc shortly after heckling Kayser and tS so much where Kayser was genuinely concerned with all the reactions and he and other people genuinely thought more and more cuts were needed to look good. It was clear who strict treatyless cooperation only was mainly benefitting.  It is difficult to not be leery when it is a potent group that can be  seemingly predatory group with its own agenda and dismissive of other concerns. 

 

Edited by Roquentin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

Mercs weren't solicited by me personally. I did cover the costs, however when it was made clear they were available. Did they not have an incentive to fight based on the prior war? Would they have gone in anyway? Could you see justin hitting TKR if TKR hadn't rolled you?

It was confirmed you were willing to work with TKR  a few months after Knightfall.

Weren't solicited by you personally?  You sure about that?  I'm aware Abbas went around looking, but I quite remember some conversations of yours with a few members/allies of mine.

What does that matter?  We made efforts to see about working with NPO as well.

You don't stigmatize/blacklist, right?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Buorhann said:

Weren't solicited by you personally?  You sure about that?  I'm aware Abbas went around looking, but I quite remember some conversations of yours with a few members/allies of mine.

I didn't personally ask them. I'm only really friends with Keynesian and he only contacted me after he went to Oblivion. It's possible I brought it up with abbas or ockey, but don't recall approaching them. If I'm wrong here, then let me know. Maybe I asked after Keynesian and some others had moved on, but I don't exactly know or have many fans in TGH. Well killzbob said he still likes me, but yeah. If there's someone I'm forgetting, then I'm just not remembering. I might have asked an ally or something after the initial ones went over.

Just now, Buorhann said:

What does that matter?  We made efforts to see about working with NPO as well.

Well it's more the direction of the cooperation which was similar to this scenario, so you had more of a basis of cooperation as TKR's attention shifted to the people you had become upset with during the war. I don't really feel we ever got to a stage where we had a war planned, but I'll acknowledge the convos between Hodor, Sketchy, and Keegoz later on. 

Just now, Buorhann said:

You don't stigmatize/blacklist, right?

I don't. It's just the way the cooperation is structured will be the core determinant.  I would have been glad to find some common ground/interests with anyone especially on the idea of showing you can't avoid damage for long periods of time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Roquentin said:

He avoided stepping in unless it was absolutely necessary.

 

2 hours ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

Please, inform me more of what was happening internally in my alliance at that time. I've forgotten all about it, see, and I need someone to fill me in.

 

https://tenor.com/view/hamster-exercise-cute-fail-gif-3358922

Edited by Nizam Adrienne
  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

It is when you make it out like you don't have a choice in actions because of what other actors are doing. You've had chances to start to form relationships with people, if that's what you wanted. I've already shared my perspective on things as leader, of starting out with more connections with people traditionally on your side. I've made more connections with people on this side and slowly had some of my connections to your side severed through the actions of your alliance/some of your allies. Before you run away with this statement, I'm not saying we were your saving grace or anything, but rather that that's one example of you deciding not to utilize connections you would have had otherwise. As others have pointed out, you are the common denominator. You've had people reach out to try and work with you and you didn't take it. But it's our fault somehow.

I mean he points this paragraph is best representative of why folks chose to not work with you/TKR. 

Firstly we’ve always chosen the option which suits our interests best given the circumstances of the situation. We don’t have control of what others can do, and we’re left looking at the options we have and choosing accordingly. That’s not a victim narrative but a recognition of how almost every alliance operates. There are foreign actions and everyone chooses the best option they believe so. 

Blaming Roq for a lack of relationship with NPO when there’s a government consensus on the lack of common vision/interests with you or your alliance is a perfect example of why folks find a lack of trust or faith in you. The constant sniping of how TKR/NPo would be all okay if roq isn’t in power is in essence interfering in our affairs especially when you’re busily mentioning this to our own members.

This blame on roq on something almost any NPOer who’s dealt with you agrees, proves something tbh, your lack of respect for us or our government. Fair enough, but that’s not the reason we chose to not work with you. We simply don’t have mutual interests or a common goal at the moment and there’s no point for cooperating for the sake of it. 

The meta of blaming him for your own choices is in essence the stigmatization/ disenfranchisement meta. “Everything would be better if we didn’t have to cooperate with Roq.” If you don’t see your own role here, and try to shift the blame, you’re not going to find too many supporters with the people you’re trying to undermine. 

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

I mean he points this paragraph is best representative of why folks chose to not work with you/TKR. 

Firstly we’ve always chosen the option which suits our interests best given the circumstances of the situation. We don’t have control of what others can do, and we’re left looking at the options we have and choosing accordingly. That’s not a victim narrative but a recognition of how almost every alliance operates. There are foreign actions and everyone chooses the best option they believe so. 

Blaming Roq for a lack of relationship with NPO when there’s a government consensus on the lack of common vision/interests with you or your alliance is a perfect example of why folks find a lack of trust or faith in you. The constant sniping of how TKR/NPo would be all okay if roq isn’t in power is in essence interfering in our affairs especially when you’re busily mentioning this to our own members.

This blame on roq on something almost any NPOer who’s dealt with you agrees, proves something tbh, your lack of respect for us or our government. Fair enough, but that’s not the reason we chose to not work with you. We simply don’t have mutual interests or a common goal at the moment and there’s no point for cooperating for the sake of it. 

The meta of blaming him for your own choices is in essence the stigmatization/ disenfranchisement meta. “Everything would be better if we didn’t have to cooperate with Roq.” If you don’t see your own role here, and try to shift the blame, you’re not going to find too many supporters with the people you’re trying to undermine. 

 

https://tenor.com/view/hamster-gif-12446356

(p.s. that was a royal you, not a "you, Roq" and the message wasn't "let's blame Roq" but good to know that was your take-away so thanks for the response anyways)

Edited by Nizam Adrienne
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

 

https://tenor.com/view/hamster-gif-12446356

(p.s. that was a royal you, not a "you, Roq" and the message wasn't "let's blame Roq" but good to know that was your take-away so thanks for the response anyways)

Why you’d forgive me for reading your post for pretty much how it came out. 

Your constant shirking of responsibility is fun to watch though!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

Why you’d forgive me for reading your post for pretty much how it came out. 

Your constant shirking of responsibility is fun to watch though!

Forgive you? What are you even talking about at this point?

Edit: Misread. You do you, Keshav. I'll be off shirking my responsibilities elsewhere ;) 

Edited by Nizam Adrienne
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/15/2019 at 9:33 AM, Pasky Darkfire said:

I thank you for your input @Shadowthrone

@Aragorn, son of Arathorn, is this about how you feel it is or do you have anything to add, or your own explanation?

I originally quoted you and would like the BK take on this seeing as you said it. Not just the NPO take because they chose to speak up.

Just saw this, but NPO essentially has my thoughts, albeit less skeptical then my own. No one does anything in this game that doesn't put them further ahead. Those who champion "mini-spheres" or decry how we harm "game health" have an obvious benefit from whatever virtue they extoll.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Raoul Duke said:

Well, I made it through 27 pages. 

Something about TKR and NPO or something.

I think i saw the word "obfuscated". I don't know what that means but i like it in theory and i'm immediately going to buy two of them.

The constitution of the United States of America is 4,543 words but this is definitely better.

 

I think you missed something.

 

Sounds like you need another reason than "We don't like you" or "Welcome to Orbis" to declare war. I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2019 at 7:19 PM, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

Till they bend the knee

dAra6dQ.jpg

 

Edited by RagnarBuliwyf
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Roquentin said:

That isn't being a victim. It's showing we have to balance against you if you come together. A victim waits for things to happen. People do stuff to avoid being victims. What would have been a victim is waiting around to get hit at a later date. 

victim-mentality-signs-pinterest-lonerwo

In this case it's more of "The majority of people in the Game are against me" but ya'know.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

Just saw this, but NPO essentially has my thoughts, albeit less skeptical then my own. No one does anything in this game that doesn't put them further ahead. Those who champion "mini-spheres" or decry how we harm "game health" have an obvious benefit from whatever virtue they extoll.  

I honestly thought you where just ignore me lol. So I'm going to guess nothing big to add to Keshav's post, then?

I do get the idea that everyone wants something. That's the nature of politics. Always has been and always will be. Everyone wants to be in a better spot than they were yesterday.

But from what I gathered BK/NPO have the same relationship with one another as everyone accuses everyone else of having with everyone else. Would you guys consider yourselves the counter to this "ruling class"? Would you just be a rival 'Ruling Class"? Like is this just shaping up to a War of the Roses for the rest of Orbis history? House of Lancaster vs. House of York style?

 

On 8/15/2019 at 10:24 AM, Shadowthrone said:

Roq pointed out the myriad of leaders stacked up, who've all worked together for many years and in comparison BK/NPO don't have such a pull, nor have we been given the opportunity to exist within such a scenario, given how we're always next on the chopping block thanks to the same folk pulling the same things over and over again. So here, the ruling class would be those who've ruled the politics of the game and have at past instituted a hegemony. 

But in that same regard, calling someone out for pulling the same thing over and over again and then, from the information I've gathered, doing the same thing with BK is a little hypocritical. Just from the myriad of posts from a myriad of leaders here in this topic and elsewhere on the forums I've been able to see and read multiple chances given to NPO to be included in on something, but the response was... less than what was expected I suppose? And it's mostly met with cries of conspiracy or paranoia. Even this here about constantly being on the chopping block as one of the top alliances in Orbis slightly smells of some paranoia. I can't say delusion because from what I can tell someone is always next in line to be rolled somewhere down the line. TKR in Knightfall, apparently, CHaOS in Surf's Up, and now BK for leaked logs about smacking ChaOS. I've only been involved in the last two. It seemed like people were more unwilling to work with whatever IQ was than anything actually NPO or BK on their own. And given the supposed split of IQ and the feeling towards the (blob?), I can see where people would be absolutely livid with seeing the reunion tour in this war. I've seen less opinions on working with BK because, they aren't the vocal-est on the forums in these drawn out, lengthy posts.

Accusations of hegemonic movements, from either side, give me a headache. I'd just. Just no. No amount of words will convince me one way or the other. Actions will. Once this whole thing is over, the dust settles, and the time to march home happens, we'll see who still stands as a unified army and who moves the frick on. I'm sure it will make for some fricking great political fodder, and I'm excited to see what happens.

On 8/15/2019 at 10:24 AM, Shadowthrone said:

We have. Roquentin is the second Emperor of the Order. Nevertheless, we've had countless government changes and the majority of our high government, have been in their positions since the end of Knightfall. I mean, if Roq sticking around for years as a leader is a grouse, than basically the entirety of KETOGG's' leadership is a whole different beast. SRD's been heading GoB's FA since its inception and before that was gov in VE. Sketchy was the leader of Rose before becoming 2IC of TGH. Buorhann has been around in high gov spsots for years, Memph has been a leader of Guardian for years as well. So no, your argument fails to take into account an important facet of the FA architecture, that would inherently be that club of leaders, neither BK nor NPO has had a seat in, since the formation of IQ.  

It would be fair to say, that we have a great relationship with Aragorn but outside of that and possibly the NG/Malal/Polar, almost everyone else within Coalition B are working together for the first time  The only real shift within that network was attempting to work together with HS/tS who's leadership nominally has always been a part of the above mentioned group of leaders, until Partisan/Kayser nuked that and attempted something different, while HS cutting Guardian to try something different. In exchange we cut IQ and was attempting to fit three different groupings into one sphere, which isn't perpetuating the said class.  

Where was Roq before he became emperor? Or did he seem to just bust out on the scene in a blaze of glory to take the reigns? How about the rest of the high gov. Surely they had some experiences elsewhere before becoming High gov of one of the largest alliances in the game? Or where they too just prodigies of their time? How is that different than the kettogg situation you described bellow?

I'm not exactly saying it's technically a grouse, but it's strange to call someone else a ruling class when you're on the same level as them, even if you haven't "taken a seat at the same table" with them. But by and by, your description of Kettogg leadership tells me they've moved around through different government positions, even breaking out of old government positions to take on new responsibilities, or less responsibilities. And Really, it looked like with the formation of IQ, y'all had your own table to be at. Just looking at the wiki, with a lot of names I recognize with even just being around a shorter while. And then BK absorbed some of the alliances in mergers.

But, You admit you maintained a great relationship with a member of IQ that you supposedly cut ties with, which is not wrong in any shape or form, you find out who your friends are I suppose, and then when they light be beacons of Gondor, you once again run in and help them fight like the split never happened. Just from my perspective ignoring anything else, it feels a little disingenuous. I've seen either you or someone else from NPO post about the idea that they couldn't just sit idly by and watch BK get killed or something along those lines. Do you guys honestly believe this would have merked BK for good?

Not to mention, there can be multiple ruling classes in one game. Claiming one side to be the "Ultimate Ruling Class" like they're all some Machiavellian Villains is; one: I being a High Gov Member in Val, to me a massive compliment, I love love LOVE playing a villain, two: definitely fits into your narrative of not having any trust in their words (More below on that).
 

On 8/15/2019 at 10:24 AM, Shadowthrone said:

I mean a few former leaders from that school of FA, have pretty much told me, that the idea is to keep a navigable distance, not too far that relationships decay, but not too close for the optics of it. That's the basic argument we've fought against for years. If you have a relationship, sign a treaty and be done with it.  

This right here I find hilariously hypocritical as a statement. By that definition of argument and the statement above it stating you've always had great relationship with Leo, you should have just resigned BK or never dissolved the treaty to begin with. You maintained a relationship that was not too far away to decay, but not too close for the optics, and yet you decry the very thing. It took the heat off you and placed it on BK, especially after the leak, to not be tied to them and to sign t$, but it seems when the fires got too heavy you had to come help put them out. So, why dissolve the treaty in the first place if your stance is "if you have a relationship, sign a treaty and be done with it" then you're not taking your own advice and breaking with BK under the pretenses of "trying something new" while maintaining this relationship is just in the same school of thought as them.
 

On 8/15/2019 at 10:24 AM, Shadowthrone said:

The lack of trust/faith in the changing of their behaviour brings us to this specific point in time, where the NPO has little to no faith in their promises that this is a one war situation and hence brought us in. As Edward has mentioned, minispheres work only if there is a system of rules, trust and faith in the other main players to make it work. There is none, and here we are. 

From what I've gathered though, people had more faith in you when the ties between you and BK broke but simply because of NPO's baseless, from the lack of actual proof, fear that they where next decided to show their cards. I mean. It's all wildly head-spinning to me to cry out that everyone else is doing the same old thing again and again while yinz do the same old thing again and again. You had a chance to show that you had an iota of faith in others, to prove them wrong, because from forum posts alone people suspected you'd be right into the fray, but you did the opposite. Trust begets trust.

It all does feel to me like old grudges are wounds that NPO just wont let heal. I think any form of game play in this type of sim is going to rely more on trust than anything else. Whether is bi-polarity or mini-spheres, there is going to have to be some sort of understanding reached between sides or group of sides. If NPO doesn't have faith in anyone but BK, really, then you're not doing anything really dynamic. Most of what I've seen from NPO is "Well, you guys didn't really want to bring us to the table, despite offering the chair, it was just a plot to stab us based on these events in the past." And then "Well, we've never been in the ruling class because they wont let us be at the table with them and that makes us not trust them." It's a bit circular logic. But I mean, all we've ever done on these forums from what I can see is go around the same roundabout at full speed.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know Roq has always been NPO Emperor in PnW; although I didn’t pay much (if any attention before creating my nation). Before that he was leading an alliance allied with NPO in CN; after fighting them for many years before finally trusting them enough to not keep try to keep them pinned down after the Karma War. (NPO’s first loss in CN). So he has history and experience with them.

So trying to get them to remove Roq is probably a bad approach & just make NPO harder to deal with. :P

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

As far as I know Roq has always been NPO Emperor in PnW; although I didn’t pay much (if any attention before creating my nation). Before that he was leading an alliance allied with NPO in CN; after fighting them for many years before finally trusting them enough to not keep try to keep them pinned down after the Karma War. (NPO’s first loss in CN). So he has history and experience with them.

So trying to get them to remove Roq is probably a bad approach & just make NPO harder to deal with. :P

I couldn't care less if they removed him or not. I was just wondering where he came from. I don't really find them hard to deal with now. But inexperience is a factor. But this is rather safe to say he's been aligned with NPO in general for awhile. I played CN I think for all of a month years ago and just shrugged it off, so my history there is even worse than my history here. XD I mostly have word of mouth and the wiki. Don't even have that half the time with CN. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

As far as I know Roq has always been NPO Emperor in PnW; although I didn’t pay much (if any attention before creating my nation). Before that he was leading an alliance allied with NPO in CN; after fighting them for many years before finally trusting them enough to not keep try to keep them pinned down after the Karma War. (NPO’s first loss in CN). So he has history and experience with them.

So trying to get them to remove Roq is probably a bad approach & just make NPO harder to deal with. :P

NPO removing roq is pretty much impossible due to a complete absence of popular sovereignty within NPO. It’s close to impossible for an alliance to perform an action which has little to no basis within its own ethos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Charles the Tyrant said:

NPO removing roq is pretty much impossible due to a complete absence of popular sovereignty within NPO. It’s close to impossible for an alliance to perform an action which has little to no basis within its own ethos.

Other than maybe Rose, not really aware of any notable alliances someone can become the new leader by popular vote in periodic elections. So either way I don’t think anyone joins expecting to replace Roq. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2019 at 12:37 AM, Shadowthrone said:

Not "fun" wars as your describe, but specific reasoning to war, to politics. Give specific ideological meaning to your action.

@Shadowthrone - Man, those words are pearls! I said about the same thing in a post weeks ago. Going to war over mindless stuff like boredom, fun, or a leader being dissatisfied with their Alliance "war reputation" totally destroys any potential for a rational geopolitical metagame in P&W to even get off the ground.

Dude, ya oughta be in government, if ya aren't already!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

Other than maybe Rose, not really aware of any notable alliances someone can become the new leader by popular vote in periodic elections. So either way I don’t think anyone joins expecting to replace Roq. :P

NPO has elections? Let me guess

Option 1: " o/ NPO"

Option 2: " Hail Pacifica "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, alyster said:

NPO has elections? Let me guess

Option 1: " o/ NPO"

Option 2: " Hail Pacifica "

Doubt it, in BK the elections they vote on are purely for lulz. One week I spent as Duke already was above any Senate Position. So would have a pointless to run.

Fark has elections when someone steps down, probably the only times any alliances really decide on new leaders (Other than Rose being the exception here). I first met Roq when Umbrella applied to join The Citadel in CN. Since NPO was unbeaten & hadn’t tasted defeat yet, wanted to shift the dynamic in The Citadel to have more who’d be on my side opposing the hegemony of the day; while screening out any alliances who wanted to join them.

Eventually this worked & my political goals were in alignment with Umbrella when I favored bringing them in. So had a good relationship with Roq and The Citadel back then. Not sure if Shadowthrone ever told me who they were, but since they best remembered me as King of FCC when we were Citadel together; they likely know Roq as far back as 2007 when he was fighting NPO. So while Shadowthrone capable and active; as the name implies I think they prefer being effective support Gov & loyal to Roq. (Kind of support Gov it’s great to have & can make a huge difference when leading in not micro managing as much.)

Edited by Noctis Anarch Caelum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well your mistake is assuming that decent alliance like NPO is being run the same way as BK. PnW NPO charter looks similar to CN NPO's. 

https://politicsandwar.fandom.com/wiki/Charter_of_the_New_Pacific_Order

Also why coup Roq? He's as sharp as they come. However look at the others in high gov under him. ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • 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.