Jump to content

If chaos drives, let suffering hold the wheel


 Share

Recommended Posts

@Shadowthrone - There’s a difference between “not fighting BK”, “we have no reason to fight BK”, and outright aiding them after their plan leaked to have 2 spheres hit except yours.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing as there were plans for BK to hit Chaos (even post-Surf’s Up, which is something that your side denied again and again) and no such plans to hit NPO, I would say that it is quite the stretch to compare your “CB” against TKR to the CB against BK.

  • Upvote 1

image.gif.d80770bf646703bba00c14ad52088af9.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kevanovia said:

Seeing as there were plans for BK to hit Chaos (even post-Surf’s Up, which is something that your side denied again and again) and no such plans to hit NPO, I would say that it is quite the stretch to compare your “CB” against TKR to the CB against BK.

He said our CB is that TKR and its coalitionmates were a threat and our assessment of them being a threat along with the warning we received was how the initial week of the war went and how it was going for them and them being a threat was borne out by the fact they had enough firepower to counter us and to make bold proclamations like this.  

YFLvwca.jpg

Every day we let them build up and get more people with high air, the bigger the problem got and the harder it would be to deal with. Their confidence grew constantly and we saw it  before and we saw it when the initial round had to be a suicide plunge. Revisionist rhetoric now states that they would always be overwhelmed by numbers, but they were in too strong of a position to simply ignore and it showed. Anyone who seriously was declaring and expecting to lose would count their blessings and not test their luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

Uh oh, is @Roquentin shifting from "Orange Man Bad" to "Angery Mongols bad" ?

Are we starting to unravel the real truth here?

What truth? That TKR was a threat and we dealt with it? I mean that's been our line since the beginning. But our DoW thread has some wonderful pieces of gold from your sphere with some wonderful proclamations. 

  • Downvote 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

What truth? That TKR was a threat and we dealt with it? I mean that's been our line since the beginning. But our DoW thread has some wonderful pieces of gold from your sphere with some wonderful proclamations. 

Orange  man Bad

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/9/2019 at 1:33 PM, Prefonteen said:

Rose has always been a hulk of a wreck. It's physical state now reflects that properly.

 

Get at me @Abbas Mehdi@Mhearl

Says the guy that made an alliance that can't function without him. 

 

FYI: It is not a compliment. Just calling every alliance you founded, frankenstein

Edited by Abbas Mehdi

 

I am not a member of Guardian p&w

f2VouKU.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2019 at 9:48 AM, CandyShi said:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds like you’re using a message from the day after NPO officially declared on TKR as your CB.

 

Or are you saying that anyone who gets mad about your bullshit on our side gives you a CB in hindsight, after you declared?

 

 

Post-facto arguments based on later debate rather than actual circumstances is pretty much what IQ is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Lest we forget: "The Syndicate and affiliates will not expand their attacks beyond Grumpy and Guardian" -N$O, less than a week before NPO expanded their attacks beyond Grumpy and Guardian

Edited by Sir Scarfalot
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lamenting CB's is a nice pass time, it however doesnt change much to the position orbis now is in. Why not formulate how to go on from here after stating once: 'hey! We didnt like that CB one bit!'. 

 

After that, consider what is best to do from this moment on? If the answer: lament some more, have fun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To paint some crazy conspiracy that KTsphere and Chaos were/are actually in cahoots is over the top nonsense to the people who actually know what the relationship is between KTsphere and Chaos. KTsphere and Chaos never consolidated. We were literally at war with each other. As far as I know, we're not allied to KTsphere. You really believe we would go to war with each other just so we could pad our stats in a war against BK, in some long-con eventual hit on NPO?

It's like I'm reading a book by Alex Jones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2019 at 9:48 AM, CandyShi said:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds like you’re using a message from the day after NPO officially declared on TKR as your CB.

 

Or are you saying that anyone who gets mad about your bullshit on our side gives you a CB in hindsight, after you declared?

 

 

I stopped logging into the forums for a while since I can read without logging in so I didn't get this notification but that wasn't what I said. The point was that KERCHTOGG had a battlefield advantage at the time which made it problematic not to alter the situation given we had no real reason to think they would avoid conflict if it became opportune especially with  increasing antagonization in the week prior  and there were also indications. It bore out in terms of their confidence after to the extent they thought they were in a position to make such pronouncements and that it was their go to response. Normally if one feels at a disadvantage, they don't make such bold claims.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

I stopped logging into the forums for a while since I can read without logging in so I didn't get this notification but that wasn't what I said. The point was that KERCHTOGG had a battlefield advantage at the time which made it problematic not to alter the situation given we had no real reason to think they would avoid conflict if it became opportune especially with  increasing antagonization in the week prior  and there were also indications. It bore out in terms of their confidence after to the extent they thought they were in a position to make such pronouncements and that it was their go to response. Normally if one feels at a disadvantage, they don't make such bold claims.

What antagonization, your unprovoked (and that's from your own narrative, mind you, since "not allied to BK, not trying to affect the war, will not expand attacks beyond Grumpy and Guardian") attacks on elements of our coalition?

The best you've got are "indications", backed by nothing concrete other than logs older than the ones you yourselves claim are too old to be relevant. More tellingly, you can't even scrape up more than that after hitting Grumpy and Guardian in an attempt to bait counters and play treaty chess, so please frick off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

What antagonization, your unprovoked (and that's from your own narrative, mind you, since "not allied to BK, not trying to affect the war, will not expand attacks beyond Grumpy and Guardian") attacks on elements of our coalition?

The best you've got are "indications", backed by nothing concrete other than logs older than the ones you yourselves claim are too old to be relevant. More tellingly, you can't even scrape up more than that after hitting Grumpy and Guardian in an attempt to bait counters and play treaty chess, so please frick off.

The old logs simply revealed for plans for collusion between TKR and its former allies beyond the split they did. It was common knowledge that was inconvenient to most.  The fact it was relayed a few days after the war started that at least one alliance was seeing it as a matter of having BK down first was a major contributor. Obviously that hasn't been released for the same reason none of the logs your side claims to have have not been released.

At the same time, it's simply how we see it driving our actions and not whether the rationales will be convincing to people who are impacted by them. If we have no mutual interests with a group of alliances and they are able to decisively beat an opposing sphere within a couple of weeks of a war starting, then it's a problem as we then lack a deterrent or any buffer and stick out. When it was also relayed that there was a goal to extract a group of alliances by a certain date, then it gets kind of dicey.  

Yeah the GOB/Guardian did invite some  more antagonization especially since people tried to take advantage of the perceived trap of the stipulations to taunt us. It also did make it a situation where both sides would be pissed if the situation continued on, so there was nothing to gain by remaining limited. One group which had multiple alliances petitioning for support would be upset when the alliance capable of doing something doesn't do it in hopes the bloodlust of the other side is permanently sated with the destruction of BKsphere and coopting/extraction of its peripheral elements. The other would be upset by a limited entry against the upper tier sacred cows they had signed up to protect and we all know how those situations have turned out and would potentially see a juicy target of fat infra nations to shred through. The only reasons to remain neutral or limited front: if you think both sides will take adequate damage or  you're afraid of losing infra or  the outcome is something you see as unimpactful, or you want the way the war is going to continue on. Seeing as we perceived no benefit in a decisive KERTCHOGG victory, the choice was obvious. The only serious and motivating rationales for staying out in such a scenario  are the following:

1. if we did see the Memesphere's size as indicative of military capability and fracturing it via pressuring it to crack through the war would be beneficial

2. if we perceived the Memesphere side to have the ability to provide sufficient resistance against KERTCHOGG in those circumstances so it wouldn't be a curbstomp for the entirety rather than them getting dunked on while kerchtogg dealt a lot of damage , which wasn't happening.

3.  if we had some sort of vested interest in the other side for future plans, which we didn't. 

4. Some moralistic stand to  avoid "collusion" charges

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best thing about Rose is it would have been pretty easy to bring Kingsglaive to their side when I approached their new Emperor; although instead Rose chose to be my primary enemy.

Will be to bad if the leadership’s incompetence hurts their chances of winning this war. :P

Anyways, keep it going & don’t bend on terms. Finally will get some action soon.

  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

Best thing about Rose is it would have been pretty easy to bring Kingsglaive to their side when I approached their new Emperor; although instead Rose chose to be my primary enemy.

Will be to bad if the leadership’s incompetence hurts their chances of winning this war. :P

Anyways, keep it going & don’t bend on terms. Finally will get some action soon.

this game will truly have two distinct eras: one before noctis got mad at rose and one after noctis got mad at rose

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Auctor said:

this game will truly have two distinct eras: one before noctis got mad at rose and one after noctis got mad at rose

Depends if you guys back out early or not; can definitely destroy Rose together. (Also they lost their best fighter recently)

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

pacifica are a proud and wrathful people, but even they have their limits. they could not have anticipated when the war began that noctis might get mad at rose about a banned person's stuff. we merely sought global hegemony, we had no idea that this would expand beyond that scope to validating noctis's feelings

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Auctor said:

pacifica are a proud and wrathful people, but even they have their limits. they could not have anticipated when the war began that noctis might get mad at rose about a banned person's stuff. we merely sought global hegemony, we had no idea that this would expand beyond that scope to validating noctis's feelings

Well, I mean you guys pretty much white peacing when they had no CB to attack; NAP isn’t real terms. Lol

Didn’t mean for me, but if you guys are at your limit already; now wouldn’t be the best time. So you might have got them off the hook for now...

(Alexio’s alliance wants to fight anyways & Rose doesn’t have much infra yet)

Edited by Noctis Anarch Caelum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.