Jump to content
Skae

[DOW] Afrika Korps Rolls North

Recommended Posts

Just now, CitrusK said:

Any one can activate a treaty, as long as they are sided with BK, of course.

And treaties are only valid as long as they're convenient for BK, unless it's more convenient for BK if they're obligatory; either way, the text of treaties and the status of aggressor are both defined post-facto by BK or NPO.

Share this post


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

NPO only signs MnDoAP's so they have literally been fulfilling their obligations to the letter. Unless TS or HS are attacked for doing nothing NPO is not obligated tohelp them.

 

funny thing, your DoW is literally because T$ did nothing BK declared war

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Dislike for AK aside, that is actually a very good DoW. Good job. 

Edited by Mr. Goober
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

HS declared an aggressive war on BK, meaning NPO being obligated to defend against counters would be chaining.

Ah yes, I remember this strategy from "The Art of War."

It's quite simple, actually.

It's the "yay, wait, nah, but still yay us plan."

Where you declare an offensive war inciting the back-up of another alliance (The Syndicate in this case.)

Then you act very surprised when they counter for your attack.

but then! all of your allies (who you told you were doing this) are going to attack Syndicate.

Which then forces House Stark to get involved and declare war on you.

But then! You ask more of your allies to attack House Stark (which is now an aggressive war against House Stark, and Syndicate)

But politically, you act as if they caused the attacks, and boom! You don't have to get hit by the alliance that you've been leaching off of for the past four months! 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


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

And treaties are only valid as long as they're convenient for BK, unless it's more convenient for BK if they're obligatory; either way, the text of treaties and the status of aggressor are both defined post-facto by BK or NPO.

No, the text of treaties is defined by universal conventions of the English language, although I wouldn't expect everyone to grasp the finer points here.
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Filmore said:

There's also that wonderful Mutual Defense clause in both T$ and HS treaties with NPO that they've chosen to ignore. Your allies may be enabled to join in your defense, but NPO is actively choosing to ignore a treaty if they don't defend HS from AK. 

Look man, we're already having to surrender to Acadia and UPN and admit Clarke did nothing wrong. Why do you keep wanting more?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Ah yes, I remember this strategy from "The Art of War."

It's quite simple, actually.

It's the "yay, wait, nah, but still yay us plan."

Where you declare an offensive war inciting the back-up of another alliance (The Syndicate in this case.)

Then you act very surprised when they counter for your attack.

but then! all of your allies (who you told you were doing this) are going to attack Syndicate.

Which then forces House Stark to get involved and declare war on you.

But then! You ask more of your allies to attack House Stark (which is now an aggressive war against House Stark, and Syndicate)

But politically, you act as if they caused the attacks, and boom! You don't have to get hit by the alliance that you've been leaching off of for the past four months! 

So are we smart enough to bait T$ into a losing war, or dumb enough to piss off all of Orbis through aggression and hiding behind NPO, I really need to know here.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

So are we smart enough to bait T$ into a losing war, or dumb enough to piss off all of Orbis through aggression and hiding behind NPO, I really need to know here.

Who says T$ are losing?

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

So are we smart enough to bait T$ into a losing war, or dumb enough to piss off all of Orbis through aggression and hiding behind NPO, I really need to know here.

Give two weeks, and you will tell me your answer, phrased differently, and answering a different accusation.

For now, I am going to tell you that I believe that BK would do such a thing. Purposefully try to create a war with the $yndicate. I have no motive behind such a callous attack as of this moment, but I've never been too big in the banking industry.

Also, those options are not one or the other.

You have baited T$ into the war that you wanted to, congrats.

Now, everyone has a disdain towards you guys. NPO has sided with you, and it is clear that BK will hit anyone at this point. BK and NPO have shown that nothing has changed, and that both of those alliances (with their side kick Guardians of the Galaxy) will attack everyone together. You're already at war with everyone, so you can't be hiding behind NPO. Although, it can, and will, be said that NPO is the only thing that keeps your ass out of danger. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think someone ordered a little to much salt. 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a serious need for this in here now.

s40NeUE.jpg

Share this post


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

Who says T$ are losing?

Oh honey.

14 minutes ago, CitrusK said:

Give two weeks, and you will tell me your answer, phrased differently, and answering a different accusation.

For now, I am going to tell you that I believe that BK would do such a thing. Purposefully try to create a war with the $yndicate. I have no motive behind such a callous attack as of this moment, but I've never been too big in the banking industry.

Also, those options are not one or the other.

You have baited T$ into the war that you wanted to, congrats.

Now, everyone has a disdain towards you guys. NPO has sided with you, and it is clear that BK will hit anyone at this point. BK and NPO have shown that nothing has changed, and that both of those alliances (with their side kick Guardians of the Galaxy) will attack everyone together. You're already at war with everyone, so you can't be hiding behind NPO. Although, it can, and will, be said that NPO is the only thing that keeps your ass out of danger. 

So in your own words, what would the motive be. Normally you don't go around trying to fight the number two alliance who is tied to the number one alliance, that seems short sighted.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

So in your own words, what would the motive be. Normally you don't go around trying to fight the number two alliance who is tied to the number one alliance, that seems short sighted.

I'm going to ignore the first part of your sentence, like how you ignored a few sentences of mine.

Normally you don't go around trying to fight the number two alliance, I will agree with you on that. 

Now. Should the Syndicate be giving loans to people you don't like (just throwing out ideas here) or harboring war dodgers (even though there are tons more war dodgers elsewhere), you could get a decent CB off on them. But, then comes the issue of them being tied to the #1 alliance in the game.

But, you and that alliance are currently in a war together, on the same side. Now, that's not, by any means, a normal circumstance. Now, what makes it better for your odds of escaping such a battle with the #2 alliance without #1 getting involved, is that you and the #1 alliance have been tied for well over a year before this incident. You guys have gotten along and have shown that your governments often chat with each other. Despite time zone issues.

Now, that's all fine and dandy. But you still have to figure out a way for NPO to have a reason to stay out of the war.

Now, if you hit Terminus Est, an alliance with a handful of war dodgers, you can use that as a CB. Since the #1 alliance has a non-chaining pact with the #2 alliance, you can freely hit Terminus Est, and wait for t$ to get involved. Once t$ gets involved, you get your war that you've been looking for, without having to directly declare an aggressive war.

The issue, is that you want more of your members to get in on the action, your allies and such. So, your buddies (like Afrika Korps) start declaring war on House Stark and Syndicate. It's over-kill because the Syndicate doesn't have good enough milcom to fight BK (let alone its allies) and the more of BK's allies get involved, the worst it looks politically.

Black Knights has the cb, and they used it. It's allies did not, and are just tagging along and declaring war directly on HS or T$. Going by the original logic that NPO can counter attacks on their allies, NPO should be attacking Afrika Korps and them... but Black Knights has already talked to them. And Black Knights has already talked them out of it (not that they needed too much persuasion.)

Edited by CitrusK
Spelling errors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

That's not what it says in the OP, but even if it was, that logic cuts exactly both ways and NPO is obligated to act in the defense of T$. "Chaining" or not, which incidentally isn't even in the text of the treaty in question, T$ has been directly and aggressively attacked by alliances in IQ that have zero paper of any sort they can possibly point at.

Also BK is the aggressor, so your logic falls apart even before that. Actually, you never had any logic to start with.

Why does KERTOGG even care? T$ has nothing to do with you guys.

Share this post


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

T$ and now HS have declared aggressive wars against BK. This enables all our allies to join, and as our treaties are chaining their allies can join.

BK declared aggressive wars against TEst, who are T$s protectorate. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but you guys don't have any ties to t$ right? Or are you willing to support anyone who crosses hairs with bk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, CandyShi said:

BK declared aggressive wars against TEst, who are T$s protectorate. 

Nothing was declared. TEst has been at war with us since it’s inception due to its governments past actions and T$ chose to support these actions through aggressive action of their own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

TEst has been at war with us since it’s inception due to its governments past actions and T$ chose to support these actions through aggressive action of their own. 

unknown.png

Their literal first war was yesterday.

image.png.3f62efbf191213fed1960fd0075bcae9.png

They were founded 25 days ago.

 

 

Honestly Leo, if you're going to waste peoples time don't even bother using the forums. People don't have 5 hours every day to counter your BS.

Edited by CandyShi
Yesterday not today, my bad. The time flies when you're drowning in essays.
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

Nothing was declared. TEst has been at war with us since it’s inception due to its governments past actions and T$ chose to support these actions through aggressive action of their own. 

Dude you're honestly full of shit up to your neck. You want to control the game with an iron fist and drive it into the fricking ground. Keep hiding behind NPO you big wuss. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

I'm going to ignore the first part of your sentence, like how you ignored a few sentences of mine.

Normally you don't go around trying to fight the number two alliance, I will agree with you on that. 

Now. Should the Syndicate be giving loans to people you don't like (just throwing out ideas here) or harboring war dodgers (even though there are tons more war dodgers elsewhere), you could get a decent CB off on them. But, then comes the issue of them being tied to the #1 alliance in the game.

But, you and that alliance are currently in a war together, on the same side. Now, that's not, by any means, a normal circumstance. Now, what makes it better for your odds of escaping such a battle with the #2 alliance without #1 getting involved, is that you and the #1 alliance have been tied for well over a year before this incident. You guys have gotten along and have shown that your governments often chat with each other. Despite time zone issues.

Now, that's all fine and dandy. But you still have to figure out a way for NPO to have a reason to stay out of the war.

Now, if you hit Terminus Est, an alliance with a handful of war dodgers, you can use that as a CB. Since the #1 alliance has a non-chaining pact with the #2 alliance, you can freely hit Terminus Est, and wait for t$ to get involved. Once t$ gets involved, you get your war that you've been looking for, without having to directly declare an aggressive war.

The issue, is that you want more of your members to get in on the action, your allies and such. So, your buddies (like Afrika Korps) start declaring war on House Stark and Syndicate. It's over-kill because the Syndicate doesn't have good enough milcom to fight BK (let alone its allies) and the more of BK's allies get involved, the worst it looks politically.

Black Knights has the cb, and they used it. It's allies did not, and are just tagging along and declaring war directly on HS or T$. Going by the original logic that NPO can counter attacks on their allies, NPO should be attacking Afrika Korps and them... but Black Knights has already talked to them. And Black Knights has already talked them out of it (not that they needed too much persuasion.)

Huh? It was already said we only have non-chaining MDs with tS and HS. 

tS entered in defense of Terminus Est, so they got countered and the alliances had a treaty chain to justify countering tS. 

HS entered on oA against BK and optionally chained via MD with tS against TCW. 

So we don't have a reason to enter if we don't have a compelling reason. idk how many times I have to say it, tS had moved on and was doing a new sphere so we don't really have a reason to enable their defense of TEst. If they had wanted to keep our sphere going, it would be a much different situation. They didn't.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Paradise said:

Why does KERTOGG even care? T$ has nothing to do with you guys.

Well. Simple. We enjoy justice. Be it our side, their side, or someone we don't have ties with. 

It doesn't matter who it is, really. We care about being truthful. We care about holding everyone to the same degree. We don't care if their our allies or enemies, wrong is wrong. I would hope so at least. (I have been professionally detached from the Ketog side of the war.)

Share this post


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

unknown.png

Their literal first war was yesterday.

image.png.3f62efbf191213fed1960fd0075bcae9.png

They were founded 25 days ago.

 

 

Honestly Leo, if you're going to waste peoples time don't even bother using the forums. People don't have 5 hours every day to counter your BS.

We did in fact decide not to slot Test right when they formed, rather we initiated peace discussions. Alot of this was done through T$ iirc, finally after 25 days we decided the lack of timely responses and the lack of formal acceptance to the terms warranted reengagement 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
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...

  • 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.