Jump to content

Coalition A is trying to do something very obvious


Raigen
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

t$ has not been allowed to start peace talks since its surrender on November 1st.

Logs have been posted which show your coalition leadership directly stating that they don't want to peace t$ yet.

 

So...yes? Again: Have you read the logs? 

 

EDIT: Im also unsure why you are quoting this post, as it's a post about an entirely different subject. Did you mean to quote me in the other thread?

Ah you're from t$ right? Congratulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

Shadow friend, the polaris copy pasta logs which HS refers to weren't admissable as unrefutable proof that NPO faced an existential threat. They were circumstantial at best. Unless you have some smoking gun material which you haven't shown HS, your entire premise for joining the war and fricking over 2 allies falls with that.

Nice of you once again attempt to draw out the nature of the logs, that were given to you in private. To us it was enough because it was direct claims that NPO had something to do with BK's original war planning and that we'd be rolled down the line for it. To us, it was enough to hit rather than take the risk of waiting. We explained the same to y'all. 

I mean the reason we did enter the war was that log along with how the war was turning out, the narratives had begun that a) NPO had something to do with it, b) NPO is OP by sitting out the war and therefore the next threat. Those were narratives being seen the moment the war had started. So however you look at it, I do believe there was enough evidence that we would have been the next target, and moved up to be react to those before it took root. 

I can point to how folks claim Fark sphere is winning by sitting out and is a problem in the future etc etc as how quickly sitting out of wars, does not work really well in Orbis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

Nice of you once again attempt to draw out the nature of the logs, that were given to you in private. To us it was enough because it was direct claims that NPO had something to do with BK's original war planning and that we'd be rolled down the line for it. To us, it was enough to hit rather than take the risk of waiting. We explained the same to y'all. 

I mean the reason we did enter the war was that log along with how the war was turning out, the narratives had begun that a) NPO had something to do with it, b) NPO is OP by sitting out the war and therefore the next threat. Those were narratives being seen the moment the war had started. So however you look at it, I do believe there was enough evidence that we would have been the next target, and moved up to be react to those before it took root. 

I can point to how folks claim Fark sphere is winning by sitting out and is a problem in the future etc etc as how quickly sitting out of wars, does not work really well in Orbis. 

...I'm literally responding to something which was referred to 2 posts above me. Let's not make that about me, shall we?

It wasn't a smoking gun keshav. You might have drawn conclusions from it and viewed it as a threat (which, frankly, you view *anything* as a threat), but it's not a clear cut CB. Other than that I defer to HS and sisy, who have made it clear that you were well informed that none of your allies were aboard with you hijacking our limited war to join coalition B.

 

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Raigen said:

Ah you're from t$ right? Congratulations.

 

1 minute ago, Raigen said:

@Prefonteen CONGRATULATIONS ON -$50 BILLION NET DAMAGE. 
                            I think your business went down.

"My arguments have been refuted so i'm going to revert to dumb stat-flexing"

 

Alright then friend. See you next time.

  • Haha 5

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

..I'm literally responding to something which was referred to 2 posts above me. Let's not make that about me, shall we?

It wasn't a smoking gun keshav. You might have drawn conclusions from it and viewed it as a threat (which, frankly, you view *anything* as a threat), but it's not a clear cut CB. Other than that I defer to HS and sisy, who have made it clear that you were well informed that none of your allies were aboard with you hijacking our limited war to join coalition B.

 

Haha this is cute Partisan. And we informed Sisy and HS that this information along with everything with put together was enough for us to hit. If the point is that I believe you should have joined us in the hit, yes I do. But do I hold it against you that you chose differently, not really. As we argued with Sisy and the rest, let the NPO to to carry out what it believes was it sovereign duty to defend itself and there would be no call in for you all to defend us accordingly, but to let us act. 

The answers we got was Sisy insulting us, and leaks of our logs from the servers to KERTCHOGG. That explains why we nuked the servers since it wasn't cool to have those leaks, in response to Zygon. And I don't see two allies disagreeing with a course of action as a bad thing, but by reacting to that disagreement with the immaturity and insults that tS threw at Roquentin and myself, it was made clear that tS didn't consider as allies and the rest of its actions has been well documented that deserved reprisals. 

Your attempts at garnering PR while working to weaken our Coalition and interfere with our wars and lack of negotiation over Test got you hit. Most deservedly so might I add, because it was either that, or your continued attempt to harm our war coalition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Q Listener
8 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

...I'm literally responding to something which was referred to 2 posts above me. Let's not make that about me, shall we?

It wasn't a smoking gun keshav. You might have drawn conclusions from it and viewed it as a threat (which, frankly, you view *anything* as a threat), but it's not a clear cut CB. Other than that I defer to HS and sisy, who have made it clear that you were well informed that none of your allies were aboard with you hijacking our limited war to join coalition B.

 

I am interested to gather your view on why this is relevant at this stage, beyond navel gazing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

 

Haha this is cute Partisan. And we informed Sisy and HS that this information along with everything with put together was enough for us to hit. If the point is that I believe you should have joined us in the hit, yes I do. But do I hold it against you that you chose differently, not really. As we argued with Sisy and the rest, let the NPO to to carry out what it believes was it sovereign duty to defend itself and there would be no call in for you all to defend us accordingly, but to let us act. 

The answers we got was Sisy insulting us, and leaks of our logs from the servers to KERTCHOGG. That explains why we nuked the servers since it wasn't cool to have those leaks, in response to Zygon. And I don't see two allies disagreeing with a course of action as a bad thing, but by reacting to that disagreement with the immaturity and insults that tS threw at Roquentin and myself, it was made clear that tS didn't consider as allies and the rest of its actions has been well documented that deserved reprisals. 

Your attempts at garnering PR while working to weaken our Coalition and interfere with our wars and lack of negotiation over Test got you hit. Most deservedly so might I add, because it was either that, or your continued attempt to harm our war coalition. 

Thank you friend. I think you're kind of cute too!

 

In doing so, you broke your word though; as confirmed by both HS and sisy. Again- i'll leave the rest of that discussion to HS and sisy as they are more knowledgeable on it.

i'll entertain you on your last point though:  The logs which were leaked featured roq extensively planning to escalate on us. If we had backed down on TEst you'd have hit CTO/OWR to draw us out. You were also actively considering other CBs and ways to get us drawn in, ranging from using Itachi being (low)gov as a CB to us protecting demonspawn.

You added a last-minute poison pill to the terms you offered to TEst and escalated before TEst could really respond. This is logged.

Your leader is on record pushing for war on its own ally through whatever means possible. This has nothing to do with "our lack of negotiation over TEst".

 

8 minutes ago, John Q Listener said:

I am interested to gather your view on why this is relevant at this stage, beyond navel gazing.

My comment is relevant to the conversation which has been going on. That's about all the relevance it needs to have, no?

Edited by Prefonteen

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

In doing so, you broke your word though; as confirmed by both HS and sisy. Again- i'll leave the rest of that discussion to HS and sisy as they are more knowledgeable on it.

Our word on a restricted war that was made with different intelligence. You need to recognise when new information comes out and different intelligence is gathered, the terms under which the original decision was made is subject to change. To us the information regarding TKR changed the terms of operation since it was a direct threat and required us to act. 

 

11 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

i'll entertain you on your last point though:  The logs which were leaked featured roq extensively planning to escalate on us. If we had backed down on TEst you'd have hit CTO/OWR to draw us out. You were also actively considering other CBs and ways to get us drawn in, ranging from using Itachi being (low)gov as a CB to us protecting demonspawn.

I've also pointedly told you that your signing of CTO/OWR was the straw that broke the camel's back. Leo's answers after that signing made it clear that you were positioning yourself to commit a Montreal Screwjob on the NPO and we did what we had to reduce the chances of that. CTO/OWR were always on the anvil the moment they exited the war in a manner that they did and hiding under the umbrage of tS and confirmations that the move was to weaken BK/our coalition put you in the centre of the ball. 

Your attempts at dragging out the TEst negotiations but having time to work out a deal with CTO/OWR further enshrined that belief. There was a point where we were protecting you from any reprisals from Coal B for your actions regarding Sanreizan, that changed when you started messing with our war. At that point our treaty was nothing more than a courtesy that was kept rather than considered in force given your own actions to screw us over first. 

Feel free to read through all the logs, all of the above would be easily proven. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Q Listener
25 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

My comment is relevant to the conversation which has been going on. That's about all the relevance it needs to have, no?

You are deflecting. My question is how does this impact your current situation now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, John Q Listener said:

You are deflecting. My question is how does this impact your current situation now?

It's a lot to do with the unravelling of the NPO-tS relationship that has some relevance to the war at the moment :P 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, John Q Listener said:

You are deflecting. My question is how does this impact your current situation now?

If you want a legitimate answer, sure:

 

The premises under which NPO entered the war directly affect the premises on which the justification for dragging out this war are built.

Similarly, the revelation (from the logs) that t$ did not enter aggressively with malicious intent but rather, was deliberately pulled into the war (with the consent of its own allies) invalidate narratives which have been used to justify keeping t$ at war.

The circumstances of a war and the events within will always be inherently connected to its peace process. While "might makes right" most definitely plays a large role, these types of events affect the disposition of both the defeated and the victor. It's important to document and understand the inputs to a process if you want to understand its outcome.

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Zygon said:

As to the countering I supposedly promised, we only said that we should look at TKR once we were done with Guard/GoB and if there was something there, we would be perfectly happy going to war against them then. Unfortunately copy pastes of Polaris logs aren't enough evidence. So, as you can imagine there was some animosity seeing the devolution of the plan we had had and agreed to and unfortunately, paranoia got the better of you and you completely cleaned the whole channel of the log’s history, as you claimed things were being leaked with no clear evidence. If anyone is revising history here, it's you.

pOlArIs IsN't mY sOuRcE

Thank you, Zygon, for publicly confirming what I've been aware of since the first week of this war without me having to burn my own informants. Just to reiterate, I never discussed hitting NPO with Phoenix. The extent of what we discussed regarding your possible involvement in the war has already been disclosed on these forums, and it doesn't in the slightest indicate we'd hit NPO, but I'll include them here again for convenience.

Spoiler

WSxPhoenix06/17/2019
Speaking of sharing
Aren't you concerned you guys might get hit by NPO/t$?

Adrienne06/17/2019
If we do, at least we've gone out in a blaze of glory
The amount of f*cks I have to give are astonishingly low

It's been made clear all throughout this war that NPO will use whatever is at their disposal, regardless of its veracity, to justify their actions and claiming I deleted logs is about as easy as it gets narrative-wise because it can't be proven/disproven by either party, so I'm not going to argue this out with you all again. Seeing as we were the most vocal voice against expanding to you, as has already been confirmed by countless members of our coalition, it doesn't make your assertions accurate no matter how loud you yell about it.

  • Upvote 3

BrOQBND.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

Our word on a restricted war that was made with different intelligence. You need to recognise when new information comes out and different intelligence is gathered, the terms under which the original decision was made is subject to change. To us the information regarding TKR changed the terms of operation since it was a direct threat and required us to act. 

 

I've also pointedly told you that your signing of CTO/OWR was the straw that broke the camel's back. Leo's answers after that signing made it clear that you were positioning yourself to commit a Montreal Screwjob on the NPO and we did what we had to reduce the chances of that. CTO/OWR were always on the anvil the moment they exited the war in a manner that they did and hiding under the umbrage of tS and confirmations that the move was to weaken BK/our coalition put you in the centre of the ball. 

Your attempts at dragging out the TEst negotiations but having time to work out a deal with CTO/OWR further enshrined that belief. There was a point where we were protecting you from any reprisals from Coal B for your actions regarding Sanreizan, that changed when you started messing with our war. At that point our treaty was nothing more than a courtesy that was kept rather than considered in force given your own actions to screw us over first. 

Feel free to read through all the logs, all of the above would be easily proven. 

The logs of you plotting to engage TEst in order to drag t$ into the war preceed the escalation. When it appeared that boyce was going to accept your terms, you also added a poison pill at the last minute to prevent him from accepting. When there appeared to be a risk of him accepting even that, you escalated.

Whether you *belief* we fricked you over does not really justify you plotting a war to hit two allies while the treaty was active. If you considered the relationship over, you should've cancelled. That is why I pulled that trigger (long overdue :P). 

Your suspicions toward t$ also do not justify your actions toward HS, who acted in good faith with you throughout all of it, including offers to mediate (as per roqs own claims). You did exactly to HS what you did to t$. How do you justify that?

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

Your suspicions toward t$ also do not justify your actions toward HS, who acted in good faith with you throughout all of it, including offers to mediate (as per roqs own claims). You did exactly to HS what you did to t$. How do you justify that?

I've always regretted the break down of relations with HS tbh. Throughout the course of the war, I tried to protect tS/HS as much as possible given the massive amounts of respect I have for Ataxia/Revan/Cypher. They dealt with me honestly and I returned the favour at all times, including on the CTO/OWR hit :P It sucks this is the way it ended up, but the choice was to keep supporting tS' clearly aggressive actions against the Coalition and ourselves versus self-protection. The latter prevailed in this case. 

 

7 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

The logs of you plotting to engage TEst in order to drag t$ into the war preceed the escalation. When it appeared that boyce was going to accept your terms, you also added a poison pill at the last minute to prevent him from accepting. When there appeared to be a risk of him accepting even that, you escalated.

TEst was something that was unhandled for three weeks. When NPO was informed on Test as a prot, we told y'all they need an independent peace with the Coalition given it had Boyce. Up until that point there was not much to do with escalating with tS. When tS was willing to not negotiate regarding Test for weeks, and signed CTO/OWR discussions began regarding a proper hit iirc. 

Like I said it was the signing of CTO/OWR and lack of negotiations regarding Test that made it clear where you were positioning yourself and opened yourselves to be hit. You showed your hand too early and we did what we had to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Shadowthrone said:

I've always regretted the break down of relations with HS tbh. Throughout the course of the war, I tried to protect tS/HS as much as possible given the massive amounts of respect I have for Ataxia/Revan/Cypher. They dealt with me honestly and I returned the favour at all times, including on the CTO/OWR hit :P It sucks this is the way it ended up, but the choice was to keep supporting tS' clearly aggressive actions against the Coalition and ourselves versus self-protection. The latter prevailed in this case. 

 

Maybe you did, and if that's the case i'm orry you got caught in the middle. Your direct superior (roq) plotted against them though, and irrespective of your personal efforts, thats not justifiable.

The choices you note aren't really all your choices. You had a choice not to plot a war on t$/HS behind their back. You had a choice to simply cancel the treaty and move from there.

1 minute ago, Shadowthrone said:

TEst was something that was unhandled for three weeks. When NPO was informed on Test as a prot, we told y'all they need an independent peace with the Coalition given it had Boyce. Up until that point there was not much to do with escalating with tS. When tS was willing to not negotiate regarding Test for weeks, and signed CTO/OWR discussions began regarding a proper hit iirc. 

Like I said it was the signing of CTO/OWR and lack of negotiations regarding Test that made it clear where you were positioning yourself and opened yourselves to be hit. You showed your hand too early and we did what we had to. 

Why was the poison pill term added, and why is your gov on record, strategizing to make the situation escalate to draw t$ in?

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2019 at 7:03 PM, Zygon said:

Well I suppose I will respond and not meme around here with gifs. Correct I told you all to go on with your TKR crusade after 4 days of HS/t$ telling you why it was not only an extremely poor idea but how it would destroy any strategy we had with our front. Through these four days you made it ever so clear that you would not back down after HS/t$ made it more than clear that we were not OK with this course of action and we would not stand for it if there was to be an attack on TKR. Actions have consequences. As NPO made it more than clear you were not going to listen to your two closest allies at the time, we made it clear to NPO by our immediate peace with our front due to the lie you would have us told on the strict post we made entering, not to mention you agreed to.

As to the countering I supposedly promised, we only said that we should look at TKR once we were done with Guard/GoB and if there was something there, we would be perfectly happy going to war against them then. Unfortunately copy pastes of Polaris logs aren't enough evidence. So, as you can imagine there was some animosity seeing the devolution of the plan we had had and agreed to and unfortunately, paranoia got the better of you and you completely cleaned the whole channel of the log’s history, as you claimed things were being leaked with no clear evidence. If anyone is revising history here, it's you.

I'll just spell it the falsehoods here. 1. You never said you would not stand for it and peace out. Wrong wrong wrong.  2. HS had barely any targets to hit on Grumpy/Guardian and was equally free as NPO and had said it would do what it could with regards to counters. 

So yeah it comes down to you not caring about the evidence in question and some sort of untold reason for giving the benefit of the doubt to TKR for apparently.

And you can take the whole no clear evidence thing away, because  Leopold was literally twisting things to other people about the contents of the channel while ignoring us. The "contacts in BK" line is apparently based on something different I said that was leaked to Partisan who wasn't in the channel as there would be no way for him to know we were entering otherwise. 

I'm glad I don't have to feel an ounce of guilt now that you're literally just repeating BS. 

 

  

On 12/8/2019 at 4:59 AM, Prefonteen said:

 

Maybe you did, and if that's the case i'm orry you got caught in the middle. Your direct superior (roq) plotted against them though, and irrespective of your personal efforts, thats not justifiable.

The choices you note aren't really all your choices. You had a choice not to plot a war on t$/HS behind their back. You had a choice to simply cancel the treaty and move from there.

Why was the poison pill term added, and why is your gov on record, strategizing to make the situation escalate to draw t$ in?

How did I plot against HS?  They chose to stick with you. Had they be willing to cancel,  they would have been able to get out of the way. 

They decided to stick with tS and liked the OWR/Carth treaties, so we can't enable that.

 

  

On 12/8/2019 at 3:25 AM, Prefonteen said:

Then why have you and your coalition been doing exactly this with regards to your escalation on TEst with the explicit purpose of drawing in t$ and exterminating us? You plotted to roll your ally and attempted to frame it as an aggressive move by us. That's you literally revising the actual event on your convenience.

 

Before you deny this, I remind you that the logs proving my claim are readily available on this forum.

 

My bullshit-o-meter is going off again.


Shadow friend, the polaris copy pasta logs which HS refers to weren't admissable as unrefutable proof that NPO faced an existential threat. They were circumstantial at best. Unless you have some smoking gun material which you haven't shown HS, your entire premise for joining the war and fricking over 2 allies falls with that.

You made your hostility clear with your actions prior to any of that. You had multiple opportuntiies to resolve the issues. You as in tS refused. You became severely hostile and we couldn't let you just continuously provoke us without a reaction.

We don't  need unrefutable proof to deal with a threat. We have no reason to allow a non-allied entity to clear the field enough for an eventual hit. People have gone to war on much less. If we hit someone we considered to be a friend then we might need unrefutable proof, but an alliance that was actively antagonizing us and when an openly antagonistic coalition was gaining ground, then we don't.  We knew tS and co wouldn't be able to fight all of the alliances on their own if it came down to it. You wanted Cov/BK to die and that's what it comes down to even if it would screw us over.

 

Edited by Roquentin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Legoboyvdlp said:

How... ironic...

It's not ironic at all though. tS would be in great shape right now if it had just stayed in lol.   Pretty much everyone fighting GOB/Guardian that wasn't tS was fine with some expansion. The war would have gone much faster and if tS had wanted to sign some peirpheral alliances after, it wouldn't have been a problem.  The alliances tS itself called into help them disliked KETOG and preferred expansion if the overall wouldn't be won otherwise. Simple fact. It would have been a pretty decent scenario for tS not to screw us. They cared about PR with KERTCHOGG instead and facilitating the destruction of BK/Cov who were already going to take copious amounts of damage anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BK/Cov wasn’t going to die you paranoid jackass, lol.

Never in any of our history (The leadership vets on our side) ever thought about pulling the same shit like you’re doing now.

You lied.  You betrayed.  You freaked out.

Thats all on you Roq.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

BK/Cov wasn’t going to die you paranoid jackass, lol.

Never in any of our history (The leadership vets on our side) ever thought about pulling the same shit like you’re doing now.

You lied.  You betrayed.  You freaked out.

Thats all on you Roq.

Does coal A actually think they are white knights and coal B are black knights?

 

Coal B is evil?*

Edited by Duke Arthur
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Q Listener
29 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

BK/Cov wasn’t going to die you paranoid jackass, lol.

Never in any of our history (The leadership vets on our side) ever thought about pulling the same shit like you’re doing now.

You lied.  You betrayed.  You freaked out.

Thats all on you Roq.

You are actually doing this to yourself, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Duke Arthur said:

Does coal A actually think they are white knights and coal B are black knights?

Coal B is evil?*

Everybody had access to the dumped logs.  You could read them yourself.

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.