A Treatise [ROH]

[Aaron JT]

Look who’s talking

[Sketchy]

4 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Stuff

I will restate my initial DOW position in it's simplest form.

Syndicate chose to attack an alliance, because that alliance wanted to do something in the future with us. We were already engaged in a war with you, and you attempted to further weaken us in the future, by eliminating people who would sign us. Tarroc laid this out in the screenshot that I posted in my response to him.

Syndicate wanted this war to happen, and thought you could weaken our position in advance by doing so. Well it's happening now. You seem to be under the impression this is us crying foul. No, it's merely us acknowledging your disposition and the lengths you'll go in order to secure victory.

Your attempt to redirect the conversation after Tarroc's blunders is noted. You painted a clever picture, unfortunately almost none of it is relevant to any of the claims I've made.

At no point have I ever suggested the Florida war itself as an issue. I don't care Syndicate hit us, nor do I care that it was a dogpile. My primary objection with Syndicate at the time was the treaty signed (and the inherent hypocrisy of it) and the CB presented, which Tarroc himself has already conceded was bs. Of course, I consider that rather convenient, as it had it's intended purpose, which was to pressure the breaking of Florida, and then, conveniently consolidate into the gap left behind. Bit late to be copping to that now I'd think.

4 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

You keep trying to bring up Carthago and KT as being some sort of secret extensions of SAIL’s. They were not. Had anyone else tried to move on them, SAIL would’ve simply said “Sorry Carthago, we offered you a spot here, you declined. You will have to live by the consequences of that decision.”. It’s as simple as that.

And yet earlier it was said they were needed for a war against us. So which is it?

Not entirely sure why you guys are still trying so hard to deny this. The entire premise of our accusation is you were intentionally obfuscating numbers. You've conceded without us even needing to pressure you much, that those were your numbers, so make up your mind. These alliances were tied directly to your sphere, and no one else.

It's honestly amusing at this point you guys still cling to this shit.

4 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Going back January, since you claim that you were kept at war as the result of some wicked trickery; the truth is that you came to SAIL two weeks in, which is premature given that usually one side contacts the other three weeks in. You did it at the two weeks mark because, both between you using them and SAIL spying them, your stockpiles of nukes and missiles had been exhausted, and most of the damage that you were going to do had already been done. 

SAIL had no interest in a premature peace, especially given the ongoing parallel TFP war, just because you were just about done having your share of the fun.

Meanwhile, your conflicts with WTF/UPN were still ongoing. These were alliances that had ties with CoA, and CoA obviously wanted to have them peaced out. CoA was a member of SAIL, and addressing their concerns/wishes was something that we were obviously going to do. 

Hence, you were asked to peace out with them first. It took you an entire week to get around to doing so, and when you finally did, you were already in the process of preparing to hit SAIL with the support you had secured from Rose and ODOO, making those talks effectively a waste of time. 

To briefly touch upon the WTF/UPN terms; they were stupid, and I am sure that had they actually been pressed, WTF/UPN would have been told to knock it off unless if they wanted SAIL to peace out first and for them to be left by themselves, since SAIL was not about to postpone its own peace over a hold-up with WTF/UPN. 

I already touched on most of this in my response to Tarroc, whose points you are just repeating, but I am glad you brought up that last part.

The entire purpose of separating out the peace talks, and forcing us to concede to other parties first, was so you didn't have to tell them to knock it off. That's my entire point. If what you were saying is true, you could have easily bundled the two peace talks together, and had that conversation, which is what we had initially expected would happen, since WTF themselves was calling it all part of the same war lmfao.

You are just lying. SAIL was indeed about to postpone it's own peace over a hold-up with WTF/UPN, because that's exactly what you wanted. That's why Syndicate sent us to them first, and refused to give us your terms until we had agreed to theirs. And that was true 1 month into the war.

You keep harping on the 2 weeks thing, and us "having our fun and wanting out". The reason we approached early was not because we expected you to peace us out after 2 weeks, the reason we approached earlier is because we expected the peace negotiations to be contentious, and for it to take multiple weeks for us to resolve peace at all. And that proved true, since after a month had passed, you had still not given us any terms.

Not two weeks, a month. We had no reason to expect you to deal in good faith, as you hadn't been up until that point. Tarroc was publicly gloating about peeling away protectorates as I recall. I didn't bother to mention that in our first post, because frankly it's not important to me, other than as another example of where things were. Contrast that to the Fortuna war for example, which ended without any delay tactics or drama.

4 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

An image that you are still trying to push now, as you simultaneously boast, after getting your ass handed to you twice and lusting for revenge for over a year, off the back of the most lopsided coalition this game has ever seen.

And there it is. I was wondering when you would get around to complaining about dogpiles again. After already conceding in this thread that you were planning to dogpile us. The handwringing over the size of the coalition is hilarious to me.

Let's get two things straight. A dogpile is a dogpile, the gap in the size of the dogpile doesn't matter. Once you are dogpiling someone, more nations isn't going to make a difference to that outcome. This war is a dogpile. Just like Syndicates last two wars against us were dogpiles. Get off your high horse. You've admitted to securing numbers to make it impossible for us to defeat you. Syndicate has a long history of doing this, as do most majors now at this point.

Secondly, we started building this coalition months ago, long before you lost all of your allies. The numbers were closer then, obviously. We have watched as Syndicate has lost allies over the period. Could we have perhaps scaled back the size of the coalition? Sure. But why? Would you do the same for us? Of course not, you've already admitted so. Those alliances wanted to fight. Strong-arming people out of the coalition so we could have more slots, is not something I'm interested in doing. I appreciate the support of our coalition partners.

Like I said in my DoW. You reap what you sow, and I have no qualms paying you back for things you do. I don't care if you dogpile me. It's never been part of my complaint against Syndicate. I only ever bring up dogpiles when people complain about dogpiles. In fact, if you guys had simply hit us outright, without all of these word salad attempts to justify your behaviour, we wouldn't even be having these longwinded debates right now.

I'm sure that, in time, Singularity will be dogpiled again. And perhaps someone will screenshot this, thinking it a political victory or to use it as some sort of premature justification. But my position isn't going to change, I'll continue to object to any ridiculous CB's or silly arguments made, but I'm not going to sweat a dogpile if it happens. Winning and losing is part of the cycle of the game, we had our turn to lose, now it's yours. Whining about the size of coalitions is beneath you, pretending like you care about it futile. No one believes that. Is it a shame that we can't have fair wars? Sure, but it's been a long time since that was ever part of the dialogue, I accepted that reality years ago. If that's something you are truly bothered by Shiho, I'd say you are in the wrong alliance.

Anyway, I'll await Tarrocs response to my original post, as he is the FA representative for Syndicate, and I'm sure he is capable enough of responding to my points without your assistance. If Tarroc would prefer to take this private, we can do that too I suppose. 

Edited August 23, 2024 by Sketchy

[JWebb]

1 hour ago, Sketchy said:

Anyway, I'll await Tarrocs response to my original post, as he is the FA representative for Syndicate, and I'm sure he is capable enough of responding to my points without your assistance. If Tarroc would prefer to take this private, we can do that too I suppose. 

 

I'm sure Tarroc will give you his attention.

[Tartarus]

30 minutes ago, JWebb said:

 

I'm sure Tarroc will give you his attention.

No, it’s okay he doesn’t have to, the real FA @Firwof Kromwell can handle it

[Leftbehind]

5 hours ago, Sketchy said:

Anyway, I'll await Tarrocs response to my original post, as he is the FA representative for Syndicate, and I'm sure he is capable enough of responding to my points without your assistance. If Tarroc would prefer to take this private, we can do that too I suppose. 

And what are the rest if us supposed to do? How dare you even suggest taking our limited amount of entertainment away. 

In all seriousness this has been some of the best back and forth ive seen in awhile. Roberts is proud of you and I know that is what truly matters. 

Edited August 23, 2024 by Leftbehind
Things

[Firwof Kromwell]

8 hours ago, Sketchy said:

-snip-

Who let this man cook, can't yall tell his senses getting to dull w/ age?! Smells like its burning hard & it's getting smoky af.

@Agent W @Shiho Nishizumi guys, Sketchy is burning again, should we extinguish it out or let him overheat to burst out? Also, who let him out of the retirement home, starting to sound even look. like how Joe Biden, it ain't pretty. Looks like Tartar is his Kamala too, this is getting uglier.

All I'm picturing is an eldery+ old man try to do gymnastics only to faceplant hard. That's the lvl of mental gymnastics were getting here.

 

Edited August 23, 2024 by Firwof Kromwell
so much smoke n mirrors you put yourself into only to measure your !@#$ in such a clouded room

[Tartarus]

21 minutes ago, Firwof Kromwell said:

@Agent W @Shiho Nishizumi guys, Sketchy is burning again, should we extinguish it out or let him overheat to burst out? Also, who let him out of the retirement home, starting to sound even look. like how Joe Biden, it ain't pretty. Looks like Tartar is his Kamala too, this is getting uglier.

All I'm picturing is an eldery+ old man try to do gymnastics only to faceplant hard. That's the lvl of mental gymnastics were getting here.

 

Damn dude has full disposed of Tarroc, he didn’t even @ him

Edited August 23, 2024 by Tartarus

[Sketchy]

2 hours ago, Firwof Kromwell said:

@Agent W @Shiho Nishizumi guys, Sketchy is burning again, should we extinguish it out or let him overheat to burst out? Also, who let him out of the retirement home, starting to sound even look. like how Joe Biden, it ain't pretty. Looks like Tartar is his Kamala too, this is getting uglier.

All I'm picturing is an eldery+ old man try to do gymnastics only to faceplant hard. That's the lvl of mental gymnastics were getting here.

 

@Tartaruswe got this man thinking he's on the team.

[Shiho Nishizumi]

On 8/22/2024 at 9:42 PM, Sketchy said:

I will restate my initial DOW position in it's simplest form.

Syndicate chose to attack an alliance, because that alliance wanted to do something in the future with us. We were already engaged in a war with you, and you attempted to further weaken us in the future, by eliminating people who would sign us. Tarroc laid this out in the screenshot that I posted in my response to him.

Syndicate wanted this war to happen, and thought you could weaken our position in advance by doing so. Well it's happening now. You seem to be under the impression this is us crying foul. No, it's merely us acknowledging your disposition and the lengths you'll go in order to secure victory.

Your attempt to redirect the conversation after Tarroc's blunders is noted. You painted a clever picture, unfortunately almost none of it is relevant to any of the claims I've made.

 

On 8/22/2024 at 9:42 PM, Sketchy said:

And yet earlier it was said they were needed for a war against us. So which is it?

Not entirely sure why you guys are still trying so hard to deny this. The entire premise of our accusation is you were intentionally obfuscating numbers. You've conceded without us even needing to pressure you much, that those were your numbers, so make up your mind. These alliances were tied directly to your sphere, and no one else.

It's honestly amusing at this point you guys still cling to this shit.

I believe that Tarroc will be addressing these, as per your request, so I'll put them aside for now.

On 8/22/2024 at 9:42 PM, Sketchy said:

At no point have I ever suggested the Florida war itself as an issue. I don't care Syndicate hit us, nor do I care that it was a dogpile. My primary objection with Syndicate at the time was the treaty signed (and the inherent hypocrisy of it) and the CB presented, which Tarroc himself has already conceded was bs. Of course, I consider that rather convenient, as it had it's intended purpose, which was to pressure the breaking of Florida, and then, conveniently consolidate into the gap left behind. Bit late to be copping to that now I'd think.

I will post a single image, with added context, because an image speaks louder than a thousand words.

This is an internal tiering chart dated November 4th. It excludes Carthago and KT, because again, they were not a part of SAIL. 



As for 'copping'; t$ presented TKR its 72 hours while Rose and Singularity were still deliberating whether to split or to consolidate, the former of which was done not out of any concern about the balance of power, but because it was deemed more viable.

On 8/22/2024 at 9:42 PM, Sketchy said:

I already touched on most of this in my response to Tarroc, whose points you are just repeating, but I am glad you brought up that last part.

The entire purpose of separating out the peace talks, and forcing us to concede to other parties first, was so you didn't have to tell them to knock it off. That's my entire point. If what you were saying is true, you could have easily bundled the two peace talks together, and had that conversation, which is what we had initially expected would happen, since WTF themselves was calling it all part of the same war lmfao.

You are just lying. SAIL was indeed about to postpone it's own peace over a hold-up with WTF/UPN, because that's exactly what you wanted. That's why Syndicate sent us to them first, and refused to give us your terms until we had agreed to theirs. And that was true 1 month into the war.

You keep harping on the 2 weeks thing, and us "having our fun and wanting out". The reason we approached early was not because we expected you to peace us out after 2 weeks, the reason we approached earlier is because we expected the peace negotiations to be contentious, and for it to take multiple weeks for us to resolve peace at all. And that proved true, since after a month had passed, you had still not given us any terms.

Not two weeks, a month. We had no reason to expect you to deal in good faith, as you hadn't been up until that point. Tarroc was publicly gloating about peeling away protectorates as I recall. I didn't bother to mention that in our first post, because frankly it's not important to me, other than as another example of where things were. Contrast that to the Fortuna war for example, which ended without any delay tactics or drama.

You have already been told why you were asked to peace out with WTF/UPN first. I won't waste time rehashing it.

With that said, t$ did not present you anything because you couldn't be bothered to even reach out to WTF/UPN for a week, and then basically disregarded talks with WTF/UPN for the next one because by that point, those talks were moot given that you had your rescue planned and being lined up.

"t$ is keeping us at war because they're making us talk to WTF/UPN, but we won't engage in any meaningful dialogue with WTF/UPN therefore perpetuating our state of war" is as circular as it gets, and not a convincing attempt at sidestepping why it went for a month without you getting stuff from us (you not doing as asked because you had put together a better alternative by expanding and winning the war).

Your recollections about Fortune war are faulty at best. I remember that coalition very well. I remember people talking themselves up into straight up naming the war after WANA, just to humiliate him further, until I told them to cut the crap. I also wouldn't necessarily call it drama-free, albeit the drama was within the coalition due to it being very fragmentized. There definitely were smoother peace processes than Fortune.

On 8/22/2024 at 9:42 PM, Sketchy said:

And there it is. I was wondering when you would get around to complaining about dogpiles again. After already conceding in this thread that you were planning to dogpile us. The handwringing over the size of the coalition is hilarious to me.

Let's get two things straight. A dogpile is a dogpile, the gap in the size of the dogpile doesn't matter. Once you are dogpiling someone, more nations isn't going to make a difference to that outcome. This war is a dogpile. Just like Syndicates last two wars against us were dogpiles. Get off your high horse. You've admitted to securing numbers to make it impossible for us to defeat you. Syndicate has a long history of doing this, as do most majors now at this point.

Secondly, we started building this coalition months ago, long before you lost all of your allies. The numbers were closer then, obviously. We have watched as Syndicate has lost allies over the period. Could we have perhaps scaled back the size of the coalition? Sure. But why? Would you do the same for us? Of course not, you've already admitted so. Those alliances wanted to fight. Strong-arming people out of the coalition so we could have more slots, is not something I'm interested in doing. I appreciate the support of our coalition partners.

Like I said in my DoW. You reap what you sow, and I have no qualms paying you back for things you do. I don't care if you dogpile me. It's never been part of my complaint against Syndicate. I only ever bring up dogpiles when people complain about dogpiles. In fact, if you guys had simply hit us outright, without all of these word salad attempts to justify your behaviour, we wouldn't even be having these longwinded debates right now.

Right. To boil this down to its essentials:

1) We dogpiled you twice.
2) This war is a retribution for the dogpiles we've done to you.

I will post three images. The first is Florida war (caveat that it includes KT; being frank, I'd remove them if I could given that their impact during it was limited, but alas, I can't. Off the top of my head, it should mean parity or slight edge for ODOO on 31-39, so treat it as such), the second is January war before TFP's hit (it was provided to me by someone yesterday), the third one is current. All of them are from CTOwned, just so that there is consistency across all three.

Again, I'll let the images do the talking, and let people draw their own conclusions.

On 8/22/2024 at 9:42 PM, Sketchy said:

Winning and losing is part of the cycle of the game, we had our turn to lose, now it's yours. Whining about the size of coalitions is beneath you, pretending like you care about it futile. No one believes that.

Your attempt at spinning something that we, and I, wrote against me is endearing.

I'll give you this much Sketchy; you coming here to do exchanges with us is definitely infinitely more commendable than those who just dropped a meme DoW and went back into hiding in their group chats.

To your point though; yes, winning and losing is a cycle. I've probably been rolled a dozen times by now. Being rolled, especially in these circumstances and given what I know, doesn't bother me one bit.

However, I am not going to stay quiet just because some people think that winning any given war earns them some kind of right to say things unchallenged. It doesn't. This is double true when it comes to bad arguments and falsehoods. And to write off the responses to those as "complaining" and "handwringing" is simply laughable.

Yes, bringing 1500 nations to hit us is notable, both as a matter of sheer numbers (up there but not at the top; One Day War, Duck Hunt and possibly another one or two surpass it) and specifically ratios (likely unmatched outside of a micro/minor conflict), so I'll note it, for the simple reason that it is notable. Had you brought about half as many, I'd not even be mentioning it since there'd be little worth noting.

Likewise, I'll note your talk about this being put together before EVH split from us (I'm sure it was), just for you hit both of us anyways on separate dates; you guys obviously deemed it more advantageous (it self evidently was) to do so, contrary to your claim of the gap in a dogpile being irrelevant. I'll also note you (Singularity) hitting EVH at all after promising a reset, when all you had to do to honor your word was stay put.

At the end of the day, you (and others) made certain decisions, implemented them in certain ways, and justified them in some way or the other. And it's very much a run the gamut kind of thing. *Insert alliance here* hit us because of revenge? That's fair. TFP hit us in a similar way we hit them in January? No complaints there. People start claiming falsehoods? I'll address it. People are wrong somewhere? I'll correct it. There's inconsistent or hypocritical behavior? I'll point it out.

It's as simple as that.

Edited August 24, 2024 by Shiho Nishizumi
Rehosted images.

[Tartarus]

31 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Your cherry picked graph still looks bad fyi. The scale on the Y-axis is inflated because of the really important c1-c16, so thank you for your accuracy.

 

I assume it doesn’t include they who apparently must not be named either. Lmfao. Gee man yeah thank god c31-c34 was equal 

 

also stop losing allies at a record rate + making ppl want to roll you, and the graph would look better. 
 

Also, I don’t get your point about being loud now just because we’re “winning”. We’re not saying anything now that we hadn’t said when you were “winning” so your change in stance is very weird to see.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

14 hours ago, Sketchy said:

I will restate my initial DOW position in it's simplest form.

Syndicate chose to attack an alliance, because that alliance wanted to do something in the future with us. We were already engaged in a war with you, and you attempted to further weaken us in the future, by eliminating people who would sign us. Tarroc laid this out in the screenshot that I posted in my response to him.

Syndicate wanted this war to happen, and thought you could weaken our position in advance by doing so. Well it's happening now. You seem to be under the impression this is us crying foul. No, it's merely us acknowledging your disposition and the lengths you'll go in order to secure victory.

Your attempt to redirect the conversation after Tarroc's blunders is noted. You painted a clever picture, unfortunately almost none of it is relevant to any of the claims I've made.

At no point have I ever suggested the Florida war itself as an issue. I don't care Syndicate hit us, nor do I care that it was a dogpile. My primary objection with Syndicate at the time was the treaty signed (and the inherent hypocrisy of it) and the CB presented, which Tarroc himself has already conceded was bs. Of course, I consider that rather convenient, as it had it's intended purpose, which was to pressure the breaking of Florida, and then, conveniently consolidate into the gap left behind. Bit late to be copping to that now I'd think.

And yet earlier it was said they were needed for a war against us. So which is it?

Not entirely sure why you guys are still trying so hard to deny this. The entire premise of our accusation is you were intentionally obfuscating numbers. You've conceded without us even needing to pressure you much, that those were your numbers, so make up your mind. These alliances were tied directly to your sphere, and no one else.

It's honestly amusing at this point you guys still cling to this shit.

I already touched on most of this in my response to Tarroc, whose points you are just repeating, but I am glad you brought up that last part.

The entire purpose of separating out the peace talks, and forcing us to concede to other parties first, was so you didn't have to tell them to knock it off. That's my entire point. If what you were saying is true, you could have easily bundled the two peace talks together, and had that conversation, which is what we had initially expected would happen, since WTF themselves was calling it all part of the same war lmfao.

You are just lying. SAIL was indeed about to postpone it's own peace over a hold-up with WTF/UPN, because that's exactly what you wanted. That's why Syndicate sent us to them first, and refused to give us your terms until we had agreed to theirs. And that was true 1 month into the war.

You keep harping on the 2 weeks thing, and us "having our fun and wanting out". The reason we approached early was not because we expected you to peace us out after 2 weeks, the reason we approached earlier is because we expected the peace negotiations to be contentious, and for it to take multiple weeks for us to resolve peace at all. And that proved true, since after a month had passed, you had still not given us any terms.

Not two weeks, a month. We had no reason to expect you to deal in good faith, as you hadn't been up until that point. Tarroc was publicly gloating about peeling away protectorates as I recall. I didn't bother to mention that in our first post, because frankly it's not important to me, other than as another example of where things were. Contrast that to the Fortuna war for example, which ended without any delay tactics or drama.

And there it is. I was wondering when you would get around to complaining about dogpiles again. After already conceding in this thread that you were planning to dogpile us. The handwringing over the size of the coalition is hilarious to me.

Let's get two things straight. A dogpile is a dogpile, the gap in the size of the dogpile doesn't matter. Once you are dogpiling someone, more nations isn't going to make a difference to that outcome. This war is a dogpile. Just like Syndicates last two wars against us were dogpiles. Get off your high horse. You've admitted to securing numbers to make it impossible for us to defeat you. Syndicate has a long history of doing this, as do most majors now at this point.

Secondly, we started building this coalition months ago, long before you lost all of your allies. The numbers were closer then, obviously. We have watched as Syndicate has lost allies over the period. Could we have perhaps scaled back the size of the coalition? Sure. But why? Would you do the same for us? Of course not, you've already admitted so. Those alliances wanted to fight. Strong-arming people out of the coalition so we could have more slots, is not something I'm interested in doing. I appreciate the support of our coalition partners.

Like I said in my DoW. You reap what you sow, and I have no qualms paying you back for things you do. I don't care if you dogpile me. It's never been part of my complaint against Syndicate. I only ever bring up dogpiles when people complain about dogpiles. In fact, if you guys had simply hit us outright, without all of these word salad attempts to justify your behaviour, we wouldn't even be having these longwinded debates right now.

I'm sure that, in time, Singularity will be dogpiled again. And perhaps someone will screenshot this, thinking it a political victory or to use it as some sort of premature justification. But my position isn't going to change, I'll continue to object to any ridiculous CB's or silly arguments made, but I'm not going to sweat a dogpile if it happens. Winning and losing is part of the cycle of the game, we had our turn to lose, now it's yours. Whining about the size of coalitions is beneath you, pretending like you care about it futile. No one believes that. Is it a shame that we can't have fair wars? Sure, but it's been a long time since that was ever part of the dialogue, I accepted that reality years ago. If that's something you are truly bothered by Shiho, I'd say you are in the wrong alliance.

Anyway, I'll await Tarrocs response to my original post, as he is the FA representative for Syndicate, and I'm sure he is capable enough of responding to my points without your assistance. If Tarroc would prefer to take this private, we can do that too I suppose. 

Alright so I have a few points of response here. Firstly, there's a variety of issues with your claims around TFP. Yes, one of the reasons TFP was hit was because they were intending on signing with you, because it was clear they were a hostile enemy party with ill intentions. We hit them because it made no reason to allow an enemy who had made it clear they intended to fight us in the future to sit out and just watch a war that involved the people they intended to ally. There were claims made at the time that "hitting TFP is just creating a self-perpetuating prophecy" when that's just clearly and blatantly untrue. We knew TFP had been talking to alliances like Rose about revenge wars. We knew at the time that TFP had wanted to intervene in Dodge This. We knew that TFP was not some neutral party that had some lily white persona, despite their in game colour. Was TFP hit solely because they intended on allying you? No. If TFP had been an absolute neutral before that point and was a total unknown as to what their desires and agenda would be and they expressed an interest in wanting to sign Sing, would they have been hit? No. If TFP had been a formerly friendly party who had no hostile history or clear ill will towards us who said they wanted to sign Sing, would they have been hit? No. 

As for the matter of me gloating about stealing prots, I have no clue what you're talking about. I told TSC when I offered them a treaty, "Hey this is not a treaty dependent upon you staying with us for the long term, I just want to offer protection because I feel bad about the situation I'm putting you in." When TSC told us after the war "Hey thank you for the treaty and the protection during the war, but we aren't looking to keep this treaty going forward" I was not angry with them. I did not demand they reconsider. I did not threaten them. I simply wished them nothing but the best and hoped they would have success going forward, and I am happy to see they have. I did not pull any prots away from you.

As for the claims around Florida, I had this conversation with Tart the other day in RON. It had nothing to do with it being Sing in Florida. I intervened in Dodge This because Florida made me uncomfortable as a sphere. It was a gamble either way, I either did nothing and ran the risk of Florida not disbanding and ODOO being crushed in an extremely lopsided war, or I get involved and ran the risk of being wrong and angering Sing and Rose for rolling them in a war when my personal driving motivating factor was wrong. I chose one option and went with it, and we are where we are. I do not have ill will towards Singularity. If Singularity had formed and split with Rose at the same time, I wouldn't have attacked. If during and after Dodge This, Singularity had not repeatedly and constantly made it clear it intended on attacking for revenge and was looking for blood, I would not have fought you in Blue Balled. I have at no point in my tenure as Exec fought a war because I disliked someone or just felt like fighting someone. Has every gamble I made paid off? Have I made the right decision every time? No, I certainly imagine not. I live with that though.

As for KT and CTO, if fighting a war alongside people means you're in a sphere with them, Singularity certainly does have itself an extremely large sphere. Yes, CTO was an alliance that we felt was needed for a war with Sing. We knew there was a distinct possibility that if the war was up in the air, a party who we knew hated us and wanted to see us lose could decide to get involved and try to sway the sides, such as possibly..... TFP. Seeing how that war did end up concluding, I think being suspicious of intervention and wanting insurance and some extra security was well justified. Was CTO an absolute necessity to win the war? No. Did we feel having CTO involved was a nice insurance policy to dissuade others from getting involved? Yes. KT getting involved was a nice bonus insurance, born out of Sing trying to roll KT. If Sing had not attempted to attack and roll KT and been made to back down by SAIL, I don't imagine KT would have gotten involved. That was born out of your own decisions. 

KT and CTO were not parts of SAIL. CTO was insurance in case anyone else tried to get involved in the war due to a grudge. KT was a bonus party who didn't like you and wanted to get involved and we had no reason to say no. Those factors do not, never have, and never will, result in alliances being part of a sphere.

This entire argument is based around things that are wrong. "T$ hated us and tried to isolate us" Untrue. "SAIL was the largest sphere because it had KT and CTO" untrue. "SAIL was trying to drag out the war and didn't want peace and was looking to throw harsh terms onto us" Untrue. You don't need to be the victim to have an argument, Sketchy. You didn't like us, and you wanted revenge, and so you hit us. That's perfectly understandable, but no one's believing this narrative that somehow you're a victim who has been treated unfairly and unjustly.

Edited August 23, 2024 by Gaius Julius Caesar

[Buorhann]

Didn’t TFP give you their word they would be waiting for the war’s conclusion before allying up with Sing/CIS?

TFP isn’t known to hold devious intentions.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

2 hours ago, Buorhann said:

Didn’t TFP give you their word they would be waiting for the war’s conclusion before allying up with Sing/CIS?

TFP isn’t known to hold devious intentions.

My conversation with TFP happened weeks into the war. As I lack the ability to time travel, despite my attempts to achieve such technology so I can go back and prevent myself from ever playing PnW and getting sucked into the madhouse, my conversation with them could not have swayed my leanings on whether or not to worry over intervention. As for TFP not being known to hold devious intentions, Eclipse, who had been an ally to TFP at the time that war was beginning, publicly stated that TFP had been plotting against SAIL with third parties, which was the sort of thing I was looking to avoid being the victim of.

[Kevanovia]

13 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

As for 'copping'; t$ presented TKR its 72 hours while Rose and Singularity were still deliberating whether to split or to consolidate, the former of which was done not out of any concern about the balance of power, but because it was deemed more viable.

This is untrue. Prior to the merge finalizing, it had been determined that Florida could not stay as is with Cata’s numbers joining Paradise’s.

-An Unbiased Bystander

[Sketchy]

15 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

This is an internal tiering chart dated November 4th. It excludes Carthago and KT, because again, they were not a part of SAIL. 

Then it's bullshit. Not much more I need to say that to that. 

15 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

s for 'copping'; t$ presented TKR its 72 hours while Rose and Singularity were still deliberating whether to split or to consolidate, the former of which was done not out of any concern about the balance of power, but because it was deemed more viable.

Crazy, I don't remember when we invited you into the Singularity Gov chat. You have made a lot of claims solely based on the fact you were in Rose once, despite you being involved in absolutely zero of those conversations.

I informed Rose I was leaving Florida before the war even ended. The decision to leave was made by us before the war even started. So I'm not entirely sure where you are pulling your information from. Out of your ass I suspect.

15 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

With that said, t$ did not present you anything because you couldn't be bothered to even reach out to WTF/UPN for a week, and then basically disregarded talks with WTF/UPN for the next one because by that point, those talks were moot given that you had your rescue planned and being lined up

We got WTFs terms. We knew what they were. We didn't agree to them. What you are saying is false.

15 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Again, I'll let the images do the talking, and let people draw their own conclusions.

Well that's a little bit better than attempting to deny the obvious. Of all the possible counter arguments I expected to read in this thread, all of SAIL vs Sing/Cam/Cypher/TGH not being a dogpile wasn't one of them.

15 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Your attempt at spinning something that we, and I, wrote against me is endearing.

I'll give you this much Sketchy; you coming here to do exchanges with us is definitely infinitely more commendable than those who just dropped a meme DoW and went back into hiding in their group chats.

To your point though; yes, winning and losing is a cycle. I've probably been rolled a dozen times by now. Being rolled, especially in these circumstances and given what I know, doesn't bother me one bit.

However, I am not going to stay quiet just because some people think that winning any given war earns them some kind of right to say things unchallenged. It doesn't. This is double true when it comes to bad arguments and falsehoods. And to write off the responses to those as "complaining" and "handwringing" is simply laughable.

Yes, bringing 1500 nations to hit us is notable, both as a matter of sheer numbers (up there but not at the top; One Day War, Duck Hunt and possibly another one or two surpass it) and specifically ratios (likely unmatched outside of a micro/minor conflict), so I'll note it, for the simple reason that it is notable. Had you brought about half as many, I'd not even be mentioning it since there'd be little worth noting.

It's really not though. The only reason to note it, after dogpiling us yourself, is to try to draw some sort of comparison and imply that your dogpile was somehow less bad than our dogpile. A dogpile, again is a dogpile.

If anything, you should be thanking me for giving you so many targets to choose from. I'm a nice guy like that.

I do find it ironic you open this by saying I attempted to spin what you said, and then you literally just change what you said and what my response was. I didn't say you were "handwringing" about being rolled. Or that you were "handwringing" about any supposed falsehoods. I said you were "handwringing" about dogpiles, despite your alliance also dogpiling people, and then you've proceeded to prove that by yet again, handwringing about the size of the coalition. 

16 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

(up there but not at the top; One Day War, Duck Hunt and possibly another one or two surpass it)

I'd be careful invoking Duck Hunt of all wars to make your points. Never has an ass pounding been more deserved since the fall of IQ.

This is the trick that is constantly played. You consolidate a bunch of ties, direct and peripheral, that make you unassailable by any individual sphere, and then when inevitably 2 spheres are required to defeat you, there is a tonne of whining about how egregious the coalition is. This is the first time I can remember when Syndicate was ever actually in the underdog position in a rolling. Duck Hunt, they were the biggest sphere. Darkest Hour, they were the biggest sphere.

A lot of historical revisionism has happened with the Fortuna war, as time passes and people forget context, instead focusing on just raw numbers. So I'll remind you and everyone else, that Fortuna was two of the largest upper tier alliances, consolidated into one group, impossible to defeat by either of the other groups individually, who also had a NAP with the only other significant tiering threats to them, Guardian and Grumpy, who sat out the war.

Fortuna is perhaps the only example of a dogpile I can think of (And have been present for) where the alliances dogpiling had to hard updeclare in order to cover the other sides numbers.

Now, I could address the Florida beatdown, but I'll instead do so in my response to Tarroc, as I see he's still pushing the "I did it because of how evil and lopsided the war was" narrative.

16 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Likewise, I'll note your talk about this being put together before EVH split from us (I'm sure it was), just for you hit both of us anyways on separate dates; you guys obviously deemed it more advantageous (it self evidently was) to do so, contrary to your claim of the gap in a dogpile being irrelevant. I'll also note you (Singularity) hitting EVH at all after promising a reset, when all you had to do to honor your word was stay put.

I'm not going to get drawn into a debate about our relations with EVH with you. You are speculating based on what you think you know, rather than any information you can provide evidence for, or any conversations you were a part of.

Considering my history of running around talking shit whenever I successfully accomplish revenge, my disinterest in doing so is rather telling to anyone with basic observations skills.

16 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

At the end of the day, you (and others) made certain decisions, implemented them in certain ways, and justified them in some way or the other. And it's very much a run the gamut kind of thing. *Insert alliance here* hit us because of revenge? That's fair. TFP hit us in a similar way we hit them in January? No complaints there. People start claiming falsehoods? I'll address it. People are wrong somewhere? I'll correct it. There's inconsistent or hypocritical behavior? I'll point it out.

It's as simple as that.

Thank you for stating my original point back to me. Unfortunately so far I've not seen you really get to the bottom of any falsehood, you've both just stumbled your way into making multiple admissions that I didn't even speculate in my own post. 

This is your issue, you seem to be under the mistaken impression the things I said in my post were an attempt to justify myself to some sort of court of public opinion. I don't care about public opinion, if you haven't noticed yet.

I could have foregone a CB, like I normally do, even when I have valid reasons, and simply memed the shit out of you. I chose to instead lay out my reasons, because I knew, you wouldn't be able to accept, or handle them. If you can post outright falsehoods as part of your CB's, and wash your hands of them, only admitting they are falsehoods much later down the track, when they are cited in a CB against you, I see no reason why I shouldn't take my time out to nitpick every single slight you've made against us, and send you all into full on shill defense mode, which, seems I have.

You both have repeatedly tried to recast it as some sort of "Woe is me" post. That post had an intended audience of one alliance, yours. I laid out why we hit you, what our perception of your actions are, what we know you've done, and how we will react to further escalations. So far, it seems, I was right to do so, as you've made a few of interesting admissions seemingly by accident.

It's as simple as that.

Now I'm going to go take a piss and eat something and I'll respond to Tarroc in a bit.

[SleepingNinja]

At least there's some decent posting going on this time. It's been awhile since we've seen that as a game.🙏

[Firwof Kromwell]

48 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

Learn to take it like Mia Khalifa & hardline follow orders from Kamala, we'll way be better 

I truly mean this in sincerity maan, from the heart, no trolling or anything. 

How does perspective(s) on identit(y(ies) form an influence in effectiveness of self-driven reconciliation compared to enforced assimilation in our multiveresed community? Consider roles of personal and social interactions in shaping further reshaping individual as well collective identities.  

How do views challenge knowledge and reality of emotions regarding meta notions of objective truth and universal values in our community? Explore implications of understanding others nature of truth and the process of knowledge acquisition.  

Ik it maybe outta place althou just food for thought maan. Really concerns me where your head aside others are at

Edited August 24, 2024 by Firwof Kromwell
me Español gud

[Sketchy]

17 hours ago, Gaius Julius Caesar said:

101010101

Alright, before I get into responding to your actual points, I have got to ask.

Does this sanitized corpo-speak crap not get a little tiring? Come on Tarroc, you already dropped the act last war, when you were in a winning position, why are you retreating into this politik-speak car salesman stuff again?

Even Partisan at his most sterile, added a little spice, a bit of paprika in the mix. And don't even get me started on WANA, are you trying to overcorrect because of him? I'm not asking for a Darkest Hour crash out rant or anything man, but a little bit of honest abrasiveness won't hurt you man.

I feel like I'm speaking to ChatGPT, and I'M the guy in the AI themed alliance.

Alright let's go. Put em up.

17 hours ago, Gaius Julius Caesar said:

Alright so I have a few points of response here. Firstly, there's a variety of issues with your claims around TFP. Yes, one of the reasons TFP was hit was because they were intending on signing with you, because it was clear they were a hostile enemy party with ill intentions. We hit them because it made no reason to allow an enemy who had made it clear they intended to fight us in the future to sit out and just watch a war that involved the people they intended to ally. There were claims made at the time that "hitting TFP is just creating a self-perpetuating prophecy" when that's just clearly and blatantly untrue. We knew TFP had been talking to alliances like Rose about revenge wars. We knew at the time that TFP had wanted to intervene in Dodge This. We knew that TFP was not some neutral party that had some lily white persona, despite their in game colour. Was TFP hit solely because they intended on allying you? No. If TFP had been an absolute neutral before that point and was a total unknown as to what their desires and agenda would be and they expressed an interest in wanting to sign Sing, would they have been hit? No. If TFP had been a formerly friendly party who had no hostile history or clear ill will towards us who said they wanted to sign Sing, would they have been hit? No. 

Alright so you agree you hit them because they were intended to sign us, for a war that hadn't happened yet. Literally what else do I need to say here. You've just made my entire argument for me, albeit while trying to add a dozen caveats and softening the blow. It's all well and good to say all these other reasons, but then the question of why you thought to single out their desire to sign us as a reason at all immediately comes to the forefront, especially when you heavily enforced that as one of your main reasons. It suggests that signing us alone, everything else non-withstanding, was a reason enough to hit them.

Here is my question then. If I found out tomorrow, that an alliance was intending to sign you, after the war was over, and I assumed that, given you clearly are not happy with us after this one, you might try to use that alliance to hit us, that I am what, within my rights to just hit them? With that as my CB? And that wouldn't be interpreted by you, as the clear intention, by me, to go to war with you, again, and to keep going to war with you?

If you felt you had a case against TFP to hit them, why mention Singularity at all? What exactly was the purpose of mentioning our impending treaty, let alone making it the cornerstone of your CB.

If you aren't even contesting the actual claim itself, the only conclusion I can draw here, is you consider that perfectly fine. In which case, you have nothing to complain about from my post. I disagree, I consider it a clear indicator that alliance intends to fight you in the future, and an escalation of what is within I suppose, the reasonable terms of engagement, and you don't. Either way, like I said in my post, if you do things like this, I will match you on them. If you think it's perfectly reasonable, then you have nothing to worry or complain about.

17 hours ago, Gaius Julius Caesar said:

As for the matter of me gloating about stealing prots, I have no clue what you're talking about. I told TSC when I offered them a treaty, "Hey this is not a treaty dependent upon you staying with us for the long term, I just want to offer protection because I feel bad about the situation I'm putting you in." When TSC told us after the war "Hey thank you for the treaty and the protection during the war, but we aren't looking to keep this treaty going forward" I was not angry with them. I did not demand they reconsider. I did not threaten them. I simply wished them nothing but the best and hoped they would have success going forward, and I am happy to see they have. I did not pull any prots away from you.

You made a comment on RON, it was noticed.

I didn't include it in my original post for a reason. I don't particularly care about it. I was just one of a few things that cemented our opinion you weren't interested in peace, or operating in good faith. You aren't obligated to operate in good faith, so it doesn't matter, but it lends to our overall expectation that no, withholding your terms from us was being done with intent, and we had no reason to expect that intent was good.

It's no different than you making the claim that us responding to you hitting us by being aggressive, is somehow an indicator that we'll be fighting you in the future, except, we aren't using it as some sort of justification to hit you, which is why it wasn't included in my original post.

Everything else you said here is irrelevant, I never accused you of threatening them or any such thing. I never said you were successful in your attempt to poach. I merely noted you were gloating about it, which you were, and how that informed our perception of the sentiment in your coalition.

17 hours ago, Gaius Julius Caesar said:

As for the claims around Florida, I had this conversation with Tart the other day in RON. It had nothing to do with it being Sing in Florida. I intervened in Dodge This because Florida made me uncomfortable as a sphere. It was a gamble either way, I either did nothing and ran the risk of Florida not disbanding and ODOO being crushed in an extremely lopsided war, or I get involved and ran the risk of being wrong and angering Sing and Rose for rolling them in a war when my personal driving motivating factor was wrong. I chose one option and went with it, and we are where we are. I do not have ill will towards Singularity. If Singularity had formed and split with Rose at the same time, I wouldn't have attacked. If during and after Dodge This, Singularity had not repeatedly and constantly made it clear it intended on attacking for revenge and was looking for blood, I would not have fought you in Blue Balled. I have at no point in my tenure as Exec fought a war because I disliked someone or just felt like fighting someone. Has every gamble I made paid off? Have I made the right decision every time? No, I certainly imagine not. I live with that though.

Oh pleasssseeee. I was ready to dismiss this, as I didn't even make the point that Sing being Florida was why you targeted it. But I grow weary of this "I was truly concerned about how lopsided the war was going to be" shit you keep doing. You've already conceded the whole "Hegemonic Sphere Creation" CB untrue, although you've hesitated to just say it was a complete fabrication, rather calling it a mistake, despite it being unfathomable how you could say something that obviously isn't true mistakenly.

Let's actually assess what that war was in the light of day. Florida, prior to the formation of Singularity, was the smallest sphere. We were not some megalithic sphere holding the game by the balls, we weren't even large enough to beat Fortuna, the sphere you just came from, in a one v one.

Right after the Fortuna war ended, we discovered very early, that TKR had plans to hit us. And let's assess what that would have looked like. TKR had just signed Grumpy, and had most of the alliances that we now know as Penta, Bourbon Street, Themselves...and wait for it...CATA. Their intention was to hit us, with all these numbers. And, we also know that Aurora had approached them, and were going to be part of that conflict against us.

That would have been, by any reasonable definition, a dogpile. That was the intention. All that Florida did, for all your talk of the heinous consolidation that took place, was even those numbers out, via a merge. Not a treaty, a merge, that would have happened regardless due to Cata's slew of retirements and general inability to continue operation. What YOU did, was secure a dogpile for TKR. Now, had you left it at that, simply claimed a revenge CB, which would have been abundantly fair, and not made such grandiose claims in your CB about "Hegemonic Sphere Creation." and tried to pass yourself off as some sort of messiah, rather than someone who had just helped reinforce an existing dogpile that we had maneuvered our way out of, we likely wouldn't even be fighting right now.

But you did, in what would become a pattern for you, draw our attention away from the alliance that had primarily aggrieved us, towards you. Which is, ironically, what inspired the cuck meme we launched at you that war. You came out, and ran interference for and stumped for TKR, against your own interests. Fair cop to TKR for allowing you to do that, it was a masterstroke on their part, and admittedly, we couldn't resist the desire to react to such a blatant display of goosestepping.

You would then go on to do this again in our next war, by drawing our attention away from Aurora, the alliance we were primary aggrieved with. I know you think, that because we reacted to you in such a negative fashion in the previous war, that it must mean we were solely trained on you. But as Shiho accidentally admitted earlier whilst trying to say we were laser focused on you, we had an extensive list of grudges, and were very much live in making the decision on who we would actively pursue. We did eventually make that decision. We chose to go after KT, for not honouring our treaty.

I don't care what rumors, insinuations or such you think give you a clear picture of what we intended to do. You seem to have mistaken my intent by claiming this. Absolutely no one thinks, that Singularity didn't have an axe to grind with Syndicate. It would be a futile effort to attempt to claim otherwise. What I'm telling you, is exactly what we planned to do, to both illustrate that, despite your thinking, you are not actually the center of our universe, and have almost never been at the top of our shitlist, until the end of last war, where it was made clear that we were at the top of yours.

I don't care if you believe it or not, but it doesn't do you any benefit to ignore what I'm saying. You have, it seems, missed the mark. I'm not claiming victimhood. These posts are not an attempt to appease the peanut gallery, whose opinion isn't going to change regardless of what is said, it's not to appeal to other neutral parties with actual political power, many of whom likely will disagree with some of the points I've made in this thread, as they contradict their own perceptions and narratives of events that have transpired both past and present. If playing the victim to win public opinion was my goal here, I'd act like you, pretend to be reasonable, and without malice, as that is normally what works.

I'm just telling you, why I'm hitting you. I'm giving you my playbook. You can go back and read what I've said, and understand it, and use it to avoid the pitfalls you've stepped into previously, if that is your prerogative. Or you can ignore it, refute it. Either way, I and Sing will continue to be the alliance we've been, win or lose, play the game the way we want to, and you can do you.

I think I'll leave it there. I don't particularly feel like going in circles about KT and CTO being a part of SAIL. We aren't going to agree on that.

Edited August 24, 2024 by Sketchy

[Keegoz]

After looking at this thread, I'd like to congratulate @Shiho Nishizumion taking over t$ FA with his deputy @Firwof Kromwell.

Good luck in retirement @Gaius Julius Caesar

[Shiho Nishizumi]

10 hours ago, Kevanovia said:

This is untrue. Prior to the merge finalizing, it had been determined that Florida could not stay as is with Cata’s numbers joining Paradise’s.

-An Unbiased Bystander

What got determined pre-war was heavily reconsidered during it.

7 hours ago, Sketchy said:

Then it's bullshit. Not much more I need to say that to that. 

Your non-argument has been duly noted.

7 hours ago, Sketchy said:

Crazy, I don't remember when we invited you into the Singularity Gov chat. You have made a lot of claims solely based on the fact you were in Rose once, despite you being involved in absolutely zero of those conversations.

I informed Rose I was leaving Florida before the war even ended. The decision to leave was made by us before the war even started. So I'm not entirely sure where you are pulling your information from. Out of your ass I suspect.

I wasn't a participant, but the information was relayed to me. If what you're saying is true, then I was lied to while I was there, which... I find to be unlikely.

7 hours ago, Sketchy said:

We got WTFs terms. We knew what they were. We didn't agree to them. What you are saying is false.

Yes, you didn't agree to them, or bother pursuing further talks, because doing so by that point was moot, given the planned Rose/ODOO entry. I'm glad that we're finally in agreement.

7 hours ago, Sketchy said:

Well that's a little bit better than attempting to deny the obvious. Of all the possible counter arguments I expected to read in this thread, all of SAIL vs Sing/Cam/Cypher/TGH not being a dogpile wasn't one of them.

Counter argument? I simply presented tiering charts so that people can contrast what's being argued to them, and decide by themselves. Simple as.

7 hours ago, Sketchy said:

It's really not though. The only reason to note it, after dogpiling us yourself, is to try to draw some sort of comparison and imply that your dogpile was somehow less bad than our dogpile. A dogpile, again is a dogpile.

If anything, you should be thanking me for giving you so many targets to choose from. I'm a nice guy like that.

I do find it ironic you open this by saying I attempted to spin what you said, and then you literally just change what you said and what my response was. I didn't say you were "handwringing" about being rolled. Or that you were "handwringing" about any supposed falsehoods. I said you were "handwringing" about dogpiles, despite your alliance also dogpiling people, and then you've proceeded to prove that by yet again, handwringing about the size of the coalition. 

I'm quite literally on record saying that I wouldn't have even mentioned it, had it been your ordinary dogpile.

7 hours ago, Sketchy said:

I'd be careful invoking Duck Hunt of all wars to make your points. Never has an ass pounding been more deserved since the fall of IQ.

This is the trick that is constantly played. You consolidate a bunch of ties, direct and peripheral, that make you unassailable by any individual sphere, and then when inevitably 2 spheres are required to defeat you, there is a tonne of whining about how egregious the coalition is. This is the first time I can remember when Syndicate was ever actually in the underdog position in a rolling. Duck Hunt, they were the biggest sphere. Darkest Hour, they were the biggest sphere.

A lot of historical revisionism has happened with the Fortuna war, as time passes and people forget context, instead focusing on just raw numbers. So I'll remind you and everyone else, that Fortuna was two of the largest upper tier alliances, consolidated into one group, impossible to defeat by either of the other groups individually, who also had a NAP with the only other significant tiering threats to them, Guardian and Grumpy, who sat out the war.

Fortuna is perhaps the only example of a dogpile I can think of (And have been present for) where the alliances dogpiling had to hard updeclare in order to cover the other sides numbers.

Right.

Firstly, and broadly (this is explicitly not referring to Quack, which I will address later specifically, as you made a point of bringing it up); if spheres are roughly equal, you will often see some sort of joint hit on them. This is fairly common behavior given the tendency towards hedging bets to secure a win. Where not, it's usually because there's some other kind of advantage, either in tier or in military (Hollywood with militarized Grumpy/TKR/Guardian hitting mostly 0350 Celestial during that war, the surprise hit by WELP on ODOO during their war in October of last year). Stuff like the Casino Royale is rare (it was nice to see it happen).

To pretend that t$ perpetually has an unassailable sphere that requires two to take it down is silly. Between the Florida and Fortune wars, the only tie it had was to Legion. Big Short was a solo hit by Hollywood, and that is a war which people still meme about to this day. Do you want to claim that Wayward was unassailable by itself? If yes, then congratulations on being as guilty as we apparently are, given your alliance's lineage, and given that sins of the father is apparently in vogue with TFP's reasoning for hitting EVH.

As for Quack, and by contrast, Fortune. Quack was inarguably the biggest, and by a big margin, and consistently so. Fortune, not so much. At some times it was, at some times it wasn't. It varied depending on which ties got added and got cut across the game. It was roughly comparable to the other spheres in the game. It was definitely a very strong sphere, irrespective of whether it was technically the biggest or not. Saying "biggest" without the due context is meaningless. It may as well be empty sloganeering.

As for Grumpy and Guardian being NAP'd; they hit Fortune in January. I actually applaud them for doing so and going for a knockout hit in the face of a numerical disadvantage. However, that they hit them is not an aspect to be omitted.

As for your assertion of needing to hard updeclare, I'll say two things. One, yes, that's how it works when you have a tiering disadvantage but a numerical advantage in the lower tiers. It'd have happened here had it been something like you, TFP and Penta versus us, for example. Two, and I am not going to fault you for this since I think that you had quit by this point; this sort of aggressive updeclaring had to be done during Brawlywood on part of Rose/BW against Hollywood as well.

Back to Quack; Quack was inarguably the largest sphere. You're also leaving out that Quack was what was left of a project that was meant to counter IQ. IQ died, and some people didn't even wait for its corpse to go cold before pointing fingers at Quack being the new rising hegemon. People took a look at that, could tell that a good number of them also had scores to settle, and decided not to split in the face of that.

As for the war itself; you're reducing it to just dogpile, and ignoring the clear paperless arrangement that had been set in place, which is what many had taken issue with. TKR proceeded to hit Rose because of those in what became Guns and Roses.

At any rate; was staying together as Quack? It led to a rolling, so I can't necessarily say that it was. I doubt that splitting would've spared its constituent parties (or at the very least t$) from a rolling either. So, as far as t$ was concerned, it was probably damned either way.

All I'll say is that I'm fairly certain that it would've split, had you waited a few weeks for it to deliberate following the game's most destructive war. Alas you didn't. At this point, it's simply history, and it is what it is. I simply find it a bit poetic that you found yourselves complaining about not being given any time to split from Rose during Dodge This, nearly four years later.

Finally, since you like to talk about big spheres, groupings and consolidation, I'll post a screenshot of one, and let you point out who can hit you on a one on one:

7 hours ago, Sketchy said:

I'm not going to get drawn into a debate about our relations with EVH with you. You are speculating based on what you think you know, rather than any information you can provide evidence for, or any conversations you were a part of.

Pot meets kettle. You haven't shared anything that isn't outside of the public domain either. I am simply playing by the rules that you yourself deem acceptable. It is a bit late to be changing the game rules now.

Speaking about sharing that which is in the public domain, and with regards to EVH; you're welcome.
 

7 hours ago, Sketchy said:

Thank you for stating my original point back to me. Unfortunately so far I've not seen you really get to the bottom of any falsehood, you've both just stumbled your way into making multiple admissions that I didn't even speculate in my own post. 

This is your issue, you seem to be under the mistaken impression the things I said in my post were an attempt to justify myself to some sort of court of public opinion. I don't care about public opinion, if you haven't noticed yet.

I could have foregone a CB, like I normally do, even when I have valid reasons, and simply memed the shit out of you. I chose to instead lay out my reasons, because I knew, you wouldn't be able to accept, or handle them. If you can post outright falsehoods as part of your CB's, and wash your hands of them, only admitting they are falsehoods much later down the track, when they are cited in a CB against you, I see no reason why I shouldn't take my time out to nitpick every single slight you've made against us, and send you all into full on shill defense mode, which, seems I have.

You both have repeatedly tried to recast it as some sort of "Woe is me" post. That post had an intended audience of one alliance, yours. I laid out why we hit you, what our perception of your actions are, what we know you've done, and how we will react to further escalations. So far, it seems, I was right to do so, as you've made a few of interesting admissions seemingly by accident.

It's as simple as that.

Now I'm going to go take a piss and eat something and I'll respond to Tarroc in a bit.

I can't make the blind see, as much as I would like (not that I was under any illusion that you would).

So much so that you don't seem to acknowledge that fundamentally, we're fine with you hitting us out of revenge. However, there are things we don't agree with, and have answered accordingly. First via a RoH, and then, by each individual. Tarroc more politely. Me, less so.

Your response has seemingly mostly devolved into ignoring and side stepping that which you can't address, self-patting over alleged admissions, double standards (ironic), and finally, "lol you shilling". Talk about a classic.

It is a bit sad to see, but I guess that it is what it is. Enjoy the rest of the war that you spent a year lusting for.

Edited August 24, 2024 by Shiho Nishizumi
Minor adjustment.

[Abaddon]

On 8/23/2024 at 3:59 PM, Shiho Nishizumi said:

This is an internal tiering chart dated November 4th. It excludes Carthago and KT, because again, they were not a part of SAIL. 

I think we've already constituted that Carthago and KT were a part of SAIL because of your previous statement expressing the need to protect them to use them in the war against us. The fact you then go "Here's a tiering sheet excluding the alliances we were going to use against you in our next war" is so obviously representative of how you operate as an alliance. This is the same exact type of gaslighting T$ tried to use at the time to hide your numbers (and weren't fooling anyone mind you). Well here are those numbers represented accurately.

Singularity's massive scary C33 advantage must've scared t$'s C40-46 tier s**tless.

[Sketchy]

4 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

What got determined pre-war was heavily reconsidered during it.

4 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

I wasn't a participant, but the information was relayed to me. If what you're saying is true, then I was lied to while I was there, which... I find to be unlikely.

Again, considering you weren't inside our government chats you are just pulling shit out of your ass. I agree it's unlikely you were lied to, I think you are just full of shit lmfao.

4 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Your non-argument has been duly noted.

If you want to see my argument, go read my previous posts. As Abaddon seems to have repeated, you guys already admitted those numbers were in your corner from the get go. I see no reason to continuously go around in circles on whether KT/CTO was in SAIL, you guys already admitted it, but are just gaslighting. Waste of my time.

4 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Counter argument? I simply presented tiering charts so that people can contrast what's being argued to them, and decide by themselves. Simple as.

I sImPlY prEseNtEd derrr InFoMatIons for derrr PeOple to DeciDe.

Bro what you doing rn lmfao. Is this actually what you think being subtle looks like? Yes, you are presenting the information in the hopes people will believe these wars aren't a dogpile. There is no other reason to do it. My guess at this point is you made the mistake initially of trying to say otherwise, and now this is your half arsed attempt to walk it back without walking it back. Stop trying to hide behind "the peoples decision" and just be honest. Were they dogpiles or were they not dogpille.

I'll respond to the rest of your silly post in a bit on my phone, as I have to leave now.

[Shwin]

On 8/23/2024 at 10:48 AM, Gaius Julius Caesar said:

~snip~

Just about everything you brought up about us in regards to us being hostile towards y'all both here and in your original RoH has been false and baseless. I'm just waiting for the current dialog between y'all and Sing to end for me to chime in. So in the meantime, please stop trying to push false narratives to try and victimize yourselves. I'm happy to discuss everything you've brought up regarding TFP after the current conversation dies down. I do appreciate the lengthy posts though - just please try to keep it accurate. 

[Sketchy]

4 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Yes, you didn't agree to them, or bother pursuing further talks, because doing so by that point was moot, given the planned Rose/ODOO entry. I'm glad that we're finally in agreement.

Nice try but I already addressed this earlier, as did you. We didn't agree with the terms they presented, and we asked for your terms. You keep trying to move goalposts, so let me restate my allegation in the clearest terms for you.

You wanted to delay the war, so you intentionally kept the discussions seperate and made it a precondition that we peace out a seperate group, before you would give us your terms. Not just peace, provide us your terms. Which you had no reason to withhold if they were reasonable. You wanted WTF and co out of the war so they wouldn't have stay in whilst you negotiated with us further.

You say "oh we would have given you nice fluffy terms" whilst you were simultaneously gloating about signing our protectorates and hitting our as of yet unsigned allies with the CB that they signed us, and you want us to believe you were gonna deal with kid gloves? Whilst doing whatever you could to hide those terms and get us to peace out and submit to another set of stupid ass terms lol. Whilst very publicly claiming we would be fighting again in the future?

5 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

I'm quite literally on record saying that I wouldn't have even mentioned it, had it been your ordinary dogpile.

Except you are mentioning it. How is your defense to me saying that you are complaining about a dogpile, literally:

"No bro I'm not complaining about dogpiles, I'm just for no apparent reason noting the dogpile, which is no ordinary dogpile, but like bro i wouldn't even have mentioned it if it wasn't a super bad dogpile bro, but like im not complaining bro just noting it down for some reason bro"

Are you alleging that this dogpile is worse than other dogpiles or not? If so are you going to expand on that or just keep telling me how you've noted it down like it's just a very interesting factoid with no other implications.

I mentioned earlier but you have the subtlety of a shovel, if you are gonna try and be slick and sly please do better than "im just noting how notable it is" and "let's let the people decide im totally not trying to sway opinion without stating one because my opinion is bad". Christ lmfao.

5 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Massive Quack Rant

Since I didn't reference Duck Hunt until you did, I'm going to keep this brief. Everything you just said is historical revisionism and or outright lying. Quack was staying together. Quack filled the power vacuum after IQ after disbanded despite promising to split up. Quack got rolled for it. You wanna rant about that go ahead, my point, which you agreed to, was that Quack was the biggest sphere in the game, and that sort of thing invites and usually necessitates a coalition that inevitably becomes a dogpile.

Fortuna was also the biggest sphere in the game. The fact you dispute this is peak hilarity to me. No other sphere had two major alliances in it at that point, no other sphere had that much upper tier consolidation.

For a reminder, the other spheres were Withheld, HOGG, and Florida. Point to the one you claim was bigger, then name the alliances you are claiming were in it.

5 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Finally, since you like to talk about big spheres, groupings and consolidation, I'll post a screenshot of one, and let you point out who can hit you on a one on one:

Haha, guess you missed my point again. I already told you in my DOW, but I'll repeat it for posterity. I'm going to cross whatever line you cross, do whatever you do, back to you. I am going to fight fire with fire. So it's really up to you guys, and I suppose anyone else who wishes to come at us, how far you want things to go.

The fact you brought this up is great. Are you saying you have an issue with it? Surely not.

Don't worry unlike Quack, I promise to split it up, and I'll actually follow through.

But I certainly would hope you aren't claiming to be upset about yet another thing you've done yourself. Only so many indefensible positions you should take at once Shiho, didn't Partisan teach you anything?

5 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Pot meets kettle. You haven't shared anything that isn't outside of the public domain either. I am simply playing by the rules that you yourself deem acceptable. It is a bit late to be changing the game rules now.

Speaking about sharing that which is in the public domain, and with regards to EVH; you're welcome.

Yeah, I haven't shared anything because it's none of your business, nor is it owed to you. I told you I wasn't interested in engaging in your attempts to bait an argument with EVH. I read the EVH post, and I responded to it. We spoke privately afterwards.

Same reason I've not bothered to address your transparent attempts to glaze TKR in your previous posts.

Do have to ask though, since we are on the subject, where exactly was Tarroc's supposed benevolence 3 months ago when you all agreed to sign the nap that !@#$ed over TKR? I guess Syndicates sense of justice must suspiciously coincide with your odds of victory. Thank the lord I've not placed myself on such a lofty pedestal.

See, I can make stupid unsubtle attempts to kiss ass too. I'm sure TKR is having the time of their lives, sitting out in peace right now, relaxing, watching the shitshow while you give them a light rimming.

Stick to your own talking points friend, you have enough to worry about.

7 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

I can't make the blind see, as much as I would like (not that I was under any illusion that you would).

Of course not, Tarroc is Jesus here, the benevolent messiah of ODOO, not you.

6 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

So much so that you don't seem to acknowledge that fundamentally, we're fine with you hitting us out of revenge. However, there are things we don't agree with, and have answered accordingly. First via a RoH, and then, by

each individual. Tarroc more politely. Me, less so.

Hahahaha. Oh god, of all the things you could have said, you said this. You are so close to getting it Shiho.

I'm aware you are fine with revenge as a CB. I was also fine with it, but you decided to expand it to include a bunch of other shit, and draw my attention to you.

I already said it Shiho. I'm doing to you, what you did to us. Do you get it yet?

6 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Your response has seemingly mostly devolved into ignoring and side stepping that which you can't address, self-patting over alleged admissions, double standards (ironic), and finally, "lol you shilling". Talk about a classic.

Haha, your first post you literally summarized what I said as stuff, and then prefaced it, like you often do, by saying I was spinning things, but then repeatedly failed to articulate what or how I was spinning things, even going as far as to change your own arguments to then strawman mine.

You've repeatedly avoided arguments by making your statements as vague as possible, or trying to leave it up to others to decide, rather than standing behind your arguments.

Meanwhile I've come at your points directly and broken down and responded to them.

But yeah keep going on about how I'm spinning things without saying anything substantive yourself.

7 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

It is a bit sad to see, but I guess that it is what it is. Enjoy the rest of the war that you spent a year lusting for.

If you want to talk about things that are sad to see, let's talk about you.

I've refrained from directly talking about your history as an FA entity up until now, as Tarroc is the FA head of your alliance and should bear the responsibility of it's decisions, but since you insist on continuing to play frontman instead of letting Tarroc do his job, which I will say, despite his stumbles he was doing a better job than you of making Syndicate look sympathetic with his "I'm just a reasonable guy look at these mean Singularity people" act, and coming directly at me, I'll address you.

You have in this very thread demonstrated your own lack of credibility. You are someone who switches up on friends. I know this from experience.

You've mentioned your time in Rose here multiple times in order to allege a variety of claims. It's a nice thing I'm sure, being able to make basically any claim you like because you were in Rose once, but I gotta ask, how does Rose feel about you waving your time in their alliance, in their faces?

You'll say anything and burn anyone for the party line. It's your nature. Right now, you are going back and making excuses for Syndicates past, completely ignoring the fact that during Fortuna, you asked to join the war on our side. Why? It was a dogpile right? Fortuna wasn't the biggest sphere, why would you sign up for such a fight?

You switched up on t$, then you switched up on Rose, back to t$. And now it's business as usual, and all of your private criticisms of Tarroc and Wana disappear.

It would be one thing, if you were the FA head of Syndicate, and wading into these waters was unavoidable for you, but you aren't. You choose to come out and fight Tarroc's battles for him on your own. That and, had you been, I doubt Rose would be fighting you at all.

Maybe you should apply for the top job. After all, on some level, you clearly want it. At least then, you'll be responsible for your own actions and can stop stumping for others.

It is sad. It's sad to see instead of a new generation of perhaps different and more interesting Syndicate leaders, I return to the game to see you two clowns both poorly larping as Partisan. Get a new schtick.

[Cino]

Alright is anyone else bored as hell of people saying every single syndi exec who speaks is clearly trying impersonate partisan?