Tim Armstrong Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) I wanted to reflect for a moment on this war and the peace talks. In terms of the war itself we have seen Orbis more or less unite against two of the longest running alliances in SK and Guardian. There are various reasons which we have now been discussing for 14 days. Based on conversations that I've had with alliances we are at war with I would venture to say that most of the resentment from past actions that people had been holding onto against Guardian has been released.As far as war history goes this is approaching the longest large-scale alliance war. Those wars always ended with white peace and an understanding of what each side achieved during the war. Sometimes there were outstanding issues that were pushed down to fuel future wars.Now we have some new alliances who are engaging in large-scale alliance war with VE and MensaHQ. Both of these alliances also have long histories of playing nation sims together and are excellent players. The difference is that they are used to war being less expensive to perpetuate long-term and they have a different understanding of what justifies reparations.I've seen references to the reps requirement we received in our peace talks with VE so I believe that I am not sharing anything that is not already widely known. We were given a non-negotiable offer to pay $100 million cash and 10k units of alum, steel, and gas.While Guardian has expressed a sincere apology to VE for our side's aggression toward them before the war and including pre-empting their attack on us, we do not feel as if this reps request is justified because they were planning to attack us. Had we attacked them for another reason we would have considered paying reps. Since this is non-negotiable there isn't really anything else to talk about. So it seems the war will continue.Let's have a dialogue about the effect that this new reparations requirement element is likely to have in order to end wars going forward in Orbis. It seems to me that there will be less war if reparations will be a part of peace as a standard practice going forward. The rigidness of the terms may also stagnate relationship development across spheres. Perhaps it will strengthen relationships between allies and improve loyalty. Please share your thoughts. *Edited to highlight point requested for discussion. Edited June 1, 2015 by Tim Armstrong 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atzuya Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Non-negotiable reps? Now that's an interesting o.o It's also interesting that both side seem to claim that they're doing pre emptive aggression on their side. You know, it's like there's this third party spurring both into hitting each other or maybe both just like to hit people they don't agree with /me dons tinfoil hat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur James Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Is that the reason why Prefrontine, Placentica etc build another alliance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jroc Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 In my mind, those reps are pretty low especially for the act of un-wanton agression with no CB other than, We're going to war with VE. You all knew this was coming. Enjoy the fireworks. Hugs and Kisses. Don't try to alter the issue at hand, this was a war to get VE out of the top ten and then turn on Rose later to hit us as planned by SK and probably explained to Guardian also. These reparations are needed to show that the alliances involved do not like it when you just go "Yolo, lets hit VE and co". tl;dr Get a CB and you will get white peace but don't moan when you hit without one and get asked to pay the repercussions. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaguar Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Well, thats what you get for declaring without CB 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Armstrong Posted June 1, 2015 Author Share Posted June 1, 2015 Pre-empting an attack on your alliance is not a CB? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atzuya Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Pre-empting an attack on your alliance is not a CB? If this is indeed a preemptive act, then shell shoulda said so on the DoW thread or at least get Memph to confirm that publicly 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegoz Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 From my time working with Guardian they did mention that they thought VE would attack them. I however never saw solid proof of this. 1 Quote [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: But Keegoz is actually bad. [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: He's my favorite bad leader though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impero Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 You posted this while I was typing up a thread of my own in the same vain, My response is on the way. 1 Quote Lord of the Viridian Entente Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldie Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) "Those wars always ended with white peace and an understanding of what each side achieved during the war. Sometimes there were outstanding issues that were pushed down to fuel future wars." 'That is the way things always have been' is the cheapest, and poorest argument for why things should be done. Just because in your multiple wars of aggression, you did not feel the need to piss on the graves of the people you have conquered, doesn't mean reps aren't wholly appropriate here. We were not aggressors here, and had no interest in making this war. It came to us, and you will pay as a result. "we do not feel as if this reps request is justified because they were planning to attack us. Had we attacked them for another reason we would have considered paying reps." VE was not planning to attack anyone, we were not the ones plotting to use one alliance to roll another alliance, then turn on the first alliance to destroy them as well. All for the crime of being 'too strong'. Of all the arguments one can make, this is a really terrible one. You attacked us not because VE was threatening you. On the contrary, VE has always been very cordial with you guys. We're an alliance that just enjoys playing games with our friends. But when we are threatened, we will go all out in the pursuit of making sure that the threats are neutralized. You guys decided that our passivity was too menacing and banded together to destroy us. In the first few days of war, you did several hundreds of millions of dollars in damage, and destroyed hundreds of thousands of steel and aluminum's worth of ships/tanks/planes. We are not seeking damages, rather for closure. You pay us a token amount, and we will move on and can allow for bridges to be rebuilt. We feel we are being very gracious in this way, as we are certainly in a position to destroy your alliance, but would rather see us both move on from this in a way that suits your role as the instigators of all of this destruction, and our role in soaking that destruction until we were able to have it turned back on you. However, if you continue to spit in our face on ending the war, we will never forget it. Edited June 1, 2015 by Goldie 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goomy Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Those terms seem fairly reasonable due to the lack of CB in the DoW and general conduct of Guardian and SK, Although perhaps there could be a little room for negotiations as Guardian have apologized and it would make peace a more achievable outcome. 1 Quote "LMFAO nazi Goomy is the best Goomy" - Kyubey "Goomy is Perfect" - Ripper Some sort of gov for CoS #RollBezzers2k18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isolatar Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Those terms seem fairly reasonable due to the lack of CB in the DoW and general conduct of Guardian and SK, Although perhaps there could be a little room for negotiations as Guardian have apologized and it would make peace a more achievable outcome. So if I had dealt billions of dollars worth of damage to your nation, and then say sorry, would you press for reps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jroc Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 So if I had dealt billions of dollars worth of damage to your nation, and then say sorry, would you press for reps? I would press for reps and a lap dance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Maxwell Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I wanted to reflect for a moment on this war and the peace talks. In terms of the war itself we have seen Orbis more or less unite against two of the longest running alliances in SK and Guardian. There are various reasons which we have now been discussing for 14 days. Based on conversations that I've had with alliances we are at war with I would venture to say that most of the resentment from past actions that people had been holding onto against Guardian has been released. As far as war history goes this is approaching the longest large-scale alliance war. Those wars always ended with white peace and an understanding of what each side achieved during the war. Sometimes there were outstanding issues that were pushed down to fuel future wars. Now we have some new alliances who are engaging in large-scale alliance war with VE and MensaHQ. Both of these alliances also have long histories of playing nation sims together and are excellent players. The difference is that they are used to war being less expensive to perpetuate long-term and they have a different understanding of what justifies reparations. I've seen references to the reps requirement we received in our peace talks with VE so I believe that I am not sharing anything that is not already widely known. We were given a non-negotiable offer to pay $100 million cash and 10k units of alum, steel, and gas. While Guardian has expressed a sincere apology to VE for our side's aggression toward them before the war and including pre-empting their attack on us, we do not feel as if this reps request is justified because they were planning to attack us. Had we attacked them for another reason we would have considered paying reps. Since this is non-negotiable there isn't really anything else to talk about. So it seems the war will continue. Let's have a dialogue about the effect that this new reparations requirement element is likely to have in order to end wars going forward in Orbis. It seems to me that there will be less war if reparations will be a part of peace as a standard practice going forward. The rigidness of the terms may also stagnate relationship development across spheres. Perhaps it will strengthen relationships between allies and improve loyalty. Please share your thoughts. *Edited to highlight point requested for discussion. I must agree with you man, those reps are a joke, so here's the new deal. Reps are: $100 million cash and 10k units of alum, steel, and gas and starting now they rise by $1 Million in cash and 500 of each mentioned resource every 15 minutes untill you accept. Bam! It's either that or perma zero infra for you guys. Take it or leave it. We're the victims of this war, you're the aggrressors, victims always have a right to ask for all the reps they want when they happen to win. tl;dr - Justice, biotch! Everyone in orbis will agree that we can ask for whatever we want and you either paying or getting slaughtered is just and fair (I preffer the latter, I'd love to see all you guys sitting at 10 score). PS. Oh look, Tim Armstrong is 21 score now [seconds pass] bam! no more, he's now 4. LOL 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impero Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) My Response: http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/6733-a-note-on-guardian-and-the-seven-kingdoms/ In short, take responsibility for your actions, SK and Guardian aren't above or better than anyone else. Edit: Also obviously Ben Maxwell doesn't speak for VE. Edited June 1, 2015 by Impero 1 Quote Lord of the Viridian Entente Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isolatar Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I would press for reps and a lap dance. I'd give you a lap dance any day 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Armstrong Posted June 1, 2015 Author Share Posted June 1, 2015 Thanks for your comments, Goldie. Guardian has been in conversations across Orbis to apologize for our past actions. What Shellhound did was wrong and we did not support it. We are doing everything we can to turn over a new leaf. Our government is new and has been very open with the best of intentions. I take your point that things shouldn't always be done the same just because that's the way they've always been done. What I was getting at is that things in Orbis are changing. It affects the whole community if non-negotiable reps are going to be a standard practice. That's why I think everyone should think carefully about the precedent this is setting. We were also not the ones plotting to use one alliance to roll another alliance, then turn on the first alliance to destroy them as well. Be honest, there was no planning - even long term- to hit Guardian? We have heard from too many people that this is not true, including VE members. Did you have good reasons for wanting to hit us? Maybe. But we have formally apologized to you on your forums for the aggression Guardian had toward VE basically since you arrived through us declaring on you. Please understand that us turning down the required reps for peace is not intended to be spitting in your face. We are acting in good faith to show that we harbor no ill-intent toward you. I can understand how paying the reps requirement seems token to you guys. However, our members feel that it is not the amount so much as the principle. Reps should only be for unprovoked attacks. To Atzuya's point above I'm sure Memph will be around to confirm that this was a pre-emptive strike. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I would take my time to elaborate one the notion that we were "planning" to attack. Those who make this claim conveniently ignore that elements in the opposing coalition spent the past *months* attempting to demonize VE in order to garner support for the very attack we saw planned in the screenshots. We were long aware of this and kept our heads down in order to stall and avoid the conflict. This war was perpetuated by the opposition long before the screen shots came out. The notion that your attack was defensive in nature is disingenuous at best. As stated before: the syndicate does not hold your attack against you, nor does it look for your destruction. These terms are not tyrannical in nature, provided the circumstance in which they were presented. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jroc Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Thanks for your comments, Goldie. Guardian has been in conversations across Orbis to apologize for our past actions. What Shellhound did was wrong and we did not support it. We are doing everything we can to turn over a new leaf. Our government is new and has been very open with the best of intentions. I take your point that things shouldn't always be done the same just because that's the way they've always been done. What I was getting at is that things in Orbis are changing. It affects the whole community if non-negotiable reps are going to be a standard practice. That's why I think everyone should think carefully about the precedent this is setting. We were also not the ones plotting to use one alliance to roll another alliance, then turn on the first alliance to destroy them as well. Be honest, there was no planning - even long term- to hit Guardian? We have heard from too many people that this is not true, including VE members. Did you have good reasons for wanting to hit us? Maybe. But we have formally apologized to you on your forums for the aggression Guardian had toward VE basically since you arrived through us declaring on you. Please understand that us turning down the required reps for peace is not intended to be spitting in your face. We are acting in good faith to show that we harbor no ill-intent toward you. I can understand how paying the reps requirement seems token to you guys. However, our members feel that it is not the amount so much as the principle. Reps should only be for unprovoked attacks. To Atzuya's point above I'm sure Memph will be around to confirm that this was a pre-emptive strike. Fair enough on the using Rose part. But, if you really would have thought this was a pre-emptive attack, then why didn't you post that originally? It all seems too convenient for me, "oh noes, we're getting decimated lets make up a reason and say that was the reason the whole time". You should have posted the reason at first. The time to turn in homework was then, not today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Armstrong Posted June 1, 2015 Author Share Posted June 1, 2015 My Response: http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/6733-a-note-on-guardian-and-the-seven-kingdoms/ In short, take responsibility for your actions, SK and Guardian aren't above or better than anyone else. Edit: Also obviously Ben Maxwell doesn't speak for VE. Impero, we are taking responsibility for our actions. We do not think we are above or better than anyone else. We have reformed our strategy and changed how we play the game in the future. That is much more significant than paying some reparations and setting a new precedent that impacts everyone who plays the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atzuya Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 To Atzuya's point above I'm sure Memph will be around to confirm that this was a pre-emptive strike. Better get Memph do it fast. It gets boring after the first dozen mention of 'lol no CB war' 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Armstrong Posted June 1, 2015 Author Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) Fair enough on the using Rose part. But, if you really would have thought this was a pre-emptive attack, then why didn't you post that originally? It all seems too convenient for me, "oh noes, we're getting decimated lets make up a reason and say that was the reason the whole time". You should have posted the reason at first. The time to turn in homework was then, not today. Jroc, you are right. It should have been in there. I think you know me well enough to know that I am not lying about this. It is not in my character to misrepresent facts for my gain. Here's the CB post. http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/6391-a-guardian-announcement/?p=102491 Edited June 1, 2015 by Tim Armstrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordMane611 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 In my mind, those reps are pretty low especially for the act of un-wanton agression with no CB other than, Don't try to alter the issue at hand, this was a war to get VE out of the top ten and then turn on Rose later to hit us as planned by SK and probably explained to Guardian also. These reparations are needed to show that the alliances involved do not like it when you just go "Yolo, lets hit VE and co". tl;dr Get a CB and you will get white peace but don't moan when you hit without one and get asked to pay the repercussions. So if rose was also plotting against VE and was willing to attack, then Rose is technically an enemy of VE. Just because they found out they were being back stabed does't ensure that they are plotting again. against VE. 2 Quote "WHEN THE RICH WAGE WAR, ITS THE POOR WHO DIE" "IF YOU CAN'T HANDLE ME AT MY WORST,YOU CAN'T HANDLE ME AT MY BEST" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jroc Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Jroc, you are right. It should have been in there. I think you know me well enough to know that I am not lying about this. It is not in my character to misrepresent facts for my gain. Oh I know, my dear. <3 Nothing but respect for you. I am just saying what it feels like, not how it actually is. But, how it is perceived by others who don't know how honest and amazing you are <3. In the end, its all about perception. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jroc Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 So if rose was also plotting against VE and was willing to attack, then Rose is technically an enemy of VE. Just because they found out they were being back stabed does't ensure that they are plotting again. against VE. That's a big hypothetical situation my friend. I don't think I can answer that the way you want it to be answered. But, ftr, I love many of people in VE and VE is cool too <3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.