Advertisement
by Bowzin » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:54 pm
by Fecaw » Mon Dec 31, 2018 4:55 am
by Cormactopia Prime » Mon Dec 31, 2018 5:17 am
by Cormactopia Prime » Mon Jan 14, 2019 1:04 am
by Zizou » Mon Jan 14, 2019 1:10 am
Parxland wrote:It might somehow give me STDs through the computer screen with how often you hop between different groups of people.
by Altinsane » Mon Jan 14, 2019 1:28 am
Cormactopia Prime wrote:We have diplomatically settled a conflict that the NPO sought only to exacerbate, and we have done so in mere days, contrasted with the NPO's long and ultimately futile occupation. We win by going high when they go low. We win by embracing principle, not powerplays. We win by being everything the NPO is not.
by Reploid Productions » Mon Jan 14, 2019 1:30 am
[violet] wrote:Maybe we could power our new search engine from the sexual tension between you two.
by Pierconium » Mon Jan 14, 2019 6:14 am
by Cormactopia Prime » Mon Jan 14, 2019 6:59 am
Pierconium wrote:So I guess we are all going to pretend you didn't attempt to bully Kitsco into an agreement to kick NPO nations before the deadline was over so that you could claim some actual victory over the NPO?
Pierconium wrote:And now you are going to claim some kind of surrender on our part because Kitsco couldn't be bothered to recruit for weeks with stamps that members of the NPO paid for? Okay, we can go with that.
Pierconium wrote:Enjoy your victory celebrations. The NPO still exists. The NPO remains in the Pacific. 'NPO delende est' *rollseyes*
by Pierconium » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:17 am
by Cormactopia Prime » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:33 am
Pierconium wrote:Your first demands on Kitsco included the caveat that he disavow the NPO. How is that related to your cooperation scenario that didn't include an additional impact on the NPO? It doesn't. Just another falsehood.
Pierconium wrote:Regardless, as I said, enjoy your victory. You are right, the activity on the 20th did precipitate the removal of this albatross from our neck. One wonders what might be accomplished with a Legio that isn't hampered by an inactive founderless region? Time will tell on that I guess.
Pierconium wrote:I'm personally glad to be rid of St Abbaddon. I have always considered it a bad deal for the Pacific. If you wish to debate this further I am sure your collaborators in TBH can point to quotes from me in the Red Phone logs where I state as such. How are those compromised morals by the way?
Pierconium wrote:Claiming that the Pacific is a husk and a pariah simply ignored reality. Five regions of any size have 'declared war' on the Pacific. Yes, Embassies have been closed, but that doesn't mean conversations have ceased. We have weathered much worse and much more legitimate threats than you in the past.
But please, continue to stroke your own ego. Time will prove me correct.
by Pierconium » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:38 am
by Scottiesland » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:41 am
Pierconium wrote:I said five regions of any size. That's five regions with populations over 100. Puppet regions don't count. Maybe you have some super secret allies?
Souls is still a leader in TBH, correct? So he isn't an Organizer (and neither are you unless that too has changed) but TBH is still an active part of APC? So TBH, controlled by Souls, is part of APC but APC doesn't consider Souls part of its leadership? Just want to make sure I have your 'high standards' correct here.
by Pierconium » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:43 am
Scottiesland wrote:Pierconium wrote:I said five regions of any size. That's five regions with populations over 100. Puppet regions don't count. Maybe you have some super secret allies?
Souls is still a leader in TBH, correct? So he isn't an Organizer (and neither are you unless that too has changed) but TBH is still an active part of APC? So TBH, controlled by Souls, is part of APC but APC doesn't consider Souls part of its leadership? Just want to make sure I have your 'high standards' correct here.
When did the rest of the Council of Hawks resign?
by Pierconium » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:48 am
by Cormactopia Prime » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:52 am
Pierconium wrote:I said five regions of any size. That's five regions with populations over 100. Puppet regions don't count. Maybe you have some super secret allies?
Pierconium wrote:Souls is still a leader in TBH, correct? So he isn't an Organizer (and neither are you unless that too has changed) but TBH is still an active part of APC? So TBH, controlled by Souls, is part of APC but APC doesn't consider Souls part of its leadership? Just want to make sure I have your 'high standards' correct here.
Pierconium wrote:Anyway, I need to step away for a bit.
The bottom line is that if the APC had the ability to take St Abbaddon then they would have. No effort on their part was made to retake the region and our decision, yes based on the drain of resources that St Abbaddon constituted, to nullify the treaty because of the lack of movement towards self-sufficiency once that drain became apparent is the only reason for this post today.
But okay, whatever. The APC has somehow scored a huge victory here by not allowing St Abbaddon to live in peace and instead making it a continuing point of contention. You better maintain a presence there as you have decided to make it a legitimate military target going forward through this blatant and false revisionism.
by Greater vakolicci haven » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:06 am
Cormactopia Prime wrote:Pierconium wrote:Your first demands on Kitsco included the caveat that he disavow the NPO. How is that related to your cooperation scenario that didn't include an additional impact on the NPO? It doesn't. Just another falsehood.
You don't come to the negotiating table asking for what you want, you come asking for more, and negotiate down to what you want. I couldn't have actually cared less whether Kitsco disavowed the NPO, which is why that was the first compromise I was willing to quickly make. In the end, we struck a reasonable deal that brought about peace and native self-determination in St Abbaddon without any natives being removed from the region, with everyone able to continue participating to rebuild and reform the region -- which had been our aim from the beginning.Pierconium wrote:Regardless, as I said, enjoy your victory. You are right, the activity on the 20th did precipitate the removal of this albatross from our neck. One wonders what might be accomplished with a Legio that isn't hampered by an inactive founderless region? Time will tell on that I guess.
Perhaps you can finally install your Emperor as Delegate, since he can't seem to manage to get a sufficient number of natives in the Pacific to endorse him.Pierconium wrote:I'm personally glad to be rid of St Abbaddon. I have always considered it a bad deal for the Pacific. If you wish to debate this further I am sure your collaborators in TBH can point to quotes from me in the Red Phone logs where I state as such. How are those compromised morals by the way?
I'm glad you finally brought that up. As a result of his conduct, Ever-Wandering Souls is no longer an Organizer in the Anti-Pacific Coalition. Unlike the NPO, we expect higher standards of our leadership, and we don't tolerate our leaders engaging in subversion against Feeders and Sinkers.Pierconium wrote:Claiming that the Pacific is a husk and a pariah simply ignored reality. Five regions of any size have 'declared war' on the Pacific. Yes, Embassies have been closed, but that doesn't mean conversations have ceased. We have weathered much worse and much more legitimate threats than you in the past.
But please, continue to stroke your own ego. Time will prove me correct.
The number of regions that have declared war on the NPO is greater than five. I won't deny that the NPO has weathered worse than this, but that was when you had actual leaders who knew what they were doing, not imports from other games and hangers-on from this game who have nowhere else to go.
"Continue to stroke your own ego." What is it with you folks and these "Continue to..." phrases.
by McStooley » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:24 am
Cormactopia Prime wrote:Let's not even pretend that St Abbaddon didn't become "a legitimate military target" for you as soon as your protectorate agreement ended and Topid returned. St Abbaddon will always be in danger from the NPO and we will always be prepared to defend St Abbaddon against the NPO.
by Xoriet » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:28 am
Cormactopia Prime wrote:Let's not even pretend that St Abbaddon didn't become "a legitimate military target" for you as soon as your protectorate agreement ended and Topid returned. St Abbaddon will always be in danger from the NPO and we will always be prepared to defend St Abbaddon against the NPO.
by Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:47 am
Xoriet wrote:Cormactopia Prime wrote:Let's not even pretend that St Abbaddon didn't become "a legitimate military target" for you as soon as your protectorate agreement ended and Topid returned. St Abbaddon will always be in danger from the NPO and we will always be prepared to defend St Abbaddon against the NPO.
Actually, no. St Abbaddon and The Pacific ended on amicable terms. While we were still in a formal relationship, Kitsco made efforts to invite Topid back. At first they were conditional, but later on Kitsco offered an unconditional return to Topid on several occasions. We sanctioned this effort, as the major issues with Topid were centered in the previous administration, and I personally told Kitsco that they could withdraw from the treaty in order to make peace with Topid in St Abbaddon. I also told Kitsco that if Topid did not turn St Abbaddon into an anti-Pacific haven upon his return, we would be willing to aid St Abbaddon - with Topid as an active member - against raiders. St Abbaddon and The Pacific ended a formal relationship, but St Abbaddon I said had earned our friendship even without a treaty in place. Topid's return was sanctioned and the option for St Abbaddon to leave the treaty without any backlash from us to make amends with Topid was offered by The Pacific. This was not a recent effort. It dates a month or so back.
by Airengard » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:55 am
Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar wrote:Xoriet wrote:Actually, no. St Abbaddon and The Pacific ended on amicable terms. While we were still in a formal relationship, Kitsco made efforts to invite Topid back. At first they were conditional, but later on Kitsco offered an unconditional return to Topid on several occasions. We sanctioned this effort, as the major issues with Topid were centered in the previous administration, and I personally told Kitsco that they could withdraw from the treaty in order to make peace with Topid in St Abbaddon. I also told Kitsco that if Topid did not turn St Abbaddon into an anti-Pacific haven upon his return, we would be willing to aid St Abbaddon - with Topid as an active member - against raiders. St Abbaddon and The Pacific ended a formal relationship, but St Abbaddon I said had earned our friendship even without a treaty in place. Topid's return was sanctioned and the option for St Abbaddon to leave the treaty without any backlash from us to make amends with Topid was offered by The Pacific. This was not a recent effort. It dates a month or so back.
So, I am not sure about this whole thing, but the APC told me that the situation was that NPO was being kicked out. 'Forcefully Ejected' was the term used.
I feel like I am not getting the real story on either side here...
by Doing it Rightland » Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:25 am
Airengard wrote:The NPO was already cancelling the treaty. All the APC did was capitalize on it to try and mark it as their victory. Nothing but opportunism.
by McStooley » Mon Jan 14, 2019 10:00 am
by Armaros » Mon Jan 14, 2019 10:03 am
McStooley wrote:Armaros wrote:Yep, because it's totally logical TBH would hit a region they just helped get Topid back in.
I didn't say it would be soon, just that other raider groups, including the most prominent TBH, are a much bigger threat to the region than the NPO or any of the other feeders. Raiders will raid. And an easy target is an easy target.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Astoria but Norwegians
Advertisement