| Author |
|
Deranzin 
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 845
|
 Posted: 07 Jan 2013 at 17:12 |
 Grego wrote:
Conditions like volountarly razing more cities than is lost in war so far, giving all gold to Harmless, and forswear friends and allies? I'd rather be a nomad with one village than bow in H? embassy.
|
I am not privy to the negotiations, but all these sound highly unlikely considering that ROADS got a deal very unlike what you claim here when it left the war. 
So, I guess that your case is like the old joke with the car jack :
"While driving through the mountains a fellow has a flat tire and realizes that he has no car jack, but he remembered that a kilometer before he had seen a house.
So he decides to walk there and ask for a spare car jack, but while walking he starts thinking : - What if he doesn't give me the car jack ? Hmm I'll tell him that my car is only a kilometer away and I need it, - But what if he insists in not giving the car jack to me ? Then I 'll tell him "please, I really need the car jack, I have nowhere to stay in this place" - And if he keeps insisting in his denial .?. I'll tell him to give me the car jack or else I'll get mad !!!
So, enraged by his musing, he reaches the door and knocks angrily and when the house owner opens it the driver shouts at him : Screw you and your car jack ! OK !?"
... and you are acting just like that Grego ... 
Alti wrote:
We sent no troops. As Grego has explained, the sending of troops by Absa was not a leadership decision. |
Ok, this is clear now. So, in effect you are in this huge war for backing actions your leadership didn't really decide instead of admitting a mistake and paying some reparations (iirc 70 million was asked back then ?), as it would have been reasonable .?.
| Yes, we were intimidated by your allies, who had a leadership that then was not keeping some of its players in line, and so we prepared for the worst. |
I do not think that you read that part correctly ... it is actually quite the opposite, but anyway ...
|
 |
Kumomoto
Postmaster General
Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224
|
Posted: 07 Jan 2013 at 15:11 |
Ossian wrote:
For those Consone members who are considering neutrailty by joining the Crow federation - that option was blocked a long time ago by ScottFitz ( who has never been neutral). It was recently confirmed in a post from a crow member that those who belonged to alliances hostile to the Coalition would not be accepted into Crowfed.
Any reader of this thread when taking into account the posts of The_Dude, Belargyle and Kumomoto will realise that they have no intention of entering into diplomacy. They are having too much of a party attacking Consone members; or humiliating them in the forums without any casus belli (except the one that Kumo will tell Nokigon to write when the last Consone player has gone).
|
Ossian-- I don't mind you trying to invent crazy insults for me, but I really do think it is wrong for you to try and paint others like ScottFitz and Nokigon in the same way. SF is a neutral in this war. Nobody can deny that. And Nokigon has never, ever, to my knowledge been anything but scholarly in his histories. And both of them are really upstanding members of the Illy community. Not only are your attacks in really bad taste, but you are doing more damage than good to your Soup cause...
|
|
Vanerin
Forum Warrior
Joined: 05 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 418
|
Posted: 07 Jan 2013 at 14:52 |
Deranzin wrote:
But Consone members, in many cases, have shown enough unwillingness to even make an account to the H? embassy and seriously talk about making peace. Instead they just shout "make peace - make peace" like a mindless street procession repeating slogans over and over again, as if such a thing is a one-sided decision. |
If Consone has not even made an account for the embassy, then I totally agree with you Deranzin. (Nice for that to happen every once in a while  )
To Consone: I understand your concerns about 'unfair' conditions, but what type of conditions do you think you will get if you do not discuss with the proper people? It is one thing to go to their embassy and find the conditions to be unreasonable. It is another thing to not even try.
~Vanerin
|
|
Alti (SkB)
New Poster
Joined: 20 Oct 2012
Location: Tor Carrock
Status: Offline
Points: 17
|
Posted: 07 Jan 2013 at 14:48 |
Deranzin wrote:
Can you please be clear whether you asked ABSA for military assistance or a diplomatic one .?. |
We wanted a broader agreement that would stop this kind of friction in the future. In the end we got it - much of the RHY-Absa-SkB treatment is devoted to laying down the rules on just this kind of thing.
Deranzin wrote:
Underlined part comment : So, since at the previous occasion (one occasion does not consitute "typical behaviour" btw  ) the problem was resolved peacefully and RHY backed down, why didn't you wait a bit for the same thing to happen in this case as well, instead of dishing out the troops .?. |
We sent no troops. As Grego has explained, the sending of troops by Absa was not a leadership decision.
Deranzin wrote:
I could be wrong since there are many month back, but iirc not many days after the war started I saw some SkB players hitting some of our sieges with 10000+ knights and I remember that it made quite an impression to me back then. Unless you mean to tell us that such numbers can be built within days. |
I should think it was infantry you saw, but no, we had been arming from when we had started receiving threats from your allies. The troops of the sieges that we could not dislodge would likely have taken longer to build - not that we can say with confidence, since they had huge numbers of scouts as diplomatic contingents, se we can only guess as to how many armies made them up.
I wonder that you seem to think you have caught me in some "gotcha". Yes, we were intimidated by your allies, who had a leadership that then was not keeping some of its players in line, and so we prepared for the worst. But since your leadership is pushing the line that the Confederation is all about stopping alliances that provide cover without accountability, i wonder if this is really the propaganda coup you suppose.
|
|
Grego
Postmaster
Joined: 09 May 2010
Location: Klek
Status: Offline
Points: 729
|
Posted: 07 Jan 2013 at 12:54 |
" Deranzin..... ...." Conditions like volountarly razing more cities than is lost in war so far, giving all gold to Harmless, and forswear friends and allies? I'd rather be a nomad with one village than bow in H? embassy. Anyway, enjoy your view from balcony and don't argue with mob. Better send some cavalry.
|
|
Deranzin
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 845
|
Posted: 07 Jan 2013 at 11:12 |
Ossian wrote:
abstractdream wrote:
Angrim wrote:
Meagh wrote:
just to point out.. they are one and the same. A military response *is* a diplomatic response. - M.
|
in which case, then, there is no war, only an extended negotiation. ;) |
I like that. The Great Extended Negotiation. Best name yet ;D |
There is unlikely to be any negotiation nor diplomacy. There will be no Peace either. The posts in this thread from various Coalition members make it clear that the players of the Consone alliances as a whole or as individuals must submit or surrender unconditionally. |
Unconditionally .?. Where on earth did you read that .?. of course there will be conditions and the sooner you get down to talk about them, the better for everyone involved.
But Consone members, in many cases, have shown enough unwillingness to even make an account to the H? embassy and seriously talk about making peace. Instead they just shout "make peace - make peace" like a mindless street procession repeating slogans over and over again, as if such a thing is a one-sided decision.
|
|
Ossian
Forum Warrior
Joined: 12 Oct 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 456
|
Posted: 07 Jan 2013 at 09:42 |
abstractdream wrote:
Angrim wrote:
Meagh wrote:
just to point out.. they are one and the same. A military response *is* a diplomatic response. - M.
|
in which case, then, there is no war, only an extended negotiation. ;) |
I like that. The Great Extended Negotiation. Best name yet ;D |
There is unlikely to be any negotiation nor diplomacy. There will be no Peace either. The posts in this thread from various Coalition members make it clear that the players of the Consone alliances as a whole or as individuals must submit or surrender unconditionally. They should submit and surrender to H? who, as indicated by Belargyle in the AA v BsH thread are the ones who decide whether a surrender is accepted or not!
For those Consone members who are considering neutrailty by joining the Crow federation - that option was blocked a long time ago by ScottFitz ( who has never been neutral). It was recently confirmed in a post from a crow member that those who belonged to alliances hostile to the Coalition would not be accepted into Crowfed.
Any reader of this thread when taking into account the posts of The_Dude, Belargyle and Kumomoto will realise that they have no intention of entering into diplomacy. They are having too much of a party attacking Consone members; or humiliating them in the forums without any casus belli (except the one that Kumo will tell Nokigon to write when the last Consone player has gone).
|
|
Deranzin
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 845
|
Posted: 07 Jan 2013 at 09:26 |
abstractdream wrote:
Angrim wrote:
Meagh wrote:
just to point out.. they are one and the same. A military response *is* a diplomatic response. - M.
|
in which case, then, there is no war, only an extended negotiation. ;) |
I like that. The Great Extended Negotiation. Best name yet ;D |
Ahahhaah amazing ! I am definitely voting for that one should it ever come to that ! 
|
|
abstractdream
Postmaster General
Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1857
|
Posted: 07 Jan 2013 at 05:35 |
Angrim wrote:
Meagh wrote:
just to point out.. they are one and the same. A military response *is* a diplomatic response. - M.
|
in which case, then, there is no war, only an extended negotiation. ;) |
I like that. The Great Extended Negotiation. Best name yet ;D
|
|
Bonfyr Verboo
|
|
vty
Wordsmith
Joined: 24 Jan 2012
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 119
|
Posted: 07 Jan 2013 at 04:05 |
Sloter wrote:
When you say that Consone has attacked you, do you mean that incident when newly recruited player which had no knowlage of game sent siege army on your player and was then kicked out from his allinace for that or do you mean other incidents?Like mining incidents you mentioned?Which incident do you consider consone attack on you? |
TD, I would like the answer to this as well, thanks! I am confused about your blanket statement. Sometimes lone wolfs make mistakes. Thanks!!
|
|
Tweet
PEACE
Topic Options