| Author |
 Topic Search
 Topic Options
|
threefoothree 
Greenhorn
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Location: tampa, florida
Status: Offline
Points: 88 |
 Posted: 28 Mar 2013 at 13:35 |
|
and i am not saying the deal with h? is bad cause i think its not, im saying i have taken bad deal in the past to save our members
|
 |
Gaius Rufius Tullus
New Poster
Joined: 22 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 14 |
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 at 13:36 |
When a great power is defeated, the winner (aka the H? & co.) try to make sure that such a war can never happen again. Let us quickly look at all the alliances which have lost against H? shall we?
Yes, we have heard the stories which H? proudly tells us about how they overcome the White Company and Black - though that is hardly mentioned..
Some of us will also remember the great VALAR war..
What happened at the end of these two wars? Well.. The leadership left or got killed.. The alliance members were left in disarray and became easy pickings and.. Well, it has been near a year that VALAR had their pummeling and are still struggling to recover.
I doubt anyone finds it odd that EE are not willing to except this Treaty of Versailles with a H? member who-shall -not-be-named acting like Clemenceau. Way to go for peace guys
|
|
KillerPoodle
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853 |
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 at 13:40 |
 threefoothree wrote:
its not a should have or could have situation.
its is simply a strong and weaker situation
EE simply is not in a place to negotiate
and not accepting simply hurts ee members.
personally, i would take a bad deal all day long to save my members who have tons of time and in many cases real money invested, and we have in the past several times.
|
The saddest thing about this is that the situation wasn't even that black and white. They could easily have negotiated in good faith and presented a reasonable counter (and Hath - proposing a counter which requires you to lose zero cities is not a reasonable one) and we'd probably still be talking instead of sieging.
|
|
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM
"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
|
|
realist
Greenhorn
Joined: 28 Mar 2013
Location: Be Positive
Status: Offline
Points: 40 |
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 at 13:40 |
threefoothree wrote:
its not a should have or could have situation.
its is simply a strong and weaker situation
EE simply is not in a place to negotiate
and not accepting simply hurts ee members.
personally, i would take a bad deal all day long to save my members who have tons of time and in many cases real money invested, and we have in the past several times.
|
It is not a strong and weaker situation.
It is a situation based on respect and beliefs.
Beliefs that made the negotiations falter.
|
|
Salararius
Postmaster
Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519 |
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 at 13:42 |
The strong can always take more from the weak. Who here hasn't known that? Perhaps, strength is shown by what isn't taken, not what is.
If I knock you down and cut off your hands it's because I fear what you may do with them. If I knock you down and let you get back up it's because I dare you to try again. Which is a game and which is "real"?
|
|
realist
Greenhorn
Joined: 28 Mar 2013
Location: Be Positive
Status: Offline
Points: 40 |
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 at 13:44 |
Gaius Rufius Tullus wrote:
<span style="line-height: 1.4;"> When a great power is defeated, the winner (aka the H? & co.) try to make sure that such a war can never happen again. Let us quickly look at all the alliances which have lost against H? shall we?</span>
Yes, we have heard the stories which H? proudly tells us about how they overcome the White Company and Black - though that is hardly mentioned..
Some of us will also remember the great VALAR war..
What happened at the end of these two wars? Well.. The leadership left or got killed.. The alliance members were left in disarray and became easy pickings and.. Well, it has been near a year that VALAR had their pummeling and are still struggling to recover.
I doubt anyone finds it odd that EE are not willing to except this Treaty of Versailles with a H? member who-shall -not-be-named acting like Clemenceau. Way to go for peace guys
|
Well said. I should have made that point as well in my previous post.
|
|
KillerPoodle
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853 |
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 at 13:45 |
Gaius Rufius Tullus wrote:
What happened at the end of these two wars? Well.. The leadership left or got killed.. The alliance members were left in disarray and became easy pickings and.. Well, it has been near a year that VALAR had their pummeling and are still struggling to recover.
|
Gaius - it would be great if you could sprinkle just a few facts around in your grand statements.
H? barely participated in the Valar war and extracted very little compensation out of the end of it.
Valar were sufficiently recovered to declare war themselves this time around - had a good battle and negotiated smoothly to exit with a few cities lost.
In short - they've done fine.
|
|
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM
"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
|
|
realist
Greenhorn
Joined: 28 Mar 2013
Location: Be Positive
Status: Offline
Points: 40 |
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 at 13:47 |
KillerPoodle wrote:
Gaius Rufius Tullus wrote:
What happened at the end of these two wars? Well.. The leadership left or got killed.. The alliance members were left in disarray and became easy pickings and.. Well, it has been near a year that VALAR had their pummeling and are still struggling to recover.
|
Gaius - it would be great if you could sprinkle just a few facts around in your grand statements.
H? barely participated in the Valar war and extracted very little compensation out of the end of it.
Valar were sufficiently recovered to declare war themselves this time around - had a good battle and negotiated smoothly to exit with a few cities lost.
In short - they've done fine.
|
How can someone post facts here when it will get deleted from the forum?
|
|
KillerPoodle
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853 |
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 at 13:48 |
|
Realist - you are correct about beliefs and respect.
Hath's delusional beliefs caused our loss of respect and landed EE in the poor situation we are in.
His poor leadership continues to damage his alliance and his members, just as it contributed to the rot at the core of Consone which lead to war in the first place.
FYI - if you had any balls you'd be posting under your in-game name.
|
|
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM
"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
|
|
realist
Greenhorn
Joined: 28 Mar 2013
Location: Be Positive
Status: Offline
Points: 40 |
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 at 13:51 |
KillerPoodle wrote:
FYI - if you had any balls you'd be posting under your in-game name.
|
Oh but, KillerPoodle, that is not what I believe in. I guess I am playing this game for beliefs too.
|
|
Tweet
Just the facts Ma'am