The Glory of Manifestos - Page 5

Shiber · July 30, 2003, 15:18

UnOrthOdOx,

We had to keep up GoW's doubts of whether we are committed to helping RP or whether we can be persuaded out of it. We couldn't have just walked up to you and said - No, we are going to help RP and we're going to war with GoW if we have to and there's little that you can offer. That would have kinda ruined the element of surprise, now wouldn't it?

So, the only way we could see to achieve this, to basically diplomatically outmaneuver GoW after it has outmaneuvered us, is by deceiving you. I honestly wish that there was another way.

Now, while your proposals may have been close to what we were hoping for at first (the 'DMZ' clause is what convinced me not to side with the proposal), they came much too late. First of all, they came after ND demonstrated their hardline approach of 'GS gets no foothold on Bob' (or something in the vicinity; I'm not sure, since I did not participate in the chat, only read the logs), and at that point we came to realize that after this difficulty there can be countless more difficulties, and in other words, even if ND agrees to allow us some foothold on Bob, we are far from welcome.
Second, when you came in with proposals that were not quite what we asked at first (and may I remind you that we came to the chat with our lowest offer), and said that you think you might be able to convince your team to side with it (but said no word about ND, IIRC), we were already delved in very interesting discussions with RP, discussions that we may have refused to have with RP had the joint GS-GoW-ND chat ended up different.

Finally, the point of you not receiving any replies since Toledo. It is but a screw-up on behalf of GS.
You sent several private-like PMs to several members of GS and asked a question. We were preparing to answer your question, and we took way too long in our discussions, and by the time we were ready to answer GF had already declared war in his PM and we thought it pointless to send our own PM to you. I'm sorry, however, if you were offended - certainly it was not our intention.

Anyway, this is all a game, so cheer up and don't take any of it personally. I've taken things personally in the past, and it has done me no good, believe me.

Shiber · July 30, 2003, 15:19

Quote:

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
You guys have Gum? Would you be willing to trade it for Wine?

Ethel, hand me over some wine to wash down this gum with.

GhengisFarb™ · July 30, 2003, 15:20

Deleted.

Panzer32 · July 30, 2003, 15:24

For those who are talking about GoW not declaring war ingame, I must apologise. It was an oversight on my part, and has now been corrected. I apologise for any undue stress and/or wars this might have caused.

Panzer32

GhengisFarb™ · July 30, 2003, 15:27

Deleted.

UnOrthOdOx · July 30, 2003, 15:29

Quote:

We had to keep up GoW's doubts of whether we are committed to helping RP or whether we can be persuaded out of it. We couldn't have just walked up to you and said - No, we are going to help RP and we're going to war with GoW if we have to and there's little that you can offer. That would have kinda ruined the element of surprise, now wouldn't it?

Not what I said at all.

You guys saw fit to respect ND enough to inform them you could no longer work with ND.

You never saw fit to respect either myself or my team enough to inform us that the deal I had been negotiating had failed (the one including ND).

That would not have needed include anything beyond that. No war on GoW. Hell, for all I care you could have asked if we would help you with ND and split Bob between the two of us.

Instead I was met with silence and being ignored from the time I sent the proposition to the time well after Toledo was in your hands and was only ever given a no comment to the things you mention above.

'No Comment' was as much courtesy as I received.

Deceiving me was a part of the game, I understand that. Business is business. But respect is also a part of business. At least show the respect to communicate.

nbarclay · July 30, 2003, 15:31

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
It was too much to ask that when it was obvious and you sent ND a message saying you had switched sides that you could not have also sent a message to me saying you couldn't work with ND then?

To the best of my knowledge, the closest thing to a "message" we sent to ND indicating our support for RP was when we started accepting cities from RP, and that was a "message" you could see as well. We considered it to our advantage to keep that "message" ambiguous rather than telegraph our plans beyond what was inherent in our accepting RP cities.

UnOrthOdOx · July 30, 2003, 15:33

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay

To the best of my knowledge, the closest thing to a "message" we sent to ND indicating our support for RP was when we started accepting cities from RP, and that was a "message" you could see as well. We considered it to our advantage to keep that "message" ambiguous rather than telegraph our plans beyond what was inherent in our accepting RP cities.

If you would like, I'll post it. Otherwise ask Shiber, he penned it.

Arrian · July 30, 2003, 15:34

Actually, I think there was a screwup involved on our side... we were supposed to send notes to both ND and GoW, but somehow only ND's was sent. Then the game moved past the point where a note was relevent.

That is my understanding of it. I distinctly recall someone complaining that we really needed to send a note to GoW... and frankly I'm kinda annoyed it never happened.

-Arrian

Arnelos · July 30, 2003, 15:37

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx

Not what I said at all.

You guys saw fit to respect ND enough to inform them you could no longer work with ND.

You never saw fit to respect either myself or my team enough to inform us that the deal I had been negotiating had failed (the one including ND).

That would not have needed include anything beyond that. No war on GoW. Hell, for all I care you could have asked if we would help you with ND and split Bob between the two of us.

Instead I was met with silence and being ignored from the time I sent the proposition to the time well after Toledo was in your hands and was only ever given a no comment to the things you mention above.

'No Comment' was as much courtesy as I received.

Deceiving me was a part of the game, I understand that. Business is business. But respect is also a part of business. At least show the respect to communicate.

Unorthodox,

Neither Glory of War nor Neu Demogyptica ever saw fit to tell Roleplay Team that they could no longer work with us until your troops were on our doorstep.

As I recall, it was YOU who came to us with an offer of an offensive alliance against Neu Demogyptica the very TURN before Panzer32 posted a declaration of war against our team.

In terms of being upset at GS for the same behavior, it's the pot calling the kettle black.

You will recall that because of YOUR intiative to seek an alliance with us against ND, I spent time writing a lengthy treaty between GoW and RP Team and then had to debate with members of my team that hate GoW that we should do it if GoW is actually willing to sign such an agreement.

Then you guys attacked us.

I didn't complain about you wasting my entire evening on your behalf, so I don't see why you're upset at GS for wasting yours.

In my case, I just turned around and wrote an agreement with GS

zeit · July 30, 2003, 15:52

I concur with Arrian's words regarding the slip-up on our behalf. As I was on a trip to Italy (which I have let UnO know about several days beforehand), I couldn't have replied myself, and some sort of reply was in order- if not a note of our actions, then merely a "No-thank you" sort of message, as a reply to UnO's last offer.

On that note, I would like to say that from my experience, the GS does make an effort to reply to messages from other teams as soon as possible, and usually manages to do so quite efficiently. I will not get into specifics, but I do think the GS have suffered more 'delays' and 'honest mistakes' from other teams than the other teams suffered from us, but I could be biased...

UnOrthOdOx · July 30, 2003, 15:53

Arnelos,

And I answered that with a frank response.

Specifically in chat I asked for several things, most especially an insurance that we would be guaranteed half of the island.

The agreement you penned offered no such thing and only ensured that RP would keep what was south of (some city or another) while GoW would keep North of some other city or another. A FAR imbalanced devision of land and resources.

It was rejected. Plain and simple, in writting. I answered as much to Togas about what was needed for it to be reconsidered.

As I have said, deception is understandable, and a part of the game, but at least I was respectfull enough to openly communicate with you guys during that time, not leave you hanging or ignore you.

Arrian · July 30, 2003, 16:12

Quote:

As I recall, it was YOU who came to us with an offer of an offensive alliance against Neu Demogyptica the very TURN before Panzer32 posted a declaration of war against our team.

That is interesting. So what are you complaining about, UnO?

I apologize for our lack of response to your PM (in which you explained you were no longer our ambassador, but wanted to know about Inchon "man to man"), we just took too damn long deciding what to say, and when we were about done, Ghengis sent a note that kinda made yours obselete... which we then responded to. Sorry about that.

-Arrian

Shiber · July 30, 2003, 16:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
Actually, I think there was a screwup involved on our side... we were supposed to send notes to both ND and GoW, but somehow only ND's was sent. Then the game moved past the point where a note was relevent.

I can confirm that.
I did not expect Nathan to send the save along while discussions were still ongoing on the wording of the messages to ND and GoW. I was caught by surprise, but luckily I was already done writing my PM to ND and received some approval for it, so I could send it. Then Poly went down.
I do not know why a message to GoW wasn't composed in time. I was too busy tending to my own ambassadorial duties to notice the diplomatic screw-up that was taking form and to stop it in time.

It was nothing malicious UnOrthOdOx, I can assure you that.

UnOrthOdOx · July 30, 2003, 16:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
That is interesting. So what are you complaining about, UnO?

Crosspost.

Read my earlier response to Arnelos.

Arrian · July 30, 2003, 16:32

I read it, UnO. Doesn't change my confusion.

Anyway, Shiber brought up something I forgot to mention: 'poly's downtime definitely threw a wrench in the works. A couple of us kept discussions going over at MZO, but not enough, and without access to our 'poly forum, it was tough. Those discussions were military-heavy anyway, as Theseus and I were two of the four main participants.

Anyway, I'm sorry you felt slighted by our screwup. Our bad.

-Arrian

UnOrthOdOx · July 30, 2003, 16:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
I read it, UnO. Doesn't change my confusion.

My problem was never about what has happened, deception or otherwise, it was about being ignored. Yes, poly was down. Often. I understand that. But we are talking being ignored over the space of three in-game turns. That was...annoying. Especially when I knew that ND and RP had at least been contacted in that time.

Arrian · July 30, 2003, 16:56

I've apologized for our unresponsiveness, though I didn't think it's as bad as you portray it (three turns?).

That's about all I can do.

-Arrian

GhengisFarb™ · July 30, 2003, 17:02

Deleted.

FrustratedPoet · July 30, 2003, 17:09

*sigh*

Has this game really gone so low?

**** this for a laugh.

notyoueither · July 30, 2003, 17:33

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
My problem was never about what has happened, deception or otherwise, it was about being ignored. Yes, poly was down. Often. I understand that. But we are talking being ignored over the space of three in-game turns. That was...annoying. Especially when I knew that ND and RP had at least been contacted in that time.

UnO, I was in daily contact with members of GoW. You were not being ignored. I am sorry if you felt that way.

DeepO · July 30, 2003, 18:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
That is my understanding of it. I distinctly recall someone complaining that we really needed to send a note to GoW... and frankly I'm kinda annoyed it never happened.

Same here... I think I complained... but as I didn't had the time to do it myself (nor was I really entitled too), and as it was a very hectic period for us, it got lost. My apologies

DeepO

HarryH · July 30, 2003, 19:06

At least these threads give me something to read while I am waiting for the save to come around again. Although I would rather be reading The Trappings of War.

Beta · July 30, 2003, 21:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Shiber
UnOrthOdOx,

We had to keep up GoW's doubts of whether we are committed to helping RP or whether we can be persuaded out of it. We couldn't have just walked up to you and said - No, we are going to help RP and we're going to war with GoW if we have to and there's little that you can offer. That would have kinda ruined the element of surprise, now wouldn't it?

So, the only way we could see to achieve this, to basically diplomatically outmaneuver GoW after it has outmaneuvered us, is by deceiving you.

Beta smiles to himself, and whispers..."Ah Grasshopper, you have learned well."

Master Zen · July 30, 2003, 23:18

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay

To the best of my knowledge, the closest thing to a "message" we sent to ND indicating our support for RP was when we started accepting cities from RP, and that was a "message" you could see as well. We considered it to our advantage to keep that "message" ambiguous rather than telegraph our plans beyond what was inherent in our accepting RP cities.

Ambiguous? That message made your plans as ambiguous as an open book.

Master Zen · July 30, 2003, 23:19

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither

UnO, I was in daily contact with members of GoW. You were not being ignored. I am sorry if you felt that way.

To set the record straight, if it wasn't me bugging you, you would have never answered me.

Arnelos · July 30, 2003, 23:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
Ambiguous? That message made your plans as ambiguous as an open book.

Which happens to be why I sorta lost it when I found out about that PM...

BigFree · July 31, 2003, 05:30

MZ: You are complaining to GS about the "spirit" of a NAP you had with them when you should look at your own actions against RP, a team you had a NAP with, before you complaign any further to GS or the world at large.

GoW marched a huge stack of Rider's towards RP's border's with the full intent of crossing and attacking RP when the NAP expired. Now, when those troops left GoW territory and headed for RP territorry; wan't that a 'hostile act' towards RP? I mean the NAP was still in effect, but GoW knew full well that they were going to be used in attacking RP cities.

To me, the spirit of a NAP is not violated when you take no actions whatsoever that can be contrued by the other team as hostile. Perhaps all NAP's in the future can be worded to include more circumstances. But, how would they be determined? Basically each team has to trust the other team on a personal level, rather than an in-game level.

Panzer32: The 'mistake' of not declaring war in-game was not exactly a mistake by your team. We all know that if you declare war on another team while your troops are outside of your border's, you will get some unhappiness due to war weariness; weariness that compounds over time. It was a logical step by GoW to not declare war on RP until it needed to do so; but please be honest with your reasons for not doing so. The fact that GoW had decalred war on RP only in the forums was well documented by both teams long ago.

Hot_Enamel · July 31, 2003, 06:56

Quote:

Originally posted by BigFree
MZ: You are complaining to GS about the "spirit" of a NAP you had with them when you should look at your own actions against RP, a team you had a NAP with, before you complaign any further to GS or the world at large.

What NAP ???

Hot_Enamel · July 31, 2003, 07:01

I started explaining why I would not be a part of Shibers petition...but then just got into a rant that is better placed in this trashing thread

Sorry Shiber

So .. I repost here, to give the GS/RP members fair chance to reply without clogging up shibers

thread with trash talking

....Blah Blah Blah.....

Some posters need to be brought back in line.

In recent events, we have a team who repeats over and over and over again, that they will win this game using an honour code that puts them above every other team.
When really, they are opportunistic as the rest of us.
The GS honour code aint worth spitting on, and GoW's mistake, was to believe that they would honour the spirit of their agreements.

Had GoW an agreement with "Mr Loophole" himself (aka Togas) we would of half expected some sort of backstab. For example, when it was suddenly dawning on RP that GoW may go to war with them, they hastily tried to negotaite a NAP. Even with our riders advancing towards their lines, they still tried to screw us by inserting a paragraph that required GoW to acknowledge that RP had legal ownership to half the continent. We expect this from RP. It is how they have been treating us for most of the game. It is one of the many reasons why we attacked. I would rather not play a game where I have to spend a whole evening studying proposals for any clauses.

Anyway .. I want to have the right to flame every GS member that deems it necessary to bring up their honour code yet again and again and again.