Aderan Wars
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

(TOC) vs (TIE)

+36
superkingtsob
Black Lotus
aworon
Nimras
doxakk
Paladius
stars
reaper
melonhead
Lucien Lachance
ยค Angel Slayer
castravete
Nomad
skyfighter
Beldar
WhatsASniper1
Nigatsu_Aka
Phyurie
kingkongfan1
Special Agent 47
pxn
Admin
Vesper
Miglow
Kenzu
Jiro
curumo
Sandwalker
r1maru
lil monsters
FarleShadow
ian
Kingofshinobis1
Magnus
seaborgium
Lord Ishurue
40 posters

Page 20 of 21 Previous  1 ... 11 ... 19, 20, 21  Next

Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by ian Tue Jul 06, 2010 2:31 pm

Kingofshinobis1 wrote:I just wanted to clarify that I was asked to check TIE logs before the war but it was never official until after the war had started (a day or two after if I'm not mistaken). Just wanted to clear that up with everyone who has been asking me about it.

Thank you for clarifying.

@ T.O.C - I know you guys still think T.I.E planned this war all along... but we didn't. This war only happened when it did in response to the threats and accusations against T.I.E, coupled with the knowledge of the "secret" alliances being formed with the express wish to topple The Imperium, along with the sabbing & assassinations against The Imperium. We did honestly try to avoid this war - had the threats and accusations stopped, we would never have had to go hidden and try to convince everyone we had disbanded (in a attempt to avoid some of the heat).

It was the threats and hostility shown to The Imperium when we went hidden which were the final nail in the coffin of peace. You guys may have offered a N.A.P AFTER you had shown that hostility and threats - but by then it was too late. The threats and hostility were out in the open and clear for us to see -and it was more than apparent to us ANY N.A.P wouldn't last given how hostile you seemed to be to The Imperium. All the N.A.P would have done would have given you guys time to better prepare to topple The Imperium on your own time-schedule... since long before the sabbings & assassinations happened, dating right back to the cabal incident - this was always your plan.

In the first 12hours of the N.A.P despite all the evidence pointing to your hostility and dislike towards us we were still uncertain on whether or not to go to war. Then we recieved word you guys were planning to amass your strike teams about 12hours before the N.A.P ended - so we officially mobilised and a strike time was set - which led to this war beginning.

This war could have been avoided simply by:

1.) Not making accusations against The Imperium which were false.

2.) Not following those accusations against The Imperium up with threats.

3.) By actually allowing Kingofshinobis to check TIE's logs to clear our names WHEN he was offerred before the actual war had began.

4.) By NOT sabbing & assassinating The Imperium.

5.) By revealing the identity and being open & honest with The Imperium of those responsible for the attacks against The Imperium (I.e. who sabbed command92? Compensation may correct the damage, but without knowing who it was we would never be able to monitor that player for future hostility against TIE i.e. he could have been responsible for all the other attacks).

6.) By being open and honest with us about your plan to topple The Imperium - or rather, by actually being honest about your alliances/ the formation of The Order of Chaos. If you try and do thing's in secret it generally means you have something to hide... whereas voluntarily giving information generally means you HAVEN'T got something to hide. Noone in TIE would have had a problem if you d have actually said "btw, Emperors, FIRE & WR are forming a empire". Instead what did you do? The night TIE went hidden you *deliberately* tried to mislead myself and TIE into believing Emperors were a "neutral" power and therefore could be relied upon to be witnesses and the guarantor of any agreement we may have reached - when all along they were secretly your allies. How did you think TIE would take that attempt at deception when we already *knew* they were your allies? - especially when their supposed neutrality was meant to the guarantor of the pre-N.A.P. That was also another serious factor we took into account in deciding that TOC had NO intention of actually respecting a long-term N.A.P (the pre-nap was merely to stall for time by TOC since you d previously spent your war-reserves on economic & military development to catch/ overtake TIE even quicker - helping speed up and make easier your conquest of TIE in the long run).

7.) ABOVE ALL ELSE - If you hadn't been messaging alliances and trying to recruit a coalition for the express intention of toppling The Imperium in the first place then you d have actually found The Imperium's friendliness we once had towards FIRE wouldn't have becoming increasingly hostile (Tip: noone likes finding out their "friends" are lieing through their teeth to them and secretly plotting their demise).

Back to the point though: We tried to clear our name by even offering for someone in T.O.C who could be trusted to be neutral and objective to become an ingame adviser in TIE to check the logs. This was a offer which was not accepted & as a direct result TIE continued to be threatened by various T.O.C members in leadership positions - resulting in us going hidden... which only resulted in MASSIVE hostility and aggression towards us - resulting in the decision finally being taken to abandon any attempt at peace...and to give T.O.C what they wanted - a massive war.

TOC's accusations & threats were against a peaceful and innocent alliance - one which eventually albeit reluctantly offered TOC the ability to see for themselves our innocence. Instead they weren't interested in finding our innocence - my guess would be because if TIE gets proven innocent by themselves they won't then be able to throw out accusations of TIE hostility or even play the whole "Evil nasty TIE" game - which in turn would then mean they wouldn't be able to feed their members a ton of BS about "evil nasty aggressive TIE" to actually convince them when the time eventually arrives why a war against TIE is "right" and "justified".

Accusing & threatening a innocent and peaceful alliance is wrong.
Accusing & threatening a innocent and peaceful alliance and then ignoring opportunities to prove that alliances innocence is inexcusable - ESPECIALLY when shortly after that opportunity become available it was followed up by massive hostility and aggression directed at TIE for our going hidden in response to those threats.

We didn't want this war - thats why we asked for it to end as soon as we did. It was a decision of last resort.

I suspect T.O.C believed it could crush The Imperium if given enough time - hence why you guys rejected our first peace attempts and asked for a peace a long time away (which it was at the time). Instead now it appears the other way around - with TIE slowly but surely eroding TOC's accounts to ever more depleted and poor levels, while massed TIE member's remain fully-combat operational and participating in this war.

T.I.E won't be a well behaved empire and just die when facing the full-fire-power, economic strength and numbers of T.O.C... sorry guys Smile

Overall i d say TIE's in a stronger position now (and after the war) than what we were before when compared to the combined strength of FIRE, WR & Emperors Smile

ian
ian
Coalition Officer
Coalition Officer

Alliance : You get 3 guesses as to which one Razz
Age : 35
Number of posts : 1180
Registration date : 2009-04-21

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by aworon Tue Jul 06, 2010 2:45 pm

anything else you dream about?

tie rejected the first peace offering by not using the 2 day nap to negotiate and avert a war.
Your peace proposal, which came later, was second, not first, get it right.

A 2 comes after a 1.

aworon
Aderan Soldier
Aderan Soldier

Number of posts : 34
Registration date : 2009-01-04

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Jiro Tue Jul 06, 2010 2:48 pm

Since the New Federation was part of TOC, I think you should know that the New Federation disbanded due to a lack of members.

Jiro
Aderan Spy
Aderan Spy

Number of posts : 487
Location : the Netherlands
Registration date : 2009-09-24

http://www.aderanwars.eu

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by jerry1 Tue Jul 06, 2010 5:07 pm

jeez you TOC players are hard of thinking lol. As has been pointed out by atleast 3 other players now, me included makes 4 - the nap so happily bandied about is irrelivant... It would not have averted anything as its only purpose as far as TIE is/was, and always will be, concerned was to give TOC greater time to arm its already sizable strike and build a war reserve again!
Which - as already stated by others - TOC players had already been heavily spending on strike in the first place. With you lot arming up heavily and banding about, AND annoying the heck out of the whole server with annoying 'TIE are evil' messages sent to almost everyone - even i got 1 lol numpties! Not to mention the fliers trying to recruit from everwhere to call to arms against TIE for weeks if not months before war started!
How much evidence do you need that in the end this argument is fruitless.
In my opinion if we hadn't of made a strike TOC would have - END OF!
Now it really doesn't matter anymore who was right and who wa wrong.
There are only really 3 options left for everyone involved:

1. Attempt to make some sort of peace deal!

2. Fight it out till everyone is dead!

3. Surrender from the war!

1. I suspect that a peace deal maybe still be bought to the table by TOC but i suspect it'll only happen if TOC back down an stop trying to play the high ground! Theres no high ground left - between us - TIE and TOC - we've decimated all high ground! Theres no where left to hide for anyone...

2. I suspect that you will find that almost all TIE members don't really care which option TOC choose any more - we are resigned to fighting TOC to stand up for what we believe is right! If you choose to continue this war i recon most of TIE will be happy to carry on meeting you on the battle field.

3. There are many more missing TOC players due to surrender from the war an perm.vacation mode, and/or booted for inactivity, than any loses from TIE.

jerry1
Mercenary
Mercenary

Number of posts : 18
Registration date : 2009-06-05

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by aworon Tue Jul 06, 2010 5:24 pm

jerry1 wrote:jIt would not have averted anything
you're right, TOC has proven that the nap would have resulted in lasting peace had TIE actually used it to negotiate. ian decided to throw away that chance though since the beginning
and writing excessive posts will not turn facts around, you shouldn't really adopt ian's style, it's bad for your health.

jerry1 wrote:I suspect that a peace deal maybe still be bought to the table by TOC but i suspect it'll only happen if TOC back down an stop trying to play the high ground!
You make no sense
Is it TIE playing high ground or is it TOC now?

Where's toc playing high ground, I can only speak for those who i speak to regularly and we're walking it. Tie does a lot of talking though on the other hand

aworon
Aderan Soldier
Aderan Soldier

Number of posts : 34
Registration date : 2009-01-04

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by ian Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:42 pm

Actually Aworon you ve proven nothing whatsoever.

You ve stated repeatedly a N.A.P I.e. a agreement - would have resulted in lasting peace. Thats it. No evidence - no nothing. A mere opinion.

On the other hand - as we ALL know, TIE & TOC on previous occassions DID reach agreements... and whats the result? War has still happened (Twice now after reaching a "agreement").

Tell me why should a "N.A.P" agreement have been a magical cure to the tensions when all other agreement's blatantly weren't?

Why should a magical "N.A.P" agreement in which you and Lord Ishurue by the THIRD line had already lied through your teeth to The Imperium (see below) by trying to convince us Emperor's was a neutral party and able to be a neutral witness to any agreement, have done any better than previous agreements?

Even more so what would have made that N.A.P agreement any different to previous agreements where TIE & TOC supposedly resolved thing's peacefully only for T.O.C to continue to press ahead with its attempts to recruit allies to destroy TIE?

The Answer: It would have done absolutely nothing other than delayed this war. You & Lord Ishurue when you tried to claim Emperors to be a neutral party and able to guarantee any agreement set the tone for how much that supposed N.A.P was worth. All it would have done is buy T.O.C more time to prepare to destroy The Imperium.

This war on the other hand has demonstrated only too clearly to you guys that your numbers aren't enough to beat The Imperium - and that The Imperium doesn't need to have its previous economic & military advantages it used to have over its competitors to fight just as effectively and brutally as we ve always done.

I suspect the whole "Topple TIE" plan which FIRE had previously been happily chasing may get re-thought after this war.


06/06/2010 01:51:24 Aworon ian, Lord Ishurue heya both
06/06/2010 01:51:27 ian Aworon, Lord Ishurue howdy
06/06/2010 01:51:34 Lord Ishurue Aworon, ian i added a nutrual party into this convo

When I went into that convo i had every intention of admitting TIE's continued existence and finding a way to avoid war. I also already was well informed about Emperor's and FIRE's links.

The moment you guys tried to sell Emperor's "neutrality" to myself you demonstrated just how far your willing to go in trying to mislead us. From that point on i tried to keep TIE's continued existence secret for as long as necessary (which i failed - later admitting our existence later on in the convo) and then resigned myself to the fact your repeated deceptions throughout the conversation (you made repeated messages which supported the whole "neutrality" story you were trying to sell to me) meant any agreement we came to was being made a mockery by the deception.

ian
ian
Coalition Officer
Coalition Officer

Alliance : You get 3 guesses as to which one Razz
Age : 35
Number of posts : 1180
Registration date : 2009-04-21

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by jerry1 Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:47 pm

@aworon
Thats what you took from my last post - the most irrelavant bits of informtion I put there. Did you even read what I wrote or are you just looking for cannon fodder because i belive you'll find none there. Everything in that post is my opinion only - re-read it to verify - I can hardly talk for a whole Empire let alone 2 lol.

Plus I think you'll find I said there is NO HIGH GROUND LEFT! ROFLOL

We all blew it up - no hills - no mountains - no hiding places left to turn. Just a number (hill4273) on a plastic cross to mark the passing of millions of troops at the ashy remains of what was once a hill - here lay the silicon remains of many a good friend and soldier - all thats left is me - the last ROGUE trooper! Friday...
There all dead dave - everyones dead dave - there dead, all dead, everyone is dead dave... how many more ways are there to say this!
I am a war ship - death becomes me! I have enough fire power to take out solar systems in a sweep of one arc! A blink of a gun can take out a sun!
Cry Havok let slip the dogs of war.
Silicon Dreams - do androids dream of electric sheep - asks the elictric monk - he doesn't need you to believe - he believes for you. He forgets where he left his horse (on a balcony in another world - the horse is quite happy if a little puzzled about how it got there!) The telephone rings - its a ghost calling - it cannot talk for it is dead.
And through this all Methusal watches from the safe place behind the moon - for 2000 yrs he/it has been watching and waiting, waiting and watching - now he/it wonders if perhaps it maybe to late! Maybe there all dead. No soul left untered - or maybe just no soul...
At the third stoke the time sponsered by ...PcHzzzz.... will be PcHzzzz.... bleep BleEp BlEeP... At ThE tHIRd StOkE ..... BEEEEEeeeee.....p

jerry1
Mercenary
Mercenary

Number of posts : 18
Registration date : 2009-06-05

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Vesper Tue Jul 06, 2010 7:15 pm

Vesper wrote: FIRE and WR formed a friendship treaty. Everyone can dispute the reasons for this treaty but the simple truth is that Ishurue was still plotting against TIE and messaging alliances around the server to bring them to the cause. I know for a fact that Ishurue himself contacted Kenzu asking for his support in taking down TIE. He also messaged rflash who declined because he is busy working his new job and does not have much time. Aworon was another person contacted by Ishurue and lured into his web. TIE caught wind of these messages and began to take action. Luckily they took action before ^Speed^ got caught in the web as well.

How about we do this. If ToC can prove that this is false info and that they were not plotting against TIE for months then perhaps TIE can let the past go and begin negotiations. If Ishurue did not contact each leader in ToC trying to unite them with the intention to take down TIE then there is no reason for this war. If however there is 1 truthful soul inside of ToC then they will admit this and then ToC can surrender and the war ends. I simply suspect that TIE will accept a ToC surrender, I am not sure if they will or not after all that has happened.
Vesper
Vesper
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

Alliance : Commonwealth
Number of posts : 518
Registration date : 2009-08-11

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by ian Tue Jul 06, 2010 7:43 pm

Lol, vesper - i suspect the "truthful" souls which T.O.C once had are no longer part of T.O.C Razz All that remains are the honest but ignorant (ignorant because they ve been left out of the loop), or the malicious and corrupt.

I think you should reword your sentence to

If however there is 1 truthful soul inside of or used to be inside of ToC then they will admit this.

As for a T.O.C surrender... noone's trying or asking for one.
ian
ian
Coalition Officer
Coalition Officer

Alliance : You get 3 guesses as to which one Razz
Age : 35
Number of posts : 1180
Registration date : 2009-04-21

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by seaborgium Tue Jul 06, 2010 7:56 pm

SHHH Ian, I am thinking of asking. Its the only thing left out of 33 pages of crap Razz

seaborgium
2nd in Command
2nd in Command

Number of posts : 2551
Registration date : 2009-10-06

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by curumo Tue Jul 06, 2010 8:41 pm

Whatever the case ... some things will never get known ... ever ... I suspect.

curumo
Aderan Miner
Aderan Miner

Number of posts : 335
Registration date : 2008-08-22

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by ยค Angel Slayer Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:52 pm

T.O.C surrender ? Laughing Now thats funny Laughing
Peace treaty ? I some how don't see that happening in the near future,
But thats just what I think, Me? I can care less if it ends or not.
ยค Angel Slayer
ยค Angel Slayer
Aderan Farmer
Aderan Farmer

ID : 482
Alliance : [ World_Republic_(O) ]
Number of posts : 74
Registration date : 2009-10-21

http://world-republic.forumotion.com/forum.htm

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by aworon Tue Jul 06, 2010 10:04 pm

ian i already said that posting extensive texts will not turn facts into fiction, besides you still haven't posted on the question I asked you.

aworon
Aderan Soldier
Aderan Soldier

Number of posts : 34
Registration date : 2009-01-04

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Lord Ishurue Wed Jul 07, 2010 11:49 pm



Okdeamif was massed .






Lord Ishurue
Lord Ishurue
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

Alliance :
Mujengan

The Unlimited Elite Gun Force
Age : 36
Number of posts : 666
Registration date : 2009-11-05

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Lord Ishurue Fri Jul 09, 2010 2:11 am



Bobjoe6 has been massed .
Lord Ishurue
Lord Ishurue
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

Alliance :
Mujengan

The Unlimited Elite Gun Force
Age : 36
Number of posts : 666
Registration date : 2009-11-05

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Lord Ishurue Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:35 pm

stars wrote:I DO NOT CARE IF THIS WAR ENDS. THOSE WHO GAVE ME NO SYMPATHY YET TOOK ADVANTAGE, I WILL NOT LET THEM PASS! For all of those others who left me be for the short time I requested I will no longer attack you.

ok
Lord Ishurue
Lord Ishurue
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

Alliance :
Mujengan

The Unlimited Elite Gun Force
Age : 36
Number of posts : 666
Registration date : 2009-11-05

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Kenzu Sun Jul 11, 2010 9:52 am

Vesper wrote:I was waiting for this post for a long time now. It wasnt my place to say anything regarding what was said and done before the war. Ian often contacted me on msn asking if I heard anything about WR and FIRE forming an anti-TIE group. Out of the blue WR really kicked up their farming on TIE (from never attacking to a few attacks a day) and so did Muj. TIEs reaction was to start farming back only to be slammed with the strictest farming policy ingame. TIE was randomly sabbed and assassinated for a period of a bit over a month and when Ian went to Ishurue himself asking to let 1 TIE member into FIRE to look over the logs he got rejected. Ishurue choose to hide the identity of the person doing the attacks, most likely because it was himself but that is just speculation. When TIE was in question of attacking FIRE we agreed to let a FIRE rep come over and look at our logs but they choose not to send anyone from what I understand. Ian and Seaborg even went under FIRE HC as officers and let them look over their logs. Even with all of that TIE was still blamed for the attacks on FIRE... scratch

That's what happens when you ignore the existence of other major alliances. If you talked to me I might have persuaded Ishurue to let a TIE member join his alliance to look into Mujengan's logs if TIE would let a Mujengan member join them and view TIE's logs.

aworon wrote:I can remember ian rejecting that same proposal by having a fire or wr member go over to be able to see logs.

so really, it's a no-argument right now

I confirm this. I made the same proposal before, and ian rejected.

As we can see having a policy that allows us to view each others logs can prevent a future war.
This policy has been already agreed on by both TOC (all TOC leaders) and TIE (ian).

ian wrote:
You can't expect to be given something you ve previously refused to give.

I never refused and you never asked.
WR has never done any sabbing or assassinating against others without making it clear it was WR, with the exception of being in war, where it's obvious anyway.

I never rejected before, but when I asked you, you rejected my offer.

jerry1 wrote:TIE for several weeks before the war had been gathering an overwhelming collection of data pointing to a growing probablility of War being organised by WR member Kenzu. Admittedly almost all information was 3rd hand or hearsay as far as most players would be concerned but even so given enough time this information can become self evident.
TIE had no intention of starting a war, especially a war of this proportion.

Giving TIE an ultimatum to disband or die was a fruitless guesture.

TIE always manages to gather data that its rival alliances are preparing for war, when TIE is preparing for war, even though the rival alliances are not preparing for war. This happened a couple times already.

Who gave TIE an ultimatum to "disband or die"?
I have never heard of such ultimatum.

ian wrote:
...
TOC's accusations & threats were against a peaceful and innocent alliance
...

You can't be serious. TIE was involved in every major war in the entire history of Aderan Wars:
1st WR-TIE war
2nd WR-TIE war
1st FIRE-TIE war
1st TOC-TIE war

Furthermore your rhetoric was much more often an aggressive one, than not. Just read your posts about the threats you made and your crusades.

ian wrote:

TOC's accusations & threats were against a peaceful and innocent alliance

Overall i d say TIE's in a stronger position now (and after the war) than what we were before when compared to the combined strength of FIRE, WR & Emperors Smile


Not at all
Check total alliance power before the war and now.
Check total incomes of TOC and TIE before the war and now.
Check total unit production of TOC and TIE before the war and now.
Counter in the inactives that TIE massed, which brought no loss to TOC, but a waste to TIE.
Statistics never lie.

Vesper wrote:
Vesper wrote: FIRE and WR formed a friendship treaty. Everyone can dispute the reasons for this treaty but the simple truth is that Ishurue was still plotting against TIE and messaging alliances around the server to bring them to the cause. I know for a fact that Ishurue himself contacted Kenzu asking for his support in taking down TIE. He also messaged rflash who declined because he is busy working his new job and does not have much time. Aworon was another person contacted by Ishurue and lured into his web. TIE caught wind of these messages and began to take action. Luckily they took action before ^Speed^ got caught in the web as well.

How about we do this. If ToC can prove that this is false info and that they were not plotting against TIE for months then perhaps TIE can let the past go and begin negotiations. If Ishurue did not contact each leader in ToC trying to unite them with the intention to take down TIE then there is no reason for this war. If however there is 1 truthful soul inside of ToC then they will admit this and then ToC can surrender and the war ends. I simply suspect that TIE will accept a ToC surrender, I am not sure if they will or not after all that has happened.

The friendship treaty has been made so that we are stronger, because with strength, we are better equipped to defend our freedom. We have seen from the past how TIE treats alliances which are strong enough to pose a threat to them. TIE is not the center of the universe and to be honest, the friendship treaty would have been signed even if TIE didn't exist. World Republic has a long history of uniting with other alliances and extending the hand of friendship to all alliances.
Kenzu
Kenzu
Alliance Leader
Alliance Leader

Age : 37
Number of posts : 3034
Registration date : 2008-12-03

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by seaborgium Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:30 pm

Kenzu wrote:
Vesper wrote:I was waiting for this post for a long time now. It wasnt my place to say anything regarding what was said and done before the war. Ian often contacted me on msn asking if I heard anything about WR and FIRE forming an anti-TIE group. Out of the blue WR really kicked up their farming on TIE (from never attacking to a few attacks a day) and so did Muj. TIEs reaction was to start farming back only to be slammed with the strictest farming policy ingame. TIE was randomly sabbed and assassinated for a period of a bit over a month and when Ian went to Ishurue himself asking to let 1 TIE member into FIRE to look over the logs he got rejected. Ishurue choose to hide the identity of the person doing the attacks, most likely because it was himself but that is just speculation. When TIE was in question of attacking FIRE we agreed to let a FIRE rep come over and look at our logs but they choose not to send anyone from what I understand. Ian and Seaborg even went under FIRE HC as officers and let them look over their logs. Even with all of that TIE was still blamed for the attacks on FIRE... scratch

That's what happens when you ignore the existence of other major alliances. If you talked to me I might have persuaded Ishurue to let a TIE member join his alliance to look into Mujengan's logs if TIE would let a Mujengan member join them and view TIE's logs.

well no kidding you weren't asked. It was an issue with Muj. Ian was told Ish doesn't rat out his members, I would look for the chat I was sent, but I don't have access to it right now due to I was at work.

Kenzu wrote:
aworon wrote:I can remember ian rejecting that same proposal by having a fire or wr member go over to be able to see logs.

so really, it's a no-argument right now

I confirm this. I made the same proposal before, and ian rejected.

As we can see having a policy that allows us to view each others logs can prevent a future war.
This policy has been already agreed on by both TOC (all TOC leaders) and TIE (ian).

Yes Ian did reject it bc it was rejected to us for a matter before the war.

Kenzu wrote:
jerry1 wrote:TIE for several weeks before the war had been gathering an overwhelming collection of data pointing to a growing probablility of War being organised by WR member Kenzu. Admittedly almost all information was 3rd hand or hearsay as far as most players would be concerned but even so given enough time this information can become self evident.
TIE had no intention of starting a war, especially a war of this proportion.

Giving TIE an ultimatum to disband or die was a fruitless guesture.

TIE always manages to gather data that its rival alliances are preparing for war, when TIE is preparing for war, even though the rival alliances are not preparing for war. This happened a couple times already.

Who gave TIE an ultimatum to "disband or die"?
I have never heard of such ultimatum.
We get information like that from messages ingame/msn convos. I don't recall a disband or die either so I not sure where that is from.

Kenzu wrote:
ian wrote:
...
TOC's accusations & threats were against a peaceful and innocent alliance
...

You can't be serious. TIE was involved in every major war in the entire history of Aderan Wars:
1st WR-TIE war
2nd WR-TIE war
1st FIRE-TIE war
1st TOC-TIE war

Furthermore your rhetoric was much more often an aggressive one, than not. Just read your posts about the threats you made and your crusades.
Yes Ian's rhetoric is very much that way, but I remember a time when WR used to do it.
Kenzu wrote:
ian wrote:

TOC's accusations & threats were against a peaceful and innocent alliance

Overall i d say TIE's in a stronger position now (and after the war) than what we were before when compared to the combined strength of FIRE, WR & Emperors Smile


Not at all
Check total alliance power before the war and now.
Check total incomes of TOC and TIE before the war and now.
Check total unit production of TOC and TIE before the war and now.
Counter in the inactives that TIE massed, which brought no loss to TOC, but a waste to TIE.
Statistics never lie.

The power really hasn't changed, it still close to what it was before, both sides have lost players to either vac or deleting or leaving alliance.

Now isn't a good time to compare incomes due to the way ppl are playing.

I can show Inactives that ToC massed, almost the first week that you guys massed players most were inactive. I don't really see how this is relevant. They were in the alliance, so it counts as losses to the alliance.

Kenzu wrote:
Vesper wrote:
Vesper wrote: FIRE and WR formed a friendship treaty. Everyone can dispute the reasons for this treaty but the simple truth is that Ishurue was still plotting against TIE and messaging alliances around the server to bring them to the cause. I know for a fact that Ishurue himself contacted Kenzu asking for his support in taking down TIE. He also messaged rflash who declined because he is busy working his new job and does not have much time. Aworon was another person contacted by Ishurue and lured into his web. TIE caught wind of these messages and began to take action. Luckily they took action before ^Speed^ got caught in the web as well.

How about we do this. If ToC can prove that this is false info and that they were not plotting against TIE for months then perhaps TIE can let the past go and begin negotiations. If Ishurue did not contact each leader in ToC trying to unite them with the intention to take down TIE then there is no reason for this war. If however there is 1 truthful soul inside of ToC then they will admit this and then ToC can surrender and the war ends. I simply suspect that TIE will accept a ToC surrender, I am not sure if they will or not after all that has happened.

The friendship treaty has been made so that we are stronger, because with strength, we are better equipped to defend our freedom. We have seen from the past how TIE treats alliances which are strong enough to pose a threat to them. TIE is not the center of the universe and to be honest, the friendship treaty would have been signed even if TIE didn't exist. World Republic has a long history of uniting with other alliances and extending the hand of friendship to all alliances.

TBH, there really isn't anyone who alone is stronger then TIE. We did however push things to protect the fact that we have better incomes and such then other alliances bc they didn't have the same play style. It was to protect our own interest, We also didn't make it so it hurt the game. I know an alliance right now that is threatening war for 1 simple kuwal hit. I know that was voiced in TIE and was shot down by almost every HC member as it would hurt the game more then help it.

seaborgium
2nd in Command
2nd in Command

Number of posts : 2551
Registration date : 2009-10-06

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by ian Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:55 pm

Kenzu wrote:
Vesper wrote:I was waiting for this post for a long time now. It wasnt my place to say anything regarding what was said and done before the war. Ian often contacted me on msn asking if I heard anything about WR and FIRE forming an anti-TIE group. Out of the blue WR really kicked up their farming on TIE (from never attacking to a few attacks a day) and so did Muj. TIEs reaction was to start farming back only to be slammed with the strictest farming policy ingame. TIE was randomly sabbed and assassinated for a period of a bit over a month and when Ian went to Ishurue himself asking to let 1 TIE member into FIRE to look over the logs he got rejected. Ishurue choose to hide the identity of the person doing the attacks, most likely because it was himself but that is just speculation. When TIE was in question of attacking FIRE we agreed to let a FIRE rep come over and look at our logs but they choose not to send anyone from what I understand. Ian and Seaborg even went under FIRE HC as officers and let them look over their logs. Even with all of that TIE was still blamed for the attacks on FIRE... scratch

That's what happens when you ignore the existence of other major alliances. If you talked to me I might have persuaded Ishurue to let a TIE member join his alliance to look into Mujengan's logs if TIE would let a Mujengan member join them and view TIE's logs.

aworon wrote:I can remember ian rejecting that same proposal by having a fire or wr member go over to be able to see logs.

so really, it's a no-argument right now

I confirm this. I made the same proposal before, and ian rejected.

As we can see having a policy that allows us to view each others logs can prevent a future war.
This policy has been already agreed on by both TOC (all TOC leaders) and TIE (ian).

ian wrote:
You can't expect to be given something you ve previously refused to give.

I never refused and you never asked.
WR has never done any sabbing or assassinating against others without making it clear it was WR, with the exception of being in war, where it's obvious anyway.

I never rejected before, but when I asked you, you rejected my offer.

jerry1 wrote:TIE for several weeks before the war had been gathering an overwhelming collection of data pointing to a growing probablility of War being organised by WR member Kenzu. Admittedly almost all information was 3rd hand or hearsay as far as most players would be concerned but even so given enough time this information can become self evident.
TIE had no intention of starting a war, especially a war of this proportion.

Giving TIE an ultimatum to disband or die was a fruitless guesture.

TIE always manages to gather data that its rival alliances are preparing for war, when TIE is preparing for war, even though the rival alliances are not preparing for war. This happened a couple times already.

Who gave TIE an ultimatum to "disband or die"?
I have never heard of such ultimatum.

ian wrote:
...
TOC's accusations & threats were against a peaceful and innocent alliance
...

You can't be serious. TIE was involved in every major war in the entire history of Aderan Wars:
1st WR-TIE war
2nd WR-TIE war
1st FIRE-TIE war
1st TOC-TIE war

Furthermore your rhetoric was much more often an aggressive one, than not. Just read your posts about the threats you made and your crusades.

ian wrote:

TOC's accusations & threats were against a peaceful and innocent alliance

Overall i d say TIE's in a stronger position now (and after the war) than what we were before when compared to the combined strength of FIRE, WR & Emperors Smile


Not at all
Check total alliance power before the war and now.
Check total incomes of TOC and TIE before the war and now.
Check total unit production of TOC and TIE before the war and now.
Counter in the inactives that TIE massed, which brought no loss to TOC, but a waste to TIE.
Statistics never lie.

Vesper wrote:
Vesper wrote: FIRE and WR formed a friendship treaty. Everyone can dispute the reasons for this treaty but the simple truth is that Ishurue was still plotting against TIE and messaging alliances around the server to bring them to the cause. I know for a fact that Ishurue himself contacted Kenzu asking for his support in taking down TIE. He also messaged rflash who declined because he is busy working his new job and does not have much time. Aworon was another person contacted by Ishurue and lured into his web. TIE caught wind of these messages and began to take action. Luckily they took action before ^Speed^ got caught in the web as well.

How about we do this. If ToC can prove that this is false info and that they were not plotting against TIE for months then perhaps TIE can let the past go and begin negotiations. If Ishurue did not contact each leader in ToC trying to unite them with the intention to take down TIE then there is no reason for this war. If however there is 1 truthful soul inside of ToC then they will admit this and then ToC can surrender and the war ends. I simply suspect that TIE will accept a ToC surrender, I am not sure if they will or not after all that has happened.

The friendship treaty has been made so that we are stronger, because with strength, we are better equipped to defend our freedom. We have seen from the past how TIE treats alliances which are strong enough to pose a threat to them. TIE is not the center of the universe and to be honest, the friendship treaty would have been signed even if TIE didn't exist. World Republic has a long history of uniting with other alliances and extending the hand of friendship to all alliances.

Kenzu buddy... a lot of what you just said concerned TIE's dealing with other T.O.C members other than World Republic.

I have to actually give you credit here btw - World Republic by and large to my knowledge are probably the least guilty party involved in this war.

- We have Myself & TIE guilty for our misleading the server about our disbandment, and for breaking the Pre-NAP agreement about 2hours before it expired - starting this war.
- We have Lord Ishurue and some of his inner circle guilty for plotting to topple The Imperium all along.
- We have Lord Ishurue & Aworon completely guilty for lieing through their teeth to myself & TIE concerning Emperor's supposed neutrality during the Pre-Nap talks.
- We have Lord Ishurue, Castravate and other Mujengen HC members guilty for lieing concerning Castravate's membership of FIRE - and for orchestrating the dishonest conduct of deliberately having Castravate leave and reenter the war on 2 occasions to gain a tactic advantage. Those lies have been continued right up to the current peace discussions.

There;s actually not too much on you currently - other than that you *may* have been aware of the whole "topple TIE" plan... but there's also a good chance you genuinely only wanted the agreement to be defensive in nature.

You are however guilty for misleading your own alliance - or at best censoring them of the knowledge you do know concerning your own allies conduct... lol.

As for TIE always preparing for war - your damn right we always are. I m not going to go into too much detail how The Imperium operates, but I ll post the below:

We have 2 distinctions between our war-readiness:

- War Preparation
- War Mobilisation.
- Final Authorisation.

- War Preparation is constant and ongoing. It is the process of ensuring The Imperium remains in a semi-decent state of affairs for any future war - forseen or unforseen - which may occur. It continues when we have no foreseeable enemies, and when we have foreseeable enemies. We achieve this via setting economic targets (i.e. Unit Productions to achieve), Military Targets (i.e. tech levels to achieve) and via other regulations (i.e. defence regulations which set out the maximum resources someone may have invested in killable units - such as income units, defence etc...).

The theory goes by the time a war becomes a high likelyhood its a bit late to prepare for war - since if you ve got a defence, odd's are you can't reduce it & therefore stand to loose it. If you ve got to suddenly upgrade techs.... its very costly and unlikely to be possible.

In the past T.O.C has consistently mistaken this ongoing and never ending process as actively preparing for an actual *defined* and specific war (i.e. against T.O.C). I.e. you ve quoted me my alliance messages in the past where I ve set targets and regulations to achieve and compared ourselves to T.O.C's economy etc... and told TIE to work harder etc.. etc... as suppossed evidence of TIE's preparing for war.

The reality is if you had a reliable access to the messages TIE sends that those messages have always been a frequent occurrence - before T.O.C even existed, and infact dating back to the very first day The Commonwealth was formed on Aderan Wars with messages comparing ourselves economic and militarily to the other "major" power's of the time (i.e. we compared ourselves to WR & The Company to try and overtake them... and in the end we ended up ALLYING with The Company i.e. a simple comparison is NOT evidence of war lol)

- War Mobilisation is where we actually mobilise for war. This is where members are warned of a imminent risk of war and where the actual order is given to stockpile resources (UU & Kuwal) for war. This means The Imperium IS actively preparing to fight a defined and specific enemy.

- Final Authorisation is where the go ahead is given to commence military operations I.e. a specific strike date is set and a attack happens.

One of The Imperium's motto's is constant vigilance and preparation. Its too late to start getting militarily prepared when a defined and specific enemy has surfaced - as that normally means war is imminent....

Hopefully for future reference T.O.C will stop misunderstanding the way The Imperium conducts its internal affairs (which frankly aren't your concern anyway lol).
ian
ian
Coalition Officer
Coalition Officer

Alliance : You get 3 guesses as to which one Razz
Age : 35
Number of posts : 1180
Registration date : 2009-04-21

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Vesper Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:10 pm

TIE makes sure to always have a certain amount of STs and kuwal saved up whether at war or at peace. You never know when something is going to happen on this game.

I think that everyone has run out of kuwal on both sides Razz Nobody is arming those 10bil strikes anymore Sad
Vesper
Vesper
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

Alliance : Commonwealth
Number of posts : 518
Registration date : 2009-08-11

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by seaborgium Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:30 pm

As a famous person once said "What'chu talkin' 'bout, Willis?"

Run out?
Bank: 259,533,216,653

seaborgium
2nd in Command
2nd in Command

Number of posts : 2551
Registration date : 2009-10-06

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by ian Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:40 pm

Vesper wrote:TIE makes sure to always have a certain amount of STs and kuwal saved up whether at war or at peace. You never know when something is going to happen on this game.

I think that everyone has run out of kuwal on both sides Razz Nobody is arming those 10bil strikes anymore Sad

I did have about 150billion kuwal saved in my bank earlier today Razz
ian
ian
Coalition Officer
Coalition Officer

Alliance : You get 3 guesses as to which one Razz
Age : 35
Number of posts : 1180
Registration date : 2009-04-21

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Special Agent 47 Sun Jul 11, 2010 6:48 pm

Vesper wrote:TIE makes sure to always have a certain amount of STs and kuwal saved up whether at war or at peace. You never know when something is going to happen on this game.

I think that everyone has run out of kuwal on both sides Razz Nobody is arming those 10bil strikes anymore Sad

There is no one over 3/4 bill def in TOC, so why would anyone build a 10 bill strike? Counter productive?

And TOC just send all their funds to Aworon to go on protection, build, and mass before getting knocked down again.

ST have ran out and replenished about 3 to 4 times now.
Special Agent 47
Special Agent 47
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : http://www.aderanwars.com/stats.php?id=427
Alliance : [ The_Marauders ]
Number of posts : 556
Location : Preparing for my next mission.
Registration date : 2009-08-22

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Vesper Sun Jul 11, 2010 8:09 pm

Hmm, I held rank 1 strike for about a week and it was only 3bil power. I was starting to think that nothing was going on anymore.
Vesper
Vesper
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

Alliance : Commonwealth
Number of posts : 518
Registration date : 2009-08-11

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Special Agent 47 Sun Jul 11, 2010 8:17 pm

Vesper wrote:Hmm, I held rank 1 strike for about a week and it was only 3bil power. I was starting to think that nothing was going on anymore.

You must have looked between massings, as my strike has went over 4 bill like 3 times in the last week. Each time it goes away fairly quickly, just like it is now, but that's beside the point.
Special Agent 47
Special Agent 47
Aderan Assassin
Aderan Assassin

ID : http://www.aderanwars.com/stats.php?id=427
Alliance : [ The_Marauders ]
Number of posts : 556
Location : Preparing for my next mission.
Registration date : 2009-08-22

Back to top Go down

(TOC) vs (TIE) - Page 20 Empty Re: (TOC) vs (TIE)

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 20 of 21 Previous  1 ... 11 ... 19, 20, 21  Next

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum