Jump to content

AirMe's Blog

  • entries
    14
  • comments
    343
  • views
    6,788

I give up

Sign in to follow this  
AirMe

431 views

I won't lie..I was in shock when I saw the announcement when I woke up today......I have spent most of the day attempting to find a way I could justify the course of action that my former alliance has taken. In the current political climate I can't.

I furiously verbally attacked TOP for the same action that MK has taken.

I worked for 2 years to help get MK off the NPO black list, to prevent things like this from happening.

It all saddens me, if there is ever an alliance where the idea that the members don't speak for alliance policy only the leader does that was MK. However it seems Archon has been taking talking points from the outspoken and sometimes juvenile members. When I was in gov, we used to chastize Londo for his hair brained schemes to attack NPO. In fact, if I am to believe certain rumors, it was one of the reasons that Athens and MK originally split because people thought attacking NPO was not worth it. If it was bad then, why is it good now?

With this disappointment I will not do as others have and immediately switch sides and make them my enemy like Tyga and others have. This fight really has no bearing on me other than it puts my allies =LOST= in a terrible position due to MK's declaration on CCC.

I also won't deny that it isn't plausible that STA and Polar were deploying their allies in such a way as to stop Pacifica from getting involved. See STA treaty with TPF and Polar's treaty with Legion. However, paranoia is not an excuse for war and I do not condone preemptive strikes.

For those claiming MK has turned into an entity as bad as the NPO was, let me say this. YOU ARE FOOLS. You do not remember the lengths they would go through to roll an alliance or keep an alliance down. GPA, GATO, Legion, FAN...etc.....

I still have respect for GOONS. I am hoping I can bring myself to respect MK again. The game is not dead and you are not the judge jury and executioner. There was already no hope of the NPO to regain the power it once had and you are fooling yourselves if you think that was true.

This was a relatively rambling post but you all get the idea.

I wish you a good fight and hope you know what the hell you are doing because I haven't a clue.

Sign in to follow this  


70 Comments


Recommended Comments



The fact you can't "justify" our attack in the current "political climate" is the entire point it. I don't know how this happened, but TOP was actually PROGRESSIVE and ahead of it's time with their pre-empt of us. This games is choked with the guise that a war can only be started in a certain manner, that a war must unfold in a certain manner, etc. Over the years here, the more defensive you are the more ~HoNoRaBle~ you supposedly are. This has been taken to such extremes that there is a massive effort to mediate conflicts to put them out, or at least keep them from expanding. This goes hand-in-hand with the fact that, because of the narrowness of the game itself, every cb (because there are relatively few that can be generated) already has a page in the playbook. From their, it's a battle to be more defensive, and each time you have to feign a more defensive nature than the last. This is has gotten ridiculous. The game is narrow enough already, we need to break down the player imposed boundaries to open game-play back up.

If you want to consider us the bad guy for being aggressive and spicing things up, then do so, we have no qualms.

Ultimately, this war, singularly, won't make CN interesting again, because it's not about one war, or one period of peace. However, I do hope this war is at least the start of us attempting to reign in the expanding cycle between wars that we have seen grow from a few months, to 6 months, to where we are now where we might have one war a year. In my mind, about once every 6 months was the best balance was the best cycle for the game.

I fear that we are headed to wars declared over cookies. And that is what has set this place apart from others. At the same time, I hear your point. The treaty web is insane and it is the one thing we all have 100% control over. People need to work at tearing that apart so there can be movement for drama here.

Share this comment


Link to comment

So you are deluded, nice, but what will you do about it? Just sit and talk about your delusion?

I definitely won't rush to support an alliance that has plunged it's knife into others backs and has consistently, for the last couple of years, placed it's allies in compromising positions.

Share this comment


Link to comment

What exactly have we done since you left that you've agreed with? We've been successful enough that I can plainly say that if you disagree with it, it's the right thing to do.

If you had your way we'd have been rolled in Karma defending Echelon. No thanks.

Share this comment


Link to comment

What exactly have we done since you left that you've agreed with? We've been successful enough that I can plainly say that if you disagree with it, it's the right thing to do.

If you had your way we'd have been rolled in Karma defending Echelon. No thanks.

Eh wut? Defending Echelon? Come again?

Share this comment


Link to comment

I think the war on CCC is far more bothersome than the war on NPO.

The war on NPO is strategically a good move if 'they can get away with it', but the CCC war is a cheap, poorly researched joke that's potentially gotten them into a lot of trouble with their allies. That's the kind of terrible strategic precedent it would be better to avoid.

Share this comment


Link to comment

He's not exactly blameless either. But you were the head of our FA so it was your job to seek out allies. Didn't we already talk about this on IRC?

There were other treaties that I didn't want that went through anyways and treaties I wanted that we didn't sign. So I am unsure of what your point actually is? Yes we did talk about it on IRC but that would leave people here in the dark.

Share this comment


Link to comment

And you know what? I may not agree with most of the things you say Alterego, but if anyone tries to run you out of the game for it I will speak up against it.

VoltairMe :awesome:

For me, this is about the beginnings. I have never said anyone is as bad as YOU KNOW WHO, but I can see the writing on the wall, and where I feel I must, I will speak up just as you have tonight.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I think the war on CCC is far more bothersome than the war on NPO.

The war on NPO is strategically a good move if 'they can get away with it', but the CCC war is a cheap, poorly researched joke that's potentially gotten them into a lot of trouble with their allies. That's the kind of terrible strategic precedent it would be better to avoid.

I am under the impression that FOK asked them for help with CCC.

Share this comment


Link to comment

There were other treaties that I didn't want that went through anyways and treaties I wanted that we didn't sign. So I am unsure of what your point actually is? Yes we did talk about it on IRC but that would leave people here in the dark.

My point is I think you're wrong nearly 100% of the time :v:

Share this comment


Link to comment

My point is I think you're wrong nearly 100% of the time :v:

Well, you know that lumps you in with the likes of alterego and the mvp. So I suppose if you can live with that fact....

Share this comment


Link to comment
When I was in gov, we used to chastize Londo for his hair brained schemes to attack NPO. In fact, if I am to believe certain rumors, it was one of the reasons that Athens and MK originally split because people thought attacking NPO was not worth it. If it was bad then, why is it good now?

Oh the irony is delicious to me.

Share this comment


Link to comment

If you want to consider us the bad guy for being aggressive and spicing things up, then do so, we have no qualms.

We consider you the bad guys because you appear to be giant hypocrites and paint yourselves as heroes. We have babyjesus arguing with AirMe in this blog post because, damn, MK might have gotten rolled, in the same blog post you are insisting you are just doing it "for the game." This war was fine without you and didn't need any more "spice."

Those player-enforced norms are there for a reason. They are there to restrict alliances from declaring willy-nilly and beating down anyone that might even remotely pose a threat, because THAT stifles gameplay. It also stifles any sort of conversation on the boards, because OWF discussion suddenly becomes CB for ever more blatant aggression.

Now, if you want more interesting gameplay and to REALLY spice things up, then you should stop trying to put yourself in an unassailable position. Sort of like how if I really want to play Call of Duty with my friends I turn on a handicap because they suck at it. Or you should break conventions that might actually put you in some real risk, like stabbing your treaty partner in the back and declaring on them because they have more upper tier nations, instead of engaging in actions you decried last year. As it is, this reeks of "might makes right," which is exactly what DH members say it is, which has absolutely nothing to do with restructuring norms to make the game more interesting.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Well, you know that lumps you in with the likes of alterego and the mvp. So I suppose if you can live with that fact....

Live with it? He should actually basque and rejoice in being compared with such greatness.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Honestly, I think it's wrong to look at things as "well at least they're not Pacifica". You know we don't have to take an either or choice. We all know they're not Pacifica, but just because they haven't stomped all over our freedoms like NPO did doesn't mean we should ignore the freedoms they are stepping on.

Share this comment


Link to comment

You don't have to run people out of the game or anything anymore. All you have to do is roll them if they do anything or are potentially threatening. That makes them about as relevant as they would be if they were run out of the game.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Sorry but if GR and whoever else didn't want us to roll CCC maybe they should have counselled them against attacking an MDoAP partner of ours. You don't get to turn around and cry foul over something like that.

Share this comment


Link to comment

We consider you the bad guys because you appear to be giant hypocrites and paint yourselves as heroes. We have babyjesus arguing with AirMe in this blog post because, damn, MK might have gotten rolled, in the same blog post you are insisting you are just doing it "for the game." This war was fine without you and didn't need any more "spice."

Those player-enforced norms are there for a reason. They are there to restrict alliances from declaring willy-nilly and beating down anyone that might even remotely pose a threat, because THAT stifles gameplay. It also stifles any sort of conversation on the boards, because OWF discussion suddenly becomes CB for ever more blatant aggression.

Now, if you want more interesting gameplay and to REALLY spice things up, then you should stop trying to put yourself in an unassailable position. Sort of like how if I really want to play Call of Duty with my friends I turn on a handicap because they suck at it. Or you should break conventions that might actually put you in some real risk, like stabbing your treaty partner in the back and declaring on them because they have more upper tier nations, instead of engaging in actions you decried last year. As it is, this reeks of "might makes right," which is exactly what DH members say it is, which has absolutely nothing to do with restructuring norms to make the game more interesting.

Couldn't be more in agreement.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...