Jump to content
  • entries
    16
  • comments
    534
  • views
    29,248

Judgements Pt. 2 (11-20)


Rush Sykes

1,689 views

Picking up where I left off.

TOP- Unquestionably the best military in the game. Anyone who debates this is a fool. This is your 2nd attempt at trying to be an empire-builder, and I honestly think it will fail this time. Not because you have poor FA people, not because you are inept, or incompetent, rather because you have built your foundation on a house of cards. You now need to rely on a vast assortment of people whom you are either a) in the process of rolling or b) have far more loyalties elsewhere than to you (because you have done nothing ever, to truly earn any loyalty) to fortify your position after this war. The one thing you have going for you, and the one thing that can make me be wrong... is that you have Ardus.

NATO - The word underrated probably applies more to your alliance than to anyone else. Sometimes, it is difficult for me (because I am old and crotchety) to accept that this is not the same NATO that tried to power play all of Aqua because of the NPO ties, back in the ICE days. The problem was, we looked at NATO with so much disdain for their whole "Umm, we are with NPO, so we run Aqua" attitude, that is really did jade every opinion about you post-Karma. If I stay in this game past this war... you guys have become my new mission. Not to try to make you love, and or even respect me.. but for me to determine exactly how different you are from NATO circa 2008. Expect me to be around if I stay. And feel free to totally reject me, after my treatment of you for better than 4 years, I wouldnt blame you. Hell, its what *I* would have done. But, I AM, once again, old and crotchety.

Umbrella - Filth. Complete filth. And it is so hard for me to believe that. I look down the list at individual members, and I see so many people I call a friend. But as a collective, you are completely unappreciative filth who feel like you are entitled to worship from others because of a collection of stats. You come across to everyone (even your own DH allies said it many times).. like your own feces do not stink. In the same war, I and my alliance burned for you, I and my alliance championed your cause in regards to terms. Truth is.. the egg is on our (mostly my) face, because your gov didnt even have the common decency to offer up a thank you. It was much more important for you to quickly begin the planning phase to sweep up those who just worked to defend and save you. Classy. Never change.

TIO - Let's be frank. I dont like you. You dont like me. The dislike began when we (Athens) hit an ODP partner of yours 4 wars ago (while holding an ODP with you). While I do understand that, I think that you guys now are starting to realize why no alliance should allow treaty ties on the other side of a war to handcuff their actions in a war. If you are not realizing that now, then there truly is no hope for you. Still, oddly enough, I look down your list of members, and I see several people I count as friends. So it makes the alliance-alliance dislike, quite uncomfortable.

Sparta - Literally the only good thing about your who alliance is Londo (for some unknown reason) chose to join you over TOP. The truth is... that is massive step down for Londo, as your own alliance gov has said 2 wars in a row now, that you are "happy to be lapdogs". Congratulations on your happiness.

Non Grata - I could sit here and type love all day long, and it would not adequately communicate how I feel about you guys. That you manage to ruffle so many feathers, is a badge of honor. That you manage to be such a polarizing entity affirms that you play the game properly. The game is not about always winning, but is about having the courage to take the chance.

Legion - essentially sitting out most of the last 2+ years of the game, you still managed to live up to your years old reputation of not being able to field a proper offensive, even while possessing such superior numbers. All your alliance is, and all it can ever be, is simply a pawn in other folks machinations. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as 95% of the alliances in this game fit that bill. But, you seem to indicate both that you a) want to be more... or b) think you are more. Either of those 2 realities make you the punchline of a joke. If you possess a strong leader, you need to find him and give him the reigns.

LOSS - If a new WAE were held today, you would win hands down. How any single member of yours can look at these last 2 wars (the means by which you entered, the allies whom you abandoned, simply to be on the winning side) and hold your head up high and say " I am proud to be a part of this"... is mind boggling. The even more mind-boggling thing is that you could still have achieved your noble goal of simply being on the winning side, without defecating in the faces of your allies in public. What a joke.

Valhalla - You are trying to play the broader political game, and for that effort, I applaud you, because very few ARE trying. I survey the world now, and I cast a leaf to the air to see the way the wind blows. I am not sure that you guys can see the forest because those pesky trees are in the way. The truth is, I will either be right or wrong in my assessment, and we will both know by Spring. If I am wrong, I will be the 1st to admit it. Jury is out on you.

Dark Templar - Nothing but respect for you guys. I just wish you would also try to take more of an active leadership role in the broader world. I only wish this because I know you have the people who can. You also have enough of a broad respect among all factions that you could inject yourself as a centralizing power.

Stay tuned for 21-30. I know you cannot wait for my further insights!

23 Comments


Recommended Comments

Can you do the neutrals too? I want to see what you think of the Top 3 alliances.

I see what you did there. But i have already edited IRON into the 1st entry. It was just a copy and paste fail , as I wrote this in word before I posted it.

Link to comment

It seems like you call Umb "filth" and NG "polarizing", but you seem to be describing them similarly. People that don't love NG probably think they're filth, and those that love Umb probably feel similarly about them as you feel about NG.

Link to comment

It seems like you call Umb "filth" and NG "polarizing", but you seem to be describing them similarly. People that don't love NG probably think they're filth, and those that love Umb probably feel similarly about them as you feel about NG.

The NG-Umb dynamic is completely irrelevant to my personal opinions of either of them. MK, GOONS, ODN , can all confirm the my opinions of Umb are based solely on my own personal interaction. You can only be requested by allies (MK, GOONS, ODN) to bridge a gap to a working relationship with an ally of theirs that you are at odds with (Umb) so many times, and be totally, completely dismissed on each and every occasion (except for Domisi actually trying once, kudos to him)... before you get sick of the arrogance and dismissive attitude. No other alliance in the top 20 has earned my opinion more than Umb has.

Link to comment

Nice to see what you think these days, Rush. Even though it's still hard for me to read these opinions and connect them to the guy I used to talk to daily.

Can't wait to see all the hate towards Argent.

Link to comment

It seems like you call Umb "filth" and NG "polarizing", but you seem to be describing them similarly. People that don't love NG probably think they're filth, and those that love Umb probably feel similarly about them as you feel about NG.

That's what makes these "judgements" golden. They're a "who do I like" elementary school list, not "what do I like" critical value judgements.

Link to comment

That's what makes these "judgements" golden. They're a "who do I like" elementary school list, not "what do I like" critical value judgements.

I think you are completely wrong. They can absolutely be both. And my judgement of Polar pretty well exhibits that. With specific regards to Umb, it 100% is a WHAT do I like. I do not like allies of allies who refuse to make an effort at a working relationship. It goes to destabilizing power spheres.

Link to comment

I think you are completely wrong. They can absolutely be both. And my judgement of Polar pretty well exhibits that. With specific regards to Umb, it 100% is a WHAT do I like. I do not like allies of allies who refuse to make an effort at a working relationship. It goes to destabilizing power spheres.

And yet you encourage TIO to attack allies of allies. You think TOP are pigdogs for playing the political game (finally!) while you think Valhalla is on the right track.

It's just a mess of who do I like or dislike, now how do I wrap what they're doing around my personal feelings.

Link to comment

And yet you encourage TIO to attack allies of allies. You think TOP are pigdogs for playing the political game (finally!) while you think Valhalla is on the right track.

It's just a mess of who do I like or dislike, now how do I wrap what they're doing around my personal feelings.

I didnt ENCOURAGE them to do so. I encouraged them to understand that enemy coalitions will try to use your treaty ties to handcuff your coalition. We are all big boys, we choose the side of the war we are on. The old saying goes, all is fair and love and war. Once the nukes start flying, the friend of my friend CAN be my enemy.

Also, nearly none of my diatribe on TOP was demeaning (except for the bit about loyalty). I simply said I think their attempt at making this empire will fail because it is built on, and relies on, too many people who have divergent plans. I was pretty clear that their playing the game was a-ok with me.

Link to comment

The NG-Umb dynamic is completely irrelevant to my personal opinions of either of them. MK, GOONS, ODN , can all confirm the my opinions of Umb are based solely on my own personal interaction. You can only be requested by allies (MK, GOONS, ODN) to bridge a gap to a working relationship with an ally of theirs that you are at odds with (Umb) so many times, and be totally, completely dismissed on each and every occasion (except for Domisi actually trying once, kudos to him)... before you get sick of the arrogance and dismissive attitude. No other alliance in the top 20 has earned my opinion more than Umb has.

You present an interesting case. I suppose all of your relationship gap bridging was done on IRC since the only forum posts I saw from you were, I think, in MK coalition forums (that is, not on Umbrella forums), where you and a few others may have been some of the largest proponents of wanting peace at the expense of a several months long extended war of all of Eq vs Umbrella. You may note that every one of my posts on those forums displayed a grateful attitude to allies and non-allies alike, even people like NG who might have gone to the other side merely for a shot at Umbrella. But I am only one person. Perhaps you spoke to the various pres/VPs of Umbrella over time rather than at our forum, in any case.

Yes, you fought in our coalition, but you did not burn for Umbrella. You burned for C&G and maybe MK. Umbrella was the nuisance that started the war (I will note that although you were always angry about our "arrogance" and "attitude" you were supportive and spent time arguing that the CB was a "because they wanted to" and not the grounds for war people make it out to be, which I appreciated). Though, I would argue had we sat back and tried to lay low like Pacifica in the past, it would have only given time for alliances like ODN to sign their treaties prior to engaging in war rather than promising not to announce/sign until after. Time was running low and prospects would only get worse had that war not started when it did.

As for Umbrella not being thankful to the allies of allies, you'll note that most of them, say even in Your immediate sphere, were tied to the hip with Pacifica, the alliance that had just organized the hit against us. Does it make sense to be thankful and rest in the laurels of having OTPs more loyal to our biggest enemy than to ourselves, or does it make sense to go out and make new friends, like Valhalla, and leave the years long rocky relationship that Umb/MK became? We chose the latter. It's filth to you, but for Umbrella, there was no better choice.

Link to comment

You present an interesting case. I suppose all of your relationship gap bridging was done on IRC since the only forum posts I saw from you were, I think, in MK coalition forums (that is, not on Umbrella forums), where you and a few others may have been some of the largest proponents of wanting peace at the expense of a several months long extended war of all of Eq vs Umbrella. You may note that every one of my posts on those forums displayed a grateful attitude to allies and non-allies alike, even people like NG who might have gone to the other side merely for a shot at Umbrella. But I am only one person. Perhaps you spoke to the various pres/VPs of Umbrella over time rather than at our forum, in any case.

Yes, you fought in our coalition, but you did not burn for Umbrella. You burned for C&G and maybe MK. Umbrella was the nuisance that started the war (I will note that although you were always angry about our "arrogance" and "attitude" you were supportive and spent time arguing that the CB was a "because they wanted to" and not the grounds for war people make it out to be, which I appreciated). Though, I would argue had we sat back and tried to lay low like Pacifica in the past, it would have only given time for alliances like ODN to sign their treaties prior to engaging in war rather than promising not to announce/sign until after. Time was running low and prospects would only get worse had that war not started when it did.

As for Umbrella not being thankful to the allies of allies, you'll note that most of them, say even in Your immediate sphere, were tied to the hip with Pacifica, the alliance that had just organized the hit against us. Does it make sense to be thankful and rest in the laurels of having OTPs more loyal to our biggest enemy than to ourselves, or does it make sense to go out and make new friends, like Valhalla, and leave the years long rocky relationship that Umb/MK became? We chose the latter. It's filth to you, but for Umbrella, there was no better choice.

Typically narrow minded and short-sighted.

Link to comment

As for Umbrella not being thankful to the allies of allies, you'll note that most of them, say even in Your immediate sphere, were tied to the hip with Pacifica, the alliancethat had just organized the hit against us. Does it make sense to be thankful and rest in the laurels of having OTPs more loyal to our biggest enemy than to ourselves, or does it make sense to go out and make new friends, like Valhalla, and leave the years longrocky relationship that Umb/MK became? We chose the latter. It's filth to you, but for Umbrella, there was no better choice.

this is hilarious given the MK/VE relationship. VE at least once acted just to spite MK (Grudge War comes to mind). Not only that, but Umb deliberately aided GOD during Dave, so it isn't as if NG/CnG had reason to ditch NPO just to cuddle up closer to DH. MK understood the situation and played it smart, Umbrella decided to just fulfill their own prophecy.
Link to comment

TOP? Best military? They went 4V1 with me and barely managed slightly greater than equal damage. If we were to do cost based... I wrecked Centurius, Crymson, and his lackeys he had hit me in his defense. I disagree. The wars are on record to reflect this. If that's the best that the "top" military alliance can do.. then I'd say we've fallen a long way in our global war fighting abilities. Those results were even with me not being able to participate for a day due to rl events that prevented me from logging in. Dread if I had gotten one more days of nukes off.

Link to comment

When good players fight good players, it tends to be a good fight. I think by calling TOP the best military machine, he was saying "TOP has a lot of good players." You sir, may be a good player, and you may end up underwhelmed. If you've fought some of the crappier alliances on Bob, guys that send 60 bombers, guys that spy you out of defcon 5 before their GA's......I guess what I'm getting at is the bar may be pretty low these days.

Link to comment

TOP? Best military? They went 4V1 with me and barely managed slightly greater than equal damage. If we were to do cost based... I wrecked Centurius, Crymson, and his lackeys he had hit me in his defense. I disagree. The wars are on record to reflect this. If that's the best that the "top" military alliance can do.. then I'd say we've fallen a long way in our global war fighting abilities. Those results were even with me not being able to participate for a day due to rl events that prevented me from logging in. Dread if I had gotten one more days of nukes off.

You were able to launch way more nukes regardless having a stockpile against greater numbers. 15 nukes on them to their 6 on you. Which means that if they did indeed do more damage to you than you to them, they were able to make up 9 extra nukes worth of damage in other types of attacks.

Link to comment

TOP? Best military? They went 4V1 with me and barely managed slightly greater than equal damage. If we were to do cost based... I wrecked Centurius, Crymson, and his lackeys he had hit me in his defense. I disagree. The wars are on record to reflect this. If that's the best that the "top" military alliance can do.. then I'd say we've fallen a long way in our global war fighting abilities. Those results were even with me not being able to participate for a day due to rl events that prevented me from logging in. Dread if I had gotten one more days of nukes off.

hey mate, one of crymson and Cent lackeys here.

Here is something for you to think about. You were nuking each one of us , while only one of the 5 can nuke you back(I fired only 2 nukes your way iirc). Some math and you doing a good job make it easy for you to get equal damage done even outnumbered in the first week of the war. If war damage statistics were available when TOP went against CnG and many more, you could have seen how much more damage we were inflicting than receiving. I still have a screenshot of the infra damage I was doing to my targets in the first week of the war.

Untitled-52.jpg As you can see, my biggest infra damage inflicted was 3.8k (my nation had around 6k tech at the time iirc). While your nation with its +10k tech had its best war performance in infra damage with 3.4k. So, yea... :P

Oh, and you aren't the only one with RL issues. Cheers and it was an honor to fight against you!

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...