Which ally will act first?

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1345181571' post='3022706']
Who are WE? And where did we establish that? And I would not give anything up. We could still argue over the CB (which is based on intentions), at least its not theater.
[/quote]

Me, Wally, Bama, you. The entire community worldwide on Planet Bob would agree war for wars sake isn't fun. Pushing a few red buttons isn't my idea of a great time.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1345181496' post='3022705']
So you'll approve any measure of war as long as "everyone knows it was going to happen"? Does this mean you'll be changing your position and fighting with LSF against NoR? Everyone knew it was destined to happen. No valid CB is needed, they can just declare on who they want.
[/quote]

Just when I think you cant say something dumber than you have already said. You have to go and prove me wrong to myself. I also made it VERY clear that before you can just make any war you want happen, you have to secure the support of your allies and their allies. If you cant build the coalition, you wont start the war. Newslflash: LSF did not win my support, nor did the even try (Im not sure if thats a plus or minus to them, only that it is a fact.) If I go to start a war, without the support of those I need to prosecute the war, then I probably should not be in leadership(which I wont be in 3 more days! WOOHOO).

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1345181706' post='3022707']
Me, Wally, Bama, you. The entire community worldwide on Planet Bob would agree war for wars sake isn't fun. Pushing a few red buttons isn't my idea of a great time.
[/quote]

You are now telling me what I believe? My God man you need some help. You are either stupid, or drunk. I would counter that point though, with this :

(OOC): I would venture to guess the 400,000 nations that once existed, and no longer exist, most of them left due to boredom. Boredom in the system that you seek to preserve. So, maybe, just maybe, the world at large, has decided that our present system sucks ass? Maybe?

Inb4 people who quit do not matter! (OOC)

[Alterego]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1345180823' post='3022701']
Im not saying to STFU because anyone manufactured a weak CB. Im saying STFU because weak CBs have been, and will always be the norm on CN. It was a conflict that everyone KNEW was going to happen eventually, who gives a flying crap how it started. There is not one power base EVER in CN, that has not acted on a WEAK CB. Thats why CBs are flipping stupid.
[/quote]

Well I went to dig up MKs famous [i]end of draconian reps and bs CBs[/i] speech made for Karma and it seems to have vanished. Never the less MK and Karma promised an end to these bs CBs but its just another MK lie. Like the one that they have no designs on AI or NPO.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Alterego

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1345181955' post='3022708']
Just when I think you cant say something dumber than you have already said. You have to go and prove me wrong to myself. I also made it VERY clear that before you can just make any war you want happen, you have to secure the support of your allies and their allies. If you cant build the coalition, you wont start the war. Newslflash: LSF did not win my support, nor did the even try (Im not sure if thats a plus or minus to them, only that it is a fact.) If I go to start a war, without the support of those I need to prosecute the war, then I probably should not be in leadership(which I wont be in 3 more days! WOOHOO).
[/quote]

So in other words you want to make Planet Bob a better place by allowing a select few nations attack anyone they want for no reason, because having a reason is "BS". Sounds like something tried before and it didn't work out. How is this better than the CB system again?

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1345182134' post='3022710']
You are now telling me what I believe? My God man you need some help. You are either stupid, or drunk. I would counter that point though, with this[/quote]

You said it yourself....


[quote]
(OOC): I would venture to guess the 400,000 nations that once existed, and no longer exist, most of them left due to boredom. Boredom in the system that you seek to preserve. So, maybe, just maybe, the world at large, has decided that our present system sucks ass? Maybe?
[/quote]

Yes I agree your system "sucks ass". Pushing a little red button and having no reason to push it isn't fun like you said yourself. No wonder they're bored.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1345180574' post='3022699']
Yeah its a hoot. On one page you have MK saying they wish there was real discourse and on another you have GOONS slating schatt for starting this thread and TLR & TOP saying STFU when someone is critical of the fact they (MK & Co) manufactured a very weak CB.
[/quote]

You're very much judging the opinions of entire alliances based on the words of only one or two members in each. More, you're completely warping what has been said so as to make it fit your agenda. Why do you do this?

Edited August 17, 2012 by Crymson

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1345182208' post='3022711']
Well I went to dig up MKs famous [i]end of draconian reps and bs CBs[/i] speech made for Karma and it seems to have vanished. Never the less MK and Karma promised an end to these bs CBs but its just another MK lie. Like the one that they have no designs on AI or NPO.
[/quote]

But they don't, you guys clearly formed just to attack them! Have you not read what they said on the OWF!

Edited August 17, 2012 by Omniscient1

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1345182208' post='3022711']
Well I went to dig up MKs famous [i]end of draconian reps and bs CBs[/i] speech made for Karma and it seems to have vanished. Never the less MK and Karma promised an end to this BS but its just another MK lie. Like the one that they have no designs on AI or NPO.
[/quote]

The funny thing is, you attribute everything that was said during Karma to MK. The coalition as a whole, sort of pseudo-elected Archon as a mouthpiece for an agenda. All of those tenets were not ever, at any point in time, meant to be universally lived up to by MK, or anyone else. I know you know all of this, and I also know that you like to play your little spin game on the facts, and I know you like to try to make something said 3 years ago be relevant now, so carry on with your little gambit. We can go back about 6 months prior to Karma, in the war we loving call NoCB... and we can point out that an alliance you just merged with, felt like it had the right to tell people who could and could not (OOC) play the game (OOC) and would gladly roll any alliance containing, or engaging in economic activity with the players that they said could not (OOC) play the game (OOC)... see that is the danger of going back in time trying to find the high ground Alterego, the high ground you seek, is often times buried in a chasm. Stick to the here and now, because thing that happened 3 years ago, are not relevant.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1345182342' post='3022713']


Yes I agree your system "sucks ass". Pushing a little red button and having no reason to push it isn't fun like you said yourself. No wonder they're bored.
[/quote]
Show me where I said this. I will wait.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1345182208' post='3022711']
Well I went to dig up MKs famous [i]end of draconian reps and bs CBs[/i] speech made for Karma and it seems to have vanished. Never the less MK and Karma promised an end to these bs CBs but its just another MK lie. Like the one that they have no designs on AI or NPO.
[/quote]

You focus on MK to the total exclusion of every other Karma alliance that has, since that war, behaved in ways that you find inappropriate and oppressive. Why?

[King Wally]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1345179993' post='3022687']
If these legit CBs were as common as King Wally claimed them to be, then the bigger side would act on them FAR FAR FAR more often than they do. [/quote]


[quote]I also made it VERY clear that before you can just make any war you want happen, you have to secure the support of your allies and their allies. If you cant build the coalition, you wont start the war. Newslflash: LSF did not win my support, nor did the even try (Im not sure if thats a plus or minus to them, only that it is a fact.) If I go to start a war, without the support of those I need to prosecute the war, then I probably should not be in leadership(which I wont be in 3 more days! WOOHOO).[/quote]

^ you answered your own question as to why this multitude of CB's never get actioned. It's because when two elements both from within the broader "bigger" side flip the bird to each other neither is really able to easilly assemble the coalition they need to beat the other as both relly on the same meta group and both have probably recently been fighting against neutral elements in recent wars and are too scared to think about the idea of building a new coalition from scratch.

The CB's are there dispite what you claim. Its an unwillingness to enter wars without a pre-determined outcome that is the problem.

I'm not here to argue with you about whats right or wrong for this place but when you came out earlier trying to make out CB's just dont exist then that's when I'll argue with you cause they are there alright they just dont fit your seperate goals of systematicly taking out rival power structures at just the right time to keep yourself in a great position. Nothing wrong with that but dont claim you arent using CB's cause they dont exist claim you are doing it for survivalism cause thats the reality of it.

PS - congratz on retirement, you've had a good run there, enjoy the break!

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1345182684' post='3022718']
Show me where I said this. I will wait.
[/quote]

[quote]Im all for arguing CBs. It makes for fun propaganda, and fun diplomatic interaction[/quote]

Oh I get it. This is one of your "take two opposing positions at once" strategy. You're kind of known for doing that.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Omniscient1

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1345182722' post='3022719']
You focus on MK to the total exclusion of every other Karma alliance that has, since that war, behaved in ways that you find inappropriate and oppressive. Why?
[/quote]
well DUH Crymson, if he is to press his agenda to kill MK, he has to have support from SF and XX. It would not serve his purpose to point out the roles of Sparta, GOD, MHA, et. al. in the current scheme of things.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1345182839' post='3022721']
Oh I get it. This is one of your "take two opposing positions at once" strategy. You're kind of known for doing that.
[/quote]


So that means I said war for wars sake isnt fun? Have you been smoking them funny cigarettes Omni?

Like seriously, what level of comprehension are you are here? That is literally mind boggling. And I know its mind boggling, because one of the people on YOUR side just queried me on IRC and asked me if you were on crack. Good grief man, be careful when you make logical leaps.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Rush Sykes

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1345182882' post='3022722']
well DUH Crymson, if he is to press his agenda to kill MK, he has to have support from SF and XX. It would not serve his purpose to point out the roles of Sparta, GOD, MHA, et. al. in the current scheme of things.
[/quote]

All of those mentioned have recently had to pay for their problems. DUH!

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1345182926' post='3022725']
So that means I said war for wars sake isnt fun? [/quote]

Actually the argument I was making was that CBs added fun. Although maybe the words used weren't as carefully crafted to get across to someone as retarded as you.

[quote]Have you been smoking them funny cigarettes Omni?[/quote]

irrelevant

[quote]
because one of the people on YOUR side just queried me on IRC and asked me if you were on crack.
[/quote]

I have a ~Side~? More importantly people on this fictional side don't like me! What will I do?!?!? Someone from your side has recently queried me telling me you are retarded. I guess we're even.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Omniscient1

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1345182978' post='3022726']
All of those mentioned have recently had to pay for their problems. DUH!
[/quote]

His specific point was about crap CBs and Draconian reps. The GODs of the world are ok with crap CBs. We all saw it when they tried to press the OOC CB on NoR, we all saw it when they backed the VE CB on Polar (I backed it too, not denying I did , but im making contrasts.) He also pointed out draconian reps. Im not sure what does and does not qualify as draconian, but SF kinda !@#$ in the face of reps too in that same war with DT (forget that they all have kissed and made up since, it still happened.) Lets call a spade a spade, Im ok with Mk centric rambling, he has an agenda, and he is doing a good job of pushing it, and to push it, he needs help from the same people who have done the same things, he is decrying MK for. To me, its entertaining.

[KainIIIC]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1345041530' post='3022144']
Of course you do. Thats why MK have been preempting, declaring without a CB and warning everyone that previous and possible challengers will be attacked before they can mount a competent challenge to you and your many layers of meaty shielding.

Oh look NPO could become a competent threat, isolate and roll.

Oh look XX/SF could become a competent threat, isolate and roll.

Oh look DR could become a competent threat. We have no plans to attack them at all, scouts honour.
[/quote]

The NPO point is true, however. SF/XX had already been largely neutralized in the last war (particularly with the big drop of score of alliances like RIA, CSN, Fark, MHA), however, it was Mj and co. that got to fight them. You do realize the entire premise for MK's war against CSN was taking a very weak event and turning what would be a bloodbath between some of MK's allies and against DR. MK essentially chose the path to purposely NOT fight you guys, help its allies with an easier war in C&G and NoR, and even bring some DR in to fight a little bit . I mean after all, people don't mind another SF beating, it might as well become a ritual.

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1345108148' post='3022376']
I love the new approach of MK and their drones: "Yeah you were right, our CB was indeed a farce because we couldn't found a real one, now get used to it and shut up."

Sorry MK and drones, I hate to inform you, but just because you think CBs are a thing of the past and you don't need them anymore doesn't mean we are automatically going to agree with you and shut up. Also, for a side who complains about the level of current political discourse, "Shut ups" aren't going to help to improve it.
[/quote]

C'mon now, you would after all expect a lulz alliance to use a lulz CB (Save Dave93!). In reality you're just kind of angry that your most hated alliance got to translate a dicey and potentially losing war into a winning war, and that so far they've got away with it. We'll see if it'll last into the next round, but c'mon. Was the TOP-Polar CB any better? Did you in Polar think that the VE-Polar CB was any better? What about the \m/-Polar?

[Omniscient1]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1345183376' post='3022730']
His specific point was about crap CBs and Draconian reps. The GODs of the world are ok with crap CBs. We all saw it when they tried to press the OOC CB on NoR[/quote]

Citation needed.


[quote]Lets call a spade a spade, Im ok with Mk centric rambling, he has an agenda, and he is doing a good job of pushing it, and to push it, he needs help from the same people who have done the same things, he is decrying MK for. To me, its entertaining.
[/quote]

How does that make his point irrelevant though? You rely on the same people you once beat up on to further your agenda. Does this mean that I should no longer listen to anything you say? I'm cool with that actually.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1345183202' post='3022729']
[b]Actually the argument I was making was that CBs added fun.[/b] Although maybe the words used weren't as carefully crafted to get across to someone as retarded as you.



irrelevant



I have a ~Side~? More importantly people on this fictional side don't like me! What will I do?!?!? Someone from your side has recently queried me telling me you are retarded. I guess we're even.
[/quote]

Im gonna go with you are drunk or high.

You said...

Pushing a little red button and having no reason to push it isn't fun like you said yourself.

I asked : Where di I say it wasnt fun to push a red button without reason to push.

You cited that quote above. The replied with bolded part. Can you explain to me exactly how the hell they are related? And SHOW ME WHERE I SAID WAR FOR WARS SAKE IS NOT FUN. THAT IS WHAT I ASKED YOU TO DO.

I figure maybe the caps might get through to you. Or you could just stop now and say "ok, you didnt say that war for the sake of war isnt fun, and you didnt say that pushing the red button with no reason to push it isnt fun" (which is true, I said neither of those things).

[Omniscient1]

I'm still waiting on the answer to what my "side" is, and how even though you believe CBs are fun you want to get rid of them.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Omniscient1

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1345183814' post='3022735']
I'm still waiting on what my "side" is, and how even though you believe CBs are fun you want to get rid of them.
[/quote]

Where did I say I wanted to get rid of them? You seriously must make stuff up as you go alone. I simply said I wanted them to morph. I dont want the same tired ass "RAWR XYZ got a screenshot of our navy guide, if they dont pay us 1000 tech for this atrocity, I am going to roll them! RAWR." I want "well, Alliances A-M are plotting to kill us and our allies, I say we take them down now before they can do it."

THAT is a CB. They plan to kill us, so we will kill them 1st. It 100% is CB, and everyone can STILL come here and argue over whether or not alliances A-M were planning to kill us. It changes nothing from the propaganda or arguing standpoint. The problem you have, is you seem to think a CB has to be some sort of romanticized fantasy where one side did something that violated the other side. If I want to roll you because you have brown hair, THAT IS A CB. A CB is whatever reason ANYONE chooses to go to war. You cant do AWAY with CBs , because you have a reason to literally do everything you ever do in life. Im sick of the "spying" CBs. The "screenshot" CBs. Because they take 9-12 months to get one that sticks. And they are ALL BS.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1345183814' post='3022735']
I'm still waiting on the answer to what my "side" is, and how even though you believe CBs are fun you want to get rid of them.
[/quote]

And I am still waiting to see where I said what you said I said.

[BamaBuc]

No but seriously guys... the war system in this world gets old fairly quickly. Nuking someone the fiftieth time is not that fun. Controversy is what makes war, and everything else around here, fun. A world where no one raises a stink about anything that anyone else does will be a boring world indeed. Why does anyone want that? We would all be bored in a month.

-Bama