Jocabia

[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1298353524' post='2641453'] No . . . every nation wearing The Dark Templar AA is well aware of the odds that are stacked against us. Every nation wearing this AA is also well aware of the injustices that have been perpetrated against us. Every nation wearing this AA is committed to every other nation in this alliance and a just end to this war, even if it means paying the ultimate price. There is no propaganda. Just loyalty, which, it seems, nearly 25 CSN members lacked as they faltered in the face of our unwavering resolve. [/quote] Oh, ouch, that was such a hurtful thing to point out. a;ls;lkahg;hkasd, sorry, for a second my keyboard was shorting out from the tears. Yes, some of our members do not want to fight in a war for any reason. Instead of allowing 1/3 of our alliance to sit in PM throughout the entire war, we instead tell people who are unwilling to contribute to the war effort to move on. Some of them have. And some people were deleted due to inactivity (some of our people just don't pay attention to bill collection, Fronz, I'm looking at you). We're a large alliance. We gain and lose members for a number of reasons. However, I'm pretty sure you can correct me if I'm wrong, but did you start this war with 49 members? And haven't about 1/3 of your nations not fought a single war? You don't quite have 100% participation, now do you? You know what the sad bit is? We've lost 25 members according to your numbers in an alliance that now has 130 members. Given that we've lost 20% of our membership, don't you think you guys should have managed to have done more than 40% damage to us in a month? I mean, we did 20% damage to you in 6 days. With the loss of 25 members (I'm fairly certain it's not that much, but we'll use your number), in 30 days we've only lost twice as much as you did in 6? Ouch, that's gotta hurt.

[quote name='nutkase' timestamp='1298352502' post='2641438'] First part of your sentence here does not make sense, since I'm gaining NS one of our other nations is losing harder?[/quote] You do know how average works, yes? Do I really have to teach you how to calculate an average? If the average NS is falling and you're gaining, then someone has to be doing much worse than the average to make up for that. Is it really that complicated? [quote name='nutkase' timestamp='1298352502' post='2641438']I rather has 150 nations at 8K NS with insane WC's then 50 at 8K and the rest at high levels with all average WC's. The level of harassment and continuation of the war would be immense. No you are wrong, I was 20K when I went to war against iFOK and Hydra under the AA of TIO, I was at 7k NS when I joined DT and started fighting against CSN. So your whole theory goes out the window [/quote] No, it doesn't. I realize that you were ghosting another NS (something that some of your membership think is totally cheating when we do it) and that a lot of your losses were during that. But I also know when you returned to the NS. You returned on the 14th at 9.1K. I'm sure you'd like to move some of your losses from this front to the other front so it looks like you're gaining, but the fact is that you're trending downward. And you've lost 15% since you started warring under the AA of DT. That's better than some, but it's hardly what you represented. I also love that your alliance is trying to convince it's members that we're in money trouble. Feel free to attempt to outlast our money. I'm sure it will work. As I say, we're totally considering the offers that myworld gave us. Give us about two weeks and we'll let you know. But because myworld was kind enough to school us on negotiation, remember that we aren't even a little obligated to come toward the middle while negotiation. When you're average NS is the same as LoSS, I'm pretty sure we're not going to feel a whole lot of pressure to settle for less than is on the table right now.

[quote name='Willaim Kreiger' timestamp='1298352450' post='2641436'] There is always another choice. If the terms you offer are absurd, it is totally within their right to reject them, and totally within their right to encourage their membership to fight back tooth and nail. You seem awful bent out of shape for being so certain you're winning. [/quote] They can reject the terms as they like. That doesn't represent another choice. It's one of the choices I gave you. And we can choose to fight until they accept our terms. And we have. Very simple. I'm not bent out of shape. I'm just explaining where things are at. In public. See, we're not surrendering in public and claiming we're winning in private. I know we're winning. They know we're winning. And they're trying to convince their membership this isn't the case, because they're afraid their membership won't be too happy about sacrificing their nations to pride.

[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1298351418' post='2641421'] I'm too lazy to count, but I'd imagine that Legacy + CSN + RnR = 2(DT + LoSS) in member count . . . just a stab in the dark. I still don't see how you beating your chest about dishing out damage to an outnumbered enemy brings us any closer to peace. [/quote] When you guys are selling your membership on the idea that you're winning, then making it clear just how out of hand this situation is, is a point that needs to be made. It's not chest-thumping. You guys are losing. Not maybe. Not kind of. Your position has worsen for the last six days and it wasn't good before that. Your alliance is either going to meet our terms or burn. It's irrelevant what you think it should be or what you wish it was or how you really wanted it to be. There is only what is. And "what is" is that you have no choice but to meet our terms or continue on the path you're on. The sooner that's clear, the better. If you've chosen to burn then stop pretending like it's something else. Stop pretending like you've chosen to beat us. We both know that is not one of the options. And if you guys are really outnumbered 2 to 1 in the overall count, then what you're doing is all that much more stupid and this is just that much more over.

[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1298349612' post='2641389'] I do believe he is mocking the conspiracy theories that are being bandied about concerning DT's secret agenda to attack some old friends in Legacy and screw LoSS all while getting away scot free. . . right. It is so impressive that an alliance with 3x the nations of DT is causing damage! Shocking, in fact! Bluster on, Jocabia, bluster on. We'll see who has the last laugh in this one. Hint: it's not you, or anyone in CSN. . . probably not anyone in SF, for that matter either. Take it from someone who has been where you are now. [/quote] Yes, we have 3X the nations you do. (2.6X but your point stands.) Do we also have 3X the number of nations that LoSS has. Remember we are also fighting on that front as well. Last I checked, LoSS has us on nations by much greater than 2 to 1 (amusingly, it's about 2.6X as well). Now, of course, they are also fighting on other fronts. It's not quite accurate to just say we've got you outnumbered. Certainly not 3 to 1. And we both know it. If you're really concerned, perhaps you should get the other third of your alliance involved. That might slow down the bloodshed. Might. Then again, even with them, we'll still have more nukes in CSN that you've got in LoSS and DT combined. But, I say, if you really wanna teach us a lesson about how sore your hands get when you beat someone this badly, you should encourage the rest of your nations to jump in. I mean, then you'd really be giving us whatfor.

[quote name='Fort Pitt' timestamp='1298349022' post='2641379'] You must be a complete noob when it comes to war. One nuke at the medium-large size nations kills off 8k NS. [/quote] But they aren't all medium-large nations, that's kind of the point. If they're average NS was 80K and the lost 8K, you might have a point. They've lost 20% of their NS in 6 days. Now perhaps I'm such a noob that I think that's a lot. Maybe I just understand math and know that if that level of loss lasts for a few more days, they simply won't have anything left. In the first 16 days of war they lost a total of 658K or about 13K per nation. In the last 6 days they've lost 417K or 8K per nation. At that pace, DT will have lost in 9 days what it took them to lose in the first 16 days of war, when they had an average NS that was 20K higher. Comparatively, our alliance while fighting two fronts, losing some nations to deletion, surrender or simply not wanting to fight in a war, has lost only about 3K per nation. Also, for comparison, LoSS has lost less than 1K per nation in that 6 day period. So to be clear, DT is losing NS by about twice as much (by percentage) per nation from our pace. They've got hardly any nukes left so there isn't the slightest chance of them actually turning that around. LoSS is also outpacing us on the percentage of their NS lost in the last 6 days even with all of their largest nations in PM. They are also essentially out of nukes. I don't know how you define losing and winning, but I define the guys who are losing the most NS and attempting to surrender as losing, and the guys who are setting the terms of surrender as winning. Feel free to correct me if it's common for people who are winning a war to surrender.

[quote name='AuiNur' timestamp='1298348529' post='2641372'] He was our number 1 guy? Nay I say, I am always number 1 in DT. always. [/quote] Ha. I'd say after having watched you fight, I'll straight up say you've done quite well. If we're talking about war-making the best combination I've seen is 907 and Runt. So much that we've avoided letting them fight together anymore. They kicked the living crap out of me. But I'll give you that you're at least in the top three.

[quote name='Fort Pitt' timestamp='1298347938' post='2641360'] No no no, you do lose $10. If you have a cone to begin with, that costs $5, then you drop it, to get a new one you must again, spend $5. $10 -$5 [u]-$5[/u] $0 See that's where you're wrong. CSN has taken way more of a beating in the time DT has been at war with them than DT has after it got blitzed by CSN. CSN is on the losing side of this war, because DT knows how to fight, you guys don't. Yeah you have maybe 10 nations that can clean house, we got 49. Becareful what you discuss, I've been warned for calling someone a troll before.... [/quote] CSN is fighting on more than one front. It's amusing that DT wants to push this "yeah, but we were winning at one point" argument. For a while more than half DT's nations were in peace mode. It was all their largest nations. Now that it's an all out brawl, which it became on the 15th, the damage to DT has been unbelievable. At the current pace, DT won't be have anything but tech left in a few weeks. 8K per nation in 6 days. And no one is going back to peace mode. We're not allowing it. We get to choose our targets. We get to keep them in anarchy. We decide when it's over. And, DT, the amazing war-making alliance you're so proud of, fought CSN for 6 days before they came to us willing to surrender. A couple days later they offered to pay 30K in reps just to get out of the war. Seems that even the gov of DT didn't consider DT to be capable of beating us. All the rest is just bluster.

[quote name='mmansfield68' timestamp='1298341971' post='2641256'] In terms of foreign affairs, you couln't carry Myworld's jock. He's forgotten more about FA than you will ever know. Your alliance's posture in the last few days (i.e. trying to create an inconcievable wedge between DT and LoSS, [b]not happening[/b]) shows just exactly how desperate you are. Desperation is a stinky cologne. [/quote] Myworld asked me to carry his jock. It was huge. That's why I've been working out so much lately. But maybe some day I'll learn how to "help" LoSS by taking them from white peace to perpetual war. And one day, after I've been carrying myworld's jock for a while, maybe, just maybe, I can negotiate my way into costing my alliance 8K NS from every single nation in my AA in just 6 days. If the goal of foreign affairs is to turn peace into an alliance in ruins, then he's an awesome, awesome FA. Admittedly, he sure has taught us a lesson on the OWF that by whining about how unfairly you've been treated you can manage to prove that in a world where everyone has chosen sides, that the people who have chosen sides tend to support their sides. It was quite the lesson in foreign affairs. I have on more than one occasion suggested myworld should teach a class. I take it you agree. But I will give you this. He has forgotten more about FA than I will ever know. Or at least that appears to be the case.

[quote name='The Great One' timestamp='1298347006' post='2641341'] You were in the comment I replied to. I take it you're admitting you were exagerrating by the fact that you tried to change the topic. You were spending $5 before you ever dropped the cone, therefore the most it can cost you is what you have left ($5). The failure in your logic is that you seem to think you lost $10 and got a dropped cone. You are forgetting you also have the cone you spent the last $5 on. [/quote] I'm not exaggerating. Their entire AA is getting their butts kicked. As is he. I do love when we're talking about DT the best the trolls can accomplish is pointing out that maybe one of them isn't getting their butt kicked that badly. Man, you sure showed me.

[quote name='mmansfield68' timestamp='1298342142' post='2641261'] Probably the "classiest" move of all was Gibsonator "hacking" your forums to create a phantom OOC attack. What's next? Clowns? Nevermind, you're already present and accounted for. [/quote] Yes, it was Gibsonator. It was right after he left the grassy knoll. And right before he finished his research at Area 51.

[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1298332611' post='2641085'] Yes... we did not include our ally in our peace talks because they had already reached an agreement on peace. Clearly contradictory. [/quote] It was the same agreement that was being discussed when you attacked. So if when you attacked you had no reason to believe it was set in stone, then you also had no reason to believe it was set in stone when you insulted them and told us not to worry about them while you guys tried to skitter out of the war. You do realize you're extremely obvious when you attempt to avoid the point. The position of LoSS in peace negotiations did not change between when you attacked and when you attempted to surrender. The only difference between those six days was the butt-whupping you guys were getting.

[quote name='Myworld' timestamp='1298336046' post='2641155'] We didn't get a chance to even get to that point when you start slapping on 40k reps right off the bat for us honoring a treaty. Kind of hard to talk about anything else when slapped in the face with reps. [/quote] Oh, good, now it's Goose's fault. I thought it was TiTaN's fault. No wait, it's LoSS's fault. No wait, it was your member's fault. Good thing it's never your fault, eh, champ? How's that class on successful foreign affairs going?

[quote name='The Great One' timestamp='1298334080' post='2641109'] Talking about a single nation right? Please be joking. 15% in a day is a beatdown, 15% in a week is nothing. [/quote] But we're not talking about a single nation. We're talking about the entire alliance losing 20% in 6 days. Besides, he claimed he was growing.

[quote name='Xiao Weng' timestamp='1298330741' post='2641054'] Sounds like they were in talks then, if they told Goose that. But no, keep on doing your side the favors you are. [/quote] Xiao and I are arguing on the same side. I feel dirty.

[quote name='nutkase' timestamp='1298299822' post='2640606'] Ummmm no? Look at my nation then at the ones that I'm fighting, very far from your theory I think I have actually gained NS while fighting CSN!! [/quote] That would be relevant if you were the only nation fighting. But you aren't. Since the 15th when your largest nations finally came out of hippie, you've averaged more than 1K lost per nation. The loss since then now stands 8K from your average NS. If in the course of that you're gaining NS, then that means that some other nation is just losing that much harder. Besides, you're a 8K nation. If you started at 0 at the beginning of the war that wouldn't make up for the damage we did to even one of your top nations in the current strategy. ThePromisedLand has lost 24K since the 15th. That's three times the NS of your entire nation. When it comes to whether your alliance can withstand our assault, your 8K nation isn't even on the radar. And, for the record, your nation started at 20K NS. It's now less than 8K. If you consider that gaining in NS, then your math needs work. And you've lost 15% of your NS since you stopped ghosting and rejoined your alliance. Again, your math needs work. 15% in 7 days is a beatdown. And in comparison, you're one of the lucky ones.

[quote name='Lord Brendan' timestamp='1298329214' post='2641035'] What? No. I probably shouldn't have bothered with the analogy since it only seems to have confused you, but here we go: You start with $10. You buy an ice cream cone for $5. You drop the cone. You decide to buy a new one, again for $5. You are left with $0 and an ice cream cone. If you had not dropped the cone, you would instead be left with $5 and an ice cream cone. Therefore dropping the ice cream cone cost you $5. Varianz, you appear to have missed my [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=98618&view=findpost&p=2640788"]post on page 62[/url]. I'm not sure why you wouldn't assume the war would be short, we had offered white peace to LoSS, and given your current confusion and anger regarding the terms, you obviously didn't predict them. We do not have a spy within DT, although that is perhaps unfortunate for you since better understanding what you were up to might have avoided the chain of events that led us here. [/quote] Isn't interesting that when White Peace was on the table for LoSS before they entered it was no reason to think the war would be short, but when White Peace was on the table for LoSS after they'd jumped in, they had no reason to include them in their own talks or worry about them at all because peace was guaranteed? The only thing that changed in those 6 days was that DT got their behinds kicked. That's it. The sides hadn't really moved closer together. Nothing had been settled. Peace was on the table before DT attacked and it remained on the table afterward. So either you had every reason to believe the war would be a short one and you're lying. Or you had every reason to believe LoSS may end up in a much longer war and you're lying. I'm willing to believe you're lying but can you just pick what you're lying about and stop contradicting yourself?

Oh, don't worry. I'm not mad. Not only did you not garner the support you were hoping for, nor did you get our membership to revolt like you were going for, but you gelled support behind us and we get to have the fun of grinding you into dust. Anyone who was waffling before isn't now. Our members have gotten more active. And you're getting crushed. Nothing you were going for in using the screenshots or the OWF was accomplished. Not one thing. We've attempted repeatedly to give you an out for this and each time you've spit in our face. Well, now, feel free to spit on my boot as I march over you. It'll help me clean the ashes of your nation off of it.

[quote name='NinjaPirate' timestamp='1298268654' post='2640331'] CSN, shut your !@#$%* ass mouth. [/quote] You mad?

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1298263381' post='2640222']your timetable is way off mate. way off. Feel free to correct me. Only, how about this time, you do it with actual quotes and evidence instead "But, but, but, we really didn't mean it" or "but it was someone else's fault." your knowledge about warfare is also quite amusing. seriously, it is. also, you do realize that i have pointed out now how CSN has already lost 3.6 times the tech they are now demanding for themselves. (i am assuming it is 20k tech to Legacy and 10k tech to CSN and ya'll have lost 36k tech total since i am not including the GOD member who has 11k tech that joined ya'll recently as he will most likely head back to GOD once this war is over with) but yes mate, please keep stating how well ya'll are doing and how asking for reps has actually done anything helpful for CSN. [/quote] You assume our goal in reps was to grow our alliance. You're wrong. Our goal in reps was to hamstring yours. And we've done so and continue to do so. Tell me, son, how are we doing on that front? How much NS have you lost per nation since we began our recent blitz? How much more will you lose in the next week? We asked you for tech that would have lowered your NS per nation by a fraction. Instead, we've lowered your NS per nation by a quarter so far and it's ongoing. But, hey, we're totally in the wrong. You know how you can teach us a lesson? Keep whining while we stand on the rubble of your nations.

[quote name='William Blake' timestamp='1298267537' post='2640307'] Good luck to you, DT. Fought you in "karma" and you seemed like a good lot. Keep fighting the good fight. Silly of CSN to not accept one of the 20k tech options DT suggested, you still get a good amount of tech from an alliance you declared on and it finally ends your (current) PR nightmare. [/quote] Honestly, DT's members are a good lot. They've had a good attitude the entire war. I think myworld et al are a bunch of slimeballs, but their membership is much better than they deserve. They're very good at war-making and coordination. I've been nothing but impressed. The membership is making the best of a bad situation.

[quote name='hizzy' timestamp='1298262937' post='2640214'] somebody's a bit upset things aren't going their way.... [/quote] They aren't. I didn't want to have to grind DT into dust. But I've resigned myself to the realization that the only thing to do here is to simply wage the best war possible. It's frustrating that we have to do this to nations I, on the whole, like. I've had great opponents throughout, and you'll find I've told them so. I imagine it would be a whole lot more frustrating to be losing, but fortunately for me and all the members of my alliance, we don't have to find out what that's like.

Yes, what was your tech average a week ago? What was your infra average a week ago? I can tell you that your ANS a week ago was 10K higher than us. It's now 5K higher than us. In a week, it will be lower than ours. And so on. Your NS on the 15th, when your largest guys finally came out of peace mode and we locked onto them was 1.991kk. It's currently 1.640kk. That's 7K per nation exactly, despite 17 of your nations not even coming out of peace mode in all that time. That's is a beating by any standard. In the same time our starting NS was 3.912kk. It's now 3.603. That means our 130+ nations have lost less NS than your 50 nations. Not the best outcome in a war, I'd say. It also means that in the time it took us to take 7K per nation in your AA you managed to take less than 2K per nation. If we go back to the 13th, like you did, your nations lost 10K per member. That was with all of your largest nations in PM for the first three days. That is a beat down. And you can say all you like how much infra doesn't matter and how easy it is to rebuy, but it matters when you're AT WAR. Which you are. Your nations are quickly being less able to sustain an army and a navy (and thus an air force) and nukes than we are. Our 130+ nations over 1200 nukes. The nations of DT and LoSS combined don't have 2/3rds that number. In your AA, you have just about 100 nukes among the people who aren't in peace mode (and please, please, please, let the others come out and play, that would be even better). You don't even have enough to put us in all in anarchy for just one day. We could keep your nations in anarchy for the rest of the month. But, hey, don't take my word for it. As I said, give us some time to consider your offer. How does two weeks sound? Let's look at the results then. I'm sure you're have lots to say about what a good position you guys are in then. Your gov knew it was time to surrender weeks ago. Your position has not improved with time. Nor will it.

1. The admin deleted them from the forums. Why? Because they recognize they're OOC. Also, our issue isn't with you seeing them. Our issue is with you using them to your advantage. Openly using them, no less. 2. Yes, in fact, it does mean that. If they take advantage of the bad acts of people, they are, in fact, encouraging those bad acts. That's why they don't do so unless they'll be preventing an even worse act. In this case, what greater OOC action is it that you were preventing? 4. Way to avoid the point. The reason the admin would remove the tech is because it gives me an unfair advantage. That's the same reason the admin removed the SS. Hmmm... seems like it's a pretty good comparison. In this case, however, the SS don't need to remain on site in order to be used, so the admin, despite recognizing them as OOC, can't prevent you from utilizing them despite their efforts. 5. You not only don't "need" them, you don't have them. And you declared on legacy and then asked for peace almost immediately. You came without LoSS. You never even made any attempt at all to secure peace for them. I notice your "evidence" for how you're looking out for them is mentioning something that happened before you pretty obviously tried to abandon them. Do you, perhaps, have any examples that are from after you insulted them and after you attempted to abandon them? We both know if we'd given you white peace that day, you'd have peaced out, without LoSS even being a consideration. But you're welcome to prove me wrong. You must have just a tiny bit of evidence, yes? 6. Yes, we get that you need them. Not exactly the best evidence, eh? LoSS is supporting you. Not the other way around. LoSS is standing by you. Not the other way around. I'm offering you opportunity after opportunity to show some support for LoSS and unsurprisingly you cannot. You can claim it's just one line, but it was a conversation where you guys dismissed LoSS and any concern for them, insulting them along the way. At no time did you reverse that position. At no time did you include them in peace talks. At no time did you show a unified front. And, it's an OOC attack to mention the screenshots and their source, but it's not utilize them to try to secure white peace and an apology? It's an OOC attack to mention the screenshots' source, but it's not to utilize them to try and drive a wedge between our members and our government? Interesting reasoning there. If the screenshots were acceptable to utilize IC then why did the admin delete them?

[quote name='Myworld' timestamp='1298261559' post='2640195'] And we've offered up 3 possible and more reasonable agreements if they are so hell bent on reps, but they went for even more absurd reps. But they have come out with: They were actually pondering the second one before they went for the latest one. Which if they would continue to ponder it was what was in the ballpark of something reasonable after talks failed and they didn't take the 30k/10k option. [/quote] Keep offering. We're totally likely to accept them. We just need some time to consider them. Let's talk again in two weeks.