delendum

I think this sums it up pretty well.

The time has come. B)

Why do people like to throw that word around so much? I think it's pretty obvious these treaties didn't get canceled on account of excessive friendship.

Two awesome alliances getting together is something I like to see. Congrats guys

I fail to see how this bares any resemblance. LoSS canceled on lot of big well connected alliances, not on a single isolated alliance marked for the slaughter.

There is no way to describe this, it's too epic, LoSS has balls of steel.

I would like to bring a clarification to your posts. Indeed, nukes are just another weapon of war, something that we in MK fully support. However, a weapon has to have a certain level of usefulness. You have to take into account the nature of the conflict; we are talking about an alliance with over 1500 nukes attacking an alliance with little over 100. Had we used nukes in this war, they would have been left a smoldering ruin - we only meant to teach them a short lesson. It was in their best interest to withhold from using nuclear weapons, since they wouldn't have made any impact whatsoever aside from degenerating things. As such, both alliances had a very clear policy of refraining from using nukes in this war; those that did were acting in violation of this policy and of their own accord - in consequence they are treated as any rogue would. The war lasted for less than a week, we asked no reparations, placed them under no terms, and even offered to help them rebuild. It was, by all accounts , a slap on the wrist.

B) Unfortunately it appears I'll be sitting this one out

A very promising start, congrats

Congrats guys

This is great to finally see! I have a lot of respect for Polaris, and of course those shroom people aren't all that bad either, albeit scum.

This is indeed excellent

Best of luck VE, this clearly wasn't an easy move to make, but I have no doubt in your reasoning and find it admirable that you managed to stand up for what you believe in.

I'm quite proud of this achievement.

I will try my best to go against my urges and post something relatively constructive. This was not only a rampant display of what GGA's "sovereignty" truly means, but a demonstration of who is actually in command. An old, 300+ members strong, well connected alliance, unaffected by any wars or surrender terms, needs outside help in ruling itself? It needs to be told what sort of views ONE member of its Triumvirate needs to have, and if they're acceptable or not? What were the leaders of the GGA doing until now that ironchef's post comes as some sort of revelation? I believe your poor (or downright absent) internal management is a coherent reflection of your political standing, and your handling of this situation the fruit of your "let daddy decide" policy. You are simply too incompetent at the moment to decide for yourselves, and when somebody in your government attempts some independent thinking, you crucify him and try to portray him as some sort of traitor. As it currently stands, I personally don't consider the GGA to be an alliance. I consider it to be a mass of people conveniently grouped under one banner - and unless something drastically changes from within, I don't expect anybody will ever take you seriously as a self governing entity.

1. Quite. 2. Nothing at all. 3. It can't be avoided, but it can be "contained" to a certain extent by having your nations well equipped for such a scenario. In the end, nuclear war will start because it will be in somebody's advantage, and your level of preparedness is what will dictate where you'll find yourself. We entered the war not expecting to get any terms at all, but reaching peace eventually became in the best interest of BOTH sides - something that almost never happens in the case of a beat down. Were we forced to pay a huge amount of reps? Sure, but we were still alive, and the damage we inflicted greatly exceeded them. So that particular beat down just wasn't profitable for the winning side - which is were the deterrent lies. I assume the huge amount of reps we were made to pay were meant as a deterrent as well, but don't kid yourself thinking alliances will pay "any amount* just because they lost. We were ready to go down fighting.

Congrats Avalanche, here's to many more to come! (I'm not sure if that's a curse or a blessing )

I wasn't challenging your right to talk about it, I was trying to point out that talk alone won't solve the problem - a proven fact given that this is by no means a new topic of discussion. I personally don't believe you can change the right people's minds by constantly bringing it up, you're actually more likely to nag them to a point where they'll keep it up just to piss you off. It's also my right to attempt to change your approach, or at least to point out its naivety. So do I, hence why I'm here

With all due respect to those of you who are trying to emphasize "fairness" by challenging practices such as EZI, you fail to understand that the world is not yours to police, and that there is no global legislation governing Bob. Every alliance is entitled by its very sovereignty to establish its own practices and enforce them as they see fit. There may exist a vague consensus, but that is only the sum of more alliances reaching the same conclusions. This renders your views irrelevant, and is the reason why such practices are able to exist unaltered in spite of the countless threads advocating their demise or proposing change. We all understand this with regards to tech raiding, what makes EZI so special that it requires countless debate? If a member of an alliance gets tech raided, the alliance is left with the choice of action. If an alliance engages in reckless tech raiding, it's faced with the eventual consequences. If one of your members is found to be a re-roll on such a list, you are left with a choice. Don't think it's fair? Then by all means, fight to defend your member either diplomatically, or ultimately by military force. In the end, you will find you're fighting against said alliance's policy of EZI, much in the same way an alliance would get rolled for its absurd tech raiding policy. If you lack the guts to back your view on this matter with concrete actions, you are just wasting your and our time for nothing with futile advocation and debate. PZI or plain old ZI, what's wrong with them? Childish, yes, but this is a game, and a game has to have losers. Think it's a grave injustice? Fight against it. Nobody does, because in the end they don't care enough. Why the fuss then? You will never obtain anything unless you are ready to back up your views with action. In RL, the Geneva conventions are repeatedly broken by some of the very same entities that established them, yet nobody does anything about it. Tell me then, what good do they bring to the people who continue to die regardless of their existence?

Here's to hoping things won't begin to stagnate from here on.

LEBUBU'S MERRY MEN WILL ALWAYS PREVAIL IN THE FACE OF ADVERSITY AND LOWER CASE LETTERS. DELENDUM, MERRY MAN OF THE COMMON CLAY.

Finally, our favorite toys are back.

well everything went as it should today, i guess that took care of it

i confirm this. also the wars and battles screen stats didn't match his nation profile screen. (regardless of page refresh)