Quercus
-
Posts
64 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Quercus
-
-
@General Ulji- I am glad this is finally out there. Every time you tangentially addressed this topic, I felt a twinge of guilt for being a party to defending a treaty partner with a pocket book instead of with our nations. In my year and a half with the Order, this was one of two things that I felt ashamed of. The other was the cancellation of the Concordium Sed Noblis with the Greenland Republic. We shut that treaty down because we saw which way the wind was blowing and wanted to avoid future trouble.
As I spend more time watching the rat race that is planet Bob or Digiterra, I realize that anybody who loves their nation infrastructure is unsuitable as a treaty partner. This is a contest where self interest causes people to forget that all things are inconsequential when placed next to real friendships. I'll say this in print here and now so anybody can hold me to this promise in the years ahead- oaths of fealty be damned, I will never again allow my nation to be sidelined when my conscience tells me that my place is in the fight.
[OOC]@Miko- Regarding real friendship, I am sending you a PM, let's talk on the phone; a little bit about this and a whole lot about a hundred other topics that have nothing to cybernations.[/OOC]
-
I agree with Yenisey.
But EGM you have to realize that ladder mobility was awesome back then because tech was worth 4x what it is now and the nations were pretty small. Ladder mobility for Urgul is pretty much impossible, even if tech was worth 100 NS per point.
What ranks would do is allow active alliances to organize their growth for local superiority on the ladder. An alliance with solid units and a decent level of esprit de corps could put 50 at the same strength and probably hold that part of the ladder in even a curb stomp.
So ranks would be bad for the hegemon and their associates, but good for the little trouble makers in the community.
-
As Sir Neboe has stated, the Realm of the Rose is an economic and social sphere. It's purpose is to provide individual nations and smaller alliances with a safe haven and a place to interact with one another. Members retain all of their autonomy save for the right to declare war or to enter into diplomatic endeavors that are in contradiction with the established purpose of the RotR (namely maintaining the Realm as peaceful and non-partisan entity).
Blackwater in comparison is a military alliance that is inherently bound to the Order through ties of fealty to Our Rose. And as such they will serve as the force that serves to defend the nations sheltering in the Realm from tech raiders and others who would prey upon the small or isolated in the community.
In each case, the nations involved benefit from the primary currency of the OBR, which is a reputation for practicing civility while exercising balanced and principled action.
-
The only way to defeat lies is to lie harder but in the opposite direction. Obviously.
If enough of us bring our lies into the same room, we eventually come to something near the truth. I have never claimed a monopoly on truth, or even greater insight into truth. But I am not senile just yet and remember most things pretty accurately.
It certainly appears that way. I guess if the NPO want to spin it into a victory then I can understand why the former CoaLUEtion members want to make out their military success as more glorious than it was.I would put it more like this
Start
NPO+allies>LUE+allies
end of week one:
NPO+allies>LUE+allies (with NAAC and GGA and little alliances tossed in)
add in the ODN and Legion
NPO+allies<<LUE+allies
If I said one thing that is true in my wall of text, it was this. The biggest side wins in this game. Ladder 1.0 made bringing your numbers to bear alot harder, so you could have the advantage at one point but not at another. But given the time, the side with the most at the top would win.
Ladder 2.0, the biggest side wins and wins easy. Ladder 3.0, we'll have to wait and see, but my guess is that numbers will still always win. The people who claim skill or superior organization have never fought uphill in a lopsided war. Sure it helps, but many in the NpO used to think that their superior tactics won wars. Now they recognize that it is diplomacy and the cultivation of friends that guarantees success on the battlefield. Fireteams, staggered declarations, Banking, SDI's, Manhattan Projects, its all minor compared to how many active nations you bring to the fight.
In the end of my wall of text (after your BS meter blew), I said that it wouldn't have mattered anyway. It is pretty much like you said, lose the battle, win the war. The only thing that changes is that Vlad and I don't have to debate the point.
Anyway, I am back to retirement from these forums, it was great to see some of you. Best wishes to everybody.
Quick edit- bros2 FTW!!!
-
Actually, the numbers were quite even.
Before Legion, although I disagree Tyga, I believe that NPO was the biggest, although I am quite probably wrong on that.
Edit: See the Sandwich Controversy post below me.
Something else I remember was that during the week that the Legion fought, the NPO slid from 1st to 2nd in the alliance rankings (which were much less extensive in those days and in terms of NS only).
As I recall, the NPO regained the #1 spot in just a couple of weeks, but as Vlad said, they were in stealth mode, so there was very little of the typical hailing and Propaganda.
Also as olive branch to Tyga, I forget to mention that he had to step down as Emperor under the terms of that war. That alone was a game changer in the historical sense.
-
While you state Vladimir is rewriting history (and to some extent he is) I could not get past this line of your post. I find it amusing you accuse Vladimir of being loose with the facts and you post such a blatant inaccuracy. Roughly equal sides? NPO, NpO and IGC versus LUE, NAAC, GATO, ODN, Legion and various bandwagoners and hangers on is roughly equal sides? Give me a break!
We don't have the numbers any more, so its largely opinion. I pointed out two key things though; 1st LUE was all at one strength because they all joined together. They dominated their spot on the ladder, but they couldn't reach too far outside of it because of the old ladders limitations. And the NAAC, well you should remember that we only had 77 members when they took the sanction away and awarded it to the NpO. The NAAC you remember was one that might seem like a viable opponent to Polaris, but the truth is that they were only six weeks from being universally ZI'ed, at the time we had around 100 members with very small nations.
And to offer a third point at the expense of GATO. When have they ever fought at a level indicative of their numbers? With GATO as an ally, it was always hit or miss; they would have a handful of active combatants and then 30 or so that logged in once per week max. They didn't even organize their members into units until 7 months after the war we are talking about.
ODN, well you have me there, they were pretty good and most were veterans of the Citrus War and knew how to fight.
Quick Edit- your bullcrap meter needs some recalibrating.
-
Arctic, I love you.
I love you too. Hell after this long, I love Tyga, and I used to think he was Satan's (Sayton's sp.?) Siberian cousin, you can't last nearly three years without respecting the other old survivors. Man, what a game it was during that first year. We played so hard, it was like we thought it would all be reset soon so it was life or death. If I'd have known how long it would last, I'd have paced myself better.
BTW- sorry about the wall of text- but it was in response to Vlad, so its not like anything else would have served as a counter.
-
A Crisis of Memory
After nearly 30 months it seems that this one war remains the most intriguing of them all. For the old League mob and their younger patriots it is the glimmer of hope that the Order isn't invincible, while for the Orders it is the moment when they faced down the entire world and came out triumphant.
Vlad,
I really do not have the time to invest in this to the degree necessary to refute your entire statement in a manner that would convince anybody whose opinion actually matters. I came here today to say goodbye to Reformentia. But since you have thrown down the gauntlet, I'll take the time to provide a counter rendition to your claims. The recollection of fact has long since passed and the truth of the matter is that for those of us that have been here long enough, we believe what we remember and we remember what we like. I claim that your memory is selective, but I don't fault you for it and am willing to accept that my version of events is imperfect. But even so, I am certain that it lies nearer the facts than your "truth".
Because of your selective memory, your work here is one of propaganda. You cite a crisis of memory, yet dispense with even the slightest effort to present the material in a historical light. The three quarters of this community who arrived after the events that you describe, read the quoted paragraph above and come away with a number of conclusions which could be argued to be erroneous.
Sentence 1- the war was intriguing. Maybe that is so, but only because it was the first war that was fought by roughly equal sides and it was also fought in a manner that saw the advantage tip from one side to the other. Most of the history of this game was decided in the back rooms of diplomacy and this was one of the few wars that was not already decided before it was fought. Even sided wars are only intriguing for their rarity. Beyond that, they have no inherent value. This war was unique only in that it was the only war that featured events that the NPO seemed unprepared for. Every war since has been fought largely on your terms and at the time of your choosing.
Sentence 2, 1st clause - the league was a mob and their descendants look to that conflict as a sign of Pacifica's vulnerability. As a member of that mob, I can only state that your opinion is just that, an opinion and not fact. There are many who still watch this world from afar who remember that there were quality individuals on both sides of the conflict. Many of the mob are now valued members of the Pacifican Hegemony, and some of us who are not can still lay claim to being peers of yours, both as adversaries in this game and as valued companions in other venues.
By the same token, your adversaries today are not solely descendants of GATO, LUE, GGA, NAAC, ODN or the Legion. Many of them are former friends who helped you to secure your place in this world. FAN and the old GOON's can claim a more recent and direct influence upon those that you claim and the GGA has spent far more of its history as loyal friend to Pacifica than it ever spent opposing your aims. If people are looking to that war for hope, then they are looking to circumstances that are unrealistic in today's world. The Pacifica that was caught unawares back then has long since passed.
And finally, regarding the invincibility of Pacifica. Invincibility is a term that is temporal in nature and not a trait that is divinely inspired. The Order is in its position of dominance largely because of its skill and effort over these long years. But that position was never assured and even today it is tenuous and contingent upon your unceasing efforts to maintain order over a system that is dynamic and fractious.
Sentence 2, 2nd clause- the Orders faced down the entire world and came out victorious. It is nice that you use the plural of Order. It really wouldn't do to have everybody who wasn't present to think that the NPO faced the entire world alone. Rysonia had a green alliance at the time that was tightly bound to the Orders, and Polaris was instrumental in your survival in that conflict.
The war that I remember went along these lines. Tension builds between the NPO and LUE. The heinous actions of a single member of LUE provides a casus belli. The NpO and LUE begin the war with an exchange of nukes, Pacifica joins to defend their sister alliance, GATO surprisingly sides with LUE. At this point the conflict is still tipped severely in the favor of the Orders, they have mobilized the most of the membership of Red and Blue (by far the two largest colors at the time) against a strong LUE split between purple and orange and GATO sitting in a stagnant brown team.
Back then there were only six colors spheres and only three of those were close to unified. The ladder in effect at that time was severely limited in that it prevented most nations from fighting one another. This factor alone made LUE a very difficult ally because they had joined this world in mass and as such could only fight in a narrow region of the ladder, leaving GATO to fight short handed against the Orders on the rest of the ladder.
A few days passed and at the end of the first week of the war, the PC led GGA jumped in on the side of GATO and LUE. A day later the NAAC joined the conflict against the Orders. The GGA is only the second largest of three alliances in a balkanized green sphere. And contrary to your statement the NAAC is a small alliance without a sanction and only two months removed from ZI at the hands of GATO, the Legion and the NPO, so they did little to tip the balance in favor of your opposition.
Even with these additions, I believe that Orders would have won the conflict in a bloody battle of attrition. But the ODN then decided to tip the balance slightly against the Orders at the end of the 1st week and shortly afterwards, the Legion makes their infamous decision to ignore their treaty with the NPO and join LUE, GATO and company in the conflict.
At this point, given the ruthless mentality that is common in this game today, the NPO and NpO lose and lose badly. The addition of the Legion and ODN simply make the fight too one side for even the legendary NPO of your propaganda to win. The mechanics of combat in this world are such that any person who has spent any time here realized that numbers win out, always. Anyone who says otherwise has never fought on the against a larger force in this game, forgets mathematics and strays into delusions better left to things that are not based on computer code.
Fortunately for the NPO, the late arrivals to the conflict were not students of Clausewitz or Bismark and only wanted to fight for a single week. During that week, I witnessed the same attrition that we have seen in any conflict in this game as the weak fled the Orders to preserve their infrastructure. I also witnessed the heroism that laid the foundation for the legend that would become the Great Patriotic War. What I did not witness was any sign that the NPO would become the first and only alliance in the history of this game to somehow win a conflict where they were outnumbered. Had the war continued, you would have ended up in the same condition as today's NpO.
It was the superlative skill of the Pacifican leadership at the peace talks and the ridiculous mercy of the Legion and ODN leaders that allowed the Orders to withdraw from a losing conflict with most of their membership and much of their infrastructure intact. Because GATO, LUE and company could not win the war without the support of the Legion and ODN, your alliance got off with an unfelt apology from Ivan Moldavi. But more importantly you left the conflict with a lesson in the realities of this game. The next time the Orders fought, they did it after months of a Dilber led campaign to acquire allies and with the knowledge of the limitations of their opponents. You adapted to the situation better than those you fought against and as such you won the long conflict and the game.
I will go further and make this claim, even if the leaders of the Legion and ODN (who are both Knight companions of mine in the OBR) had displayed the ruthlessness necessary to decisively win that war. It would have changed nothing in the long term trajectory of the game. You would have lost in a manner that left no doubt for us to debate today, but you would have won in the end. The simple fact is that the culture of the NPO was better suited for this game than the the culture of the other early alliances.
So there you have my take on things. I was there also, the only difference between my opinion and yours is that from the beginning I have had an aversion to the color red and tend to find Francoism tiresome. As such, I spent the decisive period of time on this world on the short side of most conflicts and ended up on the losing side more often than not. But that doesn't lessen my insight into military matters or make my remembrances any less credible than yours.
Best wishes to you,
Quercus (formerly Arctic of the NAAC)
-
I bid yet another farewell to a veteran player of this game, a valuable contributor to this community and a worthy companion in many adventures over the past three years. He will be missed here, and in our halls.
I quote Necrostopheles, another retired Knight of the OBR when I say; "Sooner or later we all disappear into obscurity", boredom will get us all eventually.
-
What will happen to Random Interrupt and Mussolandia?
Surrender terms for alliances are great, but we shouldn't forget about terms for individuals in all of this. They are removed from the NpO, is that the extent of it, or are we about to witness further punitive action against them?
-
After a long association with the former members of the VG Coalition, I am familiar with the loose guidelines and questionable morals employed by most tech raiders. I have heard horror stories of messages saying, "we are here for a weeks worth of tech, don't defend yourself or we will stay longer". I saw a member sanctioned by a senator at the beginning of the year for defending himself too well against a triple team of raiders.
And while I have a firm belief that it is not right for alliances to dictate to one another how the game should be played, I am unhappy to see this game degenerate to a state where there is no accountability for taking wrong action. If tech raiders must ply their trade to have fun in this game, then it is their right to do so, but I do not think it is right for alliances to begin a conflict with a tech raid and then escalate it into an alliance conflict when their prey defends themselves.
As I said above, I abhor the notion of a world police, so the best that I can offer is an invitation to the raiders out there in this game. I know of a target that will remain around the 20 member mark indefinitely and can assure you that they have no defense pacts whatsoever. Their nations are fat with tech and aside from monthly war games, they have never fought in a war. If you are the pirates that you claim to be in this game, then I encourage you to not shy away from taking a shot at some of the richest booty that this game has to offer.
-
Theoden, after reading this topic and the entirety of your posts within it, I am inclined to believe that you are being deliberately obtuse. Perhaps you are naive, but I would not be surprised to find that you are a reroll with some previous connection to the game (your interest in the GPA and the actions of the NPO suggests that would be a good place to look for your former self).
John Michaels is very much entitled to his perspective that a history in this game is pointless. I tend to agree with him. Thucydides' coverage of the Peloponnesian War remains an interesting read because the result of the war was in question. When John Michaels began his work, this world was a place of momentous decisions and the possibility for a variety outcomes existed. As of late, there has been very little to differentiate the events from month to month. We have a game that has grown static in all the segments that truly matter with all the wars beginning with a foregone conclusion. What interest could there be in such a history where stagnation is every bit as prevalent as during Pax Romanum? Sure there are alliances that succeed and fail and the names of the key players seem to change, but the reality is that this world is directly and indirectly controlled by by a single entity. The wars we see are really nothing more than the putting down of potential uprisings.
Others may cite the changing of sanctioned alliances and the shuffling of treaty blocs, but their arguments are inconsequential when compared to the immutable dominance of Pacifica. The NPO drives this game, both by their size and organization and by their continued efforts in the diplomatic sphere. You asked why the GPA was destroyed, I believe they were destroyed because they contained enough large nations to potentially be a threat if they were ever turned from their peace loving ways.
This is proactive leadership and this is what set the NPO apart from the other alliances that populated the game at its inception. They were the only alliance to actively seek out and destroy threats before they could bring real harm to their position in the game. Any alliances who have since joined the game and risen to a place of prominence have done so with the patronage of the NPO.
And as such, they all play the game with the choice to continue to support their patron or to risk losing that support by working contrary to the well being of Pacifica. This recent war is really about the same things that brought FAN, the GOONs (and \m/) into conflict with the NPO. If Polaris had not shown themselves to be a potential threat to the NPO, MCXA and the others who now profit from their demise could never have launched their attacks.
Soon this will end and we will have peace, but eventually there will be another alliance who through bad leadership or indiscretion reveals themselves to be a potential threat to the real power in this game. When that happens we will see a similar course of events. That threat will be diplomatically isolated and left exposed to destruction. Wars will be fought, sanctions will change hands and the game will continue as it has for over a year and a half, with the NPO carefully defending all that they have worked so hard to gain.
As I said earlier, any history of the game over these past years would be akin to the history of the maintenance of an empire. Perhaps it has value, but it is certainly not very interesting to read and it certainly can not shed any additional light on the future. I have already told you what will be the cause of the next war and I can already tell you who will profit most from it upon its conclusion, so what need is there for a history?
But what do I know about any of this, believe what you like.
-
Congratulations on five years of Francoism.
I am curious about this portion of your announcement:
The People's Government is currently working with members of the Coalition and the Polar Order to bring peace to the Blue Sphere. The New Pacific Order pledges to do all that it can to rebuild a Francoist Polaris to ensure that Peace, Strength and Prosperity for our brothers.This seems contrary to the best interests of your allies in blue. They fought and bled to further secure a position of authority in the Blue Team. Is Pacifica really committed to undoing their work by propping up a new NpO and promoting increased balkanization in the blue team?
Also, what would define a Francoist Polaris?
-
Edit- greatmagnus is wise.
-
Respect to MK for choosing the best strategy for their fight. To those who claim that Diskord's plan makes no sense, you are not taking into account the situation that a lone alliance faces. You have to realize that any war against the curb stomp coalition is lost from the start. The only form of warfare in this game that even slightly favors the victim is a nuclear war. Most of the independent alliances in the game figured this out a long time ago. If the magic 8-ball says that it is your time, your only recourse to a massive numbers disadvantage is to fight like a nuclear rogue. Even the OBR's Unholy Trebuchet is a form of the strategy outlined in this topic. If the goodwill of this community should ever fail our little band, we will have nothing left but to sell our lives dearly.
-
I remember the "good old days". Things back then where hardly better than they are today. The two pole world is a fallacy and a situation that only arose because the dominant power in the game ruled incompetently. GWII was lost because they didn't pay attention and let their notions about how the world should be get in the way of doing what needed to be done to secure their position. If they had ever gotten together and decided on a proactive course of action, they would still be around. Instead they sat around for half a year before fighting piecemeal and allowing their more aggressive member alliances to get mauled so that when the follow up war came, WUT was clearly stronger and more unified.
Since GWIII, we have had an intelligent and energetic power at the head of the game. They actively look for threats to their position and them move to eliminate them as efficiently as possible. A two polar world is not going to come about so long as Pacifica remains vigilant and active in the community. Their leadership is committed to ruling and their diplomatic corps is continually recruiting good allies to replace those who show any hint of turning on them. You can't blame the NPO for being the only consistently competent power in the game.
-
This war isn't over yet, the curb stomping could go on for quite awhile longer, especially if the victorious forces pace themselves and try to enjoy the endgame. And when it is all done, there should be some time to rest up before the boredom kicks in again. Once the boredom in the big alliances that run this game is finally unbearable, people will start plotting and the music will start.
Boredom is how the game of musical chairs always starts. Allies will be going round and round without drama and start looking for entertainment. Eventually we will start seeing topics on the forums about a lack of respect, or too much lulz in the IRC, or something that none of us has thought of yet. Finally when the music stops, everybody but one alliance will sit down and start posting on the forums how so and so has sent tech to somebody's cousin whose sister is married to the friend of somebody who is actually the 3rd reroll of Walford and then all hell will break loose again with everybody gang bangin the one alliance left standing.
Usually when this happens any allies of the victim put their tail between their legs and run, or they post some message of disgust and join in on the feeding frenzy. Occasionally some misguided notion of honoring defense treaties gets in the way of the scheduled curb stomp, but that just makes the portions a little larger at the tech fiesta.
And in the end, we'll have peace again, until we are bored again, and then we will rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat, and rinse and repeat. There you have the entire game cycle of cybernations over the past year and a half. Blame the evil NPO if you like, but it is really all just boredom, if you weren't bored, you wouldn't plot and you wouldn't spy and you wouldn't need to bash somebody's head in whenever you see an opportunity.
But that is just my opinion, and what do I know? Well I am off to do some lame RP stuff, so that I don't get bored. Have a nice day.
-
On behalf of myself, the members of our humble alliance and our apparently inebriated and belligerent Triumvir, Batallion, I most sincerely apologize for the rude outburst that marred what should have been a joyous and triumphant occasion for your august Order and the worthy members you have honored. I can only suspect that Batallion must have partaken excessively of your fine and potent mead, which caused the unseemly loosening of both his faculties and his tongue. This is seems all the more likely as it also impaired his spelling, as the most knowledgeable Quercus so astutely observed. With your permission, I shall take my leave of your celebration and escort Batallion to his own demesne.
Thanks for your kind apology boneroller. I apologize for my rude remarks as well- with GR's head on the chopping block, I have had a tendency to take offense easily as of late and overreacted. Batallion can spell his name any way he likes.
Should alliances really have to post every time they get new members?These aren't new members, they are old members and their promotion in this case represents up to a year of training and effort at their former rank. Sir Felkethar's accomplishment is remarkable in that he is the first Knight Commander of the Armory to have served there as a Page (during summer of 07) and as a Squire (during winter 08). I know that promotions are not a big deal in most alliances, but these three promotions were a cause for great celebration in the OBR. Our Rose arrived with regal splendor to take the oaths of the two new Squires before she knighted good Sir Felkethar.
-
Sigh... I delivered the message that canceled that treaty with the Greenland Republic over five weeks ago, a full month before this war began and three weeks before GR was alerted that they would be targeted. Most in GR are brothers to me, I have known them for years, both in this game and out of it. If I or the rest of the OBR could do anything to change their situation in the current war, we would.
Judging from your comments Batallion, you are not only grossly misinformed, but also deluded enough to believe that another 23 nations at GR's side would do anything other than further grease the tracks in front of the train that is currently running them down.
I don't mind that you don't care about is, or dislike us, but at least try to get your facts right before you try to convince others that you are some kind of authority on the OBR, the Writ de Credo, or the one other treaty that we have signed in our history.
Edit- And incidentally, it is Battalion with two t's and only one l. Try Firefox, it really does check your spelling.
-
I'm glad that this is over for Hyperion, but I have suspected all along that they were no more than a tool to get at the real target. A few more peace treaties like this and everybody should be able to focus fully on dismantling the NpO.
As for the comments about this legitimizing the flimsy pretext for war, it isn't as if the aggressors need to legitimize anything anymore. They can attack anybody they want without real consequence so long as they get the NPO stamp of approval.
-
I think that this is a bad idea, some things are better left to history.
[OOC]I have meticulously adhered to the rules of this game and never strayed from the requirement that rerolls maintain a distinct separation from their former characters. To do any less would be to bring dishonor upon the persona that I once wore with great pride. But in this case Funkson, I must respectfully ask you as your friend Arctic to let this go. I truly understand why you feel compelled to do such a thing, but remind you that there is no shame in dying beneath the banner where your NpO comrades remain true. By doing this thing you disrespect your brothers in Polaris by depriving them of your company in what may be their last battle. Return to their ranks and set an example worthy of your years of battlefield experience in this game.
Please respect the long vigil and memorial that Chozo has kept for us since the day we closed our doors. Beyond that one reminder there is no NAAC in this game today, we are a memory, misrepresented by the revisionist history of the current powers in the game, but cherished by many who remember how hard we fought time and again against the best that this game has had to offer. Please let us remain as such, it is the only thing that separates us from all our former allies who are now subjugated and left with reputations diminished beyond repair.[/OOC]
-
That was alot of posts to sift through.
Wow, glad to see my typo made me famous.Your post was just funny, nothing about Valhalla or any of its members is worthy of fame. Collectively you are nothing more than a purple tool in the Pacifican toolbox. If they ever decide to withdraw their protection from you, there will be a plethora of alliances ready to send the lot of you off to your namesake. You all may want to consider that the completion of Zha'dum's fine work in The Legion gives Pacifica a spare purple alliance in their toolbox and adjust your foreign relations to the fact that you are somewhat expendable.
And tell me, how useful are you now? I thought so.It is that type of thinking that has brought this game to where it is today. If the only value that a person recognizes in another is the current nation strength of their alliance and allies then many opinions that should be heard are overlooked. I have no love for Sponge and fought against him years before you had ever heard of this game or the NPO, but he has been one of the prime shapers of the world that you know. Were it not for him and forgotten others like him, the glory of Pacifica might never have been realized in this game and Franco's vision would have never spread beyond the place of its origin. There was once a time when the NPO and NpO stood alone against the world, these past events mark this as a time of great sadness and as such, today's events deserve better than the incessant trolling that has become the norm.
-
This is too sad, you have turned the only reasonable chance of a decent war into just another curb stomp. Nobody fights any more in this game, everything is decided by realpolitik before the first shots are fired. The chest thumping and claims of valor are all the more disgusting because any victory is a product of overwhelming numbers and not some indication of even a modicum of skill at this game or the mechanics of its war engine.
-
It is not your fault not to know that this is not my first nation, and that the old one was quite full of scars from fighting before it died.
The same can be said of many of us, but the question of how you spent your last 17 months is still germane.
If you claim that your history of operating contrary to the very same advice that you now vociferously preach was because you were a member of an alliance, then I have to ask why then did you stay in such an alliance for that duration?
However, as Government member of a political involved alliance you have other ways to 'do good' in the game than simply going to war against other nations ingame. If the game had a count of "saved lifes by good diplomacy", you can bet my nation would have quite a good amount of it, because I made sure people or groups which were elsewere doomed were let off the hook without terms by using my connections and influence. That I was able to do it and still people did not attack me for it, is quite a good sign, isn't it?Nowhere in my post was there any condemnation of diplomacy or serving good through means other than fighting (that would be very hypocritical of me given my current alliance affiliation). I gave that particular admonition because it was directly related to the course of action that you began to espouse earlier in the topic.
So, trying to accuse me of anything by looking at an ingame casualty-count is quite... naive.Touche, but can't the same be said about the ruler of nation of nearly 130k NS exhorting the average denizens of this forum toward a very dangerous set of circumstances.
They are not like you and I would argue that they do not have the luxury of your ideals.
It is easy to second guess a person like Virillus in his decision to disband a sanctioned alliance in the face of a feeble casus belli and ask from the side lines "why didn't you stand up for your beliefs and your alliance?". But the question becomes considerably more difficult when it is us standing on the field of battle. Your lofty position is akin to sitting on the side lines. You can speak with little risk to yourself.
I have realized that the selling of ideals for power or safety within the political alliances of the game has reached a point where I do not want to be part of it any longer. Now I have the option to open my mouth any time I want, and the consequences are mine - and only mine.I applaud your newfound bravery and find no fault with your argument below, but once again I have to point out that your condition is decidedly different than the vast majority of the other players in this game.
In the end, you can rant about my words as long as you wish, it will not change the fact that they are true. As long as the majority of this community put their own safety before their ideals (most call this 'realpolitik'), nothing will change. And unfortunately the current system of alliances and treaties is only going to worsen the situation, because everyone is bound to the rules of that system. Without the (major AND minor) alliances beginning to cancel MASSIVE amounts of treaties and allowing their membership free speech at these boards again AND defending them in case another alliance tries to limit this free speech with threats - the spiral will keep going down.You have led an alliance, stood near the center of politics in this game and your nation has achieved nearly all that it can off of the battlefield. It is no wonder that the game has lost its luster for you. There is little else that this game will permit you to do. But can the same be said of everybody that you are haranguing with your rhetoric? For many this game still has much to offer and for the time being they hold their pixels to be more dear than liberty, justice or free speech.
That is all that I will say on the matter save this; I initially took your comments to be hypocritical and as such was more harsh toward you than was due. I offer an apology and my hand in friendship.
Crimes of Persuasion
in World Affairs (IC)
Posted · Edited by Quercus
Not being a lawyer, I can't claim to understand legalese as well as TOP, but I can read and once translated the Writ for normal folks like myself.
I haven't seen the death cookie thread on our forums ever, but that discussion happened before I retired there so it must be open only to Knight Admins. But the OBR does have a link to my original translation in our Chamber of Diplomacy and as far as I know, it is standard practice to give the link to all potential writ signatories.
Anyway for reference- its a harsh NAP, but I thought everybody knew that since back in Dec 2006.
Check it out- I'm banned on the old forums!!!
Writ Translation in Dec 2006
Edit- And here is the actual link that is provided to Writ signatories:
http://z15.invisionfree.com/Cyber_Nations/...t&p=6097600