Moridin
-
Posts
4,592 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Moridin
-
-
Congratulations Random.
-
[quote name='Necromancer V4L' timestamp='1286312429' post='2476257']
I'm ready for 10.10.10. Are you?
[/quote]
No. I think that this 10.10.10 nonsense is another sad attempt at manufacturing drama, exactly like the last five or ten times some group has paraded around shouting that something will be happening at some future date, a claim which despite its incredible vagueness never seems to pan out. Prove me wrong, FAN. -
[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1286303327' post='2476090']
Oh man, this reminds me of that time someone interpreted a FAN announcement to say they were all becoming Jehovah's Witnesses.
[/quote]
I may or may not [url=http://z15.invisionfree.com/Cyber_Nations/index.php?showtopic=74127&view=findpost&p=7932784]have saved that forever[/url].
Easily one of the best posts ever. -
An extraordinarily awful collection of alliances.
-
[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1285886789' post='2470283']I've no issue fighting. I merely fail to see how the "only you can disband yourself" line of thought justifies eternal war.[/quote]
It doesn't, and I said as much in my first post in this thread. -
[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1285885178' post='2470266']So, how long should one remain at war? Six months? A year? More? And we're not talking about alliances like NPO, NpO, or MK, alliances with large communities. When we're talking about small to mid-sized alliances, oftentimes it just isn't worth it. While it is true that they are the ones who choose to formally disband, it is often others who deny them any other choice but disbandment or perpetual war, forcing that decision upon them.[/quote]
To some extent it depends on the circumstances - whether the victor was also the aggressor, how even the odds are, so on and so forth. Given my extreme distaste for GOONS it is hard to picture myself in their shoes, but I imagine in their situation I'd probably let the war drag on for a month or so then offer a white peace. Of course, I have no illusions that that's what GOONS will do, but anything more than that I would probably find excessive - unless of course the Ninjas were also interested in continuing the war at that point.
edit: I believe I misread your post, I interpreted it as asking how long the victor should wait before offering peace. If you're talking about how long before the loser should give up, it once again depends on the circumstances. How much do you care about your alliance, and what you're fighting for? How long could it take for your 'oppressor' to lose a major war? If the members care deeply about the alliance, there's no reason to give up at all. Fighting a war when you have nothing left to lose can be quite fun. -
[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1285881796' post='2470196']
When an alliance is unable to get peace, then it really has no choice but to call it quits. There are very few alliances capable of surviving months upon months of war.
[/quote]
That's garbage. Only weak alliances cannot survive months upon months of war; I'd say there's plenty of alliances out there that could do it pretty easily. The argument that you can't force an alliance to disband is a perfectly valid one; all that the victor of a war can do is simply not agree to a peace treaty. Whether the weaker alliance in the situation decides to bunker down and prepare for the long haul, or just give up depends entirely upon the strength and character of its members. What this does [i]not[/i] mean is that refusing to agree to a peace treaty is a laudable or even remotely acceptable stance on the part of the stronger alliance. I agree that heavy-handed peace terms (or lack of peace terms at all) do contribute to stagnation, but that doesn't mean we need to propagate the myth that you can somehow force an alliance to disband. -
[quote name='Quiziotle' timestamp='1285800238' post='2468833']
No definition of "[url="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rogue"]rogue[/url]" conflicts with any definition of "[url="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alliance"]alliance[/url]". Call or consider the Ninjas whatever you like though; the fact is that they declared war upon the GOONS with little justification and are facing retaliation as a consequence of that.
[/quote]
Perhaps you've been asleep for the past several years, but terms like these have evolved to mean something different in the context of international politics than in a dictionary.
OOC: Trying to use a real-life English dictionary to define CN terms is absurd. There are a number of terms whose accepted IC definitions that will not appear in a dictionary. -
[quote name='ironchef' timestamp='1285790170' post='2468592']
LOL <3u2 potato, but you make it so easy. Can’t you guys just tell GOONS to put a sock in it so you don’t have to keep cleaning up after them?
Or is this how it works?
MK,Umbrella,PC> We need something to do, GOONS go run your mouth so you get attacked again.
GOONS> ok boss be back with fresh meat in a snap!
[/quote]
Is it asking too much to let a war-related thread go by without someone's depressingly awful rendition of what conversations they imagine took place behind the scenes? I can't speak for anyone but myself, but whenever I'm on the sidelines and I see a post like this it makes me view the poster with nothing but the utmost contempt. -
[quote name='Quiziotle' timestamp='1285799275' post='2468811']
Are you trying to tell me that several individuals pooling their resources together under a single banner and declaring war on an alliance they dislike purely for the sake of creating mischief does not make them a literal "alliance of rogues"?
[/quote]
I am saying exactly that, because the term "alliance of rogues" is an oxymoron. I am curious when the situation you just described actually occurred though; I can remember taking part in something like that a couple years ago, but you're misrepresenting the current situation. This wasn't for the purpose of "creating mischief" (though a member of the Ninjas can correct me if I'm wrong on that count). -
[quote name='Quiziotle' timestamp='1285798288' post='2468788']
Whether or not they were or are currently established as an alliance has nothing to do with the question of whether or not they are rogues. In other words, it is quite possible for the Ninjas to be an [i]alliance of rogues[/i]. And they are! Hope this helps.
[/quote]
What the hell? That's the most retarded thing I've ever heard. In my four years in the Cyberverse, a "rogue" has always been a nation, not affiliated with an alliance, that engages in an aggressive war. There is no such thing as an "alliance of rogues". That's an utterly ridiculously term that as far as I can tell you lot pulled out of god-knows-where purely for this thread. This is roughly on par with when Continuum members tried to arbitrarily re-define the term "alliance" to exclude Vox Populi.
I think a lot of arguments in this thread have been monumentally stupid - "GOONS' allies shouldn't help them!", or "There wasn't a valid casus belli!", so on and so forth. But calling the Ninjas an "alliance of rogues" has to take the cake. -
Part of me wishes you'd have waited until a war erupted and you could've helped grind them into dust, but the other part of me has been tempted to do this very thing on more than one occasion, so I'll simply say best of luck, Ninjas.
-
[quote name='Jyrinx' timestamp='1284323130' post='2451345']
More or less this. I thought NSO's issue in that war was specifically siding with Superfriends though. Not to say they loved Athens or anything mind you. That was so long ago though and I no longer have access to those discussions so I could be misremembering. Either way like Moridin said, the treaty with IRON had nothing to do with Frostbite's dissolution.
[/quote]
You're right, I was probably projecting there. Looking over my logs, Ivan's concern seems to have been about siding with Ragnarok and SF. -
[quote name='Chron' timestamp='1284321860' post='2451304']Well, no one ever was going to claim IRON were known for their skill in politics.[/quote]
[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1284322204' post='2451312'][color="#000000"]Who needs that when you got TOP to make your decisions for you?[/color][/quote]
While it's refreshing to see a treaty cancellation where the two parties don't claim they're still going to be best friends forever, you seem to be going a little overboard. Is it just cognitive dissonance or was the relationship really that far gone? -
[quote name='cookavich' timestamp='1284320061' post='2451249']
And so the treaty that wrecked Frostbite disappears.
[/quote]
The treaty did not wreck Frostbite. Frostbite was a highly dysfunctional bloc that collapsed due to internal conflict. NSO signed the treaty with IRON only after it became apparent that the bloc was going to dissolve (whether this was their intent or not I have no idea). The collapse itself was catalyzed by the TPF war where NSO was not a fan of siding with Athens, while Polar and STA ended up on the C&G/SF side given the treaties they held. At the time of STA's withdrawal from Frostbite, Pezstar [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=77424&view=findpost&p=2076104"]said[/url] quite clearly that it had nothing to do with the IRON treaty, a statement later backed up by Tyga and Uhtred. -
[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1283495820' post='2440108']
Well, I'm sure someone will find a reason to be outraged about this no matter how cut and dry it is, don't worry.
[/quote]
Yeah, I'm quite outraged. Outraged that we have a situation here where I am compelled to accept GOONS as being in the right. Seriously, Methrage? Couldn't you have stopped to consider the implications before taking a course of action that makes everyone want to agree with GOONS? -
[quote name='Don Chele' timestamp='1283405588' post='2438925']
I briefly considered responding to specific posts here, but then I read them. You people do realize that the GPA has been operating under the same philosophy for over four years, don't you? It's not some nefarious plot to passively conquer the world. They really don't have much need to participate in the open community because, quite frankly, it rarely merits participation and they have their own, closed community.[/quote]
The fact that it is two GOONS members replying back and forth to one another, broken only occasionally by one or two people actually believing they're serious, should make it readily apparent that nobody is actually seriously suspecting the GPA of anything. -
[quote name='Heft' timestamp='1283290028' post='2437423']
No, it still doesn't top the statement we were told to read. And that was before the war had actually ended.
[/quote]
And what statement was this? Or are you referring to the OP? -
[quote name='Fernando12' timestamp='1283226415' post='2436563']
It is fun and these people are predictable in their responses
It's fun controlling them
[/quote]
Oh yes, the world-famous "I was just doing a social experiment!" response, for whenever you realize you have no idea what you're talking about but don't want to admit it. Can we expect to see you trot out the "too cool for school" defense, too? -
[quote name='Fernando12' timestamp='1283223611' post='2436510']We posted words so what. Surrendered LOL, my oh my.
We did about the same damage so we pretty much didn't lose more or less which in most definitions is about a tie. [/quote]
This is the worst revisionism I've ever seen, and it's only been a week since the war ended.
The victor of a war is [i]not[/i] determined by who deals out the most damage. FAN lost its war with the Initiative despite dishing out significantly more damage than it received. The victor of a war is determined by who dictates terms in the peace agreement, which in this case was RoK, GOD, and the rest. Ragnarok and the rest of their group could have continued the war indefinitely if they had wanted with each of their alliances only losing a small fraction of their strength, while NSO dropped much more rapidly.
I'm not sure if you understand this or not, but the very [i]reason[/i] that alliances are forced to concede defeat in the surrender document is to prevent exactly this sort of !@#$%^&* revisionism. People remember all too well the never-ending debates about whether or not the NPO truly lost Great War I, and to correct this a black-and-white statement that an alliance is surrendering is now the standard in peace agreements. The long and short of it is, if this was a tie then the leader of your alliance would not have uttered the words "The New Sith Order hereby announces its surrender". If you had fought this to a draw you would not be making concessions at all. -
A fine report as always, Sir Paul. And good lord, people need to give the NPO hate a rest. There's so many alliances in power now that you can hate; why dwell in the past?
OOC: Defying Gravity? Really?
-
[quote name='The MVP' timestamp='1282738262' post='2430702']What say you all?[/quote]
Only if you start a war against a Turkish alliance and allow me to lead your armies to victory, then screw you over by poaching all your members. -
[quote name='Bavaricar' timestamp='1282703831' post='2430301']
Not sure about the left, but the bottom far right is Lord Valentine.
[/quote]
Bottom left is, I believe, Eli Cohen, which was Francesca's alias while spying. -
My condolences, VE.
Imperial Announcement from the New Polar Order
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1287632503' post='2489326']
Max Barry? God I hope he passes over this house.
Anyway, I am certain Emperor Random will do what is best for Polar and exemplify what it means to be the leader of the Order. He is intelligent and very well versed in the politics of the Cyberverse. Plus, he is active, that is an invaluable trait that is so often lacking in leaders these days.
[/quote]
I'm pretty sure he is referring to a [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0I6mhZ5wMw]different Barry[/url].