Vol Navy
-
Posts
1,164 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Blog Comments posted by Vol Navy
-
-
Well, if I was to lead Non Grata, I would consider reconciling with The Order of the Phoenix in order to prepare for a revenge hit on IRON for their betrayal.
Well there goes our secret TOP MAP to take down IRON.
-
The only clear thing this war is shown is that HB needs to suffer the same fate it did in the books for trusting a Lannister.
Putting you in Gov and your role as their mouthpiece here has led HB to be #1 on my most disliked alliances list.
-
You could even upload to youtube.
-
Yes we feared being rolled by DR ::eye roll::. "we all know" indeed. I tell you, thats news to me. And im leading a cng alliance. But of course, I must be lying to hide the truth and must have manipulated people to blah blah blaah insert random bs. This game means so much to me, that i'm going to lie endlessly with a straight face to you for some in-game edge. Nothing else could be true.This is exactly what i'm referring to as the problem. We've created an atmosphere where everything is stuffed into a simplified political frame work that suits your ends.And sure it goes both ways. But honestly. The idea that you can sit back in whatever alliance you are in (tpf?) and knowingly tell me not only what my alliance did 'behind the scenes' but *why* it was done. Despite the people you are accusing telling you otherwise? Its ludicrous. Gets back into this idiotic paranoia thats been built and fed on the OWF that everyone has some shady and complicated agenda.... unless of course they agree with *YOU*. Then, they are do-gooding truth tellers standing up to the man.And yes coj has a win at all costs attitude. They simply act it out on what they view as the political and propaganda arena, not the in-game war arena. And let me clarify. Theres nothing wrong with trying to win. I want to win the game. I try to win it. Im not pretending otherwise. We should all try to win or whats the point?The problem comes when in order to win we start spinning worse than the real-life media and start forcing everything into neat little slots and attacking those who DONT fit in.Seriously. All the people accusing others of... anything. Being idiots, being evil, manipulative, etc etc. How often do you NOT see that simply breaking down along in-game political lines?
CoJ displays a "win at all costs" attitude? I am not sure they've entered a war yet they didn't know they were going to lose from the get go. We all know Int was talked out of defending LSF because CnG feared being rolled by DR. So irony is off the charts with this statement.1) I guess I dont disagree with you on the stagnation but I do disagree with you on the cause. To me, the cause is the overwhelming fear of 'losing' and the culture and obsession that 'winning' is everything. THAT not the treaty web is what causes stagnation. The treaty web is the excuse people use, not the root of the problem. Why are people afraid to break the treaty web? Because they will *lose*. And the root of the 'win at all cost' attitude are people like CoJ. That turn anything and everything into a cause or some sort of struggle between good and evil.We are allied to half your bloc. I can only go by reasons given by them about why CnG is letting two direct allies burn. Or you can just read threads where other Gov in the various bloc members admit it.
-
1) I guess I dont disagree with you on the stagnation but I do disagree with you on the cause. To me, the cause is the overwhelming fear of 'losing' and the culture and obsession that 'winning' is everything. THAT not the treaty web is what causes stagnation. The treaty web is the excuse people use, not the root of the problem. Why are people afraid to break the treaty web? Because they will *lose*. And the root of the 'win at all cost' attitude are people like CoJ. That turn anything and everything into a cause or some sort of struggle between good and evil.
CoJ displays a "win at all costs" attitude? I am not sure they've entered a war yet they didn't know they were going to lose from the get go. We all know Int was talked out of defending LSF because CnG feared being rolled by DR. So irony is off the charts with this statement.
-
Why should anyone allied to a CnG alliance that isn't the Mushroom Kingdom, or allied directly to the Mushroom Kingdom keep their CnG treaty?
-
It is not that NEW has not had tough battles, But that NoR has had more, they been there and seen literally all the ways a war can play out. And they have already strategies in place to deal with most scenarios, and one of these strategies is to have friends & allies (and most of all but often ignored by some, allies who are also friends).
You make it sound like NEW have never fought a tough battle.NoR, I know they are extremely well organized and experienced so they would be able to coordinate attacks with greater efficiency and this is a war winning advantage. NEW needs to get out and gather some more experience before they can match NoR in this respect.Really? NEW has fought in pretty much every war for the last several years including one of their own starting. Has NoR fought in anything besides BiPolar and the past one, on the curbstomp side at that, since they reformed?
Though your ally strategy makes no sense in this context since it was a hypothetical 1 vs 1 battle as they currently stand.
That said, neither would ever truly win. Both would be destroyed if NoR wanted to continue the fight, because I know NEW wouldn't quit.
-
Everyone is too afraid to hurt their friends feelings. All the treaties aren't necessarily a bad thing if you actually take a stand to one side or the other, but every time one alliance wants to hurt someone inside the power structure (which seems to keep growing and growing) all the others continuously tell that alliance not to. Someone needs to start thinking a little more political and hurt some feelings.
Dead on right here. The current structure seems to literally be Pacifica and it's few allies and everyone else on the other side, especially since Polaris signed with FARK.
But the core alliances in PB/DH/CnG/SF/XX are all have their great friends in the other blocs. And now they've started tying themselves to PF, DR and MJ. Seriously, how much NS needs to be tied together?
The sheer percentage of NS on Bob tied in with each other now has eclipsed tC at its height.
-
The "1 chain away" argument is a pretty laughable one. With that logic, a couple dozen alliances could qualify for the position of hegemon. Hell, when I was in \m/ we were "1 chain away" from a laundry list of major alliances including MK, the New Polar Order, Superfriends, Athens, Umbrella, FOK and VE. You can't just make a conclusion that you'd like to believe and then point at treaty links as evidence. Those treaty links go both ways. These things have more depth than you're giving them. Of course that would shatter your preconceptions so let's not talk about that.
The one chain applies perfectly, because all those alliances roll as a group time after time. RoK got a toe out of line this war because they chose to honor a treaty and it pretty much resulted in SF abandoning them and them losing their other allies on the Hegmony side of the web.
-
MK more or less voluntarily gave up their hegemony in October when they did their treaty wipe thing. Before that they had treaties with Pandora's Box (wasn't formed yet but they would have had three), Superfriends, CnG (obviously), and other groups like AZTEC and Polar/STA. That kind of treaty spread is the most important hallmark of a hegemonic force in my opinion. But since then, MK's ties are concentrated to just CnG and PB. If you add other alliances, the treaty spread gets wider but really by the time you've linked together all the alliances necessary to make one big smothering hegemonic force, there are too many alliances behind the driver's wheel to even justify calling it a hegemony.
What? The pretty much re-signed every important treaty except Polaris and STA. Then formed DH with two members of PB. MK's move shifted the treaty web for Polar and STA by isolating them, but not for themselves in any signifigant fashion. Not to mention the fact that they added TOP which put them a chain away from IRON and all that brings.
So really right now they are tied directly to PB, CnG and are 1 chain away from SF, Duckroll and Dos. That's a massive portion of the non-neutral NS on Bob.
The most important part of that is that PB, SF, CnG and the alliances that make up Dos have fought on the same side as MK in most every situation since WoTC. Until there is some proven shake up in that, then it can only be assumed that those blocs will continue siding with MK.
As to their members trying to deny the fact that they are the central player in the current hegemony, well it's probably the fact that Archon ends up being the public face of your coalitions various war efforts.
And once again it didn't help in many eyes that Stormsend said the read reason for this war was MK boredom. Their members wanted war and it was delivered via blatant aggression. Although the reasoning did tend to change with the day, I believe that reason was the most honest and likely correct one that was put forth.
Especially after it became clear that this effort wasn't truly related to the NpO theater as that one peaced out weeks before this one.
-
I honestly don't even bother spying nukes any more. Money, Incite Govt Propaganda til successful, defcon if it will help. That's about it.
The new wonders
in Icewolf's musing on the cyberworld
A blog by Icewolf in General
Posted
It'll take me about 80 days, or 4 cycles to pay off the Federal Reserve and make it become profitable as it should cost me around 200m and increase my collections by around 50 million per 20 day cycle. They do not however, show up as purchasable yet for my nation. The 20k infra model likely never will.