Jump to content

Vol Navy

Members
  • Posts

    1,164
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Vol Navy

  1. [quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1300703131' post='2672115']
    Not exactly. The point is, that it wasn't in our interests for the conflict to drag on when NSO and co. were taking their time to enter because stuff like that had already taken place. In order to cut down on further problems, getting to the main event made the most sense.
    [/quote]


    So rolling Pacifica was the main event for the PB/Polar front? Well at least that's fully admitted now even though it was pretty well clear anyway.

  2. [quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1300702728' post='2672112']
    Let's say after Ragnarok goes to Polar side, they pull significant amounts of alliances with them. I know for a fact Tautology was trying to do it. There was definitely a point where victory was uncertain during that time and regardless, entering on the NpO side late in the game was the best move for Pacific, given they'd be in a worse position if they didn't enter at all.
    [/quote]


    Well that didn't happen at all and clearly wasn't going to happen when you launched this attack. So it has absolutely 0 bearing on this conflict.

  3. [quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1300689018' post='2671989']
    Jesus. Why do you keep insisting MK is this supreme driving force?
    [/quote]


    Probably because Archon is always the voice of everything from your side. Because it's always MK making announcements like these. Because the entire reason for this war was MK was bored and thought "hey, NPO is our old enemy, lets war them." And what do you know, the war happens.

  4. [quote name='General Scipio' timestamp='1300692018' post='2672032']
    Ok, I'll make this all bolded so you can understand. [b]A month of war will not keep NPO out of the game for 2 years.[/b]

    It will keep them out of the game for like...a month. How damaging do you really think a month of war really is? NPO will do just as much damage to DH's upper tier, so they'll be in the same relative postition. They'll have 60 more damaged nations, but DH will probably have into the hundreds. If they don't come out of peace mode, DH will still have the same relative strength over them, simply because NPO never fought. 60 NPO nations will not have taken damage, and hundreds of DH nations will have been spared damage.

    Damaging DH's nations is a good tactic, because if you can perhaps get one of the main groups supporting us on your side, you'll have the advantage. Get MHA or Sparta or FARK on your side and due to the fact that our upper tier was damaged fighting NPO, you'll have the advantage in upper nations.

    NPO has been at peace for 2 years, they have the money to fight a month of wars. You're bill locked nation may take 2 years to get back up to it's pre-war levels, but NPO's will not. Get it?
    [/quote]


    Do you have a large tech heavy nation or have you ever fought one? I suspect the answer is no, not at all. In one week vs 10k+ tech nations I lost 11,000 infra and over 2000 tech and about 4000 miles of land, about 66,000 ns. The infra can be rebuilt, land isn't as easy to reaquire and the tech takes a long time to recover.

    NPO has one nation with 10k+ tech. One nation. MK/UMB alone have 55 10k+ tech nations. How damaging would a month of war vs those numbers be? Extremely. And no, NPO wouldn't dish out nearly as much damage as they took. Say an NPO nation with 5500 tech fights 3 Umbrella nation with 11,000 tech each of those nations will do signifigantly more damage than the NPO nation is capable of dishing out, almost double. His nukes will knock off around 300 infra, theirs will knock off close to 600. Air. CM and ground will also do much more.

    If that weren't the case DH wouldn't be asking for this. They would not ask for a war where they'd take anything close to equal damage.

  5. [quote name='neneko' timestamp='1300645403' post='2671195']
    I don't think anyone ever tried to make any secret of the fact that at the very least the alliances that hit GOONS will be paying reps. In fact you'd be hard pressed to find people that didn't know this. Nice insider info though.
    [/quote]


    Incorrect. GOONs may be asking for reps from everyone, them getting them is an entirely different and very unlikely story.

  6. [quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1300602764' post='2670921']
    Note: TOP did not attack the NPO in Karma or in this war.

    So with that fixed up your post reads: "well let's see, TOP was in The Continuum, followed NPO around like a whipped pup,"

    well my oh my, that proves TOP will be attacking us shortly!


    yeah that's cool and all, but i wasn't addressing the circular argument about gpa/npo/umbrella. i was saying your reasoning is identical to each other, and therefore if you are claiming that the same reasoning applies to one and not the other (note: you are), then you are a hypocrite.
    [/quote]


    So AAAAAAAAAAGGGG is a hypocrite. Thanks!

  7. [quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1300601930' post='2670904']
    uh, what? so you accuse umbrella of not changing because of something that happened 4 years ago because of the culture (or whatever), but then say that you have changed (note: using the same reasoning NFLgeneric was - 'barely anyone is left, it's all history etc)?

    although the word hypocrisy is overused on these forums, i feel its aptly applied in this case.
    [/quote]


    Ummm I brought up GPA because Johnny Apocalypse had his little rant about how "you people rolled the GPA" or whatever rubbish it was he said. I merely pointed out that Umbrella also rolled the GPA, along with VE and TOP and FOK and others on your side of the treaty web these days.

    Then AAAAAAAAAAAGGGG brought up a bunch of stuff from 4 years ago about us saying we were still the same but Umbrella had changed. Yet we've done nothing like we used to in years and have sought to repair relations with people while Umbrella is involved in this pre-empt of an alliance who was essentially neutral in the last war.

    So don't give me that "you are a hypocrite" line unless you are very happy to call AAAAAAAAAAAGGGG the same.

  8. [quote name='AAAAAAAAAAGGGG' timestamp='1300600570' post='2670885']
    Those were things in reference to what TPF had done against others, not specifically Genmay. Hell, I wasn't even thinking of Genmay as a specific incident. TPF still embraces that they left UJP out to dry, and doesn't seem to care, and embraces their current path.
    [/quote]


    Our current path as in not doing anything war wise besides defending allies since 2008? Working for a year to mend relations with on old adversary in the STA? Things like that?

    TPF still embraces that they left UJP out to dry? I don't know that we have more than 5 members left from UJP era. I have been in TPF almost for over 3 years and I wasn't around for the UJP stuff. We literally never talk about that, ever. I doubt there is a single post in our forums about UJP outside of possibly a TPF history page.

    Most of the UJP/NoV/GPA veterans actually left TPF and founded Poison Clan. Hell, Twisted was the lead General for TPF at that time and I actually fought alongside of him vs GPA.

    The TPF you are speaking of died years ago.

    Umbrella on the other hand are still doing pretty much the same thing they were doing 3-4 years ago. You are just doing it with a different set of allies.

  9. [quote name='AAAAAAAAAAGGGG' timestamp='1300599671' post='2670873']
    From the stats I've seen, we declared maybe like 3 wars on GPA, if that. We didn't roll GPA. Umbrella as a whole regrets their actions in that war. TPF? You guys have embraced Slayer's legacy, when he left his blood brothers on the field and struck a deal with our enemies and left us out to dry. When he forcefully disbanded NoV. When he went full on Stockholm Syndrome and allied those that were originally set out to destroy him, the same alliance you still remained allied to today.

    Alliances make mistakes, but at least we've been able to own up to that much.
    [/quote]


    Sorry, doesn't compute. You declared on GPA, you gave your support to that rolling. You don't get to say we are guilty of X 4 years ago, stuff we paid a massive price for btw, but get to claim you are changed and therefore innocent these days. Especially while pre-emptively rolling someone who was trying their best to remain neutral in the Polar/VE war.

    But please, continue to try and dredge up things that happened long before the war where we lost 2/3rds of our members, 90% of our pre-war NS and had to pay reps to top it off for those actions.

  10. [quote name='AAAAAAAAAAGGGG' timestamp='1300598806' post='2670856']
    Guess what, Ochocinco is gone, and Roq, myself, and the majority of the Umbrellian government weren't in Umbrella when that happened, but if you really want to bring that up - by all means.
    [/quote]


    Matters not a whit, Slayer99 left this planet ages ago and we still get raked over the coals for stuff from his era.

    Umbrella will always, always carry that stain. No matter who is in Govt or was then. You rolled the GPA. Don't run from your history.

  11. [quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1300576753' post='2670472']
    [b]No, that isn't what he is saying at all. Just because you and yours felt it was completely acceptable to roll Neutral alliances does not mean everyone else does. Do you understand? Can you stop with these terrible slippery slope arguments and stop putting words in our mouths and argue your case based on logic/reason/fact for just once in your miserable existence.[/b]
    [/quote]

    HAHAHAAHA I don't know if this has been addressed yet or not, if not, see this thread.

    http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=14358

    You and yours indeed eh TOP, VE, Umbrella etc??

  12. [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300573308' post='2670423']

    OOC: A strategy that boils down to "this game let's us choose not to play, so let's not play", "we can't beat them, so we'll just bore them to death", and "I'm taking my ball and going home" is absolutely horrible for the well being of this game. I had the option (and ample opportunity) to utilize it way back in the Green Civil War and choose more drastic methods over it because of this fact (among others). CN is fragile enough as it is. The last thing we need is people refusing to play in war mode when they get the short end of the stick. We will not condone this strategy by succumbing to it. The dogpile on GOONS was silly and we'll kick people a little bit for it come peace negotiations, but the peace mode strategy is absolutely unacceptable.

    [/quote]


    So you are basically saying GPA, WTF and others aren't participating either because they aren't using the war option?

    You gonna roll them next for that?

  13. [quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1300529925' post='2670098']
    I don't disagree there in hindsight. Archon disappearing off the face of the earth afterwards didn't help it either. Ultimately, you're right about the wider community.

    It's not really the case. As I said before, MK posters like saying things get people up in arms and they did want a war, but that is the case with almost all alliances in terms of rank and file, they're just rowdier and louder. People have talked about the radio show story but taking it as the actual reason for the war is being very MK-centric and acting as if MK members determine what happens rather than the leadership. The DoW assumed people would know the context of the Polar/STA thing and many didn't.
    [/quote]

    I believe Stormsend to be somewhat more than a general member of Mushroom Kingdom. He did say this war was to appease general members of said Kingdom. And honestly, we know that what the Kingdom wants it is going to get in regards to Doomhouse.

    You stepped in a pile of crap and have changed the story from your inital DoW once the fallout became more negative than you expected it to become. You figured every single alliance and person on Bob outside of NPO's sphere still had a pre-Karma view of NPO. That is proving to be quite different and now you are trying to legitimize your unprovoked and aggressive war. That's why you had even Spartan Govt calling you out in this thread. You put them through their own big PR debacle and harsh war for your LOLZY attack on NPO.

  14. The NS argument is a strawman as has been pointed out. Because such a massive amount of NS on DH's side is made up from tech, their top nations lose NS much more slowly than those they are fighting. I had to fight nations with my level of infra and almost double my tech. Their nukes were dropping about 550 land, 550 infra, 180 tech a day. Air attacks 80 infra each. GA's 80 infra. It's honestly ridiculous that they were even in range of me and that the tech bonus to NS isn't much greater since it makes war from WRC powered nations so much more damaging. After one round you are out of their range. Their NS is still quite high due to the tech and the fact that they retained about double your infra since your attacks are only doing half the damage theirs are.

  15. [quote name='r00tn00b' timestamp='1300432483' post='2668886']
    I don't even know what is going thru your head to come to this conclusion. NPO is not apart of RV's argument, it is the rest of them that jumped at the chance to hit goons. They should know what to expect from the alliance who demands reps from anyone who wrongs us. Why you keep bringing up NPO as part of your counter argument is beyond, do you just have the one note to chirp?
    [/quote]


    NPO = our MADP partner. Once you hit them, chain is triggered. You've hit us as well. We hit back. I actually haven't fought a single GOONs this entire war. All MK and Umbrella with one LOST.

  16. [quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1300432418' post='2668884']
    Um, this doesn't really match up with what you've said regarding the war before.

    In addition, not really, no. Why didn't MK just attack NPO before then?
    [/quote]


    I hadn't heard what Stormsend said before. Now that he "let the cat out of the bag" well, it was all for crowd control it would seem.

  17. And since no one answered it very early today....One round of war vs the massive tech nations in UMB and MK will put every NPO member down into the middle tiers. DH is already outnumbered there and getting beaten up quite a bit. Will you call in even more allies to fight these NPO nations for the last two rounds or stick it out with what you have at the table already?

  18. [quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1300431720' post='2668870']
    Five different alliances attacked NPO. To continue to claim that not one of them had any reason to do so is simply ludicrous.
    [/quote]


    There is one chief in that crowd though. Mushroom Kingdom. Not a single one of you would have attacked without their stamp of approval.

    Not UMB, not FAN, not NoR, certainly not GOONs.

    I have no doubt the cause of this war was exactly what Stormsend stated. MK was bored and their general membership was getting out of control. So they served up a little NPO war to calm the masses. FAN used this opportunity, I would figure they were most likely approached by DH and invited to tag along for the ride to try and give DH a little cover for declaring a completely CBless war. NoR is here because FAN asked for assistance.

  19. And all this CB talk still. CN Radio needs more pub, it's actually very informative. Stormsend pretty much let the cat out of the bag a couple weeks ago when he said something along the lines of "I might get in trouble for saying this, but the real reason for the war was our general membership was eating our own. We were very bored and figured hey, NPO are old rivals, lets war them!".

    And I have no doubt he was telling the truth.

  20. [quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1300361202' post='2667583']
    There is no incentive for ending the war while the upper tiers who have been in peace mode the entire time have not fought. It would be stupid and give the PM strategy a victory, which sets not only a bad precedent, but would be a nonsensical concession as we would leave a goal unaccomplished for little gain. At this point, GOONS don't require as much aid and will require less as it goes on and most of our upper tier nations can rebuild without much worry while preserving their warchest intregrity. Giving the peace mode strategy a victory is not in our interests when in the long run, it won't be beneficial for your side.
    [/quote]


    Maybe this side feels that giving your absolutely unprovoked war of aggression any further validity by agreeing to terms that benefit you while destroying them isn't the best precedent to set either. It just sets precedent that DH/PB can do whatever you want when you want, everyone else on Bob just needs to learn to grab ankles and take it.

    And sure your upper tier can rebuild it's infra. Tech will take longer to replace. Even at the best slot usage it still takes a while to replace thousands and thousands of tech and there are quite a number of MK and GOONs nations who have lost several thousand. Not to mention several that lost gigantic amounts of land, which in the current state will take years to replace if it ever gets replaced at all.

  21. [quote name='uaciaut' timestamp='1300357337' post='2667560']
    NPO:

    A) let us heavily damage your middle tier because we outnumber you there and we can even put nations into PM and back due to that.
    B) let us keep most of upper tier intanct
    C) give us white peace too

    Next thing you're gonna ask for OUR surrender as well, right? Hell maybe even dump 50k tech on you, at least we'd be doing it efficiently.
    [/quote]

    A) Don't complain about getting it handed to you in the middle tiers when you declared an aggressive war in which your middle tier was out numbered and your opponents wisely chose to fight in those ranges.

    B) I am pretty sure that is the general idea. Why get absolutely destroyed when you can go into PM and you know...not get absolutely destroyed.

    C) You probably should consider it. The war is not currently fightable in the upper tiers, in the mid and lower tiers you are getting beaten pretty badly. We are able to come out of PM, wreck nations, go back to PM without even picking up aggressive wars.

    To add to the list.

    D) Your vaunted efficiency is out the window, your top tier can't grow either because you are funneling money to GOONs to keep them moving in the under 5000ns fighting range and you are under the threat of war, so many of you are having to collect at about 1/2 your pre-war infra, even in the upper tiers that only fought for a round or two.

    E) So NPO sits stagnant at the top, you sit nearly as stagnant there. Your middle and lower tiers are getting beaten up badly and allies are also suffering due your war of unprovoked aggression.

    F) You do realize that after one round of war with your gigantic tech nations that your upper tier will once again be out of range of most of NPO's current PM nations? At that point your middle tier will be facing about 2 more rounds of war even more severely outgunned than they are now.

×
×
  • Create New...