ImaNewbie

you sir have won the thread

So what you are saying is that people who honour their treaties despite the overwhelming odds, who fight to the best of their ability and with great sacrifice deserve to be punished for that for the very simple reason they fought on the other side of the war? It is not uncommon to see in CN TBH, however it is also something Karma considers crimes of the past done by their enemies. I see more and more people who are okay with the fact when the "right" and "wrong" are relative to which side are you on. I guess that is an illness that comes with a victory.

It is clear that some alliances place themselves over all other and claim to have the right to judge who has the right to play the game to what extent. Those are usually alliances with power to enforce their decisions by use of brute force. Nothing new here. The actors have changed but they still play the same drama.

How cynical. I actually like you

People tend to mistake cleare conscience with short memory. Kudos to Echelon for supporting their ally even if the war was lost from the begining. Not every alliance is capable of that.

With those terms you are worthy to take the place that used to belong to NPO. As time passes, someone will eventually take your current place to do the same thing you are doing now. Karma The wheel of history has made full turn.

CN is in fact showing that treaties are not as meaningful as they pose to be and what goes is what is more comfortable for the given alliance. There is only a handful of people who's word is worth the "e-paper" it was written on and their signature actually means anything. Call them out on that and you are e-lawyering. Nobody likes to be called out on a promise being broken as it hurts their ego and their sense of self-righteousness. As such it ruins the game for the people who should've never been trusted in the first place. Then again their are those who tend to take a vague treaty and troll others by trying to enforce their interpretation as the one and only right understanding of the written word, even if parties involved both have different opinion. Then i would agree that e-lawyering shows its harmful face. E-lawyering isn't bad, but can be used badly. Still what is even worse is using the e-lawyering tag to legitimise the fact you just broke your word. And you are worth as much as your word.

karma war end of topic

I think WIC would be the best test of skill and teamwork here.

At least you had fighting targets, Everyone was avoiding me like i was leper or something. Through the whole course of war i encoutered 2 people that fought, kudos to them, especially blacky from Nemesis <3.

a lot of fighting words in this peace thread.

Offensive? Yes Aggresive? No Our ally was under attack and nukes were already flying their merry way in this war. Our reason for warring you guys may have passed but once those things are started it takes a while to stop them. Not to mention several other alliances you claim loose allegiance to have activated poseidon against Val by attacking without a defensive clause. However your side rejected an offer we made to stop hostilities between us and allow us to move with our treaty obligations. As such you supported the very actions that activated our treaty for the second time and provided us with yet another reason to war you. Having said that, lets enjoy peace.

maybe because nukes and navy need to be stockpilied for a few days for full capacity, while other military can be instantly bought prior to engagement.

we have girls in our ranks too

o/ peace, the time of preparation for next war. o/ everyone we fought, see you all next war, who knows at which side?

great issue as always. Kepp them coming Stumpy! aj/

yup, quite surprising i'm taunting an opponent during war. Well, I hope they actually cotribute some forces to their attack unlike some others...

Its not a question of having a reason or not but timing. Some people just prefer to wait for their allies to take the initial hits so they don't risk as much when participating in conflict. (and should it go the "wrong way" they can always not enter it)

Are you suggesting bandwagon? (either that or the combined forces of LoSS Nemesis Top BTO and Umbrella need backup. Nah, i'll go for the former.)

Like our friend said: You know you are a badass when #4 alliance is brought to put you down. o/ us

Just call it "The Great Karma War" That should satisfy the most. It is great in terms of engaged nations, casualties, GRL, and the effects it will cause to planet Bob as well as possibly the time span of the war. It is connected to the Karma movement which to my knowledge exist only for the cause of this war and is said to disperse after it. I know many of you don't want to call it this way. I know many don't want the name Karma to be connected to the word "war". But personally i think this war is already associated with Karma and I also believe many view it as a Great War. The thing is the more "Great War (insert number here)" we will have the less meaningfull the term will be. The name must describe the war but also must be different from the names of the wars that are not associated with it.

This war saw the dawn of Karma as the power capable of changing world order. Not wanting war named after Karma is a "political corectness" stunt. Keep in mind however it doesn't matter what the official name is. Each group will remember this war under a different name. Will see it differently as we all have our own side of the story. If people want to call it Karma War they will. Regardless of what a politcally correct minority attempt to enforce.

o/ purple Nuke them till they glow then shoot them in the dark!

nah, we take our time. don't finish before we do.

honourable and respectble 64 Digits, carry on.