Saber

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='03 February 2010 - 03:57 PM' timestamp='1265209065' post='2156518'] That's an impressive nuke. [/quote] Meh, if it ain't 1k it doesn't count.

[quote name='Smooth' date='03 February 2010 - 08:39 AM' timestamp='1265182744' post='2156016'] + No warchests + No coordination + No staggering o/ The Great War Era I miss it. [/quote] There was coordination . At least in GW2 and GW3.

Almost an even war.

[quote name='Steelrat' date='03 February 2010 - 11:31 AM' timestamp='1265193074' post='2156203'] Why the hell is this war $%&@ed up, it´s the best thing ever happened, except from NPO taking not part yet . Please NPO join in and all my wishes come true. Seriously this war fantastic, i would call it the great leveler. After this is over, hopefully earliest in 1 or 2 month, Bob won´t look the same and never will be. [b]DEATH TO THE TREATY WEB[/b] [/quote] It may be the game reset it needed. Lot of problems of inflation would go away if this war lasts few weeks/months.

[quote name='Prime minister Johns' date='03 February 2010 - 10:13 AM' timestamp='1265188383' post='2156131'] Firstly the situation was mixed up and when the news hit the public it came in that order. And secondly we are all fighting to assist each other, the main show is over. And we are now fighting for the sake of fighting now, or at least it seems that way from my perspective. Don't get me wrong I will carry out my orders to the letter, and do all I can to get my allies out of war. But I consider the war to of ended when the original combatants came to terms. [/quote] It is indeed a confusing situation. I honestly don't know what will happen now. CnG is claiming they won't give us peace while our side is fighting for that peace (at least from my perspective). However I wouldn't say war ended. I'd say that part of the war ended. Namely because CnG got wind of TOP/IRON/TORN entering the way we did, and made a smart decision to try and split us up. That's why the peace was pushed forward. Archon asked \m/ to do him a favour and when Chief Savage Man got wind of TOP/IRON entering to support NpO from Jyrinx, \m/ agreed to terms and NpO was out of the war. This does not change the fact that they peaced out because they wanted to focus on us. I do believe I would be very upset if I got peace for my alliance just so opposing coalition can focus on other people on my side. I'd see it as attempt to divide and conquer what it really is. PS. I do not think there was a conspiracy to take out TOP or IRON, but when the opportunity had arisen it was taken and rightly so (I'd do the same in their shoes). Problem occured when they underestimated resolve of NSO and NpO who were ready to come back to get peace for everyone who entered on their part (NSO their direct allies, and NpO even TOP who was not directly involved). Apologies to alliances I forgot to mention. I know our side is more than TOP/IRON/NSO/NpO but for simplicity I didn't name everyone.

[quote name='Prime minister Johns' date='03 February 2010 - 09:46 AM' timestamp='1265186765' post='2156105'] Two of polarises allies enter the war using the CB of assisting polaris concurrent to the withdrawal of \m/ and polaris from the war, which is the opposite of what people were expecting. When a war ends with white peace both sides shake hands and call it a day. [b]But what happens next is the real kicker, various other alliances also declare war in support of various allies and the war continues, even though there is no CB any more other than assisting our allies.[/b][/quote] Here you are wrong. We declared prior to the peace declaration and in support of your alliance. Yes, the peace was achieved but from what was shared on OWF it was only because Archon wanted to focus on TOP and IRON and use our "second front" as a way to eliminate part of the threat (Chief Savage Man admitted that they accepted terms because situation changed and Archon asked them to). Link to the "admission" - http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79467&view=findpost&p=2151175 From the start there was no talk of peace for us. I completely understand why NSO and NpO (and other alliances) returned to the fight. You don't get to peace out part of the coalition so you can destroy other part. Not if that coalition expects to live another day.

[quote name='Manis B' date='03 February 2010 - 03:53 AM' timestamp='1265165603' post='2154384'] LM is in whatever alliance that will feed him tech. GATO, GRE, TOP, who knows where else [/quote] TOP never fed tech to it's nations. I know that Gremlins had a program where top 5 of their nations were given free tech paid by their banks but such programme never existed in TOP. In TOP you will get things for free only if you are under our average. We will boost you up, get you up to speed, but to feed tech so you can be bigger, think again.

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' date='03 February 2010 - 08:56 AM' timestamp='1265183770' post='2156052'] UjW vet and former Paradoxian here. I think I got a bit less than half of my casualties in GOONS prior to joining TOP and the clear majority of the rest while I was there. It's prolly true that TOP hasn't really been on the wrong end of beatdown tho', until now. [/quote] This ain't a beatdown nor it is the wrong side Umar .

Great Winter War

[quote name='Zizka' date='02 February 2010 - 10:25 PM' timestamp='1265145951' post='2153862'] I'm having a hell of a time myself. [/quote] I must say it's the same for me. Just seeing whole range of emotions in posts of people on OWF. From gloating to crying to gloating. It's definitely strangest war ever. And most confusing. For me it is very fun as well even though GW2 and GW3 were more defined and antagonism was bigger.

[quote name='DaJoW' date='02 February 2010 - 03:57 PM' timestamp='1265122624' post='2153164'] That was fun. Since we shared ours with NPO we had to try and keep track of our stats manually, not too easy when we had 3-4 different member lists floating around [/quote] We had no sanction so we had to compile stats by hand. I literally used a calculator to sum everything up. Then once we hit 5k average NS we posted it on OWF and no one believed us (major alliances had 2k or so averages). Good old times .

Where do I surrender? How can we win, Oyababy is on other side.

[quote name='Jyrinx' date='01 February 2010 - 10:36 PM' timestamp='1265060175' post='2151083'] Pshh, this is the PM I sent Chief Savage: Jyrinx, on 28 January 2010 - 02:02 AM, said: [quote]Hey, First of all I'd like to note that I am not sending this message in any way in official capacity as a government member of STA; I'm just sending this as Jyrinx. So yeah, this war is !@#$@#$ stupid. TOP/IRON/TSO and basically ex-hegemony will be fighting with Polar and friends against Superfriends + CnG (I doubt they'll be neutral; CnG will be pushed towards your side of the war). Let me phrase this more clearly: TSO (aka the scum of the earth) along with TOP and friends will be fighting. With Polar and friends. Against CnG. This is retarded. Everything about this war is retarded. I hate the !@#$%* situation STA and others have been placed in. Hell, STA is now at war with CSN, a classy alliance that we have no beef with. This sucks. I know you're going to say this is Grub's fault. I'm not going to contest that at all, instead please just look at this pragmatically: we're empowering TSO and friends. Even if your side wins, you'll take tons of damage and the damage you dish out will be heavily tilted towards the Polar subset and not the TSO/TOP subset. Basically, the coalition that is capable of standing up against TOP + ex-hegemony in the future will kill itself here. Grub has gone off on one of his weird moral crusades. Don't know why, don't really care. But apparently from what I'm getting all you guys have to do is apologize and not tech raid really large alliances or something. Correct me if I'm wrong on that. Even the guys that are supporting you (like Stumpy et al) think that you guys are dumb for raiding so liberally. So yeah, here's basically my question here: is there anything I can say to you to get you to just do that (i.e. apologize for Grub being insulted and then not raiding large alliances or whatever the $%&@ it is Grub is going on his moral crusade about)? In the same topic, you could basically say that grub is incompetent and you think he's a bully or whatever. I think Grub just wants the apology to be specific to whatever slurs were said to him. Again, I know you don't care about your infra; neither do I to be honest. What I do care about is that the anti-TSO/TOP+friends alliance is killing ourselves. Over something retarded. Grub is weird, but from a sheerly pragmatic point of view I just had to send this to you and ask if there was anyway I could convince you guys to peace out this !@#$%* situation. Regardless of your response, take it easy man and all the best. - Jyrinx, guy who thinks this war is stupid[/quote] There was no conspiracy and I even stated at the beginning this was my own view. I had no idea btw that TOP and IRON were going to pre-emptively hit CnG (if others in gov knew, they didn't inform me). Edit: Also, just so my views on TOP are clear: [16:37] <%Jyrinx[STA]> Nothing against you btw Obama [16:37] <%Jyrinx[STA]> or TOP [16:37] <%Jyrinx[STA]> But you are allied to TSO [16:37] <%Unsure> roll TSO [16:37] <%Jyrinx[STA]> That's basically the jist of my beef with TOP [/quote] Just wanted that quoted.

[quote name='Jerichoholic' date='01 February 2010 - 05:59 PM' timestamp='1265043555' post='2150639'] The winner is those of us who like war and believe that casualties is the only stat that counts. TOP only needs to lose 20 members to lose their sanction. I'm sure their middle tier and low tier (along with whatever ghosts they have) will be decimated enough to leave TOP. The top TOP guys seem to be in it for the long haul. The others will be dropped quite a bit as well, I look forward to seeing the tier barriers drop quite a bit in the coming weeks/months. [/quote] Hell, if we could ask admin to take us off the sanctioned list we would. All we got from it is ghosts at 100NS who joined and won't leave. We were actually under 200 members for a while but ghosts kept us up. We are over 200 real members now because lot of people returned to fight for TOP. But no one in TOP would see loss of sanction as a loss. Infact exactly the opposite. We would like that.

[quote name='Brotherington' date='01 February 2010 - 03:57 PM' timestamp='1265036253' post='2150462'] This is very easy to say after 4 days of war. [/quote] 4 days was enough to change your party line from "Muahahaha, TOP is gonna get curbstomped, gonna enjoy seeing you burn" to "TOP outnumbers us in upper ranks, we need help". [quote name='Lord Stark' date='01 February 2010 - 06:21 PM' timestamp='1265044919' post='2150669'] I am of the mindset that an aggressor shouldn't ask for reps - if MK had attacked TOP and co. I wouldn't support us forcing them to pay reps in surrender. We were aggressively attacked with a clear lack of CB though... That does demand serious reps imho. [/quote] Good luck with that.

You could have saved us all a bit of time if you actually read what Grub had already said. Thanks for nothing.

So you finally got guts to actually declare on us? Ganging on IRON along with MHA and Gremlins (who actually know how to fight) is easy but this, haha . Welcome to the fray gentlemen. Welcome. PS. I love the backtracking by CnG members, few days ago it was MUAHAHAHA, TOP IS GOING TO GET CURBSTOMPED, now it's WE NEED HELP, TOP AND IRON HAVE A MIGHT UPPER TIER, THEY OUTNUMBER US! I can see you are feeling the cliffs behind your back and walls are closing in.

[quote name='greatmagnus' date='01 February 2010 - 03:41 AM' timestamp='1264992080' post='2149176'] Never cared for NS? They why all the back room deals about no nukes over the past wars? [/quote] I explained this many times but I'll do it again. No first strike rule we had was a simple one. It's goal was to maximize the ratio of inflicted damage to received damage. In most wars we had an advantage in high ranks and we could saturate our opponents and conventionally destroy them. Damage they could inflict on us was very low as they cannot effectively kill 3 nations on their own. But if you bring nukes into the mix they can nuke us just as easy as we can nuke them. So, obviously we preferred to keep it non nuclear for tactical reasons. Namely using our conventional advantage we held. It's pretty analogous to having a gun in your hand, and a hand grenade and your opponent in a smallish room with you. You can keep shooting at him and kill him with the gun or you can throw the grenade and kill him and hurt yourself pretty badly as well. We preferred to kill him with the gun. We are not going to shoot ourselves in the foot. *EDITED: Throw the grenade, not the gun

[quote name='KingSrqt' date='01 February 2010 - 01:34 AM' timestamp='1264984448' post='2148723'] you overestimate your position. [/quote] As a sovereign alliance no one can force us to give you peace if we don't want it. What's there to overestimate?

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='01 February 2010 - 02:26 AM' timestamp='1264987586' post='2148830'] It would actually be pretty cool to have a strength range stand-off like that. [/quote] Sadly I don't think it's possible to actually have one. NS losses in 7 days of nuke warfare at high ranges is huge. You can lose 2k infra a day and that kind of losses make certain that you'll fall out of NS range you are in.

[quote name='ty345' date='01 February 2010 - 02:43 AM' timestamp='1264988600' post='2148934'] It's ironic because you have the reputation of caring about nothing but NS, when you said the opposite. Don't make me explain the joke, or it isn't funny [/quote] Reputation and image is completely different than fact. Anyone who is in TOP knows that we have never cared for NS, we cared for being effective at war. That's why we prioritized military wonders, why we bought nukes when they were expensive to maintain (years ago) and never grew above certain range (most of us). I hope you see that we don't care about our NS now. Oh, and my nation description is still (after years): "The Order of the Paradox comes first, my nation comes second! In Hoc Signo Vinces!" I think it summarizes view of most TOPers very well.

[quote name='flak attack' date='01 February 2010 - 01:26 AM' timestamp='1264983965' post='2148703'] That's because you don't no how anarchy works [img]http://thecastlehall.com/boards/Smileys/kickass/eng101.gif[/img] [/quote] Probably

[quote name='ty345' date='01 February 2010 - 01:13 AM' timestamp='1264983200' post='2148680'] Oh, the irony! [/quote] What is ironic about it? Most of us stopped buying infra after we got last economic improvement. We didn't inflate our NS through land or masses of redundant infra. Two largest guys in TOP (LM and ExtremelyAverage) were relatively recent arrivals to TOP and had their own way of running nations. If I was LM I would have never bought past 14k infra, but then again, I would have never become #1 nation in CN either.

[quote name='Prodigal Moon' date='01 February 2010 - 01:06 AM' timestamp='1264982777' post='2148668'] That's what I'm saying. I don't understand how these nations got so big while saving so much. Donations? It is a mystery. [/quote] My nation is 1200 days old. It's a long time. Also most of us that have huge warchest decided to stop buying infra at a certain point and just hoarded cash. If we kept buying infra (I could have bought to 20k infra for example) we would have much lower warchests but more NS. For most people in TOP NS was irrelevant and we focused on being most prepared we can be.

[quote name='KingEd' date='01 February 2010 - 12:47 AM' timestamp='1264981654' post='2148629'] On a serious note, does anyone know what LM's war-chest is ? Being that he is the largest nation in the game or was...I'd be interested to know how much he has saved up over the years. But for the ones I saw here... 6bill, 7.8bill, you guys are insane! Go buy some dam Infra or Land or Tech, do something! lol. [/quote] I know I know! And yeah. When Vladimir Stukov came with his warchest requirements I thought he was a lunatic. Now I think he was a visionary!