shahenshah

Nice sig man.

The community at large would appreciate the propaganda in pictures rather than wall of text, thank you.

Good thing you provided the details, else many here would have mistaken the gentleman in middle to be Mr. Mogar.

Come to think of it, this post had alot of foreshadowing :ph34r:

Start-Stop-Start war

Lol! Good one!

Hi, please name it #bakstab, thanks.

The coalition of mostly battered alliances took about week to assemble with negotiations on going in parallel, and at the same time alot of people on both sides started to PM, LM had some plan, we were going to fight in tiers we had advantage and avoid, the other side would do the same, causing minimal engagements, anyway, war begun but peace was agreed. NPO was well under the terms and would remain so for months, and given the brutality of Karma terms, the other side was just looking for reasons to impose even harsher terms on NPO. Hence, NPO was never seriously considered and under intense pressure of reps, nobody seriously at the time even considered calling NPO in, calling them in would have been stupid and too much to ask, the conflict appeared localized, calling NPO would be calling in the whole of Karma back on, that would be stupid, stirring the pot there would be bad for them and bad for TPF and bad for everyone else working to sort it out Bravado is only good until rhetoric, we ALL saw what it was, we ALL agreed to our plan A and plan B and we worked on it and got it. Your original points alleging TPF were idiots for getting caught, dude, the alleged spying had occurred during the Karma and the end of war terms stipulated all hostilities were to cease and they were ceased. It was a trap and for some reason, SF decided not to pursue the matters, we saw the opportunity to end the obviously loosing-conflict and ALL parties on our side decided to end it when we could. But also saying people burned for NPO at that point is also plain wrong, NPO was no where in picture due to reps. We didnt want to bring them in to picture, it would be impossible for them and bad for everyone and instantly start Karma 2.0, nobody wanted that. We were all going to be beaten up because we refused to play nice after our beating. That was that. Nobody burned for NPO in winter of 2009/start of 2010 and saying otherwise is a stretch if not outright lie, that's a poor attempt to guilt trip NPO even amongst countless other attempts here. We were all slated to burn, because we refused to take off the uniforms. Hegemony was dead de facto, but many thought we hadnt been beaten enough and it was still there on paper and we all got targeted until that we were all beaten again. Anyway, all in all, SF got theirs too, especially Ragnarok/GOD, which brings warmth to my heart whenever I think about it. Regards

The spyings had occurred months prior to the actual war declaration, I believe the gap was of 6 months plus. Some at that time genuinely but mistakenly believed CBs were what triggered wars but obviously it was done to beat up one of the corners of the bloc that was down and defeated.Q alliances who had'nt embraced the new hegemony were to be lined up and beaten up once more after Karma, it was just part of that cycle, the connection between spying and the conflict was no deeper than just rhetoric. We were all going to be beaten up and at the time, that decision was not in our control or for that matter for anyone on that side of the politics.

Dont start at Karma, go back earlier.

You know I said specifically: "Not this one", I am not accusing Mi6 or STA or TPF and I wouldnt. I have no proof for that accusation and I wont make that accusation. My point remains that the people in future do not find the scheme for exploitation. Who knows, maybe in next war, we're on the receiving end, but I would'nt want any of the IRONers to run here and there due to some extraordinary event, it applies, equally, to all of us. I'm not trying to be partisan here and due to my AA, I should'nt automatically be percieved partisan although that would be a simpler stance to adopt, in this part of the forum, we arent in war, but are colleagues in the same game and community. If my wording appeared any bit partisan, I take them back now, I'm in no way accusing anyone, but trying to discuss a way so people do not scheme this into some in-game exploitation in future. Hope that clarifies, Thanks

I appreciate what is being done, I'm speaking in context of what can be done to ensure no side gains any advantage due to this in-game. I also believe no one will have any issues in ensuring a fair play. DDoS protections may or may not work on the other hand, hopefully they do, but to have a mechanism to ensure no unfair play occurs after the attack will give less incentives to anyone in future to influence in game actions.

We can give it a refresher in everyone's mind after 8 years, or atleast *attempt* to address it and discuss ways to address it, mine is just one suggestion. Sitting and doing nothing about is purely in my personal, opinion, the worst option, it will only encourage this kind of behavior for anyone wanting to gain unfair advantage in future wars. Not accusing anyone in current war, just saying, anyone in future can connect the dots and go for it.

This sets a bad precedent for future wars (not this one), since everybody knows now, DDoS the servers in middle of the war, run to peace mode. It's a dangerous precedent to set and we as a community should not passively encourage that. Just an idea, peace mode should be disabled for 24 hours of servers being back up for nations *not* in pm already. You're all welcome to share ways to address and minimize any unfair game-play advantages due to this extraordinary event.

Good luck Wes! have fun o/ Kiwis

Rhiz rigged me out in the first round after my chart busting performance last war that had him running despite bigger nation, injustices even within alliances, let alone outside.

Avakael has a fair point. What MI6 thinks of itself: What the world thinks of MI6:

Thanks Ogaden :-)

I sign this motion, onwards comrade!

You spread the damage out the thinnest, independent of the arithmetic of this war. Its a good policy to have for any grouping or sides, you tend to aim for maximum advantage. Despite all the hupla hoo of one sided wars etc, everyone shouting that or vice versa have always aimed for maximum advantage in the past at coalition levels. Winners and losers change, but coalitions always aim for maximum advantage, not equality. This was true in the past, it is true now and it will remain as such, everyone has shouted the war isn't equal argument, those attacking have done it, those getting attacked have done it too, so, in the end, it is what it is. The argument was stupid before, it is stupid now. Its merely an emotional outlet to satisfy your inner self that the big bad guy is on to you, and you're fighting the good under dog fight, and that if the big guy had the balls/honor/moral/whatever he'd come on to you in an equal fight, so you are fighting injustice and evil. Its just that, a silly line that is always associated mostly with smaller side, regardless of actors in the smaller side. Same actors have pressed for maximum advantage when they were in position of strength and actors in strength have shouted the equal war argument in the past too when they were in smaller sides.

Long long overdue. One can research for suspect behavior of individual nations here: https://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid If you cannot copy paste tables in excel, there are plenty of addons in chrome to copy paste tables in excel or Google sheets. Once in tables, you will be able to better organise and interpret data. Hoping moderation teams could share nation ids of multis, that would speed things up. Alternatively, one can out suspect I'd of receiving nation on that field and see the aid history and you may be able to spot past banned nations and AAs and correlate and report a suspicious behavior via that route.

Sure, consider yourself stamped with my seal of credit. You can just quote this post. Tho if someone still doubts your ability, don't worry, just let me know, I'll tell em exactly where I stamped you.

Ditto, and same goes for Mi6. Having actually fought both, I can throw in 2 cents. Sure people vomit bs along party lines and against positions they themselves held in one of the political cycles in the past, the usual crap and the usual moral outrages, but some things are just plain open and clear like how relentless MI6 and VE can be when fighting. Arguing on that is just stupid, you may dislike one or the other depending on politics or whatever, but not giving due respect to ones fighting capacity generally is harmful to ones own self. Better to respect that or learn it the hard way.

I've not seen other boards so can't really guess.

One's home boards cannot be possibly as bad as these.