Vhalen

And the people that he consequenced acknowledged the same.

Wait, I thought we just got out of that era.

I see the treaty web used less as a commitment to common defense (as it should be) and more an excuse to dogpile opportunistically. We can hope that the current altercation might change that, though. (Yeah, right.) Apparently it's not all that hard to come up with other excuses.

I question my sanity for continuing to read this, but... It was a 30 member alliance -- a size universally acknowledged as a sovereign entity. Therefore it was not a raid; it was an undeclared war. Since it seems this has become a pattern, it has dangerous implications. I can't say I'm thrilled with the way this unfolded, but it doesn't come as a surprise that \m/ and company aren't garnering much sympathy. With my limited knowledge of what happened (mostly due to not giving enough of a rat's ### to dig up details), I'm inclined to agree with your second paragraph. However, I strongly disagree with the first. It's everyone's business when a mad dog starts biting the neighbors, even if you don't know them particularly well. Let's face it: that's why NPO got knocked off the mountaintop. They were unpredictably, dangerously aggressive, and it made everyone nervous. Hmm, doing the same thing and expecting different results, what's that describe again?

I still feel more or less safe. I mean, it's not like the Browns won the AFC Championship too.

Civility and butt-kissing are two different things. If you don't comprehend that, perhaps it's safer for you to avoid such trying things as conversations. Well, it seems to me that if it isn't being adhered to, then it isn't a valid document. Perhaps that means they're unaligned? I imagine it would just be a raid, instead, in that case, and nobody in \m/ would complain. Seriously, though? This whole thing seems stupid to me, from basically every angle and side. Someone wake me when it's over?

I have a real hard time caring about this thread one way or another, but: I disagree with this completely. I consider IRC completely OOC, unless specifically stated otherwise.

Circle complete unless someone backs out. Thanks, all!

Working on it...waiting for a few queries to come back.

The problem with this idea, even if it were implemented, is that it's easy to inflate casualties at the top ranks at the endgame, simply by buying full soldiers each time you're nuked. Hiring soldiers and placing them at ground zero to be irradiated isn't tactically sound at all, and shouldn't be rewarded.

Down to Aluminum/Marble or Aluminum/Pigs, and whichever we get decides whether we go with fish or fast food. I'm sure both are delicious!

I kind of have wheat myself, so I don't think that's going to work out.

I just updated it with both options until something starts to click a little more. And yes, I'll send out messages to everyone once the circle's in order.

Bump. FYI, my circle last round stayed together all round! B)

I understand what you meant. I'll see what's up once I get a few more replies. I actually think I prefer fish to spices, because that extra 8% population will end up being a few improvements, but I'm willing to go with either if the circle fills up.

Just vaguely wondering why you'd pick cattle over fish, since neither produces any BR.

CIRCLE COMPLETE. Thanks, all.

Well, if you want to call them rogues. I generally consider people who duck out of alliance a few days before round end, in order to nuke the people their alliance is working against without creating a full alliance war between the two, to be more along the lines of black ops agents. Disavowed, sure, but we all know who they're working for. It doesn't destroy a nation. It does make it hard (perhaps a bit longer than it should, and I have no issue with knocking a day off nuclear anarchy, as was suggested earlier). I agree that it sucks to be in nuclear anarchy for the last 10 or 12 days of the round, watching as people above you collect millions in taxes. But it happens, and as long as TE doesn't see one massive alliance/bloc clogging the whole top 50 or so, pretty much everyone who floats into the top few will get attacked. Admin/moderation have been pretty good about catching slot-fillers and fake wars in past rounds, at least in the top 10, so "cheating the battle system" isn't really an option. Heck, I was in basically the same situation you were, this round. We actually got nuked by the same guy, but I think I'd already saved a bit more cash than you, and I've been able to cling to a top 15 spot since, with an offhand chance at making top 10 still, depending on what happens tonight.

I think "no lower boundary" presents an unintentional window for an update senate rogue. (Vote for self, start sanctioning.) If you take out the lower boundary altogether (presumably it's there to prevent that sort of thing), then I suggest adding a time constraint from start of voting until senate powers are enabled. Perhaps the simplest way is just to disallow senate powers for an hour starting at update, so a "reasonable amount of the population" at least gets an opportunity to vote before a senator can start doing things.

This sounds like about the best solution to me. The amount of damage is strong, but not overwhelming (pretty much as it should be, I'd say), but with the shortness of a round, nuclear anarchy + war length (because, let's be honest, it starts a day after the war starts, and ends five days after it ends), means it's not all that hard to deprive people of collections for about a quarter of the round. Since war length isn't changing, maybe the other should be considered. Of course, that would mean altering the discount for radiation cleanup (2 days sounds like it would give a very good reason to go for that trade set).

Recently, The Guild of Calamitous Intent has taken notice of certain questionable events occurring within this venue (hereby referred to as "The Thread"). As the contents of The Thread undeniably present a party (hereby referred to as "The Nemesis") seeking a suitable Arch, The Guild would like to take a moment to courteously remind The Nemesis that there is no substitute for a qualified Guild professional. Furthermore, The Guild orders the following: 1a) The Nemesis must cease inciting improper behavior. 1b) In the future, The Nemesis must direct any further applications for an Arch through proper channels. 2) All parties taking advantage of The Thread to practice Costumed Aggression or Arching without a license must cease and desist, until such time as they have acquired an Arching License from The Guild, along with the approval of the Council of Thirteen and The Sovereign. Once these terms have been met, all parties are free to resume their search for a suitable Nemesis/Arch relationship. Thank you for selecting The Guild of Calamitous Intent. Vhalen Sovereign, for the Council of Thirteen

I find that all debates are pretty much equally dumb, since they basically boil down to a presentation of opinions that aren't mine.

You haven't been looking very hard, then.

Percentage gain seems like a vaguely silly metric to me, since the blocs with the highest initial percentages are going to show the "worst" growth, as the metric favors smaller initial numbers. To show an "unbiased" look, and perhaps an interesting comparison, I'd recommend a different presentation, which incorporates both percentage and total numbers, and draws attention to the numbers instead of the names, so you can highlight highs and lows in both, like so: Nations over 100k NS Citadel: (57) 65 = +8 = +14% SF: (7) 11 = +4 = +57% Poseidon: (8) 9 = +1 = +12.5% FB: (8) 9 = +1 = +12.5% CnG: (6) 9 =+3 = +50% Edit: Included underlining because it looks nicer that way.

Vox members would likely have the best hard numbers, as Nintenderek indicated. I only brought the numbers up because certain people were waving false ones around like they held true. I concede your point, sir, and this will be my last comment on the subject (at least in this thread).