Kiss Goodbye

If there is one thing I do not miss it is the chanting of people on the opposing coalition to bring out enemy nations from peacemode during war, as if the alliance had not ordered them there for a strategic purpose thoroughly discussed within their coalition. It's always been obvious that the nations were there for logical reasons--in top tier alliances like TOP the reason is usually that they have no money and would be bill locked immediately if they fought. In mixed or mass alliances the reason is usually that they are banks who are relied upon to relieve bill lock as needed. Sometimes it's both. The demands to come out typically ignore the strategic reality for an attempt at a PR hit. Has that ever worked? What is bizarre now is that it is not coming from the winning side, but the losing side. At least those who were winning had leverage.

After that, they'll move on to the next set of targets in their range, and then the next. It seems pretty well thought out. Ratshole discussed it about five years ago.

I'm coming back for one reason only: to remind those who were unaware what kind of person Steve Buscemi really is. Many years ago, a certain alliance somehow found out about an internal discussion we were having. That discussion was not terribly aggressive but out of context it seemed so. As I was fixing it (by showing him the ENTIRE discussion), their leader admitted to me that a member of TOP showed him tailored screenshots of that discussion. I launched an investigation--all signs pointed to Steve Buscemi. He even appeared to be a part of them. But there was not proof, so I let it go. At the eve of war, with TOP at the head of the Coincidence Coalition--Steve Buscemi entered peace mode against orders. No explanation was given. But he was a quiet member, so I let it go. When we were caught unaware and trapped by our enemies during the BiPolar war, Steve lashed out at Crymson, and jumped ship, and joined the other side. I resolved not to let that go. Want to talk about grudges? Steve Buscemi was a traitor to us. But TOP did not hold a personal grudge against Steve for one reason: those who knew held our tongues. You were not worth the cost. But we never forgot. And now no one else will, either. Thanks for handing this opportunity to us. That is realpolitik.

I imagine they're considering this very accurate analysis: I had expected this war to run significantly longer, honestly. That was well within Eq's power, and would've ground down the warchests of their opposition quite a lot more. I'll assume that the decision to end was based on spy reports suggesting otherwise though. Separate note: Given the many pages of hails from AZTEC, DT and Sengoku on the TOP front, I must assume my old friends have done their usual thing. TOP makes most of its friends by nuking them. Glad that hasn't changed.

Given the warchests present among the majority of the nations on the doomhouse side, a quick peace would be a huge error. You'd need to nuke away virtually all the tech on these nations to not see them just rebuy all the way back to where they were one day after the war. This would take many, many months. Meanwhile, political realities would set in and the DH faction would likely be playing kingmaker between Duckroll and XX/SF in some future war.

I would guess that they are making extensive use of other AAs. As they did in BiPolar. I wouldn't hold my breath to find out where so they could be counted though. My curiosity is why anyone is on the main AA at all.

I am probably underestimating the majority. I have no idea what other alliances' warchest standards are. But it would be very interesting to see where everyone stacks up.

Not immediate. I'd guess most people have 100 days of bills or so (not really enough to fight a long war on even grounds). Some in certain alliances likely have much more; these will be the difference makers. Hopefully they are not ordered to waste their resources rebuying infrastructure in war. The methodology is based heavily around not overdeclaring and instead running with 1 offensive war and 3 defensive wars, selecting targets to bring down one at a time (those with shortest warchests). Gramlins deployed this against IRON in Karma (calling it 'sniper' and the MK tactic of declaring on 3 nations at a time 'shotgun') and they were able to roll through the IRON upper tier in chunks, widening their attacks as more nations were put in bill lock (at which point they only needed to be sent 1 nuke per 5 days and the usual attacks which were unopposed). That may not be repeated here, if as stated some Doomhouse people are prioritizing rebuying all the way back to the top levels, rather than to the next level down on which they'd have a big advantage. The only way to stop it is to keep people from being able to redeclare on their previous targets. After Doomhouse&Co secure their upper tier we may see some of them sell infra/land to declare down and widen the advantage as people exit peacemode, bit by bit. There is, of course, a lower limit on their capacity to do this. At high NS levels, however, a net 1.5m/day isn't going to cover the bills. But yes, as I noted previously the aid chains that matter most can be provided by nations well below this mark. That's where DH are critically misjudging: since aid hasn't progressed significantly, a 100k+ nation and a 60k nation are basically able to dish out the same amount of money.

It really isn't, because you only need one nuclear weapon a week to keep a nation in nuclear anarchy and unable to benefit from collections. Once in bill lock, you and your nuclear weapons are dead weight, and DH nations are free to keep targeting you, expanding out of 'sniper' mode (3 defensive wars, 1 offensive war) to continue the bill lock. And nuclear weapons cost quite a bit to upkeep, as does infrastructure. Your folks can't sell their infra, either, because then they'd be out of range. This is a warchest and aid chain battle, plain and simple. Nobody (on either side) seems terribly interested in posting their warchest spy results here, though. I see a lot of bluster in these threads from both sides without any of the important information backing it up.

I do. 2010 BiPolar. It was the TOP signature strategy. It's also why AI and IRON are so good at tracking it. What many of us making arguments about 'the top tier' are missing is the purpose of a top tier. The purpose is to be able to drop 15m every ten days on smaller nations to turn them into large nations without any impact to the nation's growth. This is consistently achieved around the 60k mark. The game has gone on for so long without any substantial modification of the aid system that the difference in economic function of a 60k and a 160k nation is precisely zero. Hal is correct but didn't make his point as well as he could have. No, what will make the difference in this war is how many nations on each side have the warchest required to maintain war at a high level of infrastructure with no effective tax collections due to nuclear anarchy for more than 180 days. And also how well nations on both sides are able to keep their peers from slipping in to peace mode to recover warchests and reload nuclear weapons. That does tend to be more common among top-tier nations, of course.

Shah, you were IRON gov when Liquid first introduced this plan to the 'convenience coalition' in 2010. You and many others should be fully aware of pretty much the entirety of the battle plan.

You know, Timberland, I don't give one flying [REDACTED] about this war. But it does make me sad to see you holding a grudge against our old friends. Please think about letting go of whatever happened.

I can think of no better topic to make a final post with my account on these forums. I kept it in existence entirely to say this one thing. You make me proud, Yevgeni. I always knew you would lead us.

Some of you know me. I've made some good friends before I departed this world and never got to say goodbye to you. I did so because I knew I could never leave if I tried to explain myself to you. Leaving hurt. My reasons are my own, they are selfish and more than a little motivated by my shame in my inability to stop the destruction of my alliance and my great failure to bring about the events that seem to have come around today regardless. That has taught me one thing. In the grand scheme of Planet Bob, [b]diplomacy is meaningless.[/b] What is right will always happen, eventually. Despite my failure to take advantage of the opportunities presented to me, what could have been now is. The fate of my own alliance is trivial in the grand scheme. I see that now and feel more at peace than I have at any point in the last year. Some of you have only seen my name in a single TOP announcement that I was elected Grand Chancellor for a term. In that time I saw my fair share. I sought to make amends around the world for TOP. I think I had some success in this--at least, I hope I did. That was all blown away after I left, of course--I established a level of communication with both my own comrades and the leaders of my peers that dominated my life. It wasn't sustainable for me and it certainly wasn't something those who came after me could be expected to sustain. How then was I to respond when I kept getting queried: "It's not the same without you!" I realized I hadn't actually built a relationship between them and TOP, but one between them and myself. With me gone, so was that relationship. And when the consequences of that came crashing down? I left in shame. Although I did always perceive the Mushroom Kingdom to be on the 'other' side, it wasn't because I thought TOP had some destiny to face them in battle. Yevgeni Luchenkov and I argued in favor of them at length and I do think we made some real strides forward on their boards. The leaders of TOP who taught and advised me during my tenure did much the same. I assumed we might fight, but as part of a conflict against Polaris...not directly against one another. It was because they were allied to the New Polar Order. No other reason. How we were so foolish to lose sight of that fact and deemed them our great enemy and Polaris our savior is something many, MANY people have asked. How could TOP be so stupid? People were quick to blame Crymson. It's not his fault. It's mine. I got our membership so accustomed to regular updates of the entirety of CN politics, distilled for their understanding, that when I stepped down there was just a massive information vacuum left behind. I didn't even bother to share the information that I'd during my tenure on council. Before I even was elected to run our foreign affairs, I was ruining wonderful opportunities for our allies. In the heyday of the Liquor Cabinet, the post-Sponge government almost started a war with FOK. I didn't even have to do anything--I could've idly sat by and watched the fireworks start. Yet I did. If any of the leaders of the time who remain in this world are reading this...I am sorry. I think back most of all to the almost-war Kronos had with the Siberian Tiger Alliance in December 2009. I was at my worst that day. Our grandmaster and grand hospitaller were gone, and I handled the events of the day alone. It should have been war. It would have been a good war, much like today's war. I spoke to the leader of Kronos at that time beyond the mere confines of Planet Bob, and deep down I *knew* we should have stood and fought straight away. Maybe we would have lost? I don't know for sure. But it would have been a better war than the one we fought a few weeks later, alone, for sure. I was the one who capitulated. As quick as my friends were to apologize for the calling out my alliance received for my decision to pay the debts of an alliance who so wanted a real fight, I must admit: the criticism was true. I was a coward. We could have brought destruction down upon the world, maybe won, maybe lost, but instead I clung to my infra and let us fight another day. What a fool I was! To the leaders of the time, I am sorry. We could have been so much more. Ultimately, my shame is that I had ample opportunity to set us on the right path--the path the whole world has embarked upon today. Instead my apathy--and cowardice--allowed our destruction. And I didn't even fight alongside my brothers for it. For that, most of all, I am sorry. I could have done so much more. And yet it doesn't matter. I understand "Everything must die" is the new chant of the day? Perhaps my shameful legacy can be put to rest and I can have some peace at last. I almost didn't share this, but in the end, what are my thoughts but a howling in the wind? Goodbye, friends.

I don't think your friend is especially in need. This is now basically a curbstomp. I'm not discussing the subject of whether it's deserved--that's a topic that has its own discussion elsewhere--but your entry is far from defending anyone in need, it's just assisting in that. Had there not been a sudden peacing out everywhere else in this war I would entirely understand your actions. I recognize this decision was made before that fact, and I do hope you'll consider peace now.