Derantol

[quote name='Gopherbashi' timestamp='1343533816' post='3016589'] [font=Courier New][b]Dave's War[/b] July 27, 2012 - Day 44 --------------- [b][u][size=3][color=orange]Dolan[/b][/u] [/color][/size][/font][font="Courier New"]• 457.00 --> 456.54 ([color=red]-0.46[/color]) [b][color=orange]•[/color] [color=orange]Continuing Alliances[/color][/b]: 457.00 --> 456.54 ([color=red]-0.46[/color]) [b][color=orange]•[/color] [color=orange]Incoming Alliances[/color][/b]: 0.00 --> 0.00 ([color=black]+0.00[/color]) [b][color=orange]•[/color] [color=orange]Outgoing Alliances[/color][/b]: 0.00 --> 0.00 ([color=black]+0.00[/color]) [b][color=orange]•[/color] Alliances[/b]: 23 [b][color=orange]•[/color] Nation Count[/b]: 3,147 (618 in anarchy, 641 in peace) [b][color=orange]•[/color] Nation Strength[/b]: 113,275,249 [b][color=orange]•[/color] Nuke Count[/b]: 31,236 [color=orange]•[/color] [url=http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance_stats_custom.asp?Alliance=Independent Republic of Orange Nations][color=orange]Independent Republic of Orange Nations[/color][/url]: 47.01 --> 47.02 ([color=green]+0.01[/color]) / -15.3% cumulative *snip* [/quote] Not to beat a dead horse, but IRON isn't in war anymore, so it's throwing off stats. Is there a bug in the program or something?

[quote name='im317' timestamp='1343343474' post='3015896'] there isn't exactly a cap for GRL. global radiation = (total nations hit by nukes * 300) / total nations its peaked for this war due to the limited number of nukes you can buy although its going to have a few sharp drops when its been 30 days from a large front peacing out. [/quote] Actually, the theoretical maximum is 300; If X is total nations, then (X*300)/X=GRL, and X/X=1, so then you get 300. Or there's the cap at 5, but whatever. EDIT: This came off really snarky, and that's not how I mean it. I'm also too lazy to figure out how to word it better, so I'm leaving it that way. Also, Gopher, IRON hasn't been at war for a few days now. I think there might be a few more still on that list, but not in the war anymore.

Perhaps I'm alone in thinking this, but would it make more sense to group the two wars now, or leave off the LSF war altogether? It's pretty clear to most, I think, that the LSF front isn't going to expand past what it already has. The loss to IRON's score is going to be almost exclusively caused by Sparta, or so I would hope, so the LSF front is going to generally be represented by inaccurate or misleading stats. No biggie if nobody else agrees, just thought I'd put that out there.

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1340552169' post='2994464'] I don't think you understand what irony means, [/quote] I'm not sure you understand what irony means; the example of irony he put forward is an excellent one.

[quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1340149494' post='2989387'] People making peace mode jokes and callouts are doing it for a [b]reason[/b] too. I anyway commend your post and I hope it helps to keep the debate on peace mode at a minimum. [/quote] You make a fair point; however, often the [b]reason[/b] is that those people think they're making a valid point that needs attention. I'm making the argument here that the vast majority of reasons for posting about peace mode are stupid ones. Thanks for your commendation - I will be sure to have a medal made to put in my sig

[quote name='James Dahl' timestamp='1340145000' post='2989262'] People don't have anything else to argue about, and they don't want to just be quiet so you have "lol peace mode" [/quote] I suppose I have too much confidence in peoples' ability to be creative about their posturing.

So every war, people start posturing about things that the other side is doing. That's all well and good, and for forum lurkers like me, it can be awfully fun to watch, whether it's for or against you. But can people leave the Peace Mode Warrior out of it this time? I'm pretty sure most of us have been through this war thing before. If you haven't been paying attention at all since Karma and before, this will be news to you; everybody puts people into peace mode. Sure, an alliance 100% in peace mode is something you can poke fun at. An alliance 100% in war mode will attract attention too, on the basis that people are generally impressed by the commitment to the possibility of complete and utter destruction of an entire alliance's infrastructure. But numbers in peace mode even up towards 60% aren't exactly uncommon. Everybody knows the reasons for it too, and if you are still pointing out that your opponent has X number of people using the vaunted hippy shield, you are either behind the times or being deliberately obtuse. For those behind the times... 1) Peace mode is often used to restock nukes and navy before returning to the fray. 2) Alliances will often keep a reserve, which occasionally exceeds the size of the main force, ready for a counterattack. 3) Some of these nations will spend most or all of the conflict in peace mode for a variety of reasons - being radically outnumbered in the upper tiers is one of them, and I imagine that for smaller alliances, the archaic idea of the dedicated bank nation still exists and is (marginally) helpful. Heck, I imagine that simply having a few members that are still very strong will help in the case of rogues. 4) Nations kept in reserve this way have, in past cases, been part of the surrender terms bargaining - let your upper tier experience a predetermined amount of war in order to avoid complete devastation. Yes, I know that some nations simply hide in peace mode because they love their stats, or don't agree with the war, or other things that could be construed as violating the written or unwritten agreement between an alliance and its members. Those people generally are called out by their own allies, so you don't have to do it for them. But entire alliances hiding in peace mode are doing it for a [b]reason[/b], even if you don't think it's a good reason. And frankly, it's boring to read pages upon pages of "You're in peace mode" "No, we have less people in peace mode than you" "It's a legitimate strategy" and the like. Really really boring. So please, go ahead and posture. We all enjoy reading about it, even when it's meaningless. But the Peace Mode Warrior label has been cliche for some time now. This has been a topic of discussion in past wars as well; just figured I'd get this started while we're all still waiting with bated breath for more war declarations so that people might actually see it.

Any tl;dr for those of us who don't have time to watch it yet? All I'm getting from your post is "FUTURE SOON" and a vague reference to what could be referred to as another industrial revolution, and I don't have time to watch the video at the moment.

I fully agree with jerdge - but I think it's also important to differentiate between slander and genuine criticism. In this particular case, it doesn't look like there's any confusion; one comment of encouragement should never draw this sort of fire. But I think it's also important to be able to level with someone and tell them that something is wrong with what they're doing. That sort of thing is becoming harder to do in our society because so many criticisms are taken as insults somehow. I guess I'm saying that any system supporting free speech should especially protect critical speech that has a basis in fact.

[quote name='Nikita Ilyich Lenin' timestamp='1337074863' post='2967659'] Can we outsource our econ to you. [/quote] Roq, you should consider doing this for small alliances. Walk in, help them set up a tech program, and leave a guide behind. I don't think anyone doubts your ability to get tech running.

Not knowing how many streaks go on for how long, would it be possible to perhaps display all streak above a certain threshold? Or, alternatively, simply a top 3 or top 5 streaks in length? I don't get a lot of meaningful information when I just see streak updates every 5 days - that means five different updates to check to see who is on a streak right now.

Since you'll be in the neighborhood anyway, I hear Forks, WA is a great center for paranormal... stuff, anyway. And Bigfoot is supposed to live in Washington or British Columbia, I think. Right?

[quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1331630016' post='2937535'] Like you needed that to get on top... Wouldn't it be the first time, for IRON, BTW? I can't imagine another alliance which had that potential for that long, and that didn't reach it yet: I guess that such a long "delay" will just make it sweeter! Or, I don't know, on April 1st we could announce your comeback to neutrality and the merge into the Independent Republican Agency of Nations for the Protection of Green Oranges... [center][img]http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lh9b17fnKh1qcptm2o1_500.jpg[/img][/center] [/quote] Technically? I think we were ranked first right at the beginning of Karma. I'm not sure if that actually shows up in the Sanction Race, cause I'm pretty sure it was for less than a day. And we can't go back to neutrality - we were never neutral, just independent!

A friend of mine wrote this essay for a class that he took called "Confronting Moral Dilemmas." It's pretty funny - read past the first few paragraphs for the better parts. For what it's worth, he got an A on this paper. At the beginning of the term, I felt as though I had a coherent grasp on many concepts concerning morality. I have strong opinions concerning many of the issues mentioned in the course catalogue, and I was excited to take a class which would focus on moral dilemmas and allow me to explore concrete examples of controversial issues. In that capacity the class has been very helpful. Learning about the great philosophers and their ideas, particularly social contract theory, has made me examine and in most cases reinforce my opinions on a variety of moral issues. One of the strong points of this class was the literature we read and the in-class discussions in which we explored the ideas presented in the assigned text. Though a portion of the reading was difficult and somewhat inaccessible, the professor's guided discussions of the readings always ensured that everyone was on the same page. The fact that some readings were very dense social contract theories in the tradition of Rousseau and Kant while others were fictional short stories also served to add variety to the course work. Overall, this was a highly effective class that allowed students to expand as writers while receiving grounded, helpful critique from a qualified professor. However, I did not progress as much as a writer as I had hoped to by the end of this term. My main problem with essay writing, as it was in the beginning of the term, is quite simply time management. I write very meticulously and slowly, and so have had some difficulty completing assignments in the allotted time. The draft process also proved difficult for me to adjust to, because I edit as I write rather than writing a first draft and then refining it. A prime example of my difficulty with drafts is my research paper concerning the Death Penalty. My initial draft of the Death Penalty paper was poorly written and not well organized. I did not allow myself enough time to research the subject matter, and I was both physically and mentally drained when I began the essay. In some ways this was helpful as it forced me to revise and re-write a significant portion of my paper to complete my final draft. Had I written a first draft that I was happy with from the start, it would have been difficult for me to make changes for my final draft. As it was I was able to make several important additions to my paper, namely a paragraph discussing how the death penalty is not administered universally or fairly across racial or gender-related lines. Additionally I polished and refined much of the sloppy writing of my first draft. Initially, I thought that “Confronting Moral Dilemmas” was a course designed to help students understand the life and reproductive cycles of the Common European Mange-Donkey. I have always been extremely interested in equine biology, and so I jumped at the opportunity to learn about a specific subject in such depth. However, I quickly realized my assumptions concerning the course's subject matter were incorrect. Instead of mange-related fur deterioration and foot and mouth disease, we were discussing human rights issues! Since I was initially misled by the course title, the remainder of this essay will not discuss my experience in “Confronting Moral Dilemmas”. Instead, I will present my own research relating to the behavioral and reproductive habits of the Common European Mange-Donkey. For the sake of concision I will refer to the Common European Mange-Donkey simply as “The Mange-Donkey”. Of course, if I were writing an essay concerning multiple species of Mange-Donkey (i.e American Mange-Donkeys, Afro-Asian Mange-Donkeys) than a greater degree of distinction would be necessary. Mange-Donkeys are similar to standard donkeys, and both species belong to a greater family known as the Equidae family. This family also includes zebras, mules, and horses. Though horses look sleek and get most of the publicity, they also suck. Mules cannot reproduce, but they are great for party tricks, and zebras are more often striped than not. Mange-Donkeys, however, are in a class all of their own. It has often been said that being a Mange-Donkey is not simply a matter of genetics- rather, it is a way of life. While it is certainly true that Mange-Donkeys are most easily distinguished by temperament rather than appearance, there are still visually observable distinctions that set the Mange-Donkey apart from the standard donkey. Physically speaking Mange-Donkeys are differentiated from the standard donkey by large, moth-eaten patches of hair, a certain troll-like cunning in the eye, and a strong North Yorkshire accent present in the bray. If they serve dual duties as Slapping Donkeys, Mange-Donkeys may also exhibit such characteristics as a balding or hairless hindquarter and a tattered mane and tail. While it is commonly supposed that the Mange-Donkey came by its moniker because it is prone to a mange-like skin rash, this assumption is incorrect. The skin rash (known as “rain scald” or “mud fever”) is in fact common to both Mange-Donkeys and standard Donkeys, and is caused by prolonged exposure to damp conditions. In reality, “Mange-Donkeys” are known as such because they are half mange, half donkey. It is interesting to note that unlike most hybrid animals (mules, ligers) Mange-Donkeys can reproduce. I have devoted much time and effort into researching the etymology of the word “donkey”, but have not had much success finding accurate sources. As a result, I have formulated my own theory concerning the names' derivation and origins. To me, the most logical answer is that the word “donkey” is a diminutive of “Don Quixote”, the name of the Spanish knight in Cervante's novel. Somewhere along the line, a committee was called and an executive decision was made to get rid of the oats and the tea, leaving only “Don Qui”. This became further corrupted as the syllables were combined into a single word and the spelling was anglicized, ultimately evolving into the modern English “Donkey”. I feel that the skills I am lacking in terms of my writing abilities will all come simply as a matter of practice. The more papers I have to write to make a quick deadline, the more drafts I complete, the better and less frustrated I will be.

[quote name='shahman' timestamp='1329885059' post='2925407'] I think more than once-a-week all alliance would be too much. I'm against it. Also, I like the new format. A++ [/quote] Both of these. Though I might be biased somewhat, given that my alliance is in the sanction race anyway :V

No, they won't even break 150 nations. But they will (assuming a perfect merge) get up to just over 20 score.

[quote name='Velocity111' timestamp='1326768815' post='2901290'] This shouldn't necessarily detract from what you're saying, but the min NS is, in fact, zero. You just don't start off with zero NS (you start with 3) because you have 1 infra. If you are to lose that 1 infra, you will be at zero NS. [/quote] I think he meant score, with which there is a mathematical bottom. If he didn't, then I guess you're right

I'm glad we're on the same page, Mr. Janova.

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1326515924' post='2899252'] Also I'd like to address a grudge that shouldn't really exist: DR/VE. Considering Impero was willing to go in with Argent on Gre, they weren't really bad at all. It was an alliance IRON is treatied to though in a nominal sense that was blocking it. VE is always made into the bad guy, though. [/quote] Does DR mean Duckroll or something else in this instance? I wasn't aware there was really a grudge there. I mean, I'm relatively indifferent to VE, with some slight negative coming from being allied to GOD, but that's a very minor thing.

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1326472330' post='2898800'] Sorry, I'm not giving credit to NPO for taking a beating in Karma because (paraphrase) they were so bad they required everyone else to hate them. They were just as bad the day prior to the Karma coalition beginning to be formed. The credit goes to the people that actually formed the counter coalition. Hey, let's credit Lex Luthor for Superman's good deeds too. [/quote] NPO was the biggest enabler; it wasn't the man behind the curtain running the show. And in a world where the most selfless thing you can do in a non-conflict atmosphere is to send out as much aid as is possible every ten days, there needs to be something more to inspire stories worth talking about. NPO fit that bill. If you want it phrased differently, you could say that NPO's worst enemy was its own power. That power, and the manner in which they used it, encouraged resistance over time until all that resistance snapped.

[quote name='Jaiar' timestamp='1326507589' post='2899177'] Why don't you mass message Fark nations and link them to this thread? Brehon, if your enemies are not ready for peace on whatever terms then you guys just have to keep fighting. What's the big deal? If they prolong peace then issue additional terms. But, be prepared for them to reject those terms and fight longer until it gets back to white peace. This entire situation can go in circles forever. Fark, Spart, FAN...they are defeated when they are actually defeated and accept terms. Until then, NPO and company need to keep slugging it out. You have not won simply because you say you won. You actually have to get the surrenders or whatever. You guys will be alright so just fight on and get peace whenever it comes. [/quote] Wars are not fought solely with statistics and numbers. This thread is evidence of that. The "big deal" is that the longer that war goes on, the longer it takes for all parties involved to get back to the normal state of affairs, and the longer it takes for everybody to grow. You're right, Fark, Sparta, and FAN can refuse to accept surrender terms, but Brehon evidently isn't out for the complete and utter annihilation of these alliances. Besides, the only time the stalling the end of war ever helped a losing alliance was when IRON fought Grämlins, and the only reason that worked was because Grämlins was withering away and IRON managed to get favorable public opinion. The alliances fighting Fark, FAN, and Sparta are not in imminent danger of dying out. They all have many other options; one of those options is this thread. [quote]This thread is pure propaganda. The winners want peace so they call the losers petulant children. The losers could also be called warriors. Whatever your vantage point is, is what you will choose to call the sides.[/quote] Propaganda is a weapon of war. And remember the propaganda doesn't have to be deceitful or misleading in nature to be considered propaganda.

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1326491443' post='2899043'] Honestly, the reps would have just gone to C&G instead. It was always C&G's decision to let Sparta have some and Hyp was actually concerned about Sparta not needing it as much. edit: Hm, I remember getting all the black alliances to switch to indirect so the peace deal could go through. [/quote] On top of that, I know that Sparta forgave at least a portion of the reps owed them by IRON. Before Karma, I remember IRON doing similar things because those who wanted reps demanded a total amount of reps, and if IRON took a portion, we could forgive it soon afterward and lighten the load a little bit. I've never been privy to surrender negotiations, but that's what I remember hearing at the time.

[quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1326478991' post='2898899'] For the entertainment of people not directly involved with the conflict, or government? The forums need more topics like this, not less. [/quote] This, please. Drama is good for this game, especially fresh drama.

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1326480855' post='2898921'] The problem with grudges is that grudges have supplanted politics for too many people. Instead of looking around for alliances that have natural points of alignment with one's own (anti-raiding, pro-raiding, optional-only, neutral, moralist, Francoism, Adminism, communist, nationalist, etc) alliance, people end up allying alliances that they have no political business being allied to. A good example is Ardus' path for VE post-reformation, as outlined in his thread "The Ardus Files" where you've got this alliance that preaches honor and whatever else VE doesn't have allied to Polaris, NPO, etc during the height of their atrocities simply so that VE can get revenge one after another on the people that declared war on them pre-disband. Now they're all evened up, but VE still doesn't embody the ideals on its state seal or letterhead in part because they don't know how anymore; the current leadership all came up in this era of sell-outism. TOP you've got allied to MK who charged them massive reps. Grämlins spent two years talking out both sides of its mouth to stick it to GGA. [/quote] I would venture to say, given your qualms, that if a grudge is to be held, holding that grudge shouldn't require a sacrifice of alliance values. In that case, FAN is an excellent example of a group that has a legitimate complaint against NPO and other alliances. However, that particular grudge has a bit of a stale taste to it now. Is this the third war now where FAN has gone to war with NPO? Compared to this war, where TOP and IRON have been pretty consistent about voicing displeasure for Polar and have worked to make the political environment one in which we could attack more safely. As exciting as wars are, it's usually pretty evident in the first week who's going to win. Seeing the treaty movements and watching tensions build is more exciting for me, especially the closer we get to another war. Also, it seems like you're endorsing that alliances themselves remain stagnant and don't look for opportunity to grow and change. TOP and MK becoming allies was unexpected, but the interaction between them after BiPolar evidently made it clear to them that they could get along. If alliances can't realign from time to time, then it really will be the exact same sides fighting the exact same war over and over. The more of this realignment that occurs, the more interesting the game would become. If you would have told me a year ago IRON would be fighting on the same side of the war that Complaints and Grievances were on, I would have thought you were crazy. And yet, here we are.

[quote name='Louisa' timestamp='1326224134' post='2896967'] But that is surely nonsense? After all, ut was Fark that attacked, and so they should have thought of putting people in Peace Mode before doing that, if they wanted to make a reserve force. [/quote] It wouldn't really improve that score much, maybe from 2 to 3 or 4. Not utilizing Peace Mode is certainly a penalty. I suppose this is the first time I'm watching a mass alliance truly go down in flames while it wasn't happening to my own, but when I try to think objectively, I have to assume that it looked about the same as when IRON would get countered by MHA, Sparta, Fark, and whoever else they cued up. Maybe I'm wrong, though.