Jump to content

Ardus

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,156

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Blog Comments posted by Ardus

  1. Rush Sykes

    Posted

    It's interesting that you think its mostly related to cancellations, because in my talks around the game, it has been far less in cancellations, and more in the pursuit of new relationships. Treaties just being thrown down at the last minute. The thing is... there are a few alliances (TOP may be one) that are exceptions. There may even be alot that are exceptions, but there are clear and prominent guilt examples of this in each sphere in the game. It is disheartening for me because I cut my teeth on FA, and this would have been 100% unacceptable back in those days. It does not bode well for the future of the game, IMO.

    Well, I can only hope everybody else is slacking off on communications. We won't be and I'd love for it to become another powerful advantage in our pockets :P

  2. Rush Sykes

    Posted

    I've been making rounds (or getting/letting/slacking until Cent or Sal do it) telling allies whenever we even get the idea of signing a treaty with somebody. My little birds tell me this isn't exactly a unique practice, even if there are clear holes throughout CN.

    I think the problem is more evident with cancellations. People rarely cut ties on "good terms" anymore, if they ever did. Treaties don't fall until there is not a single hook left to hang it on. So when cancellation comes around, the one or both of the alliances probably (1) dislike the other, possibly intensely and/or (2) calculate that the other will be on the opposite side of a foreseeable conflict. The former provides an emotional motivation to be curt and cut with little heads up. The latter provides a pragmatic reason: you don't want to give a potential enemy any additional time to react or control a situation.

    I have been lucky to not have to cancel any treaties in recent history (excepting CTI and CE, which were already clearly defunct), so I can't provide detailed guidance on how to properly move forward with divergence. I can say that the trend of surprise nullification and misleading or false justifications provided (cancelling over A when in fact you're preparing for war B) provides for very dangerous and powerful resentment that people underestimate and which can lock up global affairs for a very long time. If nothing else: don't send deputies to do it, don't go public before you've informed in private, and be honest in your reasoning. The last may well prove surprisingly helpful and the other party you're looking to cut may give you a view you hadn't considered.

  8. hawk11

    Posted

    Well which is it, Ardus? Is is "sick" and you "refuse to accept it in any form whatsoever" or is it boys will be boys? I mean, please, don't insult us. A person's personal photos don't "just sort of fall" onto anyone's forums. You have to find the user, then you have to go through all the albums, then you have to decide which ones you want to make fun of, then you deliberately open a thread and post the pictures. When you personally call TPF's OOC war "awesome" and then equivocate MK's own recent OOC attacks two days after calling OOC attacks "sick" it raises some serious questions. There is a gulf between what you say and what you do, and filling that gulf is your political allegiance then and your political allegiance now.

    I'm speaking to matters I'm not very familiar with as I did not participate, but I recall the Legion member used and shared the photos and album on IRC. If A shows B a picture and B laughs at it, B is certainly being mean, but has not elevated himself to our Slayer situation. B has not attempted to use OOC objects to influence the IC dynamic, nor has the IC dynamic led him to laugh at the pictures of A. MK laughs at Legion. It also laughs at everybody else, including enemies, neutrals, allies, and its own members. Especially its own members. What is "sick" is when people become so invested in a game that they set out to try and dig up real life material to use against people in that game. That is not just mean, but suggests an obsession with the game and its players that is unwell.

    Since you seem rather inspired by the subject, I must inquire as to your own opinion. Is it acceptable or unacceptable to seek out real life details of players to be used in-game? Is it acceptable or unacceptable to laugh or mock other players for real life details that make themselves apparent?

    Returning to the original sequence of posts you referenced, I'll note that only one of the quoted posts take a position contrary to the one I argue in the podcast. The rest simply don't like NoV, a position that was plenty justified by NoV's IC conduct in the lead-up to the war.

  11. Ardus

    Posted

    and led the ODN from pariah status to core member of C&G
    Os has certainly done a bang up job as Sec-gen, however the efforts that led to ODN's progress from pariah began a long time before Os took the reins. Arguably it was the efforts of Arsenal, Joracy and others (incl. myself...not trying to sound arrogant or anything but I also put alot of work into laying that groundwork) that laid the groundwork for that. ODN's govt has always been a team effort no matter who was at the helm.Os's efforts to build on that base have nevertheless been impressive, and if the only reason he got 'pushed' out is his length of tenure then it is pretty sad way to repay him for his efforts.

    I refer you to my previous post.

  14. Ardus

    Posted

    It's funny to read about VX in hindsight. Not that I disagree with you about his failure, of course, but at the time he was a very popular leader, at least until he $%&@ed up.I think the mark of a successful alliance is that it can transfer the leadership well. Like you said, alliances like MHA that cycle through personality-less leaders are just as poor at this as alliances with a single leader at the helm into perpetuity. On the other hand, change for the sake of change is dangerous as well. There always needs to be a balance.

    The same things that made VX exceedingly popular are what doomed him. He was idealistic, charismatic, and outspoken. That was wonderful for firing up the GATO membership, but he couldn't keep his mouth shut when he needed to most. Then again, we forget how little time he was given to work with. The span between GW2 and GW3 was the blink of an eye compared to modern timeframes. Maybe he could have turned out better.

    My perception of him is heavily tainted by his effort to spook VE out of GWIII after the /b/ assault. I can't remember what words I used, but they weren't kind.

×
×
  • Create New...