Daimos

GPA is the only true super alliance left. In the end, they will win this game. Mark my words.

Wonder if he was not a member of NPO will there still be a blog and poll in regards to this hmmmmm.

[quote name='Bill Wallace' timestamp='1308576396' post='2735793'] New Armed Oceanic Entente Viridian Entente New Polar Order New Pacific Order FAN What could go wrong? [img]http://learningrx.lyrishq.net/media/images/Simon%20Says%20Game.jpg[/img] [/quote] I would call this new alliance "The One" or UNO

Over 9 pages in this alliance announcement. It must have NPO content. I was right Carry on.

I think it is a cool way to say thank you. If it annoys our detractors that is just icing in the cake.

Looking forward to see your thoughts about the war Regent. New Frontier, if anything this war has thought Pacificans is we are damned if we do not and damned if we do. I expect Pacifica to be an active alliance again politically. Two years in the sideline only got us attacked.

Regardless who is in the top, others will strive to depose them. That is the nature of the world we live in. MK influence over the majority will wane eventually; it is just a matter of when. I believe their recent aggression has hastened that event.

Never seen Pacificans so reinvigorated by this war. I think this war has shown us that we can never be an alliance content to be in the sidelines. Whether we like it or not, events will transpire to thrust us in the middle of it. We best be ready next time and I think we will.

TOOL you could not pick a better alliance to merge with in TPF. I got tons of respect for those guys. I hate to say it...but classy move from MK and Umbrella.

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1305908685' post='2715563'] I don't think you really understand the meaning of rivalry. Rivalry can even exist between allies. [/quote] I do, I just do not see one against Polaris.

[quote name='SeasonsOfLove' timestamp='1305895037' post='2715491'] You have no idea how wrong you are. There was a time, right before the WotC, that Polar surpassed MK as the #1 enemy within NPO. The IOs and some members were involved in a covert campaign to spread the truth of Polar's NPO-undermining actions, and 2 members of that campaign betrayed the IO's plan to Sponge. It was pretty nasty around that time. The two alliances had only Moo and Sponge talking to each other, which was horrible, because they hated each other after Sponge tried to overthrow Moo. It was bad. It's lessened a lot since Karma, though. [/quote] I have no opinion on what happen in the past but since I joined back in 09’ I never got the sense from my comrades or leadership any ill will towards Polaris.

[quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1305855065' post='2715237'] [b]NPO-NpO:[/b] People underrate this one I think. There was a time when NPO was the most hated alliance in Polaris. We had just signed a MDoAP with MK and we just found out Pacifica had a spy inside Polaris. We were as close to war as you get. Would've been interesting. [/quote] I think this is just Polaris point of view. It is hard to hate an alliance that came from Pacifica’s womb.

[quote name='King Srqt' timestamp='1305736607' post='2714370'] Surprised no one has said Vox v NPO. That was one of the most enjoyable times in this game for me. [/quote] Mentioned it on the second page.

[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1305578836' post='2713006'] Beating down on guys that launch 4 attacks in a week and don't understand why buying 105 bombers is a bad idea is hardly my idea of an exciting fight. [/quote] Strategy man. You seek fun, we seek to deny it from you. Seems to be working

Congratulations all around!

My top 5: NPO - MK NPO - DH NpO - TOP NPO - Vox NPO - FAN

Gramlins to join Dos Equis. Calling right now.

[quote name='BDRocks' timestamp='1305319223' post='2711482'] To be fair, a good part of the MK NS loss has been deletions and people leaving. [/quote] Shrooms deleting, leaving the game, moving to other alliance during a NPO curbstomp? I thought this war was supposed to provide you much fun? If this does not do it for yah, than I do not now what does. Seems you got internal issues.

[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1305206122' post='2710661'] If you'd ask some of our friends, you'd know we weren't keen on getting involved. Simple as that. Is it true that there were two different coalitions being managed against a common enemy? [/quote] There were a few alliance who did not want to get involve in the VE-NpO war, NPO included but if a treaty partner was to get involve it would be hard press for us not to. IRON really would have said no to TOP if they would have asked for assistance?

Thank you for a good read StH!

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1305138438' post='2710188'] It wouldn't have. We likely would have to have used offensive slots on alliances coming in before NPO like maybe Legion for example mostly due to the fact that Polar still had the option of deploying them against VE, who'd have no allies except Umb/GOONS left to go in because they had successfully played NV by not countering VE initially, limiting the damage we could do to NPO. There are various scenarios I can bring up where it becomes problematic to counter NPO. NPO would have also had the opportunity to peace mode its upper tier to a greater extent in preparation. The direct attack on NPO maximized the level of damage we could do to NPO. The dividends proved to be greater than anticipated with NPO letting us have a week to completely decimate the upper tier they hadn't been able to get peace mode with no counters. Then Legion sat in PM for almost 2 months and when they came out, they were easy pickings. Attacking DH before DH goes in would be dumb. As this war has shown however NPO and its allies have an advantage in the lower to middle tiers, so they could have handled some alliances without really getting hit hard by DH as we would be limited in targeted selection or as I said be tied up with NPO allies. How would it have been a curbstomp really? VE and the rest of our coalition was already tied up. What was VE going to do to NPO and allies lower tiers if they were still fighting NpO? Who else was going to come in against NPO? There was really a very limited group of alliances that were free to do it. [/quote] Your coalition has treaties and resources outside of DH to deal with Legion and NPO. MK for example could have asked TOP to assist with Legion and NPO’s upper tier. TOP could have activated their treaty with IRON to deal with the mid and lower tier. Regardless of the scenario of the way we would have come in, your coalition had more than enough resources and options to deal with it and launch an effective counter attack.

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1305135442' post='2710171'] They don't if we can't target NPO effectively. Sometimes you have to be willing to take PR risks for the military victory. NPO wouldn't attack DH head on simply because that wouldn't make sense and it's not something we've claimed ever. It was threatening, rather, to the coalition. I disagree with that assessment anyway. The alliances that get the most flak over the war are ones people disliked before it. I've said it before, I don't believe the actual military action to have really shaped the opinions. PR isn't everything and military strategy aren't the same thing anyway. [/quote] It is not worth risking PR if a counter attack would have achieved the same result. If we agree that attacking DH would be foolish than how are we a threat to a coalition with the combine forces of DH and VE and it’s allies? Even if you discount the PR aspect of your action, the military aspect of it is flawed. VE and its allies might still be fighting at your side if you only waited for NPO to commit on their war. It would have been a truly curbstomp and would have shortened the war which was the intention of your preemption.

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1305129581' post='2710147'] It was never a 3:1 odds thing even if the numbers were in favor of VE. NPO coming in with the ability to just score victories in the middle-lower tier areas wouldn't have been very good for us. Considering NPO and co. utilized the upper tier PM strategy to avoid taking damage there while swarming the lower tiers of opposition alliances, there is no reason for us to let you have your free shots and get away with a preseved upper tier, especially when taking into account NPO's conduct before we declared. [/quote] Whatever the odds were, the fact is, if NPO commits DH counters, thus increasing your odds and neutralizing ours. Our general population’s conduct might have been threatening to you but do you really think NPO leadership with it’s current military and political state of affairs would foolishly attack DH? Your strategist seems to miss all the mark on this war. The preemption, prolonging the war and the terms. If you have simply did what was expected of you, you would have come out roses to the public eye.

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1305127577' post='2710135'] Plenty of alliances could chained in ahead of NPO going in given that seemed the strategy at play. That would make it harder to concentrate damage on NPO who were the biggest target in the group of alliances. There was plenty military advantage in the end as we ended up having a free week at taking shots at everything in the upper tier we were able to get. Had the NPO been able to go in where it wanted, we would have seen more peace moding. In the lower tiers you always had an advantage. ChairmanHal is on the ball in his last post entirely with one exception, especially with the Karma War part, not so much the "dirty" stuff, though. I've mentioned it before but it doesn't seem to stick. In addition, the peace moding is the reason the war has gone on this long, not the manner in which NPO was attacked. [/quote] DH would still have the luxury to wait out on NPO to commit. VE’s coalition had the military might to withstand any other alliance that would have entered. It is absurd that your main reason in prolonging the war is because NPO has not suffered enough when the main objective should have been to assist your treaty partners in the VE-NpO war. That is if you insist that this war is the result of that one.

DH has stated the reason for preemption is to deny NPO and allies an ideal entry point to the VE-NpO war. I counter, there is no such advantage. If NPO entered the war other than honoring a treaty, we would have been curbstomp not only by DH and it’s allies but the non-involve as well via militarily and/or publicly. I would like to hear (from DH leadership preferably, no disrespect ChairmanHal) what kind of scenario that an "ideal entry" NPO would have entered that would have swung the war.