WcaesarD
-
Posts
577 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by WcaesarD
-
-
Thanks for the war stats, Gopher.
-
Nice to see ASC get a mention at least, but would've liked to see em crack the top 25. After looking over the list it seems to me that you've given more recent disbandments a bit more of a bump, but I could be wrong. I'll be looking forward to reading your reasons.
-
[quote name='BamaBuc' timestamp='1296885280' post='2620051']
I'm a little confused here. Okay, so those nations left NEW after the war. So? What do you mean by a "real nation"?
-Bama
[/quote]
I suspect he meant a nation truly wishing to join an alliance for the long term, not one wishing to get in some free hits against Fark and then just leave after the war is over. Makes sense, even if you don't agree with it.
Best of luck, Fark, enjoy. -
[quote name='MagicalTrevor' timestamp='1296790250' post='2618676']
Yes, that is simple and is my exact point in fact. We stated this fact to ML last night. Saying that our attacks on TPF were sanctioned. And their response was to tell us they weren't sanctioned and ML treated them as rogue attacks.We told them that we were at war with TPF and they tried to be smart arses and say we weren't due to no OWF post. Our response was that ML could either let the nations go as rogues, or we will officially recognise a state of war between the allances. It is now over 24 hours later and no word. Therefore ML are honouring their treaty with TPF (as is their right) and we, being the gentlemen we are, are acknowledging the state of war that is between all 3 of us.
I have explained that terribly but there is literally no issue at all here other than people seemingly expecting MK/Umb to not honour the doomhouse accords.
[/quote]
This should have been your OP, it would have saved 5+ pages of headaches. -
[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1296790016' post='2618664']
Yup. And there is nothing wrong with ML doing that, except for their failure to call a spade a spade. We are calling a spade a spade.
[/quote]
You're doing no such thing until we see some admission from you stating you were engaged in a war with tpf prior to all of this, regardless of the size of the engagement. -
[quote name='MagicalTrevor' timestamp='1296789177' post='2618619']
ML decided to play the smart arse and tell us that our nations were rogues. When we informed them that they were in fact sanctioned attacks their response was to keep telling us our nations were rogues.
We are just recognising the fact that ML has declared war on MK/Umb. Nothing is wrong with it other than their attitude yesterday and im sure the rest of the peanut gallery will tell us we've done something wrong aswell.
[/quote]
Your op states that sanctioned attacks on another alliance constitutes an alliance war. Your alliance has done exactly this to TPF. TPF's treaty partner, ML responds in kind, seems fairly simple to me. So I assume you now recognize formal hostilities (war) with TPF as well, as per this logic outlined at the start of this discussion? -
[quote name='tamerlane' timestamp='1296788852' post='2618596']
I think its more along the lines of us asking ML to call a spade a spade and not play the idiot.
[/quote]
I fail to see how you don't need to declare against TPF, if this is the case. So if just one or two nations who aren't rogues attack you it's alright? Doesn't seem consistent. -
After reading that op, I came away with "we didn't need to declare to help our allies, but ML does". This seems dumb.
Edit: still, good luck to umb/mk. -
[quote name='LittleRena' timestamp='1296545823' post='2614430']
65% of non-peace mode GOONs nations are in anarchy, that's the majority.
But those are just stats, make of it what you will, is the target to get 45% more into anarchy?
[/quote]
If NPO/their allies manage to get 110% of GOONS nations into anarchy, I will stop fighting against them. -
Used it once or twice, seems fairly pointless, and you can bet I won't be wasting my time with it around update if I'm trying to get some attacks timed right.
-
[quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1296163519' post='2606101']
Per the [url=http://tinyurl.com/cnwarsides]sides[/url] spreadsheet, theres almost 10k nations in this war. I dont have the peace mode numbers but i assume theyll be coming out sooner or later
Clearly the solution to the GRL problem is GPA needs to DoW on Doomhouse in defense of NPO, theres another 1500 or so nukes to add to the 20k or so in the war right now
[/quote]
Better solution, GPA declares on TDO in the ultimate battle for neutral supremacy. -
[quote name='Gopherbashi' timestamp='1296007578' post='2601568']
When's the last time I got to put FAN into some warstats?
[/quote]
I don't know, but it's been too long. -
I'm more interested to see if TDO has its numbers shoot through the roof like in the last couple of global wars than to see if GPA takes a top slot. And it seems that unless MHA gets involved for some reason the second is unlikely to happen. Either way, thanks to gopher/everyone else who updates.
-
Too much diplomacy, not enough wars. Congrats though.
-
Have fun, athens.
-
[quote name='Joe Stupid' timestamp='1295319450' post='2579648']
And once again Rok is put in a !@#$%* position. Yay allies.
[/quote]
Yeah, maybe you should consider trimming down the number of treaties you guys hold. -
I support the top 15 dropping all their infra/tech through war, thus, voted yes.
-
[quote name='LegendoftheSkies' timestamp='1294990873' post='2574891']
Nice foresight there: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97064&st=0
[/quote]
That really wasn't us doing anything more than responding to an attack. No attack, no response. We weren't really "up to" anything. -
I wish we could calculate just how many guns we've put in the hands of children everywhere today. What a fantastic way to finish my night.
-
More children in this world need good, working assault rifles.
-
[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1294445844' post='2567860']
The 200 member threshold should have been removed atleast 2 years ago. Let it stay and be a reminder to how whack the system is.
[/quote]
I could be mistaken in my understanding, but I always assumed the 200 member limit was a way to contribute to player retention and recruitment in the overall game. I see people complaining frequently about lower numbers of players, well, if you want a sanction, go recruit some more players. I don't see any reason to remove it, in fact, I would argue for it to go higher, as opposed to lower. -
well, Mr Damsky, it seems as though your alliance now has a valid cb on GOD. Hopefully you will show them mercy.
-
[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1293139357' post='2551924']
This is, perhaps, the thing that angers me the most. You discarded our treaty, and indeed our very friendship, to make a political point.
[/quote]
I know you stated in your op that you didn't have any feelings of ill will towards the general membership of GOD, but that seems to go against your actions here. You, in a very public place trashed the actions of their chosen leader and posted (in what very easily could have been a 2 sentence thread notifying bob of the cancelation) this debacle of a thread. I completely agree with buds that after reading through this it seems a cheap attempt to discredit xiph/GOD and possibly SF. I've got no opinion on the treaty of MK/TOP or on your cancellation, but I am extremely disappointed in the manner in which GOONS threw a friend from just moments before out to the wolves for seemingly no reason. -
I still don't get why everyone is so worked up about this, it all seems like it makes sense to me.
War. There was one. Now there isn't. We had fun
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
This thread is indeed accurate, hostilities between FAN and UoCR have come to an end.