Jump to content

Altheus

Members
  • Posts

    426
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Altheus

  1. Their very way of life is being attacked, while they may not personally owe it to TDO they should defend what they stand for when it comes under attack.

    While it probably won't happen, if TDO does crumble and the rogues move onto other neutrals no tears will be shed for their pain.

    But I doubt MQ/DBDC will move onto other more prepared neutral alliances.

     

    Like I said, it's easy to see why it'd be logical for GPA & WTF to defend TDO, but I think we agree they probably won't because the philosophy they're sticking to (rightly or wrongly) deters them from responding.

  2. This however is not about choosing sides or getting involved in the daily dealings of the warminded alliances, this is about an alliance being attacked simply for being neutral. One would think every neutral alliance out there should think twice before using the term neutral to not get involved this time. 

     

    Neutrality isn't a side though, it's a philosophy. GPA & WTF don't owe TDO anything. Granted it might be logical for neutrals to gang up on anyone that attacks them, but then they'd have effectively evolved into a bloc.

  3. Jerdge is right. Trying to make out this war has some anti-neutral moral imperative is ridiculous. That said, war is part of this world and comes to everyone in the end, rightly or not.

    As it's going to happen anyway my advice to TDO would be to take the good out the situation as best you can. Namely, it's good for activity, a good test for your military and a good way to find out who's committed to your cause. Just don't disband, they can't force you.

  4. Erm, I left UCN and it imploded about two days later. I was "on trial" at BFF when it imploded. This incarnation of BFF continued limping along, so we're rebranding to stir up activity and hopefully bring it back to some glory. So no, it's not similar. I see you're no closer to grasping simple concepts than you were a few years back. That's unfortunate. 

     

    Let's not kid ourselves, it is similar. The similar bit is that you like rebranding/relaunching new alliances from the ashes of old ones. Nothing wrong with that, it's how you do it that counts... and how you treat those that disagree with you.

    Now I haven't seen any sign that you've made the same mistake as before, because no-one from BFF appears to be kicking off that you don't represent them, so it only seems fair to give you the benefit of the doubt that you've done it right this time, however they are strong similarities between this and before and making out otherwise is silly and unbecoming of you.

  5. Where have I seen this before? Oh yea, that's right. UCN debacle redux. I'm glad to see we haven't learned from past mistakes.

    Hey Chax, long time no see.

     

    Yep, deja vu. Hopefully this time Chax remembered it's a good idea to get the alliance all on board before doing it. Haven't got messaged by any angry ex-alliance partners this time so maybe we're in luck :P

     

    Good luck LPH.

  6. Alliances don't have to owe anything to the game, other than perhaps their members enjoyment. I think there is a tendency to judge the "worth" of an alliance solely down to political impact and/or political competence. But outside the OWF elites, a substantial numbers of players aren't involved with the politics of the game, often out of choice.

     

    So they value the worth of an alliance based on different criteria from what you find here. Maybe they just like the people, maybe their real-world friends are already involved, heck, maybe they just like the name, theme or the alliance's flag. I don't think the reasons behind why actually matters, because the important thing is that they've already voted with their feet by joining the alliance in the first place.

     

    So the alliance system is really self-policing. If no one wants to join then they won't and the alliance will fail. If people don't like the alliance they're in then they inevitably leave.

     

    Of course apathy is a major factor at both alliance and nation level, I can think of a number of zombie alliances in which it's more serious than they're not doing anything politically (they're not doing anything at all!) That's a bit sad, because I can't imagine how you'd have much fun being a member of said zombie alliance other than just being a way to deter tech raiders.

     
  7. [quote name='Ernesto Che Guevara' timestamp='1358371809' post='3077677']
    To Sentinel, UPN in particular, MCXA and The Legion: You guys were good sparring partners. Sorry for the animosity between us, OOC I've always thought you were a pretty cool bunch. IC I hated you (Sentinel) but that's the game, ya know? And despite my best efforts I couldn't make you all lose heart. Damn you.[/quote]

    You too. Throughout the majority of CN's existance we've been either working for or against each other and it's been huge fun. CDT, CDT fallout, Peggygate, Sentinel vs. BFF, we've shared so many eras that have defined our alliances that you became a major part of the game for me.Thanks for the good times...and the bad times (which were actually good ;))

    Glad to hear you're staying. If we didn't lose heart, neither should you! Heh, OOC let's either be massive friends or massive enemies again because it'll keep us both entertained.

    One last thing, I never did hate you guys. In fact I adore you. Whatever your name, CNE, TCW, CoN, UCN, Europa, BFF etc. you were always the snugglebunnies to me ;)

  8. [quote name='Lady Dakota' timestamp='1358231789' post='3076682']
    They're an alliance period. They want to be a collective together and are doing so. Who are any of you to say they can't be an alliance? Does ARES existence really bother you? No they're simply going on about their existence and RIA is being like a bigger brother to watch over them to ensure their survival. I applaud RIA for being kind where others clearly have no mercy.
    [/quote]

    Well said.

×
×
  • Create New...