Altheus

...somehow this thread has become a discussion about the merits of announcing via the OWF, rather than about CDT...

To my understanding the intention was to announce it's cancellation, but people wanted to get things sorted and wrap things up properly before doing so. This isn't an official line, but personally I'm very sad to see CDT dissolved and wish that that bloc had continued on indefinately. It's dissolved (of which blow it I'm going to give the OWF a straight answer, because there isn't enough of that), because the bloc had been struggling for a long time to unify it's foreign affairs and that was making it hard to move things forward. Despite that a number of people wanted to carry on fighting, of which I'd include myself, but the prevailing view was that the struggle to keep things going had been going on for just too long and so it was time to pack up. Definately end of an era & whilst like any bloc CDT had it's low points, it also had many very happy days and brought people together who still share lasting friendships. From NATO it's first member to Wolfpack it's last, I'm proud to have met all of you. o/CDT. A damn fine bloc

[quote name='tamerlane' timestamp='1286304104' post='2476107'] and UPN. [/quote] Now you're just trying to upset me

It's clear to me that what's responsible is the Athens-MK divide

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1286207123' post='2474241'] NpO is kind of the boss of its own minicluster (I've variously called it 'BLEU 2.0', 'Frostbite' and 'Blue' throughout different phases of its history). Most of the time they've rather straddled the lines between the two sides (for example in the earlier two images on this page). MK cancelling on them has weakened the pull from the SG side of the web, I guess, making them appear further on the 'Remnants' side. It is an interesting point, though, which I'd missed myself. There isn't a strongly connected 'old Orders side', which actually shows up pretty well from the sparseness of the web over there. For example I doubt TOP and NpO or Legion and Argent would consider themselves to be closely allied. It's more a case of 'all the alliances not in SG and affiliates'. The web does represent reality – it's a direct application of the model to existing treaties – but its implications don't necessary match what's going to happen, as not every treaty is actually the same weight as the model assumes. [/quote] I see, so it's the angle that we're looking at the 3D-Model that's hiding the sparseness of the web on the 'old Orders side', when looked at from a different angle they're still very far apart & not really a 'side' at all. That makes sense now.

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1286200768' post='2474187'] The division between the old and new worlds is as sharp as ever, with the tight 'Supergrievances' megabloc on the right of the image and the loose collection of alliances clustering around the old Orders making up various microspheres on the left. Only Brigade, UPN and DT remain with split loyalties on that front. (Valhalla's position is not so central as this viewpoint makes it appear.) [/quote] Thanks for all the work you put into this. However I just want to pick you up on one point that interests me. You seem to be indicating that the line to draw is between 'Supergrievences' & the 'old Orders', presumeably NPO & NpO and that this line is deeply established. i.e. 'as sharp as ever'. However in previous graphs NpO has been placed on the same side as supergrieviences rather than sharing a side with NPO, also presumeably due to recent war history. Therefore why would an 'old Order' side be described as deeply established? Following on from that and if you think that it hasn't been, do you think that a) the 'old Orders' side is a new thing or b) the graph doesn't represent the reality? Or possibly a c) that I'm missing. Also please don't take my post as some kind of political stunt as people seem to have taken a previous one. I'm retired, curious & would genuinely like to hear your thoughts.

Interesting news. Thanks for the answers.

Out of curiosity have FARK left Superfriends? I couldn't help but notice the following: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Superfriends (note FARK's description as a Former Superfriend) & wanted to determine if it's just a prank or if it's genuine.

[quote name='Olaf Styke' timestamp='1285913899' post='2470842'] Pacificanism was and IS something very different than what is going on with GOONS. Pacificanism .... [/quote] I agree with you to a point, clearly NPO & GOONS are very different alliances who respond to others in very different ways. However, too much is made of NPO's power and influence when they were on top. The most powerful entity was never NPO per see, but the power structure once described as hegemony that NPO was part of. For sure, due to their size and more importantly their long list of contacts NPO was a big influence on the power structure, but others (including many who moved across to Karma) also had a big stake in it and were certainly not mini-NPOs. The Karma war wasn't a revolution, instead (like all CN global wars) it was a civil war within the existing power structure. In Karma's case, the Continuum. However your point still stands, NPO & GOONS are very different. I just wanted to add that many in Karma are closer in character to NPO than GOONS. Alliances in fact often once closely allied to NPO & that means to a certain extent that business at the top of CN carries on as normal.

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1285942971' post='2471046'] But I guess that says a lot about the way you see MK. [/quote] Yep. I don't like you. Thought that much was already clear though.

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1285941931' post='2471032'] You just don't get it, do you? It's clearly MK's fault if an alliance is incompetent and/or disbands. [/quote] I'm not quite sure why you're bringing your own alliance into the discussion...unless you mean to imply that GOONS' actions are dictated to by MK. Also before you say it, no I don't think MK are responsible, but I do think you immediately assuming that MK has anything to do with this says something about your ego.

[quote name='Anu Drake' timestamp='1285933124' post='2470959'] Silly thread. Disbanding alliances isn't what is going on, and I don't think anyone has been forced to disband since Karma. Our continued existence is evidence enough. We lost Karma and whatever the last war was called and despite the hate we felt there was never any talk of forcing us to disband. [/quote] A number of micro-alliances would disagree with you

Over three years in government and not one serious rogue attempt, I retire and a big one strikes... clearly you all missed me

[quote name='Thunder Strike' timestamp='1283951984' post='2446522'] He replied specifically to Xiph, who is not a group of people, but a person. I think. [/quote] Ask Cora if interested. I get the impression that it's a number of people in maroon though rather than just Xiph.

[quote name='Thunder Strike' timestamp='1283947344' post='2446487'] He was talking about USN leaving CA, so I don't see why that is relevant. Unless you are suggesting USN left CA because of Cora's personal dislike for Xiph. Political decisions that are based on personal relationships like that don't tend to work out for the best. [/quote] It's relevent because he's blaming UPN for USN leaving CA. I quote "This would be [u]UPN's[/u] handy work."

[quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1283914856' post='2446136'] [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=60305&hl="]This would be UPN's handy work[/url]. [/quote] You're wrong, utterly wrong. Also, I've already told you this and I don't like repeating myself. Cora is fully capable of deciding she doesn't like you all by herself. She doesn't, I hear about it all the time and given what she's shown me I agree with her viewpoints. The idea that I orchestrated some grand plan to split maroon up is laughable. I didn't know any of you enough to care. So stop blaming me for whatever issues you have in maroon, because whilst I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy you're tilting at windmills.

Four years it's taken for someone to rogue me, batter late than never. Time for some mutual stats destruction

On the plus side I now no longer have to argue that there isn't a chance in hell of UPN joining C&G

[quote name='Stealthkill' timestamp='1281992080' post='2418223'] You clearly have never fought UPN before. [/quote] Coming from R&R and your complete inability to fight us in two seperate wars, that's rich.

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1280329247' post='2392476'] [color="#0000FF"]I don't know how much you know about UPN-NPO relations, so perhaps I can be of some help. For a long time, prior to Karma, UPN was desperate to get a treaty with the NPO, and were constantly turned down. One didn't happen until Invicta pulled in a few favors and decided to form the Waltzing Street Compact with the UPN, the NPO, and NATO. Really, it was Invicta that got the UPN that treaty. Not any love the NPO had for UPN. After that, UPN primarily affiliated itself with purple, and then UPN and purple drifted apart after the last war, with its parting finalized when it and Invicta canceled on each other. These days UPN is far more closely associated with Polaris than either purple or the NPO.[/quote] Sorry to burst your bubble but during that period of time UPN-NPO relations were very non-committal from both sides. Invicta, NATO and others basically had to persuade me (I was leader at the time) that NPO relations were a good idea, hence WSC. Certainly the feeling was, treaty or no treaty, that we were closer to Polaris. Despite that we fought with WSC in Karma, although the tensions over that inside UPN were huge and resulted in people leaving before the war, due to predicting sides and not liking the people we were with. As for UPN/Purple relations...well trust me when I say they'd been broken for a very long time, but in those days we were good at keeping it off the OWF

[quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1280299532' post='2392276'] And yet, still, NPO? Are you [i]high[/i]? [/quote] Careful Xiph, you might want to wipe that foam away from your mouth.

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' date='15 July 2010 - 11:32 AM' timestamp='1279189948' post='2372667'] I know this may sound a bit stupid and I will take the ribbing that comes along with what I'm going to ask. What in the hell does Ave Legio mean? Could one of you Legion folks please explain the translation into English? [/quote] It means "Welcome Legion!" in Latin. i.e. it's a greeting. Other than that, Legion will do fine. Haters or no haters. Also, lol Pezstar

This reads like, "Lets threaten a far weaker target with destruction and see if they react, oh they have! Aren't we good!" No, you're not. You're bullies.

[quote name='WalkerNinja' date='02 July 2010 - 03:05 PM' timestamp='1278079528' post='2357668'] I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that TOP did a number of things wrong. More accurately, let me rephrase that to read "There were many things wrong with TOP." [list=1] [*]TOP allowed both of the blocs in which they held membership to trample on one another to the point that neither were sustainable. This served to weaken TOP's protection and make us susceptible to attack. [*]TOP allowed pragmatism to evolve into indecision. Indecisiveness bred internal frustration and caused our perspective to become skewed. [*]TOP's skewed perspective became calcified, and we were thus unable to appreciate the perspective of others. [*]After the fall of both the Continuum and the Citadel, TOP became isolated. [*]TOP was unable to free itself from the fetters of an ex-Hegemony reputation and methodology in a post-Karma world. [*]Without a comforting defensive bloc, and simultaneously holding the #1 rank, TOP became a focal point of political speculation distorting our already skewed perspective into paranoia. [/list] There were many things wrong with TOP.[/quote] Just want to say that I completely agree with your analysis and came to the same conclusions myself. It's a shame though that if TOP realises the above, that outwardly they tried to spin a different tale during the conflict. Even going as far as to try and pin their ills as the fault of others. The pre-empt was very surprising at the time, but perhaps (given TOP's paranoia) it shouldn't have been. Either way glad to see a TOP member trying not to shift the blame.

[quote name='Cataduanes' date='30 June 2010 - 01:37 PM' timestamp='1277901445' post='2355091'] As in the red wine? god i love that wine . Best of luck to both the Legion and UPN. [/quote] It most certainly was named after the wine. I'm a big fan and Roman grape variety/Legion, made sense Also, sad to see this go, best of luck to you Legion and just call if you ever want a chat.