Achilles

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1302052282' post='2685122'] Not this again. Just because you paid somebody money doesn't mean they have less reason to hate you. In a world such as this hate can flourish regardless of monetary ties. [/quote] Ok, but apparently the CB for this war isn't "We just hate NPO". Obviously, DH has just been lying this whole time. Thanks for clearing that up. I bet your friends at DH love it when you contradict them.

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1302017280' post='2684673'] You assumed wrong. Dead wrong. [/quote] Well, then there was no point to the KARMA war, there was no point in the reps NPO paid, and there is no point to this war either. I'm glad you were here to make those points. [quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1302017996' post='2684677'] Wow, I guess we should've consulted you before moving. It seems you're the expert on just how much justice was received by each alliance and how much is enough for each party. I'd answer your question but I don't have the same insight into NPO's inner workings and politics as you do to FAN, MK, and GOONs. [img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aeriso_oL2.jpg[/img] [/quote] My apologies, I didn't realize I took Over YOUR position as the expert in the needs of CN. I thought that when the KARMA war ended, it was because everyone got what they wanted.

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1302014102' post='2684653'] This is neither a lie nor a contradiction. If you didn't notice, five alliances attacked NPO. To say they all had exactly one reason (the same reason) is ludicrous. Yes, a major reason DH moved was because of PB-NpO. That doesn't mean it's the [i][b]only[/b][/i] reason we're allowed to use. FAN obviously has their reasons, and NoR has treaties. I can't speak for everyone, but GOONs has had lots of problems dealing with NPO as of late and I've wanted to hit them for quite some time. [right][img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisdisR5.jpg[/img][/right] The main problem is NPO's side believes that either having more than one reason means we're just making everything up as we go, or means we had no CB at all. Both claims are completely ridiculous. [img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aeris-_-L9.jpg[/img] [/quote] I'm sorry, I had assumed that the FAN issues and the MK issues were resolved after the KARMA war. What are the issues with GOONS as of late.... before this war? I'm just trying to understand. FAN got what they wanted out of the KARMA war and MK, well, MK got revenge for past aggressions. GOONS is back in CN, which should be enough for them. How many more wars will Pacifica have to go through over things that were supposed to be handled before? I believe we paid our debts didn't we?

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1301726152' post='2682761'] CN: Still seeing female alliance leadership as a joke. [/quote] Wow, gender must play a role in intelligence.

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1301551712' post='2681267'] Considering who that comes from I will consider this.. love.. and adoration. Sticks and stones might break my bones, but whips and chains excite me! [/quote] MV, this scares me. Whips, Chains, Excitement. No. Just NO.

[quote name='mattski133' timestamp='1301494291' post='2680637'] I don't think that was sarcasm. [/quote] Telling NSO to use the Moldavi Doctrine to support one of the alliances they just got out of war with. I would hope that was sarcasm. If not, you guys should start nuking yourselves to make it easier on us.

[quote name='Lusitan' timestamp='1301481859' post='2680583'] I tell you, nuking Legion is an extremely gratifying feeling. I encourage NSO to activate their Moldavi Doctrine in defense of MK and experience that yourselves. [/quote] At least your sarcasm is mildly thought out.

The In Flames piece made the whole press. LOL

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1301371690' post='2679666'] That's not what I meant, nor what I said. I'm not quite sure how to say it any other way though to be honest (or don't feel like rephrasing it at this busy juncture). And honestly, I dont understand why you are putting things like the word "even" in quotes, since we're talking about the tangible and documented here. Our side had around a 50-60 mil advantage total with all players in, at best. This isn't speculation, I planned the damn counters and placements. The sheet that was circulating in public also reflected that. Was it an advantage? Sure. Was it a massive one or one that you couldn't have worked around? No, it was closer then anything this planet has seen in a very long time. On top of that, the nation count stat was particularly troublesome. But, in the end, you placed your NS badly, did odd things, didn't work together, and had some alliances that were just extremely ineffective. Moreover, it was easy to predict so lining up counters in an efficient way wasn't exactly a mind bender (bipolar was much more difficult). No, someone like CCC doesn't really tie up MK, but thats not the type of situations that were the norm on the polar front. In the example above I mentioned tieing up ODN, well, MCXA and the assorted others ODN was on could have easily done that if they were effective. But, they weren't, and therefore ODN was free to support. I understand this stuff makes it hard to tout the "woe is me we have been curbstomped!!!" line, but for the 900th time, these are public numbers and shouldn't be at dispute. Knock out punch? Hell no. But there is something particular you could have done. Not really trying to sit here and get into it while the war is still in progress though, maybe once it ends. [/quote] The numbers you posted showed around a 20 million ns advantage on the side of DH. Are you saying that isn't a noticeable advantage? 2000 nations and 20 million ns is a big difference. Repeating the same thing you've been saying doesn't make what you're saying any more credible. Also, showing numbers that support what we're saying and pretending they support your "Theories", doesn't make that true. I understand the stats that you posted may not be up to date, but I'm confused as to why you posted them. They show exactly what I've been saying. Our side has been outnumbered during this war. Maybe it hasn't been the entire time, but the numbers under TOTAL WAR support the fact that we have been outnumbered. Unless, those statistics(Public numbers) are completely incorrect and pulled from thin air.

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1301371690' post='2679666'] That's not what I meant, nor what I said. I'm not quite sure how to say it any other way though to be honest (or don't feel like rephrasing it at this busy juncture). And honestly, I dont understand why you are putting things like the word "even" in quotes, since we're talking about the tangible and documented here. Our side had around a 50-60 mil advantage total with all players in, at best. This isn't speculation, I planned the damn counters and placements. The sheet that was circulating in public also reflected that. Was it an advantage? Sure. Was it a massive one or one that you couldn't have worked around? No, it was closer then anything this planet has seen in a very long time. On top of that, the nation count stat was particularly troublesome. But, in the end, you placed your NS badly, did odd things, didn't work together, and had some alliances that were just extremely ineffective. Moreover, it was easy to predict so lining up counters in an efficient way wasn't exactly a mind bender (bipolar was much more difficult). No, someone like CCC doesn't really tie up MK, but thats not the type of situations that were the norm on the polar front. In the example above I mentioned tieing up ODN, well, MCXA and the assorted others ODN was on could have easily done that if they were effective. But, they weren't, and therefore ODN was free to support. I understand this stuff makes it hard to tout the "woe is me we have been curbstomped!!!" line, but for the 900th time, these are public numbers and shouldn't be at dispute. Knock out punch? Hell no. But there is something particular you could have done. Not really trying to sit here and get into it while the war is still in progress though, maybe once it ends. [/quote] The numbers you posted showed around a 20 million ns advantage on the side of DH. Are you saying that isn't a noticeable advantage? 2000 nations and 20 million ns is a big difference. Repeating the same thing you've been saying doesn't make what you're saying any more credible. Also, showing numbers that support what we're saying and pretending they support your "Theories", doesn't make that true. I understand the stats that you posted may not be up to date, but I'm confused as to why you posted them. They show exactly what I've been saying. Our side has been outnumbered. Unless, those statistics(Public numbers) are completely incorrect and pulled from thin air.

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1301352322' post='2679411'] The only time where we had more numbers than the other side was when we had called in all our allies, but DH had not called in much of theirs. That "peak" would only hold any significance for the result of the conflict if, for some reason, DH's allies would be kept away from the fighting. There wasn't really anything to do that. Really, you get a "point" where the eventually defeated side has more nations than the other in almost every conflict, because of the nature of declarations and counter-declarations in the alliance web. This war simply dragged out those points more than previous ones, due to the length in between declarations. But as long as DH's allies were going to enter anyway, the length of the "peak" doesn't make any real difference. [/quote] This as well.

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1301349370' post='2679362'] The peak is obviously the point where you had the most amount before people on your side began to surrender, so I'm not sure why you would be inclined to ask that since it's pretty much the definition of the word "peak" when applied to context. Also, I'm speaking of the larger war, not just the NPO theatre. I mean, it's not really a point that's up for debate, as there was an unbiased public stats sheet keeping tract of bare NS and nation counts, etc. [/quote] Ok, if you're talking about the peek in members on our side of the fence, I understand, we may have had more numbers at our peak than DH did at their peak, but the day of attacks, that wasn't the case and it isn't the case now. So, I would like to see how the numbers were set up for the majority of the war. Also, I mean the peak of the war, where both sides were at there maximum amount of nations, not the peak where our side had the most nations. I had taken you out of context apparently.

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1301348150' post='2679349'] Your side had more nations then ours at its peak, so yea, really just doesn't apply here. [/quote] I'm inclined to ask at what point you feel was the peak? There was a point when we had more nations, around day 3, but I don't think that's been the case the entire war. these are the numbers around day 46 of the war. DH 1707 NPO 1186

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1301347274' post='2679338'] The numbers in this war were more even then any other in recent memory, for the onset and short time thereafter until surrenders started rolling in, that is. A few fronts remained even throughout as well. So while it may be true as a general statement, it certainly doesn't apply to this war. [/quote] You may be right if the numbers you're talking about are numbers in strength... I'd disagree completely if we were talking about numbers of nations, which I was. [quote name='Volatile' timestamp='1301347522' post='2679340'] Talking about numbers while many on one side are in peace mode Had the pleasure of meeting/working with a couple of VE nations this war and I'm pretty sure that ability is not an issue, anything but... VE [/quote] More Peace Mode crying? Are you not getting enough from the nations not in peacemode?

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1301342613' post='2679281'] You have it backwards, gross incompetence tends to lead to being defeated in wars. Being defeated at war could indicate incompetence, but not necessarily. On the other hand, being incompetent to start with [i]will[/i] tend to lead to defeat unless you posses enough sheer numbers to make up for lack of ability. [/quote] It seems that way in this war. Also, in the KARMA war. Sheer numbers making up for lack of ability.