Jump to content

Max Power

Members
  • Content Count

    860
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Max Power

  • Rank
    Coffee King

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Nation Name
    Kuraland
  • Alliance Name
    Javahouse
  • Resource 1
    Iron
  • Resource 2
    Marble
  1. tJL: Either you're one of the six nations in our top tier, or you're in our bottom tier. This is a legit great answer.
  2. Looks like you're doing well. Nice to meet you and glad to see you're passionate about HR of all things. (My background is similar.) Needs more cat pics.
  3. Max Power

    Sheep inc

    So you're suggesting playing Catan? Works for me.
  4. from the OP: For instance, if you've outright banned tech raiding, there is probably a reason for that, and it just might mean that the more aggressive, amoral alliances shouldn't be a natural fit. I was responding to that.
  5. Alliances can absolutely support tech raiders without raiding themselves. There are two ways to look at this. The less nerdy way is an alliance's belief that alliances in general should abide by their respective moral codes. This takes a relativist view that doesn't force an alliance's views on any other. This is pretty close to how I RP my position in tJL. The nerdier way is to use D&D terminology and call it lawful-neutral. Sure, I want to obey my laws, but I'm not going to go around crowing about whether what do you is right or wrong. A real-world example of this is how the Bismarck administration initiated the Kulturkampf against the Catholic Church in Prussia yet its closest ally was staunchly Catholic Austria-Hungary. This analogy gets zany when you call tJL "Prussia", tech raiding "Catholicism" and Kashmir "Austria-Hungary", but you can see how the underlying principle works. Most CN alliances are monarchies, dictatorships, or something similar, and even the democratic ones are basically oligarchies. Comparing CN alliances to nations before WWI - and the CN war cycle is a lot more like the 19th-century lightning war period than anything since - there were tons of alliances made on friendship, or more usually, marriage. I think let's call it the early modern up to WWI period (c. 1453-1914, which, yes, I understand is an absolutely massive period) is a more accurate analogy for CN than the current world is.
  6. <3 Thanks to Kashmir and AI for having our backs, to NSO, SRA, PPO and Kaskus for stepping up the plate, and to those in tJL who stood up most under fire (you know who you are).
  7. ^Echoing that, including yours. The text log between l0c0 and oyb is the best part.
  8. These are great. Keep 'em coming. "Yell at me later, we have more pressing concerns now." I need to start using this in everyday life. Who says you're gone for good? This'd be the perfect back story for how you could come back as, y'know, a Ghost.
  9. LW is completely right but the fact that I think he's generally right shouldn't be a mystery at this point. We're gov in the same alliance ffs. I see optimal treaties as friendship + politics. That means you're legitimately friends yet also share the same political goals. While it may seem tough to find other alliances like that, know what? You can probably find anywhere from 2-5. In excess of that, why do you even need more treaties? I guess it can be fun to maneuver Diplomacy-style but I personally hate Diplomacy so I'm not the best person to comment on all that. I mean hell, to me a realpolitik stance for tJL would be this: we are who we are, we won't change, we aren't going anywhere, our alliance model works, roll us, we don't care, we'll come out in the black in the end. Ultimately, when alliances get rolled in cycles every 1-3 years, what more can you want? On the whole, I think using allies as shields in ridiculous, but if you're willing to be that shield, I can't stop you. I know if DS wanted to hit AI, or AI wanted to hit DS, I would be throwing a &#33;@#&#036;fit so loud it would be heard halfway across the world. Unlike LW above, I'd admonish A, B and C for allowing such ridiculous behaviour even more than I'd admonish X for being such an awful ally.
  10. Well worded. I have a way bigger problem with #2 as well, and it's one of the reasons I try to get to know allies' allies. #1... I mean going after less connected alliances makes sense for the naive reason of wanting to limit counters, if nothing else. It's like an incredibly benign form of pixel-hugging.
  11. I get two things from all this: 1. I have an insatiable urge to write my own version of this list. 2. The Disorder War seems to have not been very well planned. I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW OR WHY.
  12. Been winning plenty and enjoying it thoroughly. I like what xoin said about definitions of winning, though.
  13. Max Power

    Recruit Me

    Came here to say this.
  14. You're missing NG-NoR. It's a MDoAP. Obvious adverse effect discrimination against tJL and Kashmir.
×
×
  • Create New...