Tevron
-
Posts
755 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Tevron
-
-
Very nice post.
-
This war, and I think many people would agree, nukes have been unnaturally streaky. There have been many many instances of 15-27 nukes being burned up in a single attempt to nuke someone. Is it possible that the RNG with nukes is somehow broken? The actual blockage rate (according to some of the data I've seen) is fairly accurate, but it seems like wars are insanely punishing, with some nations successfully nuking each day with little issues and others going through their entire arsenal all at once.
-
11 hours ago, jerdge said:
With Polaris declaring war against the DBDC the BiPolar 2 name really takes off.
11 hours ago, Jazzy95 said:BiPolar 2: Electron Boogaloo
Jazzy's suggestion: -
4 minutes ago, Piejonk said:
Ya, there might be a better way to do it, I'm also leaning towards the second table (taking opponents into consideration). The stats in general get muddled with people fighting inactives, etc. that blow things out of proportion. Not sure if there is a perfect way of encapsulating all of this, but I have to say that I agree with you in that so far, this metric is the best I've been able to see/come up with the data.
Not to mention fighting with higher tech wingmates. There's almost no way to account for those nations though, who do the right thing in their wars but just happen to be paired with higher tech guys. They are basically always losing out in a stats comparison like this imo.
I honestly think for such nations it is best to just not try to accommodate that situation because it can't easily be done to my knowledge.
-
6 hours ago, Master Hakai said:
consider this my formal apology to the community for failing to add signatures to this announcement. i fixed it, but fear it may be too late, as the damage has already been done.
Will be reporting you to A BM.
-
22 minutes ago, Ibz said:
Is it aggressive when CCC has chosen to send war aid?
Along these lines, is it aggressive for CCC to be in coalition chats to start an aggressive war? Their alliance's principles are as misinterpreted as the Bible they profess to base their alliance on. I'm sure their charter is no longer relevant to anything they do, but it is telling just how far they've drifted from it.
-----Enjoy your quest KoRT!
-
3 minutes ago, kerschbs said:
Honestly yes it does. The complete inactivity and complacency of alliances across bob infuriates me. Especially alliances like VE and ODN whom only appear to be here out of some combination of nostalgia and spite.ODN's non-involvement in this war is a return to the optional defense network. Frankly embarrassing.
-
War were recognized or declared!
-
Doom Gambit Accepted: Bipolar Variation.
-
3 minutes ago, dev0win said:
Nipsy Tussle is open for anyone that want's access to disappointment in CN, which is why everyone was invited to it lol.
Open for everyone, accepted by a small few. Now instead we just get another losing war for the Gratasphere.
2 minutes ago, kerschbs said:
Thank you for admitting you wanted to raise hell with OBR and Sparta and confirming the move to black was done with ill intent.Arguing that Doom moved to black with peaceful intentions is a farce and we all know it but it’s nice to have CLAWS gov confirm it.
I'm sorry, aren't we the boring ones who don't do anything to stir the pot? Choose one narrative and stick to it.
-
The logs from February and March were a plan to raise some hell. However, lots changed and Sparta ended up being friendly instead of hostile. It's cute to pick and choose.
The argent doom tensions were well known by everyone involved, so those are just kinda lulzy.
Next I expect logs where FL and Lord Darrin complain about claws and doom wolves. Egad.
Or maybe logs about Nipsy Tussle or talking about hitting Polar allies? Who know?!
-
Fortunately you have a vast record of experience to speak for.
Levon's suggestion remains a good one. It doesn't make sense for TE to allow navy dodging mechanics since it's competitive.
-
On 7/7/2022 at 7:01 PM, James Spanier said:
Woah, spoiler in the title!
Damn, I love this song.
Enjoy the war friends! -
Congratulations to Sys!
-
No one below the rank of Grand Moff Tortoise may post in this thread.
Have fun!
-
CLAW DoW 2 sounds like a weird stock exchange market, which is exactly how playing CN during wartime feels.
Our ghost soldiers march, but are unlikely to arrive due to well placed salt and crucifixes.
-
6 minutes ago, Bionic redhead said:
So Iron have stood back and done nothing while DBDC raided us and now they've declared war on one of our treaty partners. Such great allies they are.
I mean even Fark stood back and did nothing while DBDC raided them, so the bar shouldn't be so high there probably.
-
8 minutes ago, lilweirdward said:
Haha see Squidward I can kind of see, especially because my nick is sort of similar. I can live with that one.
It's like an association thing I swear. Now it's going to be squidward all the time, there's no going back.
Also, props to Sparta for fighting, sometimes they are a bit quiet.
-
The bloc with the best flag is here peeps.
Have fun GLoF, and welcome back to the world!
-
3 hours ago, lilweirdward said:
All the PM criticism aside, it continues to astound me how many people go out of their way to victimize themselves OOC for being trolled by NG, simply because it's NG. I mean honestly, people have trolled each other over going into PM for how long - since the beginning of Bob? But now that NG does it, suddenly it's "thinly veiled harassment?" The other day, someone in NPO referred to some of NG's The Boys memes as porn, which is so mind boggingly stupid that I honestly thought it was a joke at first.
You've always struck me as the kind of person that doesn't think being trolled is funny, and that's totally fine, I get that not everyone enjoys it. But come on, for the love of admin, can we please not start with the whole business of feigning OOC offense over harmless stuff, especially freaking PM arguments of all things
Honestly, it's hard to take what you say seriously because I always read your posts in my head with the voice of Spongebob. I agree that NPO should just call it humorous bestiality, you know since it depicted a man with an octopus sucking him off and it's supposed to be funny, but I'm really not sure this is the time nor place.
Now, you can go back to being the victim for this "defensive war" against the big bad doomies and the big bad NPO and the big bad DBDC that won't be in your range and hasn't fought you in years and the big bad thought police who hate that ur trollin brah m8 wot. The idea of "victimization" being played whenever anyone points out something dumb as bricks from someone else is a tired sentiment that I don't think anybody here has the time of day for.[OOC]While some of us can't recognize the OOC / IC barrier (You), my dislike for HoT harping on WC in this thread isn't that I feel it crosses a line -- I'm simply sticking up for my fellow co-leader. More importantly, I feel it is hypocritical behavior, since WC can do no right in HoT's book, which was the entire point of my post. That's why I broke down my argument into three parts: #1) explain tactics in case HoT is actually ignorant. #2) point out that he has no actual standards for his constant whining about WC, doom, literally anyone not on his side. #3) give him an example of how his logic can be employed fallaciously in a similar way. -- HoT's posting isn't harassment and is milquetoast standard OWF stuff.
When I say thinly veiled harassment -- I'm not meaning to draw it into something bigger, it's just meant to point toward HoT's bias, not anything that is an OOC matter. You get that false impression of me as someone who is somehow taking IC offense as OOC from my disdain for people trolling me and/or flame-baiting me on OOC boards, such as yourself when I confronted you about it on discord. Now let's take the OOC harassment discussion off the board, since it was never on it until you decided, because you can't differentiate between my IC / OOC character. [/OOC] -
29 minutes ago, HeroofTime55 said:
You're better than this, FL. You know full well that we lack the sort of upper tier that your side has, of which WC is a part of at 400k NS. We have literally only 3 nations bigger than WC. There is zero excuse for a 400k NS nation on your side to be hiding in hippie. Admittedly, there's plenty of reason for smaller nations on your side to go into hiding, but a 400k NS nation? That's a joke, WC is a coward and more damage will be inflicted on the rest of you because WC won't pull her weight. WC is going to hide in hippie until everyone is out of range, and then come out exclaiming "I would fight, but there's nobody left in my range." What, does she have bone spurs or something?FL is better than wasting time on you. Frankly, I can't think of someone who isn't. Yet here we are.
PM is used to redeploy, and CLAWS military policy takes no issue with nations using PM to get out of anarchy (often for a quick collect) before returning to war. Nations do this, even in the high tier (egad), because it makes it easier to declare offensive wars without a surprise quad coming in and maintaining anarchy. If WC is in peace mode in a week, then maybe you could say she is cowering, but for all intents and purposes, she's doing pretty much the most normal thing for a nation
I guess when WC comes out of pm for a re-deploy she will no longer be a hippie but an opportunist or something? What's the next thinly veiled harassment you'll dish at her without holding your own side responsible for anything?
Note, this is my attempt to illustrate your disregard of standard tactics: I think WC did something a lot more impressive than you. She declared war on two targets, and one had more tech than her. You know full well that the upper tier is full of geriatric husks of nations, regardless of the alliance. There is zero excuse for a 210k nation on your side to declare a single war when this is basically your only shot to do any real damage. Admittedly, there's plenty of reason for nations in the high tier on your side to cower, declare a single war and a down declare at that while your comrades fight tougher battles, but a 210k NS nation? That's a joke. you are a coward and more damage will be inflicted on the rest of your coalition because you can't pull your own weight. Not to mention the damage you could have inflicted had you targeted a couple inactives. You're going to avoid fighting aggressive wars until you're out of range of everyone in the high tier, and then come out exclaiming "I would fight, but there's no open targets." What, do you have bone spurs or something?As you can see, anyone can be willfully ignorant and use it to piss on others. But what's the fun in that? If the paragraph above was a serious criticism levied against you, it would be moronic and if anything, make the writer into the clown. Just because you have people clapping along to the points you're making does not make them any more interesting or accurate.
-
4 minutes ago, kerschbs said:
I like when you make my point for me. You have full nukes, your side greatly outnumbers ours in your NS range (as you pointed out NG only has one nation in your range,) and yet per usual you ran and hid after doing literally the minimum possible.Now just because you might prefer to nuke with less tech than your allies doesn't mean White Cocoa has to. This might be gamechanging advice for NG since both you and caustic find this somehow odd, but more tech = more damage!
-
4 minutes ago, Velocity said:
Can confirm that I’m a deep state actor for Al Bundy. 🙂
Shoe salesmen have gone too far!!!
-
19 minutes ago, HeroofTime55 said:
If we really want to be semantic, there is a difference between "an attack on one..." and "a war against one..." the latter being a choice that can be made internally, not just externally. Doom can (and did) make the choice to put others in a state of war against Doom.You are aware that saying the word semantic in a literal discussion about meaning doesn't somehow invalidate your own statements or my questions, right? Semantics are about meaning, so obviously meaning does matter. The use of "arguing semantics" is supposed to be deployed when both people actually agree, they just are using the wrong definitions. (And the arguments become a disagreement about the terms themselves -- the discourse field and its meanings)
You've elected to ascribe the choice of DBDC as the choice of DS and DW. That's what I take issue with, and you're doing it again here. Should we take your argument seriously, then I guess "RFD" declared war on DBDC too. Either way, alliance sovereignty does exist and equating an individual's declaration to a group is simply inaccurate.
(Or was this Al Bundy's plan all along????!!!!?!??)
BiPolar 2: Electron's Boogaloo War Graphs/Maps by Lollerobot
in Open World RP
Posted
Very nice, thanks for sharing this here!