Icewolf
-
Posts
6,113 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Icewolf
-
Using word games to get around a meaning that is plainly obvious to all? How much does it matter to your side to pretend that you are not losing?
-
What happens if you revert to default text and then retype it?
-
The reason people hold ODN to the standards of its coalition partners is because it is not in an alliance of convenience or respecting treaty chains. It is in the war it is in now because of choices it made to stick with a certain path that it could have turned from. That means it has accepted the actions of those it is allied with. That said, attacking an applicant AA is no worse than many other activities in this war. Should the big nations drifting down the ranks of (in)competence lay off the underwondered nations that are new to the game but are around the 3-4K NS mark? That is frustrating. I know that. I was fighting nuclear capable Polar nations before I completed my first tech deal due to when I joined the game in 2011. What kept me around was communication. I knew why the war was fought and that kept me interest because it was an interesting war. Tell your members what is going on and they will appreciate it and fight for it because there is a hell of a history there. First experience of the game being fighting in another chapter of a long saga is far more interesting in my view than a "this button here? Yep click it to buy tech. Now send it to me."
-
I'd disagree with the statement that large alliances offer less personable treatment. Any alliance that treats its members in that way is going to have problems and is not worth joining. In anycase, you get out what you put in. IRON is a mass alliance (currently second largest in the game) and is a good example of this. Our aid programs are varied and there is a role for everyone, and you are given a choice as to how you want to be in the alliance. We have an academy program that trains people and various services that people can enter into. Others don't want to be as involved and just follow instructions. Certainly our members are not numbers. I also think that a mid ranking alliance is not necassarily a bad place to be. There is no reason for them to be described as just "middle of the road." That in itself is significant as it gives you a balance between security and chance for personal advancement that takes longer in a large alliance. However the price for being in a small or mid tier alliance is that you will not be at the heart of things as much. Mid tier and especially small tier is about finding your place in a power sphere rather than punching your own weight. As a diplomat I go to other alliances and immediately get noticed as a representative of an alliance that can pummel you. On the flip side it is perhaps easier for a small alliance to pursue a certain role play dynamic. LSF and Kaskus are good exampls of small alliances (although I suppose they would both be mid teir) that have interesting times and interesting dynamics whilst not having a major punch or role in the world.
-
Well just looking at the top 30 nations in GOONS. They are all in peace mode. They count for approximately 63% of GOONS NS. -
That would be more scary than the Forces currently ranged against us.
-
Curious. Which ally called for them to leave? I guess that is what we find out in Peace III: From Hippy to happy.
-
Some of my alliance mates have produced different numbers...thats all. Would be nice if a Mod confirmed what is supposed to happen.
-
How have you calculated that?
-
Any such effect would be insignificant next to the weight on certain alliances mind that they might be treated badly by some and labelled as first out. Far more reasonable and better explanation? EQ are not a bunch of jerks.
-
Well the difference is about 0.5% for 100 infrastructure. SO smaller than I expected it to be. Not sure how big it is over a jump though.
-
Was this said with an honest desire to see that UCoN and their fighting reputation is preserved down the ages or out of a desire to try and make it seem that your enemies are insincere and not worth talking to? For what it is worth, given EQ does not regard UCoN as a thread, recognises that they came to this war out of treaty obligations and not out of malice to the EQ side, I think it is extremely safe to say that the well wishing in this thread from the EQ side is genuine. The only people who truly know how they fought are those who fought them. Personally I remember how well every alliance I have ever fought has fought and remember who fought well and would not state otherwise later on. I have also never praised the fighting of an alliance that did not deserve it. I assume that those in MW are doing the same.
-
So the update log says the purchase limit has been raised to 100. My question is, has this lowered the effective purchase price? Namely, if I purchase at 2999.99 100 infrastructure, will it be all at the same price per unit as though I had purchased 10 levels, or will it scale so the overall price will be the same as buying ten at a time up to that 100? Looking quickly at my nation it seems the former is the case. In which case, I would like to ask why such a significant change (reducing the cost of infrastructure purchase) was introduced in the middle of a major war when I understood it to be practice not to introduce major gameplay changes mid war? It seems the cost difference is smaller than I thought so not very major.
-
And it is not presented as fact. It is presented as an opinion drawn from the factual basis of how people posted in this thread. That and it is totally unrealistic (and in fact I know it is not the case as does anyone with the tiniest knowledge of the (in)competence alliances) to assume otherwise.
-
Which stated facts in any of my posts here are inaccurate?
-
You are trying to portray that I said things I didn't because me saying that fits the imaginary world you wish to construct.
-
Given I got told of for my English in this thread, I would expect the trolls to come for you shortly. And the facts are that certian things were posted. Spin spin and dance all you like. That doesn't change. Are you really so desperate for appearances that you can't even acknowledge that people did exactly as I said they did? Is it so impossible to even acknowledge the possibility that (in)competence is not perfect? Does the desire to spin and spin and dance and play with the faries really take you that far away from reality?
-
I was carrying on a conversation for most of them. Or is this a statement that facts matter not to (in)competence and we should not expect anychange in their spin machine no matter what facts are in existance?
-
Of my posts in this thread. Post 1. I commented about when people posted. That post expressly acknowledged that some members of (in)competence had posted nice things about UCoN. Post 2 and 3. Sidetracked into confusion and say nothing. Post 4. Directed at individual member Post 5. Same post with sexier language. Post 6. Again expressly acknowledges the fact that (in)competence members have posted nice things about UCoN Post 7. Inquires if people actually read my post. Post 8. Same thing. Post 9. This one. Go on. Check. Find the difference. Or spin, spin, spin and dance away with the fairies and the rest of us will continue to live in the reality land where (in)competence is losing the war and has differences of opinion between its ranks, including members annoyed by the fact the first domino has fallen.
-
The reoccurring trend is (in)competence failing to read what is actually written, Maybe this is why they think they are winning...they deny what is actually said. I expressly said that many people on the (in)competence side are probably happy about this. However, (in)competence side is not united. There are those on your side who are unhappy about this. That they saw rapidly that their PR spin line was going to be a disaster and are now retracting like crazy does not change that.
-
Did you even read what I said? to quote caster up there "try harder"
-
Given it was the first thing out of your sides mouths what were we supposed to assume? And I don't doubt that many of your side are happy for UCoN. Probably not happy to lose power on your side but glad that an ally got peace. Is that universal on your side? Well the early evidence suggests otherwise.
-
So. SO YOU CAME HERE. YOU LAMBASTED AN ALLIANCE. A poor, sweet, battered, innocent alliance. AND TO MAKE THIS HEINOUS CRIME EVEN WORSE YOU DID NOT EVEN BOTHER TO ESTABLISH THE FACTS!!! I do not need to say more. How can we stand for this? What manner of creature of hell are you? Have I tried hard enough yet? Things make more sense now then.
-
So many tombs litter the world. So many fallen, so many forgotten.
Icewolf replied to Icewolf's topic in Open World RP
572,886,779 Total Population 383,745,795 Total Citizens 189,140,984 Active Military http://www.cybernations.net/stats_demographics.asp -
So you dived into an OWF thread to lambast someone who had fought hard for your side before even checking the facts of the case?
