Haflinger

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1317344744' post='2812264'] She claimed to be a dove. Her word, not mine. This would imply a peaceful nature. Perhaps not a hero (as I was simplifying things), but it was inaccurate all the same. [/quote] A dove means someone who opposes war. It is the opposite of a warhawk. Generally, this is true of DK; she has never advocated any wars that I know of herself, and has opposed quite a few of them, in several cases paying reps to avoid them. [quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1317344744' post='2812264'] That is very debatable. Unless you were privy to all the events before and during that conflict, you don't really have the relevant information to judge us on that war. [/quote] I was FA leadership in an MADP partner of the alliance leading the charge to get LSF freed from that war. I do kinda know what I'm talking about here Part of the reason why what was done to NoV was seen as non-controversial was because it was exactly the same as they had done several times before themselves. It was still a bad idea; you can't solve the problem of people forcing alliances to disband by disbanding the alliances that do it, but them's the breaks.

Has anyone ever charged reps for individual surrender terms before? This war is just so ... full of [i]interesting[/i] precedents.

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1317163530' post='2809896'] Not exactly. I just don't buy it when a former villain, by their own admission, claims to now be a hero once their seat of power has been forced away from them. And neither should anyone else. [/quote] You're illustrating my point. DK's not claiming to be a hero, she's claiming to be a person who did some good at some times. You however have categorized her as a villain, therefore everything she ever did was horrible. [quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1317163649' post='2809897'] Does this mean we should all be judging NoR on the basis of old wars on Commies and such? [/quote] But of course! Also NoV's eternal war against LSF was obviously [i]completely[/i] justified.

[quote name='Diego18' timestamp='1317320939' post='2811942'] Your entire alliance is in peace mode... what kind of support is that? [/quote] I know you're in NSO, but have you ever heard of a second wave? That said: I have no love for Polar, as is well documented here on these fora. However they haven't done what people here are accusing them of. Or put bluntly: Polar didn't ask for this announcement; UPN did it because they wanted to. [quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1317323345' post='2811982'] Non Grata just decked you in the face over something they do everyday, rather than try to negotiate your way out of it, now is the time to show what military capabilities your alliance has if any. If UPN just rolls over and takes it without putting up a fight you guys will just be on the bad end of many more jokes to come. [/quote] NG have flaws, but they don't raid applicant AAs everyday. [quote name='ShouAS' timestamp='1317323727' post='2811994'] But it someone else was to attack UPN in defense of NG, then the defense clauses of UPN treaties would come into play, so its NG asking its allies to stay out that is stopping this from escalating. All blueballs should be blaming them. [/quote] I believe all UPN treaties are non-chaining, so said defense clauses would be optional in the scenario you outline. [quote name='Wentworth' timestamp='1317325340' post='2812020'] When Pacifican allies "shielded" her by not calling on them, she burned anyway. Just a thought. Fair move though. [/quote] It was frequently claimed that NPO was hit because there was not a public statement made that she would be staying out. Here UPN are giving a public statement. Good luck; frankly this war started because of stupid mistakes, and not just on UPN's side. So hopefully if there is to be another global conflict it will be over something substantial, not one ruler somewhere doing something dumb.

I see that Captain Flinders still lives in a black and white world entirely composed of heroes and villains, where the heroes are people who never did anything bad and the villains are everyone who ever did something bad. The problem with living in that world is that when you apply that distinction to life you find you don't have any heroes, just villains.

[quote name='Conformist Maryland' timestamp='1317074602' post='2809084'] lol awesome. Legion, GB and Lord Swampy were two of your BEST members. "The reason why people hate us is because they still connect us with Great Britain and Lord Swampy" lulz. Really? No. People hate you because of your ignorance. [/quote] How well did you know those two really? Swampy is a good guy, and didn't deserve most of the crap that got dumped on him. But he did some awesomely dumb things, like well the stuff that led to Purplegate. GB on the other hand... oh lord, are you going to claim he was a good leader here? How bad is your memory?

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1316965176' post='2808152'] Could someone pull out a timeline and point me to where posting spied screenshots became different from taking them. [/quote] It was right around when GOONS posted edited snippets of that channel that you set up.

They were founded as a GOONS1 protectorate, and fought for the Unjust Highway in that war so long ago.

[quote name='nippy' timestamp='1316859713' post='2807308'] I do believe we'd break you before you broke us. [/quote] You do know where BAPS came from, right? (Hint: Most of their old membership are from boards.ie, but their founder was also an SA poster.)

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1316791987' post='2806692'] And my alliance is the one that saved a small one man alliance from the cruelty of evil raiders and forced recrutement. Your point? [/quote] Neither of you are complete villains That was my point.

Yeah. It depends on your NS. If you're very small, then all you really need is soldiers. As you get bigger, you need other forms of military to protect yourself.

You should post your nation strength, infrastructure, and tech level to help people evaluate your needs. Most people deal with the defense of their nation by joining an alliance though. If you want to stay out of war, there are several neutral alliances out there that do not generally fight large-scale wars.

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1316684064' post='2805828'] I don't pin you as anything else other than someone who grew a conscience when you were on the receiving end of a losing war. I don't think of you as one of the "bad girls" either since any alliance you were in as never been relevant enough. You were just a follower. Now that you're not on the side with the power, you seem awfully vocal about how reps are evil and blahblahblah. I could be wrong and you could have been opposing reps and E/PZIs and co with all your heart and soul but that sure wasn't in public. If anything else fails, you can always resent that bloody tech if it hurts you so much. [/quote] DK does have a somewhat mixed past, but her alliance is the one that paid GOD to free Kaiser Martens before Karma.

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1316720197' post='2806099'] That you doubt me, only shows that you dont know me. Not that im not totally ok with this. Its a mighty big step you take to assess the character of someone whom you have never spoken to, I mean, in a 3 week + "planning" phase, only 4 lines of text from me show up. Why? Simple.. there are no other lines. Odd that I would be planning something, but not be... you know.. part of the planning. Odder still that when Necro decided he was going to try to start this war, and my allies were lined up hoping Polar would jump, I calmly cautioned them against it. Why? Because despite the fact that I want to roll Polar, and I think they deserve, I dont want the rolling to be part of a set up. I didnt like it this past war, I dont like it now. My only interest in Necro's plan was to a) determine who in Polar he was working with and b) if it was the same polar member he told me was going to join TLR. Believe what you want. Wisdom of fools and such... [/quote] Actually, I have talked to you. Admittedly it's been a while though. It was back then (you know, when Athens and Invicta were treaty partners) that I came to the conclusion that you're not an idiot, which you seem steadfast in trying to prove that you are. Anyway there are actually four lines from you. Session Start: Tue Aug 16 19:00:09 2011 Session Ident: RushSykes|TLR [19:00] Session Ident: RushSykes|TLR (Coldfront, NecroV4L[TLR]) ([i]hostmask-censored[/i]) [19:00] <RushSykes|TLR> so, im gonna say this now, and hope its not too late... [19:00] <RushSykes|TLR> should be put on hold cuz we have no MoW right now [19:00] <RushSykes|TLR> and are in the process of interviewing new people for the job [19:01] <NecroV4L[TLR]> At most, I can give you a week [19:01] <NecroV4L[TLR]> Maybe 10 days [19:06] <NecroV4L[TLR]> 8-14; It's fluid, so I'll flex it around that window as best I can given the situation at the time. Session Close: Tue Aug 16 19:06:44 2011 Session Start: Sat Aug 27 20:38:33 2011 Session Ident: RushSykes|TLR [20:48] <Necro[TLR]> Anyday, anytime, within the next 60 days; when you're comfortable. [20:48] <Necro[TLR]> Within two days of your decision. [20:49] <RushSykes|TLR> ok Session Close: Sat Aug 27 21:27:33 2011 How you can attempt to spin the second set of logs above as anything but "Great, I'll let you know when we're ready to go and you can start the war" is uncertain.

[quote name='Jgoods45' timestamp='1316702783' post='2805918'] You are, as usual, completely wrong. These were the actions of ONE former member (who has since been sentenced to ZI) of TLR that were in no way shape or form sanctioned by the government of The Last Remnants. The reason why Rush didn't inform Polaris himself of the plot was because he wanted to find out who Necro's co-conspirator was. Once he found out, he would of informed Polaris of the plot and would of named both individuals involved in the incident and they would of been properly taken care of by the governments of the two alliances. After all, Rush has a history of exposing spies to Polaris and has done so in about 2 or 3 different occasions even though he had no obligation to do so. [/quote] Ah yes, the classic "We were going to tell them - REALLY" defense. Pardon me if I am a bit doubtful. Assuming what you are saying is true and you are vaguely competent, the correct time to tell Polar would be as soon as you knew there was a conspiracy going on. That way, you let people who are getting spied on know immediately, and then they don't go and post logs proving your guilt in half the embassies on Planet Bob. Well... I think you're fairly competent actually, so I don't believe your story. It just ... holds water the way this does. [IMG]http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w264/DavidsWine/sieve.jpg[/IMG]

[quote name='Mandellav' timestamp='1316653712' post='2805587'] I don't doubt that there is animosity between our alliances. But perhaps the definition of baiting I was thinking of and your definition are quite different. I see baiting as deliberate actions taken to try to manufacture a war with someone.[/quote] Your government planned a scheme to try and manufacture a war with Polar, and then attacked the guy who told Polar about it as a traitor. Everybody's seen the logs.

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1316692528' post='2805846'] He has 2,515.239 I have 1,137.429 [/quote] Your land is irrelevant. Land only helps defense, it doesn't help offense. So when two nations with 40K land each are trying to spy each other, they both have crappy odds.

I have noticed some strange spy odds over the past year or so; not often enough to make a bug report but enough times to make me wonder. However - does he have a lot of land? Land improves defense against spies.

The text for this is bad, but the intention is to prevent people from accepting trades while keeping potential partners hanging.

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1316446383' post='2803757'] Also- I am utterly amused at Haf calling me out on my WC when it appears he does not exactly have a good one either. The irony of that. [/quote] Why do you say that? I consider my warchest to be adequate. I would prefer it to be awesome. It is however several times the size of yours.

Sigh. I'm obviously building warchest. So yes, were you to attack me [i]right now,[/i] you'd have a distinct naval advantage. However I'm not fighting anyone right now am I? You're the guy at war.

I wouldn't nuke you, unless I needed to nuke you in order to win GAs. And no, you're not getting battle support on me. You need to remove my navy in order to do that. You see, unlike you I do keep enough warchest to justify having a full navy when I'm fighting. Still... You're making the basic first mistake of most CNers; you think the guy who wins the war is the one who inflicts more infra damage. This is wrong. The guy who wins the war is the one who inflicts more cash and tech damage. If you nuke me down to where my bills are costing me under 1M/day, but it only costs me say 300M to rebuild all my infra postwar, while my attacks and your bills during the war cost you 500M, then I won the war (assuming tech damage is relatively even). The only reason to fire nukes (and CMs) at all is to do tech damage, and also to help win GAs. Infra is so bloody cheap that it really doesn't matter, especially since losing it means getting your bills cut. Forcing the other guy to pay a lot in bills is one way of causing cash damage, but usually it's hard to do. You on the other hand appear willing to help a brother out.

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1316402107' post='2803421'] The irony of you trying to imply otherwise is even better imo [/quote] Yeah, because I have for a long time tried to avoid wars, and have never done anything that could be seen as causing them. No, that's totally me.

Other people have said lots of good things about BAPS here, but nobody's said this: They are one of the most fun groups of people you will ever have the good fortune to meet.

[quote name='Viluin' timestamp='1316388256' post='2803312'] To be fair, a full navy isn't that hard to maintain in war, most of the ships that will get killed are cheap anyway. It's when you have to buy new aircraft carriers every day that it really burns (at that point you may as well stop bothering with your navy). A full navy may actually be cheaper to maintain (at first) than, say, a 1/2 navy with a lack of screens. Not sure, too lazy to figure it out. [/quote] It's not the replacement cost, it's the bills. Frankly if I was trying to bill-lock someone with a crappy warchest and I saw they had max navy I would probably be tempted to just ... completely ignore it. Spies are how you do it; well and GAs and dogfights.