RIA Treaty Cancellation

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Lusitan' timestamp='1302502913' post='2688407']
I wouldn't expect someone from Invicta to understand, but has it occurred you that some of those nations might be in peace mode because they either have badly incomplete trades or because they have tech levels severely unadjusted from their infra levels?
[/quote]
Banks frequently have huge amounts of infra and low tech. That's one of the signs that that's what you're looking at when you pull up a nation's statistics.

[janax]

First, no one should have banks. You are terrible if your alliance needs dedicated people to send money, and you should be ashamed.

2nd, sorry to see this happen with VE and RIA.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1302454147' post='2687890']
Compared to what? Saturday night with VE's two alcohol-fueled rage bros?
[04:02] <WasDroganAFK> Hey impero, thanks for the money land and tech, got any more noobs who need spanking?
[04:02] <~Impero[VE]> whatr
[04:03] <~Impero[VE]> your a dfducking idiot
[04:03] <~Impero[VE]> you werwe at like 40 infra
[04:03] <~Impero[VE]> basemtne dweller
[04:03] <~Impero[VE]> go away
[04:03] <~Impero[VE]> stop trying to axct big
[04:03] <&Sethb[VE]> !@#$%* !@#$
[04:03] <WasDroganAFK> lowest ive seen so far is about 280 infra
[04:03] <~Impero[VE]> pice of garbage
[04:03] <~Impero[VE]> go cry

[04:06] <~Impero[VE]> your gov makes fun of you
[04:06] <~Impero[VE]> and leaks faske !@#$ to you
[04:06] <~Impero[VE]> its funny
[04:06] <Avakael[RnR|BBL]> ^Drunk, drunk, drunk, and possibly stoned, too.
[04:06] <~Impero[VE]> yeap

[04:09] <~Impero[VE]> aww the little 13yearold dorks stoepd trying to be tough
[04:09] <~Impero[VE]> too bad
[04:09] <~Impero[VE]> i wonderr if they had a lonely new years
[04:10] <+lurk> maybe they got cockblocked too
[04:10] <~Impero[VE]> nah
[04:10] <~Impero[VE]> kids like WickedJ cant gete within 10 yeards of a chick
[04:10] <~Impero[VE]> damsky
[04:10] <~Impero[VE]> etc
[04:11] <~Impero[VE]> theyu sit on the interent and cry
[04:11] <&Sethb[VE]> and say
[04:12] <&Sethb[VE]> u mad
[04:12] <~Impero[VE]> yea
[04:12] <~Impero[VE]> u mad
[04:12] <~Impero[VE]> look gutys
[04:12] <~Impero[VE]> i said u masd

[04:16] <~Impero[VE]> i lvoed making fun of peopel liek you in highschool
[04:16] <~Impero[VE]> i bet you got pusshed around alot
[04:16] <~Impero[VE]> good times

Sounds like I'm missing all the fun in Impero-land; it looks like it would be like living in an after-school special. Do you think you and SethB could teach me how to be cool and have rockin' Saturdays?



[/quote]

Log dumps from me inebriated after getting home at 5am from a long night abroad from Il Impero Romano are certainly indicative of my person. Thank you for exposing this earth shattering development to the world, now justice will surely be swift.

[Sir Dingly Dang]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1302534844' post='2688566']
Log dumps from me inebriated after getting home at 5am from a long night abroad from Il Impero Romano are certainly indicative of my person.[/quote]

Well, to be fair....

[youwish959]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1302534844' post='2688566']
Log dumps from me inebriated after getting home at 5am from a long night abroad from Il Impero Romano are certainly indicative of my person. Thank you for exposing this earth shattering development to the world, now justice will surely be swift.
[/quote]
I have always been a firm believer in the fact that the real you comes out when intoxicated.

[Solaris]

[quote name='youwish959' timestamp='1302537269' post='2688577']
I have always been a firm believer in the fact that the real you comes out when intoxicated.
[/quote]
Unless you seriously count a disproportionately represented brain function as a true measure of someone's real self, you might be on the wrong trail here.

[D34th]

[quote name='youwish959' timestamp='1302537269' post='2688577']
I have always been a firm believer in the fact that the real you comes out when intoxicated.
[/quote]

Exactly: [i]In vino veritas[/i]

[Sir Dingly Dang]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1302538264' post='2688590']
Exactly: [i]In vino veritas[/i]
[/quote]

I thought it was "In Jägermeister veritas"

[youwish959]

[quote name='Solaris' timestamp='1302537834' post='2688584']
Unless you seriously count a disproportionately represented brain function as a true measure of someone's real self, you might be on the wrong trail here.
[/quote]
I do and your welcome to hold me to the same standard when I get on irc drunk (which happens relatively frequently).

[Geoffron X]

[quote name='Alfred von Tirpitz' timestamp='1302495532' post='2688342']
Not really, SF is not supposed to work that way.
[/quote]
What is supposed to happen and what actually ends up happening are often separate.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302465590' post='2687985']
CJ, I don't agree that without SF PB is in a dominant position. The coalition sizes in this war were pretty close, and that's with SF mostly on our side and with the extra support that hitting the Orders brings.[/quote]

The Pre-War SF had a total NS of about 15 mill...plus/minus actual number might be a bit off that. The entire SF didn't fight on the same side of the war (or even entirely on one side individually in RIA's case). Given that "DH" is actually DH+PB+C&G+non-SF allies, if R&R, CSN, and GOD had vaporized in an unfortunate meteorite strike, without question there was still sufficient force present to take down both Orders and their allies. It was have been a bit of a harder fight on the Polaris Front, but the outcome there was reasonable clear. Anti-Polaris forces had a decisive NS advantage.

[eyriq]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1302541024' post='2688617']
The Pre-War SF had a total NS of about 15 mill...plus/minus actual number might be a bit off that. The entire SF didn't fight on the same side of the war (or even entirely on one side individually in RIA's case). Given that "DH" is actually DH+PB+C&G+non-SF allies, if R&R, CSN, and GOD had vaporized in an unfortunate meteorite strike, without question there was still sufficient force present to take down both Orders and their allies. It was have been a bit of a harder fight on the Polaris Front, but the outcome there was reasonable clear. Anti-Polaris forces had a decisive NS advantage.
[/quote]

If SF completely had avoided the VE coalition it changes the narrative drastically, putting much greater strain on alliances like Sparta and MHA, while greatly increasing the likelihood of SF fully committing to the NpO coalition. SF may be deteriorating but they still wield vast amounts of political power, to the point where their overall effect is greater than the sum of their parts.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='eyriq' timestamp='1302548577' post='2688662']
If SF completely had avoided the VE coalition it changes the narrative drastically, putting much greater strain on alliances like Sparta and MHA, while greatly increasing the likelihood of SF fully committing to the NpO coalition. SF may be deteriorating but they still wield vast amounts of political power, to the point where their overall effect is greater than the sum of their parts.[/quote]

With respect, SF would have sat the whole thing out most likely, like Duckroll (minus Molon Labe of course), not piled in on the NpO side. As I indicated, the war would have went harder for VE's side (we seem to agree here for the most part, but not on the severity), but they weren't in danger of losing it.

SF is now a bloc of 4 alliances, perhaps soon 3. Time will tell. I think a lot now rides on Xiph's charisma and whether or not RIA makes further changes to its FA policy other than canceling a treaty with VE. However, it would be a mistake to say that the combined forces of GOD, CSN, and R&R are totally inconsequential.

[Mirreille]

[quote name='Lusitan' timestamp='1302473936' post='2688052']
First, you can pull the "you're not sure NPO was not going to enter" card all the time you want. I am sure. My leaders were fairly sure too when they took the decision they took. That said, and once again, the reasons why this started are irrelevant for the way it ends.

Second, this has a lot to do with pride sure, but it also has to do with not allowing the precedent of running for Peace mode to settle. If NPO wanted, this war would have been over 2 months ago.
[/quote]

I would really like to see some shred of evidence that this was so to come into the public domain. The way NPO sat out the $6M Dollar War didn't tell you they would try to avoid a war an any cost? When TPF and legion did not come in to help STA & Polar immediately, that didn't tell you that group didn't want the war to expand if at all possible? I'm sure if STA & Polar has activated their treaties they would have come on.

That precedent you are talking about was already established in NoCB and Karma, both of which saw many nations sitting in peace mode for most of the war. This isn't anything new and I am sure that the people who know more CN history could show you even older examples.

[quote name='janax' timestamp='1302528798' post='2688535']
First, no one should have banks. You are terrible if your alliance needs dedicated people to send money, and you should be ashamed.[/quote]

Fine. Not everyone is an untra-elite, hyperactive group like Argent or Umbrella say. Why this ticks you off so much I don't know, but there are thousands of casual and semi-casual players who are perfectly happy either being banks or being helped by banks. Deal with it.

I mean really! It's like the wolves complaining that there are sheep out there...

[Monster]

edit:

Given this thread isn't about NPO at all, I don't really want to speak more on the subject in here and we can take it to PM if you want mireille, expect something in your inbox because I don't want to keep derailing.

[quote name='eyriq' timestamp='1302548577' post='2688662']
If SF completely had avoided the VE coalition it changes the narrative drastically, putting much greater strain on alliances like Sparta and MHA, while greatly increasing the likelihood of SF fully committing to the NpO coalition. SF may be deteriorating but they still wield vast amounts of political power, to the point where their overall effect is greater than the sum of their parts.
[/quote]

I know it's not readily apparent to a lot of people, but that's pretty much a bunk hypothetical. VE didn't just go out and declare war out of the blue. It's like asking "how would the war have gone if Dajobo never talked to Lennox?" from my perspective.

Edited April 12, 2011 by Antoine Roquentin

[mrcalkin]

[quote name='Mirreille' timestamp='1302561180' post='2688815']
Fine. Not everyone is an untra-elite, hyperactive group like Argent or Umbrella say. Why this ticks you off so much I don't know, but there are thousands of casual and semi-casual players who are perfectly happy either being banks or being helped by banks. Deal with it.

I mean really! It's like the wolves complaining that there are sheep out there...
[/quote]

I think the reason it pisses people off is that because, really, it doesn't require that much time invested. There are many casual or semi-casual players in alliances that you would probably consider hyperactive. It is like there are still a few nations practicing feudalism and the rest are in the nuclear age. It also means that, if we play to our fullest potential, we are doomed to never have any real competition in the game on an in-game organization level, meaning every war that comes around we'll have to deal with the same old "shouldn't have spent so much time growing to irrelevance" type comments. I would much rather it be wolf v wolf personally.

Edited April 11, 2011 by mrcalkin

[Penguin]

We still call people "Bankers" if they are willing to devote extra cash to our young ones. Of course, they still build up tech and warchests and fight, but it's not uncommon for someone who devotes more slots to aiding their alliance than doing tech deals to have lower tech supplies as a result (I know I do). Although the term used to mean something else entirely (i.e. nations that sat out of wars to serve as cash reserves), I don't think it's all that anachronistic for a recruiting alliance.

Edited April 11, 2011 by Penguin

[eyriq]

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1302562403' post='2688837']
edit:

Given this thread isn't about NPO at all, I don't really want to speak more on the subject in here and we can take it to PM if you want mireille, expect something in your inbox because I don't want to keep derailing.



I know it's not readily apparent to a lot of people, but that's pretty much a bunk hypothetical. VE didn't just go out and declare war out of the blue. It's like asking "how would the war have gone if Dajobo never talked to Lennox?" from my perspective.
[/quote]

Given the context of SF's potency or lack thereof in the hypothetical 'hegemonic' grouping it is a valid hypothetical to refer to. Of course since the parent idea of you guys being 'hegemonic' is bunk in the first place the entire hypothetical is useless for practical purposes.

[Monster]

Oh, fair enough.

[Penkala]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1302541024' post='2688617']
The Pre-War SF had a total NS of about 15 mill...plus/minus actual number might be a bit off that. The entire SF didn't fight on the same side of the war (or even entirely on one side individually in RIA's case).
[/quote]

In all seriousness:


SF is a shell of its former self. It has 4 alliances... probably soon to be 3. The bloc's been plagued by inconsistent FA directions and serious mismanagement for some time now. The leadership -- and the world -- has watched as the vast majority of nations have left the bloc.

SF will soon be politically irrelevant. It's not the same SF I was proud to be a member of. There's a reason I left the bloc. For some reason, they still retain a large portion of undeserved influence and respect. But soon enough people will realize that SF -- despite being a past powerhouse -- is no bigger or stronger than most of the others blocs out there. In fact, SF is significantly undergunned. Most nations retain extremely small warchests, few have any experience or training, and their tech ratios are terrible. They're extremely slow builders and generally fairly inactive alliances.

SF is extremely overrated, and I think the first war that they are on the losing end of will show that most of SF is average at best.

Edited April 12, 2011 by Penkala

[Haflinger]

[quote name='mrcalkin' timestamp='1302562529' post='2688839']
I think the reason it pisses people off is that because, really, it doesn't require that much time invested. There are many casual or semi-casual players in alliances that you would probably consider hyperactive. It is like there are still a few nations practicing feudalism and the rest are in the nuclear age. It also means that, if we play to our fullest potential, we are doomed to never have any real competition in the game on an in-game organization level, meaning every war that comes around we'll have to deal with the same old "shouldn't have spent so much time growing to irrelevance" type comments. I would much rather it be wolf v wolf personally.
[/quote]
Then stop allying everyone who takes the same approach to CN as you do. Seriously.

If you want your enemies to be people like you... well you can see where I'm going with this.

[EViL0nE]

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1302579614' post='2689098']
In all seriousness:


SF is a shell of its former self. It has 4 alliances... probably soon to be 3. The bloc's been plagued by inconsistent FA directions and serious mismanagement for some time now. The leadership -- and the world -- has watched as the vast majority of nations have left the bloc.

SF will soon be politically irrelevant. It's not the same SF I was proud to be a member of. There's a reason I left the bloc. For some reason, they still retain a large portion of undeserved influence and respect. But soon enough people will realize that SF -- despite being a past powerhouse -- is no bigger or stronger than most of the others blocs out there. In fact, SF is significantly undergunned. Most nations retain extremely small warchests, few have any experience or training, and their tech ratios are terrible. They're extremely slow builders and generally fairly inactive alliances.

SF is extremely overrated, and I think the first war that they are on the losing end of will show that most of SF is average at best.
[/quote]
I'm still working on a few quirks with my OWF translator, but I believe converting this from Penkalese to English roughly means: "SuperFriends was far too much awesome for me to be around and I had to run away before the awesomeness consumed my mediocrity and left me as a former shell of myself. Thank you SuperFriends for continuing to be the most kickass entity on Planet Bob, I salute you."

Sound about right?

[Penkala]

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1302580417' post='2689136']
I'm still working on a few quirks with my OWF translator, but I believe converting this from Penkalese to English roughly means: "SuperFriends was far too much awesome for me to be around and I had to run away before the awesomeness consumed my mediocrity and left me as a former shell of myself. Thank you SuperFriends for continuing to be the most kickass entity on Planet Bob, I salute you."

Sound about right?
[/quote]

Yes I ran away because I couldn't handle how awesome treatying SOS Brigade would be.

Get out.

[EViL0nE]

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1302580458' post='2689141']
Yes I ran away because I couldn't handle how awesome SF is.[s]treatying SOS Brigade would be.[/s]

[s]Get out.[/s] Thank you for reminding me of my place.
[/quote]
This translator is amazing... I never realized what a fan of GOD you were, Penk.

[Max Power]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1302580398' post='2689135']
Then stop allying everyone who takes the same approach to CN as you do. Seriously.

If you want your enemies to be people like you... well you can see where I'm going with this.
[/quote]
So they should cancel on Argent and treaty you? Sounds brilliant!

Holy crap, I'm agreeing with a couple of Penkala's posts.