The GM's Court

[Triyun]

I'd also point out Satellite recon for finding carriers isn't actually all that great. Further that system isn't even operational IRL, which is relevant due to Mara's size. The best satellite recon can do which btw has to be in LEO and thus is not in a particularly good orbit or surveillance which is what Mara seems to be claiming is form a fuzzy picture of the direction and general shape of a single carrier once in a while. To be able to specifically target certain carriers and not others as well as not super tankers from the Alaskan oil lines is a bit of a god modding exaggeration in and of itself, what could be done is the detection of large ships and the fuzzy ID of some that may or may not be aircraft carriers with little idea of national orientation.

Edited September 5, 2012 by Triyun

[Tanis777]

I am also going to note that computer viruses cannot harm the intended network without physically uploading it onto the network from a device via USB or a user opening some sort of executable file from some e-mail attachment/fake website. But I doubt many CNRP military networks allow such shenanigans to occur.

[Kankou]

Actually, it is relatively easy, assuming you can get control of the USB drive in the home of the owner.

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

[quote name='Tanis777' timestamp='1346886278' post='3028087']
I am also going to note that computer viruses cannot harm the intended network without physically uploading it onto the network from a device via USB or a user opening some sort of executable file from some e-mail attachment/fake website. But I doubt many CNRP military networks allow such shenanigans to occur.
[/quote]
Come now, you know that at least ONE soldier wants to increase the size of his penis in 4 weeks.

Edited September 6, 2012 by KaiserMelech Mikhail

[Tanis777]

[quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1346887856' post='3028101']
Actually, it is relatively easy, assuming you can get control of the USB drive in the home of the owner.
[/quote]

And through the physical security measures that prevent you from uploading that beautiful virus onto the device. If it was so easy, the DoD networks would be crippled. Easy countermeasures of strict USB lending to the point of nobody using them and even then, usually the drives are protected along with log-on access to the devices protected with ID card access and a password of sorts to accompany it.

If most players are smart, which I'm sure many are, they most likely imply high security measures against such a silly thing with specifically issued USB drives that never leave a base and is always secured at the end of each duty day and only given to senior NCOs or senior officers.

[Kankou]

[quote name='Tanis777' timestamp='1346901104' post='3028130']
And through the physical security measures that prevent you from uploading that beautiful virus onto the device. If it was so easy, the DoD networks would be crippled. Easy countermeasures of strict USB lending to the point of nobody using them and even then, usually the drives are protected along with log-on access to the devices protected with ID card access and a password of sorts to accompany it.[/quote]
It isn't necessary to temper directly with the USB itself. You can easily infect the less guarded (home) computer where the USB would likely be used, thus spreading the necessary programs through indirect methods.

[quote name='Tanis777' timestamp='1346901104' post='3028130']If most players are smart, which I'm sure many are, they most likely imply high security measures against such a silly thing with specifically issued USB drives that never leave a base and is always secured at the end of each duty day and only given to senior NCOs or senior officers.[/quote]
IF most players are smart. Furthermore, this is not always possible. Of course, within the context of CNRP it would be, but in RL rare are a completely locked down system.

[Triyun]

Two nuke destruction rolls.

[img]http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/69/screenshot20120906at224.png[/img]

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1346955945' post='3028202']
Two nuke destruction rolls.

[img]http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/69/screenshot20120906at224.png[/img]
[/quote]
I'm assuming that that's a 90% odds.

1-90=Win
91-100=Lose

Roll 1= 14
Roll 2= 89

[Centurius]

2 nuke destroy rolls please:

[img]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/40664850/mara.png[/img]

[Malatose]

[img]http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/5646/nukeg.jpg[/img]

Requesting two Nuke Destruction Rolls.

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

[quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1346956491' post='3028205']
2 nuke destroy rolls please:

[img]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/40664850/mara.png[/img]
[/quote]
1-70= Win
71-100= Lose

Roll 1= 21
Roll 2= 54

[quote name='Malatose' timestamp='1346956658' post='3028206']
[img]http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/5646/nukeg.jpg[/img]

Requesting two Nuke Destruction Rolls.
[/quote]
1-70= Win
71-100= Lose

Roll 1= 39
Roll 2= 72

[Isaac MatthewII]

Dang, yall like nukes don't ya?


I didn't know you needed a roll to nuke.

[Triyun]

We're targeting hers, using the destroy WMD spy roll function it's part of in game spy roll abilities

[Isaac MatthewII]

Ah, that makes more sense.

[Kankou]

I challenge the nuke destroy spyroll with Malatose. Given he has never been subject to a preplan, exactly why are we allowing such a military-level roll in the first place?

Furthermore, I contest Triyun's attack, given I do not recall him ever being in a preplanning session.

[Triyun]

1) Mara acknowledged my entrance into the war in two IC posts. Its a bit late to contest it now. Further this conflict has always involved Tianxia in a support role and the scope of the conflict is being conducted within my territories and spheres of influence. Beyond that basic inconvenient fact is that I simply do not believe in preplanning. However, I will be absolutely insistent on conducting war simultaneous with this action. The only way Mara's not fighting my entrance and quite possibly a few others, is if Mara gets IA and Cent to peace her out before we enter.

Again, its already existing that my forces are providing support in this war. For all intensive purposes I will enter this war without conditions, you can either !@#$%* a lot about it and I end up entering anyways or you cannot and save us all a huge head ache. But there is no grounds in the rules for even if its ruled I can't enter this way, for me not to have a waiver in this simply because denial of a waiver is denial of my freedom to RP which is against the rules both in general, and against the actual meaning of the preplan rule as was setup by Shammy, Cent, and myself. We've all testified in what it means numerous times.

2) There is a DIRECT correlation between the spyroll and destroying a singular nuke. Its accounted for IG as 'destroy WMD' I would argue its one of the most basic functions of spyrolls, and has in fact been used before on multiple occurrences to destroy nukes. I would go on to point out that there are no restrictions on spyrolls being used in any form. Vektors entitled to use spyrolls to destroy WMDs or any other mission against any other player so long as its his nation state doing the spyroll.

[Kankou]

[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1346972970' post='3028240']Mara acknowledged my entrance into the war in two IC posts. Its a bit late to contest it now. [/quote]
If you mean the posts in your thread, all I see is an offer to start preplanning, not an open offer. You're engaging in same "putting the words into other's mouth" as you like to argue when things are to your disadvantage.

[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1346972970' post='3028240']Beyond that basic inconvenient fact is that I simply do not believe in preplanning. [/quote]
I do not give a damn about your personal views. As long as a certain regulation has been established by a democractic vote, you are in no position to simply ignore it unless the other side allows you to ignore it (such as Jeff744's open declaration that one does not need to preplan with him for a one-on-one war).


[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1346972970' post='3028240']Further this conflict has always involved Tianxia in a support role and the scope of the conflict is being conducted within my territories and spheres of influence.[/quote]
And? Did Mara attack your support role? Did Mara attack any installations of Tianxia? Nope.


[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1346972970' post='3028240']Again, its already existing that my forces are providing support in this war. For all intensive purposes I will enter this war without conditions, you can either !@#$%* a lot about it and I end up entering anyways or you cannot and save us all a huge head ache. But there is no grounds in the rules for even if its ruled I can't enter this way, for me not to have a waiver in this simply because denial of a waiver is denial of my freedom to RP which is against the rules both in general, and against the actual meaning of the preplan rule as was setup by Shammy, Cent, and myself. We've all testified in what it means numerous times. [/quote]
You are the one denying others the right to RP, by almost every single action you take against those that do not follow your lead. So tough luck.


[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1346972970' post='3028240'] There is a DIRECT correlation between the spyroll and destroying a singular nuke. Its accounted for IG as 'destroy WMD' I would argue its one of the most basic functions of spyrolls, and has in fact been used before on multiple occurrences to destroy nukes. I would go on to point out that there are no restrictions on spyrolls being used in any form. Vektors entitled to use spyrolls to destroy WMDs or any other mission against any other player so long as its his nation state doing the spyroll.[/quote]
You are talking about an era before preplanning. Thus please update your argument to fit the realities.

[Voodoo Nova]

[quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1347000394' post='3028347']
You are the one denying others the right to RP, by almost every single action you take against those that do not follow your lead. So tough luck.
[/quote]

For christ sake, get the sand out of your vagina.

By simply existing in Quebec, you deny 'x person' the right to RP in Quebec. Your Bosclair Doctrine denies 'x person' the right to do as they please in Canada without interference. My taking of two Brazilian states? I'm denying someone the right to RP those as a part of a Brazilian nation. Mara & Cent owning bits of Louisiana? Denies my right to RP Louisiana as a complete state within my nation. Isaac is denying someone the right to RP in the area his nation appeared in.

See how retarded the "You deny others the right to RP" argument sounds? It can be applied to any action, inaction, or existence of any nation, so stop using that argument because no one denies anyone's "right to RP".

Edited September 7, 2012 by Voodoo Nova

[Captain Enema]

Not that I really care, but, I don't think your argument has much of anything to do with anything about anything Voodoo. Kankou is talking about something completely different than land occupation.

[Kankou]

[quote name='Voodoo Nova' timestamp='1347022017' post='3028367']
See how retarded the "You deny others the right to RP" argument sounds? It can be applied to any action, inaction, or existence of any nation, so stop using that argument because no one denies anyone's "right to RP".
[/quote]
I am certain that the topic was not on occupying land, as TBM mentioned. Furthermore, I only use that lame excuse of an argument back at someone who comes whining about "denial of my freedom to RP which is against the rules".

[Triyun]

Again, given that I'm one of three people who invented preplanning, I'm pretty sure I know they meaning of the rule and the scope it was made to cover and what it was not made to cover. Covert action was never intended to be included in preplanning. It just wasn't.

Freedom to RP only means the freedom from GMs, it does not mean freedom from interaction with other players. Any player can force interaction with any other player if they so choose on an IC level. Thats absolutely fine. Thats why we're playing a multiplayer and not single player game. Its a whole other ball game if you're claiming that a GM can choose whether or not two players are allowed to interact and define what decisions one player can or cannot make. That is essentially the core element of your argument. It is the subordination of the IC decision making process of a nation to the whims of an external OOC decision making process in RP. Restricting the IC decision making process of any one nation was simply not, part of the preplanning rule. You can wish it was all you want but you need to accept the fact that your intrepretation of preplanning has nothing to do with what the actual rule was made for. There for four people who made and had input on the rule, Shammy, HK-47, Centurius, and Myself. That fact is a stubborn thing. Your mystifying belief that it somehow was made to stop people from RPing wars if it got to big or that it was somehow it now also applies to spy rolls is a fiction. You're basically like a tea party guy whose arguing about Thomas Jefferson's views on separation of church and state [i]with Thomas Jefferson.[/i]

In regards to my support role not being restricted, the firing of missiles across my territorial waters, and a decent chance my island territories I would say is pretty much widely accepted grounds for a DoW. I had to deal with this as a problem in the first Great War I fought in 2008. Further I would go onto say that it is within the national interest to see that Northern Imperium is defeated with as few casualties to my allies and as swiftly as possible. The National Interest of my state is reason enough to do anything I wanted. You know damn well there is no IC argument against that. You can complain that 'oh thats not fair, thats OOC' but no its not. Its a reason which has justified countless wars in real life. Its the way the world is. Those who maintain friendly relations or do not concern themselves with broader affairs need not worry about the national interests of other states conflicting with theirs generally. Those who antagonize other states do need to account for the national interest of other states. Being bad at diplomacy and this kind of politics does not mean another cannot choose to be a practitioner of these form of politics, nor should they be penalized for being more successful at it so long as it remains an IC enterprise. Which at least in this situation I don't think one can argue the actors on our side of the coalition have not had a lot of IC interaction forming this alliance. The role for disputing this form of political action is an IC one, it has no basis in the GM court or preplanning under the original restrictions.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1347033099' post='3028393']
Again, given that I'm one of three people who invented preplanning, I'm pretty sure I know they meaning of the rule and the scope it was made to cover and what it was not made to cover. Covert action was never intended to be included in preplanning. It just wasn't.

Freedom to RP only means the freedom from GMs, it does not mean freedom from interaction with other players. Any player can force interaction with any other player if they so choose on an IC level. Thats absolutely fine. Thats why we're playing a multiplayer and not single player game. Its a whole other ball game if you're claiming that a GM can choose whether or not two players are allowed to interact and define what decisions one player can or cannot make. That is essentially the core element of your argument. It is the subordination of the IC decision making process of a nation to the whims of an external OOC decision making process in RP. Restricting the IC decision making process of any one nation was simply not, part of the preplanning rule. You can wish it was all you want but you need to accept the fact that your intrepretation of preplanning has nothing to do with what the actual rule was made for. There for four people who made and had input on the rule, Shammy, HK-47, Centurius, and Myself. That fact is a stubborn thing. Your mystifying belief that it somehow was made to stop people from RPing wars if it got to big or that it was somehow it now also applies to spy rolls is a fiction. You're basically like a tea party guy whose arguing about Thomas Jefferson's views on separation of church and state [i]with Thomas Jefferson.[/i]

In regards to my support role not being restricted, the firing of missiles across my territorial waters, and a decent chance my island territories I would say is pretty much widely accepted grounds for a DoW. I had to deal with this as a problem in the first Great War I fought in 2008. Further I would go onto say that it is within the national interest to see that Northern Imperium is defeated with as few casualties to my allies and as swiftly as possible. The National Interest of my state is reason enough to do anything I wanted. You know damn well there is no IC argument against that. You can complain that 'oh thats not fair, thats OOC' but no its not. Its a reason which has justified countless wars in real life. Its the way the world is. Those who maintain friendly relations or do not concern themselves with broader affairs need not worry about the national interests of other states conflicting with theirs generally. Those who antagonize other states do need to account for the national interest of other states. Being bad at diplomacy and this kind of politics does not mean another cannot choose to be a practitioner of these form of politics, nor should they be penalized for being more successful at it so long as it remains an IC enterprise. Which at least in this situation I don't think one can argue the actors on our side of the coalition have not had a lot of IC interaction forming this alliance. The role for disputing this form of political action is an IC one, it has no basis in the GM court or preplanning under the original restrictions.
[/quote]

What your intentions were, when you made the rule, is maybe of importance if we would talk whether the rule exists or not. But it is not an excuse to get exempted from the rule itself. The community can vote on rules and once it has been established, it counts for everyone. Also, even if you changed your opinion, we had two votes that proved that enough people see a reason in the rule. Thomas Jeffersons opinion counted not because he was Thomas Jefferson, but because people agreed with him. Just like this, I don't see you having a right to be exempted from this rule, as long as the rule stands and we had two votes confirming that the rule still holds sufficient support. Like it or not.

Your third paragraph may give you a legitimate IC reason to attack, but noone doubted that. Your attack just got contested as there was no real preplanning. Not as if people would give much of a damn why they declare war anyway.

On Vektor: You really want to argue, that the destruction of a military asset, is not an act of war? Information gathering spyrolls, I'd accept as not being subject to such rulings, infiltration too, but the outright destruction of a nuke is in my eyes enough of a move to warrant being counted as an act of aggression that needs a preplan. Just like how we need a preplan, before we go and bomb someones towns and armies or march through through their streets and over their fields. Otherwise, what is a war? To me it sounds like the "China Incident".

[Isaac MatthewII]

who has sand in their vagina, that sounds painful.

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

Ye olde peeps,
This is not the place for this kind of discussion. Take it to the OOC thread.

SO SAYETH THE GM!

[Triyun]

[quote name='Evangeline Anovilis' timestamp='1347044664' post='3028427']
What your intentions were, when you made the rule, is maybe of importance if we would talk whether the rule exists or not. But it is not an excuse to get exempted from the rule itself. The community can vote on rules and once it has been established, it counts for everyone. Also, even if you changed your opinion, we had two votes that proved that enough people see a reason in the rule. Thomas Jeffersons opinion counted not because he was Thomas Jefferson, but because people agreed with him. Just like this, I don't see you having a right to be exempted from this rule, as long as the rule stands and we had two votes confirming that the rule still holds sufficient support. Like it or not.

Your third paragraph may give you a legitimate IC reason to attack, but noone doubted that. Your attack just got contested as there was no real preplanning. Not as if people would give much of a damn why they declare war anyway.

On Vektor: You really want to argue, that the destruction of a military asset, is not an act of war? Information gathering spyrolls, I'd accept as not being subject to such rulings, infiltration too, but the outright destruction of a nuke is in my eyes enough of a move to warrant being counted as an act of aggression that needs a preplan. Just like how we need a preplan, before we go and bomb someones towns and armies or march through through their streets and over their fields. Otherwise, what is a war? To me it sounds like the "China Incident".
[/quote]

Committing an act of war is not at all protected by preplanning. You can try and pretend it is, but it isn't. The rule is not meant to protect from war. You can then ask for conditions from Vektor about the scope of war, but he's under no obligations to grant it.

Further I don't claim its because I'm me that I'm immune from it, I'm claiming that the rule is much more limited than you seem to think I am. By involving me in basing and firing over your territory I'm already defacto in this fight. That entrance is further reinforced by Mara responding to my ultimatum with a threat of force and acknowledging we're in this fight.

While votes which were both basically ties and by the way one actually would have lost had it gone on a few more hours (more people with nations voted to abolish it, but only did after the poll deadline), they were NOT votes to expand the rule to areas which it didn't exist. It never did exist in terms of causing casus belli or in conducting covert action, which is an act of war. By the same token, nobody is obligated not to kick your ambassador or leader into a pit, yelling "THIS IS X NATION!" without preplanning. Those are all acts of war. Preplanning isn't a shield.

Melech go get me a beer.

Edited September 8, 2012 by Triyun