Jump to content

So here I sit


Arcades057

Recommended Posts

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1317912057' post='2818473']
Tetris earned themselves a fight with what they did and hardly anyone is disagreeing with the validity of Legion's CB.
[/quote]


I think the VE-Polar remark was to point out that when VE hit Polar, they brought a bunch of friends, they didn't go 1v1. Why is one alliance bringing friends to unbalance the sides ok, but others doing it to balance the sides is not ok?

If they wanted fair and even, they should go 1v1 apparently. Even if one side is roughly 1/8th the size of the other.

The bottom line now, the sides are roughly half a million NS apart, 25-30 nations difference and within 200 or so nukes. Most wars don't get any "fairer".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='janax' timestamp='1317912360' post='2818480']
I think the VE-Polar remark was to point out that when VE hit Polar, they brought a bunch of friends, they didn't go 1v1. Why is one alliance bringing friends to unbalance the sides ok, but others doing it to balance the sides is not ok?

If they wanted fair and even, they should go 1v1 apparently. Even if one side is roughly 1/8th the size of the other.

The bottom line now, the sides are roughly half a million NS apart, 25-30 nations difference and within 200 or so nukes. Most wars don't get any "fairer".
[/quote]

VE was never mocking Polar about being incompetent nor baiting them with spied intel, that's the main difference and you know that.

As well yes, this might be the fairest war ever if TLR and GATO weren't dedicated to sending aid throughout the entire conflict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Wu Tang Clan' timestamp='1317910666' post='2818444']
I don't know about you... but I usually fight in wars for a purpose. Like gaining a better position politically, or fighting an alliance that deserves it... before I do it for pure entertainment...
[/quote]

Sure I do, but then again I actually play my character in game. It's not like how I do things bears much relation at all to how the rest of y'all play.

But even I can and do tweak my IC position as necessary to make sure that what I am doing is good, or at the very least not bad, for the game as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1317912602' post='2818490']
VE was never mocking Polar about being incompetent nor baiting them with spied intel, that's the main difference and you know that.

As well yes, this might be the fairest war ever if TLR and GATO weren't dedicated to sending aid throughout the entire conflict.
[/quote]

We're backing our ally per our treaties. Since it's evident Polar and their ilk have no intention of stopping that, it makes no sense at all not to. I see the appeal to the peanut gallery of a completely even scrap, but the appeal of our ally coming out of this in the best possible shape is going to have to take priority for us I'm afraid. There are a number of alliances tied to Legion who are welcome to try and stop that though.

Edited by Laslo Kenez
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Laslo Kenez' timestamp='1317913001' post='2818499']
We're backing our ally per our treaties. Since it's evident Polar and their ilk have no intention of stopping that, it makes no sense at all not to. I see the appeal to the peanut gallery of a completely even scrap, but the appeal of our ally coming out of this in the best possible shape is going to have to take priority for us I'm afraid. There are a number of alliances tied to Legion who are welcome to try and stop that though.
[/quote]

Not faulting you for backing your ally, but the argument that this is completely even when one side has access to unlimited aid during a war is a big stretch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1317913209' post='2818502']
Not faulting you for backing your ally, but the argument that this is completely even when one side has access to unlimited aid during a war is a big stretch.
[/quote]


It's not like TLR and GATO are Umbrella...no offense to those parties. Unlimited seems a might over done :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1317913209' post='2818502']
Not faulting you for backing your ally, but the argument that this is completely even when one side has access to unlimited aid during a war is a big stretch.
[/quote]

There's only going to be a certain number of nations who're going to find such aid useful anyway. Yeah, it's not even, but with our ally fighting I haven't had any interest in making sure it is. I sympathise with the neutrals though, I can see it from their shoes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1317885165' post='2818219']
We will have to agree to disagree. Because how I see it, an oA comes at a political price. Often times it depends on the enemy, the sides, and the need for help, but there is always a cost associated with it. But a protector fighting with its protectorate, seems solid as hell to me. Its really their duty. You can argue in a different venue the intelligence of IAA letting a protectorate sign a mandatory defense clause. But, they did. But, as a protector, they are right where they should be.
[/quote]
I always figured the point of a protectorate was to help an alliance develop into a "sovereign" alliance, [i]protecting[/i] it from external threats. When a protectorate goes and attacks something I do not see why the protector should consider it's duty as the protector active, its not attacktor after all :awesome:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='bigdaddychacha' timestamp='1317913976' post='2818518']
"That depends on what your definition of the word, 'Is,' is..."
[/quote]

If you're implying spying is subjective then it doesn't matter if Tetris did it or not.

Only way to determine who is right is who wins. :awesome:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Sigrun Vapneir' timestamp='1317912984' post='2818498']
But even I can and do tweak my IC position as necessary to make sure that what I am doing is good, or at the very least not bad, for the game as a whole.
[/quote]

I beg you to explain how this war is bad for the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='kevin32891' timestamp='1317916990' post='2818585']
If you're implying spying is subjective then it doesn't matter if Tetris did it or not.[/quote]Congratulations! You fail at reading comprehension, understanding context, correctly interpreting a metaphorical juxtaposition, and mid-late '90s history. Go back to middle school. Do not collect two hundred dollars as you pass Go.

Edited by bigdaddychacha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Wu Tang Clan' timestamp='1317917960' post='2818597']
I beg you to explain how this war is bad for the game.
[/quote]

I didnt say that this war was bad for the game. I was replying to a post by potato, here let me refresh your memory;

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1317895982' post='2818313']
I still wonder why people think a war should be fair. You fight a war for a principle or to break your enemy. No matter your reason, you want to win it. Not make it interesting for the public.
[/quote]

In the real world it may well make sense that if you have to fight you should use every possible advantage and destroy the enemy as utterly and as quickly as possible. But doing THAT (which I havent said or even implied is the case here and now - we are talking hypothetically and at most about where it *might* go in coming days) IS bad for the game in my opinion. We're all here to have fun, and when one side in a conflict has too overwhelming an advantage and presses it too ruthlessly it quits being fun for a lot of players; not just those on the other side, but even uninvolved bystanders may well decide this game is bollocks and move on just because they see it happening to someone else.

Edited by Sigrun Vapneir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Sigrun Vapneir' timestamp='1317920509' post='2818638']
I didnt say that this war was bad for the game. I was replying to a post by potato, here let me refresh your memory;



In the real world it may well make sense that if you have to fight you should use every possible advantage and destroy the enemy as utterly and as quickly as possible. But doing THAT (which I havent said or even implied is the case here and now - we are talking hypothetically and at most about where it *might* go in coming days) IS bad for the game in my opinion. We're all here to have fun, and when one side in a conflict has too overwhelming an advantage and presses it too ruthlessly it quits being fun for a lot of players; not just those on the other side, but even uninvolved bystanders may well decide this game is bollocks and move on just because they see it happening to someone else.
[/quote]

This is where I disagree with you.

Not too long ago a coalition led by NPO fought to disband LUE. A while later, a coalition led by NPO forced extremely harsh reps on MK. This didn't ruin the game... It actually ended up making it better. MK came back with a vengeance, and became one of the most influential alliances in the game. The story repeats itself with Genmay, GOONS, FARK, and so on, and I'm sure it will continue to in the future.

Being defeated in war isn't what kills an alliance. Being a terrible alliance and having nothing to fight for does. Stand up for yourselves, and every defeat is a potential victory. If your alliance isn't strong enough to do that, then be neutral, because you obviously can't handle the facets and consequences of war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='bigdaddychacha' timestamp='1317918407' post='2818607']
Congratulations! You fail at reading comprehension, understanding context, correctly interpreting a metaphorical juxtaposition, and mid-late '90s history. Go back to middle school. Do not collect two hundred dollars as you pass Go.
[/quote]

You sound pretty mad. Calm down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='bigdaddychacha' timestamp='1317918407' post='2818607']
Congratulations! You fail at reading comprehension, understanding context, correctly interpreting a metaphorical juxtaposition, and mid-late '90s history. Go back to middle school. Do not collect two hundred dollars as you pass Go.
[/quote]
On the one hand, part of me wants to encourage Legion to keep posting on the OWF if this is what we get. On the other, your posting is so objectively bad that it hurts me to see it. So conflicted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Sigrun Vapneir' timestamp='1317920509' post='2818638']
I didnt say that this war was bad for the game. I was replying to a post by potato, here let me refresh your memory;



In the real world it may well make sense that if you have to fight you should use every possible advantage and destroy the enemy as utterly and as quickly as possible. But doing THAT (which I havent said or even implied is the case here and now - we are talking hypothetically and at most about where it *might* go in coming days) IS bad for the game in my opinion. We're all here to have fun, and when one side in a conflict has too overwhelming an advantage and presses it too ruthlessly it quits being fun for a lot of players; not just those on the other side, but even uninvolved bystanders may well decide this game is bollocks and move on just because they see it happening to someone else.
[/quote]

I play a game to win it. I had fun being on the losing side but, in the end, I'd still rather win.
The political manoeuvring is the fun part. Not clicking buttons repeatedly. Legion (to take the present example) not being able to build a coalition big and/or competent isn't really my problem: if I was going to war with Legion, I'd be using my aces in order to take them down. And not play 2s and 3s in a way to make it fair for the opponent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Legion's history of war shows they're largely incompetent at it. You can show how amazing they are at war with your propaganda and whatnot, but in the end, their war history shows that of a paper tiger, and I doubt things have changed much. Now, the problem that the Tetris coalition faces with The Legion is that there's a lot of them. Tetris + NSO couldn't take them down being that they simply don't have the manpower to cover all their slots to apply the most effective damage.

So no, I don't think there's this many declarations over "cowardice" it's simply to apply the most maximum damage to the Legion as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Wu Tang Clan' timestamp='1317921520' post='2818651']
....Being defeated in war isn't what kills an alliance. Being a terrible alliance and having nothing to fight for does. Stand up for yourselves, and every defeat is a potential victory. If your alliance isn't strong enough to do that, then be neutral, because you obviously can't handle the facets and consequences of war.
[/quote]


Truer words and all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1317924204' post='2818691']
I play a game to win it. I had fun being on the losing side but, in the end, I'd still rather win.
The political manoeuvring is the fun part. Not clicking buttons repeatedly. Legion (to take the present example) not being able to build a coalition big and/or competent isn't really my problem: if I was going to war with Legion, I'd be using my aces in order to take them down. And not play 2s and 3s in a way to make it fair for the opponent.
[/quote]

That, sir, would be a waste of aces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1317887994' post='2818252']
Maybe our allies took it upon themselves to get ready to defend us, but then we realized its not really a big deal and we told them to back off. :smug:
[/quote]

This is very cute but I highly doubt it's how it went down. I think it was more "No no stay out it'll make us look like we can't handle ourselves, this is our shot at regaining the world's respect!!!!!!! :awesome: " .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Cager' timestamp='1317927111' post='2818727']
This is very cute but I highly doubt it's how it went down. I think it was more "No no stay out it'll make us look like we can't handle ourselves, this is our shot at regaining the world's respect!!!!!!! :awesome: " .
[/quote]
With a little bit of allies saying "we love you and all, but the counters we'll get.................................do you really need us? Like reaaaaaaally need us?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...