An Ordo Paradoxia Announcement

[Stelios]

[quote name='dockingscheduled' timestamp='1318984694' post='2828297']
Catseye is now in AP Coaltition:

http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000072

http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000278

their TC members:

Fishbolle, Malkier, ghostryder, Richthofen XIX, Rheinoland, Solaris
[/quote]
Yes 4 of 6 are RE members. We know this.

[dockingscheduled]

coincidence?

[Lehran]

[quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1318978657' post='2828239']
Also, I think this thread can do without the name calling and personal attacks from all sides.

At the end of the day we are all people, and there will be disagreements that can never be resolved. We all love our alliances and have have differing ideas about how TE should be played. Fair enough. For the most part, those that post in OWF have played for quite some time. Those people know the generally accepted principles we all live by when we play. We all do the best we can for our alliances and the game as a whole.
[/quote]

What this man says is true. No matter how strongly you feel about your alliances... remember that it's just a game and please don't go on personal attacks against people. Those are real people you are insulting behind that computer screen, and nobody here knows anybody else well enough to make that kind of a judgement. Please, make your opinions heard but don't attack others on a personal level.

[quote name='dockingscheduled' timestamp='1318998296' post='2828442']
coincidence?
[/quote]

Yes, it's completely a coincidence Nothing going on here, move along now...

[jraenar]

[quote name='NeoGandalf' timestamp='1319001667' post='2828480']
Yes, it's completely a coincidence Nothing going on here, move along now...
[/quote]
You have no idea what you are talking about. We were playing truth or dare at the toga party, and all four of them refused to answer whether they thought Stelios or ADude had the better posterior assets while wearing leather chaps. So as punishment, we made them trade with nations outside the AA.

Now if we can get back to the topic at hand, which is the tragic end to this glorious war.

[Stelios]

[quote name='dockingscheduled' timestamp='1318998296' post='2828442']
coincidence?
[/quote]
lol i already went over this with Bcortell. Go ask him

[Cellardoor]

[quote name='Stelios' timestamp='1319005530' post='2828512']
lol i already went over this with Bcortell. Go ask him
[/quote]

Might just be me, but I don't care what they're doing. Just building for the next war.

Life is so much easier when I don't have to worry about our flag chances.

[Stelios]

[quote name='Cellardoor' timestamp='1319034578' post='2828628']
Might just be me, but I don't care what they're doing. Just building for the next war.

Life is so much easier when I don't have to worry about our flag chances.
[/quote]

Its just a plot against you, just you

[freedomfighter]

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1318977286' post='2828220']
First, I did not disregard that he was away. If fact, I took his bio into consideration. If his bio did not say he was coming back in the middle of the war, I would not have assigned hit to anyone. I never waste slots on obviously inactive players.

Second, as you pointed out earlier, and confirmed by his bio, that he was on vacation. Hardly an "entirely uncontrollable OOC situation". I went on vacation in June and knew very well I ran the risk of being attacked and in fact I was. If I recall, I was attacked by TPC nations during a late round free for all.
[/quote]
hey guys,
first of all thanks for posting my TE name plus WC on public forums
from a strategic point of view I understand that you took me out (effectively, congrats^^),
but - believe it or not - I have some kind of ethics as well: If you would have spared me and would have written a PM
not to attack you, I would have not attacked you, simple as it is.
But if battle ethics are that down in TE that no one can be trusted - this was the right move.
Anyways, it is kind of frustrating anyhow^^ well, we move on, life is more than TE ^^

PS: My holiday was great anyways

Edited October 19, 2011 by freedomfighter

[Owney OSullivan]

[quote name='freedomfighter' timestamp='1319048052' post='2828703']
hey guys,
first of all thanks for posting my TE name plus WC on public forums
from a strategic point of view I understand that you took me out (effectively, congrats^^),
but - believe it or not - I have some kind of ethics as well: If you would have spared me and would have written a PM
not to attack you, I would have not attacked you, simple as it is.
But if battle ethics are that down in TE that no one can be trusted - this was the right move.
Anyways, it is kind of frustrating anyhow^^ well, we move on, life is more than TE ^^

PS: My holiday was great anyways
[/quote]

So if we PM'd you and asked you politely not to attack us in our alliance war, you wouldn't have? I wonder what your gov and fellow alliance members would think about you sitting out a war because the opposition asked you not to engage. You're talking about war ethics, but you'd gladly let your alliance mates burn while you go untouched and not participate? Something seems off with that. What if you were ordered to attack targets?

[Shaazzam]

lol @ no one is to be trusted

if i was in your AA you'd be at the top of the list

[dockingscheduled]

[quote name='Stelios' timestamp='1319005530' post='2828512']
lol i already went over this with Bcortell. Go ask him
[/quote]

i never even brought up your AA's name, lol. i'm just going along with the defensive tone you took

[freedomfighter]

[quote name='Owney OSullivan' timestamp='1319052409' post='2828746']
So if we PM'd you and asked you politely not to attack us in our alliance war, you wouldn't have? I wonder what your gov and fellow alliance members would think about you sitting out a war because the opposition asked you not to engage. You're talking about war ethics, but you'd gladly let your alliance mates burn while you go untouched and not participate? Something seems off with that. What if you were ordered to attack targets?
[/quote]
I suppose my alliance mates understand that RL is more important than CN and ethics more important than "alliance honor" - at least for me. Different value systems, I suppose.

[themadstork]

[quote name='freedomfighter' timestamp='1319062164' post='2828821']
I suppose my alliance mates understand that RL is more important than CN and ethics more important than "alliance honor" - at least for me. Different value systems, I suppose.
[/quote]

I see it a little differently. Not sure if it's been answered before but just because someone puts "I'm away till so and so date" why am I suppose to believe that? I can just keep that in my nation bios all round and I'll never get attack.

[Lord Klusman]

[quote name='Owney OSullivan' timestamp='1318916529' post='2827724']
Well, hopefully this can be sorted out in a timely fashion. And I remember that, Devil Dog. It's a rare occasion when alliances blitz the same targets, what I'd like to see is 2 alliances blitz each other the same night, has that ever happened to anyone's knowledge? That'd be epic.
[/quote]

This did happen (this round even) I found out that Synergy was going to attack the Kiwi's so I ordered a preemptive strike 2 minuets before there target list went out they were set to attack an hour and 15 minuets later!

[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=105534"]Read this thread[/url]

[Thomasj_tx]

[quote name='Lord Klusman' timestamp='1319069285' post='2828886']
This did happen (this round even) I found out that Synergy was going to attack the Kiwi's so I ordered a preemptive strike 2 minuets before there target list went out they were set to attack an hour and 15 minuets later!

[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=105534"]Read this thread[/url]
[/quote]

's?

[Overlord Wes]

[quote name='Lord Klusman' timestamp='1319069285' post='2828886']
This did happen (this round even) I found out that Synergy was going to attack the Kiwi's so I ordered a preemptive strike 2 minuets before there target list went out they were set to attack an hour and 15 minuets later!
[/quote]
I believe he meant unknowingly blitzed each other. That situation doesn't really count.

[KillerCruiser]

so would you guys count this as synergy's second war for the round or no, and if so would you count this as TPC and OP third war for the round...

Edited October 20, 2011 by KillerCruiser

[Stelios]

[quote name='dockingscheduled' timestamp='1319056422' post='2828782']
i never even brought up your AA's name, lol. i'm just going along with the defensive tone you took
[/quote]
Never said you did. And I dont believe my tone was defensive. Just stating something

[Owney OSullivan]

[quote name='freedomfighter' timestamp='1319062164' post='2828821']
I suppose my alliance mates understand that RL is more important than CN and ethics more important than "alliance honor" - at least for me. Different value systems, I suppose.
[/quote]

But your RL obligation(i.e. your vacation) is over, so if this war was still ongoing you'd let your alliance mates suffer while not participating in the war? Don't you think they would expect you to attack your opponents once you returned to activity(provided we PM'd you and did not attack you, and were capable of declaring on targets)? If not, that's certainly not an alliance I'd like to be a part of.

Edit: Don't take this as a personal attack or anything freedomfighter, I just find it to be a curious situation and I doubt if we gave you a free pass you'd just be a non-combatant for the remainder of the war. That would be pretty much be infra hugging. TE is for wars and it's hard to imagine someone not fighting for their alliance if they are able to, and also it's hard to imagine the alliance letting someone get away with that.

[quote name='Overlord Wes' timestamp='1319075610' post='2828941']
I believe he meant unknowingly blitzed each other. That situation doesn't really count.
[/quote]

Aye, this is what I meant. I think it'd be hilarious if it ever happened.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Owney OSullivan

[freedomfighter]

[quote name='Owney OSullivan' timestamp='1319094406' post='2829164']
But your RL obligation(i.e. your vacation) is over, so if this war was still ongoing you'd let your alliance mates suffer while not participating in the war? Don't you think they would expect you to attack your opponents once you returned to activity(provided we PM'd you and did not attack you, and were capable of declaring on targets)? If not, that's certainly not an alliance I'd like to be a part of.

Edit: Don't take this as a personal attack or anything freedomfighter, I just find it to be a curious situation and I doubt if we gave you a free pass you'd just be a non-combatant for the remainder of the war. That would be pretty much be infra hugging. TE is for wars and it's hard to imagine someone not fighting for their alliance if they are able to, and also it's hard to imagine the alliance letting someone get away with that.

[/quote]
I admit, it would have been a difficult situation, but nothing you can not solve if talking to people with common sense. A pity that talks did not have a chance here...anyways, what has happened, has happened, CN:TE goes on. For me, the subject is discussed^^

[SoADarthCyfe6]

Right, glad you guys decided to use the Incite Government Propaganda trick on freedom too. Classy.


Regardless, the fights over, the debates over, lets just move on to different things.

Best of luck to GDA and any OP nations in the rebuild (if they even took any damage).

[Cellardoor]

Why would you NOT incite gov't on someone on an 11 day stack at 3k infra at war with your alliance? I don't recall any war where we've not incited gov't at least in the first few days of the war.

[freedomfighter]

[quote name='Cellardoor' timestamp='1319122189' post='2829262']
Why would you NOT incite gov't on someone on an 11 day stack at 3k infra at war with your alliance? I don't recall any war where we've not incited gov't at least in the first few days of the war.
[/quote]
I can tell you why: Because my tax collect would have been big enough to ensure a proper war for a long time. Inciting propaganda, blockades etc. were clearly intended for AFTER the war - and that is a whole different subject.

[paul711]

[quote name='freedomfighter' timestamp='1319135386' post='2829369']
I can tell you why: Because my tax collect would have been big enough to ensure a proper war for a long time. Inciting propaganda, blockades etc. were clearly intended for AFTER the war - and that is a whole different subject.
[/quote]
Spend some of your WC on spies and you wont have to worry about it. LE and OP have been messed with all round by spy attacks it is nothing new. It was war and now it is over, we hit you despite your bio saying you were away and your gov was incited, big deal its TE. Gov incite is really not that bog of a deal you just dont get the happiness bonus for having your populations desired gov unless you actually collected while still under anarchy effects.

[Cellardoor]

You have to collect under the anarchy effects. That's the idea of it. And it limits what they do during the war too. It makes money more important and encourages your opponent to not rebuy planes, buy spies/run ops, buy a MP, etc.