Unknown Smurf Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Everyone knows that if NSO brings in RoK it will end up being a PR nightmare, therefore, they will not enter the conflict. Although they (rightly) believe that they get an advantage in surrender term negotiations by posturing and/or implying their allies may join the war... which is why we have 40 pages of them doing that here. That said, I would like to recommend all Legionnaires (and our supporters) leave this thread, though I acknowledge I hold no sway over anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol Navy Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 I must say Legion, this talk of breaking the Sith over your knees and such doesn't sit very well with me. If you guys had only had this attitude during the DH war it wouldn't have went on for so damn long for the rest of us. But you were facing the prospect of a daunting upper tier at that point so you were petulant feet draggers. If you have a way out, you should probably take it pretty soon. Because the fallacy of this thread from some is that NSO is begging allies to come save them, when it's much much more likely they are having to continually ask allies not to come in and stomp all over you for several weeks. Now people will say this is because NSO was beaten by you guys, but that's not the case at all. You've been beaten from day 1. Because this is a political world and the Sith have been better and making much better political ties than you have over the past half year. The current state of your nations is directly tied to the Sith being one of very few who didn't choose to use all the advantages they have over your alliance right from the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mq3eleven Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320083666' post='2835815'] Everyone knows that if NSO brings in RoK it will end up being a PR nightmare, therefore, they will not enter the conflict. Although they (rightly) believe that they get an advantage in surrender term negotiations by posturing and/or implying their allies may join the war... which is why we have 40 pages of them doing that here. That said, I would like to recommend all Legionnaires (and our supporters) leave this thread, though I acknowledge I hold no sway over anyone. [/quote] Wake up, PR is senseless. All of you speak of morality, and continuing to walk the righteous path. It's a joke. I would applaud NOS for bringing in allies. It would be a bold move, and one that their leaders should be debating seriously. The standard by which all of you try to act by is sickening, and I hope that it blows up in your face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='mq3eleven' timestamp='1320083611' post='2835814'] Why end a war that you're still doing damage in? The rate of said damage is irrelevant. If their members still want to cause destruction, then there is no reason to agree to terms. [/quote] ~50% of their alliances NS is in peace mode and ~85% of that has been in peace mode over 5 days. If they really wanted to cause destruction, 42.5%* of their alliances total NS could come out of peace mode right now. * = [size="1"]85% of 50% of a total is .85*50 right? Math is not my forte apparently..[/size] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mq3eleven Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320083911' post='2835818'] ~50% of their alliances NS is in peace mode and ~85% of that has been in peace mode over 5 days. If they really wanted to cause destruction, 42.5%* of their alliances total NS could come out of peace mode right now. * = [size="1"]85% of 50% of a total is .85*50 right? Math is not my forte apparently..[/size] [/quote] If those nations entered peace mode during you war with NSO, that is a tactical failure on your part and I wouldn't be throwing those numbers out there. People already think you're an incompetent joke, no reason to make it any worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='mq3eleven' timestamp='1320083867' post='2835817'] Wake up, PR is senseless. All of you speak of morality, and continuing to walk the righteous path. It's a joke. I would applaud NOS for bringing in allies. It would be a bold move, and one that their leaders should be debating seriously. The standard by which all of you try to act by is sickening, and I hope that it blows up in your face. [/quote] PR =/= morality. PR is how the world perceives you. Morality is doing what is right. STA is as moral as they come, but has questionable PR because they have alienated many people in their moral stance. As with OBR, they are strong and moral, but they are considered all but neutral and, therefore, have negative PR. NSO is as immoral as it comes, but their "strategic withdrawals" and are [b]always[/b] for PR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='mq3eleven' timestamp='1320083611' post='2835814'] Why end a war that you're still doing damage in? The rate of said damage is irrelevant. If their members still want to cause destruction, then there is no reason to agree to terms. [/quote] Why ask for white peace if their members still want to cause destruction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leet Guy Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320083911' post='2835818'] ~50% of their alliances NS is in peace mode and ~85% of that has been in peace mode over 5 days. If they really wanted to cause destruction, 42.5%* of their alliances total NS could come out of peace mode right now. * = [size="1"]85% of 50% of a total is .85*50 right? Math is not my forte apparently..[/size] [/quote] I think their current stint in peace mode is indicative of their intent to cause damage after doing things like rebuying nukes. Tell me how many of those "50" in peace mode" have been sitting there for, say, 14 days, rather than the hilariously low bar of 5 days you measured? This would be more telling of their intent to rebuild and fight longer or cower away taking pot shots on the OWF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320083911' post='2835818'] ~50% of their alliances NS is in peace mode and ~85% of that has been in peace mode over 5 days. If they really wanted to cause destruction, 42.5%* of their alliances total NS could come out of peace mode right now. * = [size="1"]85% of 50% of a total is .85*50 right? Math is not my forte apparently..[/size] [/quote] [color="#0000FF"]I know tactics is not a strong point of yours, but believe me, peace mode is a valid tactic when your goal is to come out and fight. You'll be seeing us again quite soon. This war is far from over.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='mq3eleven' timestamp='1320084167' post='2835819'] If those nations entered peace mode during you war with NSO, that is a tactical failure on your part and I wouldn't be throwing those numbers out there. People already think you're an incompetent joke, no reason to make it any worse. [/quote] Due to nuclear anarchy its quite hard to keep staggers, especially when you have so few nations to work with (less than the enemies total). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Spectre Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320084170' post='2835820'] PR =/= morality. PR is how the world perceives you. Morality is doing what is right. STA is as moral as they come, but has questionable PR because they have alienated many people in their moral stance. As with OBR, they are strong and moral, but they are considered all but neutral and, therefore, have negative PR. NSO is as immoral as it comes, but their "strategic withdrawals" and are [b]always[/b] for PR. [/quote] Hey now, OBR doesnt have a negative PR... They are flat neutral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mq3eleven Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320084170' post='2835820'] PR =/= morality. PR is how the world perceives you. Morality is doing what is right. STA is as moral as they come, but has questionable PR because they have alienated many people in their moral stance. As with OBR, they are strong and moral, but they are considered all but neutral and, therefore, have negative PR. NSO is as immoral as it comes, but their "strategic withdrawals" and are [b]always[/b] for PR. [/quote] You're missing the point, and it doesn't surprise me. PR is a waste of time and effort, the weak babble on and on about it. Morality is even worse than PR. To even question any thought that you may have as "right" or "wrong" is weak, you are always right. NSO "strategic withdrawals" can't be any worse than The Legion's ability to sit on the sideline when it should act or look bad in a conflict it should dominate. Quit wasting my time, and go back to your litter box with the rest of whatever of you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1320084250' post='2835822'] I think their current stint in peace mode is indicative of their intent to cause damage after doing things like rebuying nukes. Tell me how many of those "50" in peace mode" have been sitting there for, say, 14 days, rather than the hilariously low bar of 5 days you measured? This would be more telling of their intent to rebuild and fight longer or cower away taking pot shots on the OWF. [/quote] While this is true, when nations like [url=http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=18636&Extended=1]this[/url] with a WRC have been in peace mode for 6 days and only have 6 nukes, I find it hard to believe they will be coming out anytime soon. [quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1320084255' post='2835823'] [color="#0000FF"]I know tactics is not a strong point of yours, but believe me, peace mode is a valid tactic when your goal is to come out and fight. You'll be seeing us again quite soon. This war is far from over.[/color] [/quote] Says the one who admitted himself that he does not know the war.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320084303' post='2835824'] Due to nuclear anarchy its quite hard to keep staggers, especially when you have so few nations to work with (less than the enemies total). [/quote] [color="#0000FF"]Oh, stop pretending you were declaring wars on anyone other than NSO or Tetris. We were your main targets. Since you didn't really bother yourself much with the other three you did have the nation advantage over us. You could have easily kept us from withdrawing.[/color] [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320084533' post='2835831'] Says the one who admitted himself that he does not know the war.. [/quote] [color="#0000FF"]I never said I did not understand tactics. I just said that I myself, as an individual, am a poor fighter when up against five or six nations twice my size.[/color] Edited October 31, 2011 by Rebel Virginia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 (edited) Guys its a war, lets all enjoy from the people participating in it to the side liners enjoying their popcorn. Sure there are a few that have kernels stuck between their teeth but don't let those people ruin our fun. Also newsflash: Infrastructure and technology can be rebuilt. Edited October 31, 2011 by kevin32891 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 If we're really going to talk about peace mode, let's all ask ourselves why, despite the fact that they now outnumber Tetris and NSO, Legion still has 50 nations in peace mode? Talk about idiotic strategies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leet Guy Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320084533' post='2835831'] While this is true, when nations like [url=http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=18636&Extended=1]this[/url] with a WRC have been in peace mode for 6 days and only have 6 nukes, I find it hard to believe they will be coming out anytime soon. [/quote] In retort to your five days in peace mode standard, you cite a nation that has spent an abhorrent six whole days in peace mode. Blasphemy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mq3eleven Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1320084207' post='2835821'] Why ask for white peace if their members still want to cause destruction? [/quote] If the leaders of my alliance weren't asking for a white peace during any war, I think there would be something wrong. If you're implying that conversations of white peace, is the same as surrender, then you certainly haven't learned anything during your many years here. If The Legion was as strong as you suggest, why would they let NSO nations into peace mode citing "It's hard to keep nuclear anarchied nations staggered." We both know they are a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1320084565' post='2835832'] [color="#0000FF"]Oh, stop pretending you were declaring wars on anyone other than NSO or Tetris. We were your main targets. Since you didn't really bother yourself much with the other three you did have the nation advantage over us. You could have easily kept us from withdrawing.[/color] [/quote] Stop pretending IAA/BTA/NsO did nothing. As of 10/27: BTA has 27 wars for 18 members. NsO has 73 for 33 members. IAA has 32 for 43 nations. For comparison sake: Tetris has 109 for 33 nations. NSO has 384 wars for 110 nations. So Tetris+NSO = 345% of nations in a war. BTA/NsO/IAA = 145% of nations in a war. Reference: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=106175&view=findpost&p=2833084 Edited October 31, 2011 by Unknown Smurf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1320084771' post='2835839'] In retort to your five days in peace mode standard, you cite a nation that has spent an abhorrent six whole days in peace mode. Blasphemy! [/quote] He was literally the first that came up. Would you like [url=http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=139895&Extended=1]this[/url] example instead? The second that came up, been in peace mode for 19 days. EDIT: Typo, 19 not 29. Edited October 31, 2011 by Unknown Smurf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320084825' post='2835841'] Stop pretending IAA/BTA/NsO did nothing. As of 10/27: BTA has 27 wars for 18 members. NsO has 73 for 33 members. IAA has 32 for 43 nations. For comparison sake: Tetris has 109 for 33 nations. NSO has 384 wars for 110 nations. So Tetris+NSO = 345% of nations in a war. BTA/NsO/IAA = 145% of nations in a war. Reference: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=106175&view=findpost&p=2833084 [/quote] Oh my god are you really bringing this up again? Your statistics are ridiculously flawed, first because you don't even bother to remove wars that started before they entered the Legion war from the count, second because you assume no one has deleted wars (hint: they have) and third you don't count wars that were quickly peaced out when nations surrendered. Along with other statistical flaws I'm probably missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mq3eleven Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1320084565' post='2835832'][color="#0000FF"]I never said I did not understand tactics. I just said that I myself, as an individual, am a poor fighter when up against five or six nations twice my size.[/color] [/quote] It's nice to see you admit that. Don't know how anyone ever thought you were on the level of Ivan the Terrible, Diskord, WC, or myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='mq3eleven' timestamp='1320084798' post='2835840'] If the leaders of my alliance weren't asking for a white peace during any war, I think there would be something wrong. If you're implying that conversations of white peace, is the same as surrender, then you certainly haven't learned anything during your many years here. If The Legion was as strong as you suggest, why would they let NSO nations into peace mode citing "It's hard to keep nuclear anarchied nations staggered." We both know they are a joke. [/quote] To be fair to legion they were outnumbered until just this announcement. At this point I assume they are outnumbered in the lower tier as well, which is where NSO's nations prominently are. Whether they are still a joke militarily or not may now be arguable. They did face a bigger coalition than themselves and handled themselves well despite what we all (myself included) expected. Does this one war automatically fix their reputation? Of course not, but it's a good step towards it. Whether they reach that goal or not, that's left to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320084825' post='2835841'] Stop pretending IAA/BTA/NsO did nothing. As of 10/27: BTA has 27 wars for 18 members. NsO has 73 for 33 members. IAA has 32 for 43 nations. For comparison sake: Tetris has 109 for 33 nations. NSO has 384 wars for 110 nations. So Tetris+NSO = 345% of nations in a war. BTA/NsO/IAA = 145% of nations in a war. Reference: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=106175&view=findpost&p=2833084 [/quote] [color="#0000FF"]And what does that have to do with the fact Legion was not declaring war on those three alliances, instead focusing only on NSO and Tetris? Are you trying to deny that you had more than ample resources to deal with two small alliances?[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krunk the Great Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1320084303' post='2835824'] especially when you have so few nations to work with (less than the enemies total). [/quote] Don't tell me you buy this crap you're selling about your side being smaller. Stop playing the victim. Also you really need to work on your statistical skills--percentages higher than 100 are absurd and you aren't taking multiple war slots into account (Each nation has 6 war slots available.) -- You divided by the wrong base. (NSO has 110 members but would have 660 war slots, for example) The correct base would be the total number of war slots for our side (For a percentage involving us). Edited October 31, 2011 by Krunk the Great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts