Jump to content

Legends of Cybernations


Recommended Posts

[quote name='Fleury Lindros' timestamp='1323722987' post='2875553']
lol imo Hrmmm is the opposite of a legend. without him and the rest of ODN making a separate peace when the war was pretty much like already won the NPO would not have survived the first great war

what a saint, keeping the alliance alive that had fought u for most of ur existence and pretty much wanted u exsterminated LOL
[/quote]
And who are you to talk of GW1 ODN?

We made the decision in good faith. While it was a regrettable decision, there was a sense of honor in it that doesn't exist now. I remember reading the private forums when Moldavi came and talked to us, and he seemed sincere. That was all we were looking for back then it seemed.

We got conned. Also, NPO would have survived the war, don't kid yourself.

Edited by Penlugue Solaris
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 261
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1323729659' post='2875697']
And who are you to talk of GW1 ODN?

We made the decision in good faith. While it was a regrettable decision, there was a sense of honor in it that doesn't exist now. I remember reading the private forums when Moldavi came and talked to us, and he seemed sincere. That was all we were looking for back then it seemed.

We got conned. Also, NPO would have survived the war, don't kid yourself.
[/quote]
To be fair, he does have a point in the general sense that ODN, from the First Great War to sometime around early 2008, was a terrible joke of an alliance. Along with The Legion, I don't think I've ever seen an alliance as oblivious to political realities as ODN between the Great Wars. The fact that they're now one of the best-performing alliances in the game, and reliable allies, is testament to the quality of leadership and membership since.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1323741418' post='2875912']
To be fair, he does have a point in the general sense that ODN, from the First Great War to sometime around early 2008, was a terrible joke of an alliance. Along with The Legion, I don't think I've ever seen an alliance as oblivious to political realities as ODN between the Great Wars. The fact that they're now one of the best-performing alliances in the game, and reliable allies, is testament to the quality of leadership and membership since.
[/quote]
Generally yes, but Hrmmm isn't the best example there. His thing was more a mindset, not a lot of understanding at least from what I recall of 2006. Neboe or someone else probably remembers better.

Edited by Penlugue Solaris
Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Archon' timestamp='1323168157' post='2865599']
Threads like these make me wish I had taken meticulous notes or ever written down my story. I imagine it would be an interesting read for many.
[/quote]
Indeed, I wish I'd been more careful about keeping back ups of a lot of things, especially logs. There's a lot of interesting material I just don't have good references for any longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1323760129' post='2876337']
Generally yes, but Hrmmm isn't the best example there. His thing was more a mindset, not a lot of understanding at least from what I recall of 2006. Neboe or someone else probably remembers better.
[/quote]
anyone who played back then will probably agree that ODN was terrible in 2006, they're certainly improved dramatically compared to how they were up until UjW, but that doesn't change the past.

edited to actually make sense, it's 5am.

Edited by Mogar
Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Mogar' timestamp='1323769823' post='2876402']
anyone who played back then will probably agree that ODN was terrible in 2006, they're certainly improved dramatically compared to how they were up until UjW, but that doesn't change the past.

edited to actually make sense, it's 5am.
[/quote]
Disagree completely with the statement ODN was terrible in 2006, but this isn't the place for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='rsoxbronco1' timestamp='1322837995' post='2859373']
Everyone may be legends, but the Trashcat is the true hero of cybernations.
[/quote]

Took way to long to mention Stumpy. Also might have missed it but has anyone mentioned bros? I mean he's a decent impact on CN. More legend worthy than a lot of names I've seen on here.

Also since bunch of other people who did things behind the scenes got mentioned I'll also throw out there that Trace and Stormsend fit the bill as well if others have stretched that far.

EDIT: Also Anthony that whole Jr com mess took a lot of talent from NPO like Sirwilliam and others.

Edited by The Corrupt Teacher
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ivan Moldavi is a given.

I'd argue the following as well:

Neboe
Chris Kaos
Pope Hope
banned member
Philosopher
Pope Pius XIII (a legend, insofar as how much he legendarily sucked)
Arctic
Bilrow
SocCarolina

Take Care,

Celtic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pius as legendary (or even infamous)?

No. He had minimal impact on this game. The idea for the NpO would have eventually been done by Moldavi. They were just waiting for an excuse, and NAAC was perfect for it.

Edit: this was before my time in CN. I started originally in May of 06. This is mostly speculation on my part. I knew Pius from other games and he told me his side of the story. Never heard the other sides story,

Edited by Ameris
Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ameris' timestamp='1323812178' post='2876919']
Pius as legendary (or even infamous)?

No. He had minimal impact on this game. The idea for the NpO would have eventually been done by Moldavi. They were just waiting for an excuse, and NAAC was perfect for it.
[/quote]

There would not have been a Second Polar War without Pius (at least, in the way it turned out)

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1323729659' post='2875697']
And who are you to talk of GW1 ODN?

We made the decision in good faith. While it was a regrettable decision, there was a sense of honor in it that doesn't exist now. I remember reading the private forums when Moldavi came and talked to us, and he seemed sincere. That was all we were looking for back then it seemed.

We got conned. Also, NPO would have survived the war, don't kid yourself.
[/quote]

The ODN cannot be held to blame for the consequences of an early peace in the Great War. They were not the only alliance growing weary of the fight... and its really not as though we'd have been able to eliminate the NPO.... The VietNam approach to that war would have only served to further fester the overconfidence of the victorious allies, and entice the NPO and allies to recover and retalliate with greater force, sooner. Great War 2's outcome would have been closer to that of Great War 3's. That the victorious allies were unable to capitalize on the ground they had gained is a testament to overconfidence and political ignorance to a growing opposition. We saw the second and third wars coming, and did nothing but talk.

Take Care,

Celtic

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Celtic' timestamp='1323812922' post='2876932']
That the victorious allies were unable to capitalize on the ground they had gained is a testament to overconfidence and political ignorance to a growing opposition. We saw the second and third wars coming, and did nothing but talk.
[/quote]

In the case of some alliances, yes. But not in all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1323826847' post='2877116']
In the case of some alliances, yes. But not in all.
[/quote]
I'll second this, the writing on the wall was clear, some of you simply failed to acknowledge it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Mogar' timestamp='1323846792' post='2877589']
I'll second this, the writing on the wall was clear, some of you simply failed to acknowledge it.
[/quote]
It is very easy to say this now. I don't know what you were saying back then, simply stating a fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1323850866' post='2877628']
It is very easy to say this now. I don't know what you were saying back then, simply stating a fact.
[/quote]
whether it was Karma, this current war, or GW2, reading the signs is easy, it's getting others(Orrple in GW2, for example, whom I've held a grudge with since that war actually, up to and including recently declaring alongside NSO simply to hit a few of them.) to pull their heads out of the sands and prepare to fight for their existence, rather than hope it just all goes away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Unknown Smurf' timestamp='1323156120' post='2865504']

Not necessarily true. I think anyone that took it upon themselves to shape a coalition did not necessarily need the backings of those doing the grunt work in their respective alliances. This war, for example, took someone with a vast understanding of the treaty web and individual grudges (and aspirations in NPOs case) to shape this into a curbstomp of Polaris/SF/XX (who, all combined, are well connected enough where this shouldn't be a curbstomp). Getting all these strategic alliances to DoS despite not being allied to (and in some cases not fond of) each other in order to accomplish that is the making of a legend. I have no clue who did it though, I would guess someone in TOP which leads me to crymson, but his posting makes me doubt that. :unsure:
[/quote]

No, not Crymson. For the record this was not nearly as hard to get people together as previous wars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1323729659' post='2875697']
And who are you to talk of GW1 ODN?

We made the decision in good faith. While it was a regrettable decision, there was a sense of honor in it that doesn't exist now. I remember reading the private forums when Moldavi came and talked to us, and he seemed sincere. That was all we were looking for back then it seemed.

We got conned. Also, NPO would have survived the war, don't kid yourself.
[/quote]
I don't recall being insincere. I may have played up the victim aspect a bit more than necessary in the hopes of gaining sympathy but that was not directly an effort to con ODN.

Also, to whomever was stating that NPO was out to exterminate ODN from the beginning, you have that backwards my friend. ODN was founded by those from another realm with a similarly named alliance specifically to oppose the NPO in the Cyberverse. The fact that I was lenient and simply had them declare/post public oaths of personal loyalty to me shows I had no desire to see them exterminated, even if I did enjoy seeing them humiliated.

Edited by Ivan Moldavi
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is pointless to just make a list with 30 names on it, as some people have done. If people really want to make a "Hall of Fame" kind of thing, then they should at the very least try to define what a "legend" is. It would also be interesting for all of the entries (or at least the top-tier ones) to have some kind of definitive biography, high and low points, and the like. The ones whose main achievements were years ago might even be tempted to share what went on behind the scenes at the time, the kind of thing that most people will never read about normally.

Of course, it is always subjective. There are a lot of influential people in all kinds of fields, but only a few of them stand out. A football analogy would be that Cruyff is a legend, while Bergkamp was just a great player. This makes the distinction clear, without diminishing the greatness of the latter.

Anyway, they would probably be forced to make some kind of hierarchy, with tiers like:

[b]First tier:[/b] those people never to be topped, people who combined several great aspects. There have been a lot of people with organisational skill, military intelligence, diplomatic ability, personal charisma, etc. But also consider just how they put these skills to work into concrete achievements of massive importance, the ability to actively take credit for their achievements so that we may remember their names, a large following, etc. It seems to me that there are only a select few who combined all or most of these aspects.

Of course, there are also those who were perhaps strictly organisationally strong (i.e. people lopsided towards one very specific skill which they were excellent at), or people who did not have extraordinary skills except for the charisma and the ability to be at the forefront of extremely important events. Perhaps we need to look at their impact to determine whether they still belong in this tier.

[b]Second tier:[/b] I think this would be for people who, for instance, created a significant treaty system or was prominent in a global war, or someone who glued a treaty system with lots of opposite alliances together, those who founded new and unique alliances and brought them to prominence against the odds, but who did not influence things beyond that, on a gamewide scale. So basically people who had an impact, but not one that is necessarily felt by all of us.

[b]Third tier:[/b] if people want to even bother with this, it could include the kind of people who just have fame or notoriety in general, or specific achievements that are just plain interesting. People who managed to get their alliances sanctioned despite all odds early on, rogues, rebels, lesser organisers in important wars and alliances, leaders of major alliances that achieved long-term stability and diplomatic and military success for themselves in general, etc.

Edited by Mr Garcia
Link to post
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...