Vladimir Stukov II Posted November 8, 2013 Report Share Posted November 8, 2013 Thanks for the update! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Buscemi Posted November 8, 2013 Report Share Posted November 8, 2013 Because why the hell not. Data courtesy of RI5 war damage calculator https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AloywFw9emCwdG9qR0d1UWZ6bm5Dd2c5RnNsRUxOQ1E&output=html Wow, this is really nice stuff to have. Thanks to Ogaden or whoever made it. I like the A vs. B breakdowns. Best war stats layout I think I've seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gofastleft Posted November 8, 2013 Report Share Posted November 8, 2013 I know I am getting old, but I seem to remember making this same argument to TOP several years and wars ago when they made the same deal and having them tell me that I was crazy to be upset and their deal was not hurting me and my alliance at all. You're half right: on your side, it only affected NPO. On Val's side, it threw a big middle finger to the other alliances at war with NPO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 I know I am getting old, but I seem to remember making this same argument to TOP several years and wars ago when they made the same deal and having them tell me that I was crazy to be upset and their deal was not hurting me and my alliance at all. I completely forgot about this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 I completely forgot about this. It's a great little detail, and the first thing I thought of when I heard the deal made. TOP's medicine tastes very bitter, so I can see how they wouldn't like it. They play viciously and with very little regard to what stands in their way. I'm a fan, but it sucks to be on the receiving end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex The Great Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 its like being a cat and getting in a fight with another cat.... oooooohhhhhhhh i love catssssss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kremlin Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 (edited) I know I am getting old, but I seem to remember making this same argument to TOP several years and wars ago when they made the same deal and having them tell me that I was crazy to be upset and their deal was not hurting me and my alliance at all. Back when non nuclear wars and no first strike policies were still a thing. And I think we launched CMs in that war. Edited November 9, 2013 by Joe Kremlin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 I know I am getting old, but I seem to remember making this same argument to TOP several years and wars ago when they made the same deal and having them tell me that I was crazy to be upset and their deal was not hurting me and my alliance at all. I believe you mean six wars and nearly five years ago, back when no-first-strike policies and non-nuclear wars were still common. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 Non nuclear wars died with noCB, and global wars have been uniformly nuclear since UjW. Plus, Karma was nuclear from the get go, so there was that. I do like how this is such a talking point that your excuse is repeated almost verbatim, though. That's a nice touch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 Back when non nuclear wars and no first strike policies were still a thing. And I think we launched CMs in that war. As Delta said, MK shattered the no first strike policy in noCB. Alliances then rapidly abolished the damned setback policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 I don't think people can hold it against TOP at this point since after sentiment turned against them they got crushed in BiPolar, in some part due to that policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 I don't think people can hold it against TOP at this point since after sentiment turned against them they got crushed in BiPolar, in some part due to that policy. I won't hold doing it against them, but I will hold currently thinking it was a good idea against them if they still think that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Stukov II Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 Yes, TOP made a mistake over four years ago. Considering the shit we took for that it is amazing how Valhalla would think it would be a good idea to do the same thing in this war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 Yes, TOP made a mistake over four years ago. Considering the shit we took for that it is amazing how Valhalla would think it would be a good idea to do the same thing in this war. At this point, I'm unsure whether I'm more amazed at people repeating obvious mistakes, or not repeating them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander shepard Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 Are people people in here complaining about attacking alliances not doing enough in a dogpile? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Buscemi Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 I believe you mean six wars and nearly five years ago, back when no-first-strike policies and non-nuclear wars were still common. Nope, it was actually all the alliances at war with TOP that you tried to cut those deals with and by that time everyone nuked. I should know I was in TOP at the time. Luckily BAPS told you to $&*# off and I could exchange some fine weapons with my BAPS targets. The other alliances like GOD and Echelon were pretty pissed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefjoe Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 (edited) Yes, TOP made a mistake over four years ago. Considering the shit we took for that it is amazing how Valhalla would think it would be a good idea to do the same thing in this war. Same thing? Sorry but no, cutting deals with every alliance you are at war with to withhold nukes for the entire war does not come close to being in the same ballpark as a 35~40hour no first strike. Not to mention many of the nations Val was on got nuked anyhow, just by others as we were the stagger slot. I will say I wasnt happy about hearing this had occurred, and went weapons hot immediately when it was brought to my attention(Shit sometimes happens when im not around, believe what ya want), but yea 35~40hours =/= whole war that TOP missed. Edit- Now please continue to talk trash or w/e and get back to your regularly scheduled BS. Toodles! Edited November 9, 2013 by chefjoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gofastleft Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 (edited) Back when non nuclear wars and no first strike policies were still a thing. And I think we launched CMs in that war. I believe you mean six wars and nearly five years ago, back when no-first-strike policies and non-nuclear wars were still common. Notice the bolded part? When you are done laughing you may continue reading Sorry but you are both wrong. That war was all out nuclear 25 hours after the first declaration. Crymson are you still hanging on to the idea that it didn't cause anybody you were fighting with more damage? Edited November 9, 2013 by Gofastleft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 Last time I checked TOP wasn't allied to Valhalla. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 (edited) Sorry but you are both wrong. That war was all out nuclear 25 hours after the first declaration. Crymson are you still hanging on to the idea that it didn't cause anybody you were fighting with more damage? The war was all-out nuclear, yes. We still had the aforementioned policy, and Karma was the first war we'd entered in the middle rather than at the beginning. It is also worth noting that regardless of our non-use of nuclear weapons, our entry into the war spurred two alliances into surrender within a day and turned the Echelon front from an even contest into a walkover, and that we entered despite having literally no treaty obligation to do so (we triggered OUT in order to join the wars in question). However, I fully accept that it was a sizable mistake, one that certainly caused our co-combatants to take more damage and needlessly strained relations between us. It was one born of outdated procedure and simple thoughtlessness rather than any malice, and one for which we voiced contrition on multiple occasions. The most relevant point at hand is that this incident was nearly five years ago and that, until just a few days ago, neither TOP nor any other alliance had done anything of the sort since. Notice the bolded part? When you are done laughing you may continue reading I suggest you examine your humor subsystems, as the bolded part was a joke made in reference to a comment from earlier in the thread. Nope, it was actually all the alliances at war with TOP that you tried to cut those deals with and by that time everyone nuked. I should know I was in TOP at the time. Luckily BAPS told you to $&*# off and I could exchange some fine weapons with my BAPS targets. The other alliances like GOD and Echelon were pretty pissed. Hum ho... given that we were at war with Echelon, I don't think that they were very unhappy about the issue at all. They were probably quite a bit more unhappy that our entry spelled certain defeat for them. That said, Steve, I don't recall you raising any complaint at the time. Same thing? Sorry but no, cutting deals with every alliance you are at war with to withhold nukes for the entire war does not come close to being in the same ballpark as a 35~40hour no first strike. Not to mention many of the nations Val was on got nuked anyhow, just by others as we were the stagger slot. I will say I wasnt happy about hearing this had occurred, and went weapons hot immediately when it was brought to my attention(Shit sometimes happens when im not around, believe what ya want), but yea 35~40hours =/= whole war that TOP missed. Edit- Now please continue to talk trash or w/e and get back to your regularly scheduled BS. Toodles! So you've finally broken radio silence on this issue in order to compare what you've done to something that TOP did five years ago? Nice try, CJ. As for your secret deal, it would have continued had others in the coalition not noticed it---and it's rather convenient to simply blame such things on your subordinates, isn't it? But once again... good effort! Edited November 9, 2013 by Crymson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 I won't hold doing it against them, but I will hold currently thinking it was a good idea against them if they still think that. It was a terrible idea and I remember going to many, many people afterwards and apologizing for it. Most people dropped the no nuke policy after MK shattered that stigma in WoTC, however, we still hung on to that old military doctrine. We were lambasted and rediculued for good reason. This doesn't take away from the fact that Valhalla made a separate deal with NPO during this war when their ally is fighting NPO. CJ and his buddies like to go around telling everyone we are shitty people so you'll have to excuse us if we giggle over this misstep by them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valtamdraugr Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 Shitty ideas for 500, Alex. I don't know about that 'only for so long' stuff, but the flip side of that would be that Val honestly thought noone would catch it.. considering it would have become even more apparent as the days went on. There are number geeks here who live for that kinda thing, no offense. I'm all for possibly prolonging war though.. so.. \o/ wtg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartfw Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 Same thing? Sorry but no, cutting deals with every alliance you are at war with to withhold nukes for the entire war does not come close to being in the same ballpark as a 35~40hour no first strike. Not to mention many of the nations Val was on got nuked anyhow, just by others as we were the stagger slot. I will say I wasnt happy about hearing this had occurred, and went weapons hot immediately when it was brought to my attention(Shit sometimes happens when im not around, believe what ya want), but yea 35~40hours =/= whole war that TOP missed. Edit- Now please continue to talk trash or w/e and get back to your regularly scheduled BS. Toodles! Is this comment saying that -- the original agreement was for no first strikes for 40 hours but after that first strikes were allowed or -- the original agreement was no first strike. As such it could have lasted a long time. However someone messed that up 35-40 hours later and it fell apart. Obviously the two are very different. Thanks for taking the time from warring to clarify. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 Is this comment saying that -- the original agreement was for no first strikes for 40 hours but after that first strikes were allowed or -- the original agreement was no first strike. As such it could have lasted a long time. However someone messed that up 35-40 hours later and it fell apart. Obviously the two are very different. Thanks for taking the time from warring to clarify. The latter. The issue did not arise until others in the coalition discovered that no nukes were being exchanged between Valhalla at NPO. At that point, chefjoe conveniently disavowed the policy and placed the blame on others in his government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercoolyellow Posted November 9, 2013 Report Share Posted November 9, 2013 The latter. The issue did not arise until others in the coalition discovered that no nukes were being exchanged between Valhalla at NPO. At that point, chefjoe conveniently disavowed the policy and placed the blame on others in his government. Valhalla has always been very loyal to its allies :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.