OsRavan Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 (edited) A view from both sides: People who like NPO are praising them for this war tactic and standing up to DBDC. #courage People who like DBDC are thinking that NPO watched their friends burn when they needed help. #cowards interesting While you certainly have a point that usually these debates just devolve along AA lines, I dont think that's the case for me here. I hardly think Polar are cowards. They are fine people. And I fully expect them to be in the war eventually. I chalk their not being in it now to maneuvering not to cowardice. But I also chalk up this announcement as a peace of fluff to drum up the 'people who like NpO' into a nice frenzy so when polar hits someone (maybe even someone sending aid to DBDC... but only the one that makes political sense) elan shoots up. And I would hope that people on both sides could see this for what it is. A mildly smart propaganda piece. Edited November 16, 2014 by OsRavan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 It's principled to attack practical terrorist targets, and ignore the ones that are inconvenient for you? Huh. Please at least mind your p's. NPO != NpO. C'mon now. ugh, yes i know. stupid me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 It's principled to attack practical terrorist targets, and ignore the ones that are inconvenient for you? Read the Art of War. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel3200 Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Read the Art of War. ... I think the word you're looking for is "practical," not "principled." Attacking convenient targets and ignoring the ones who put you in a bad position is practical. Cherrypicking in that manner is most certainly not "principled." While you're attempting to refer others to Sun Tzu, you might want to refer yourself to Merriam-Webster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 (edited) Dajobo has set the principle, and MiniPax will execute according to the Art of War. I am not sure what is difficult to understand about target prioritization. Edited November 16, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel3200 Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Dajobo has set the principle, and MiniPax will execute according to the Art of War. I am not sure what is diffucult to understand about target prioritization. ... you realize you're basically backing up OsRavan, right?If Polar chooses who it targets with this practically, based on who is and who isn't convenient:Which is fine. I'm not implying that Polar shouldn't be political or focusing on making smart plays.... that is... well... smart. But don't hand me a real-politic move and call it a principled stand. I'll roll my eyes. If you want a way to skip treaty chaining if needed, or to drum up morale. Awesome. But to expect a savy player to take this serious is ridiculous. Because no way Polar wants to be at war with every alliance that is going to ignore this and send DBDC aid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Six aid packages from four nations since this 'decree' was promulgated. Zero attacks by Polaris. (Protip for Polaris: One of the nations aiding DBDC is unaligned. You can hit him without repercussions. Don't say I'm not being helpful.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 ... you realize you're basically backing up OsRavan, right?If Polar chooses who it targets with this practically, based on who is and who isn't convenient: I told OSRavan to stop blathering because he thinks he is clever when he is not. Read the OP and you will see the same kind of principle often shown by Emperor Ivan Moldavi. Polaris will not be forced into action by comedic barbarians who think terrorism and the reduction of alliance sovereignty is something funny. Polaris reserves for itself to act against tech suppliers at her own convenience. That's the essence of it, so stop creating strawmen about how we must attack every tech supplier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubaQuerida Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 This is not the first time DBDC's tech suppliers have come under direct threat, and it certainly won't be the last. It's a well-known, though surprisingly ineffective tactic and requires a lot more commitment and infrastructure than anyone at Polar has prepared. It's not to say it cannot be done, but it's an exercise in futility and as I stated before, will be Polar's undoing if they follow through on even a portion of what they've assigned themselves. I'm with OsRavan on this one, I think it's a lot of banter and posturing to please a constituent base that has probably already made up its mind. I would have advised waiting until the political climate was more in their favor, but then again, that's why I'm not on that side of the treaty web. It's all conjecture until someone does something about it, and I'm confident in the ability of our tech suppliers to defend themselves bravely. What is real is DBDC's recognition of war with every aspect of Polaris, from their tech supply chains to their leadership and treaties. As Prodigalmoon alluded to earlier, it's best to not pick a fight with an enemy that has little to lose, though it's unfortunate he wasn't capable of distinguishing which party that is. DBDC will take very little direct damage from such a moronic foreign policy as Polar's "hit the tiniest nations at will" and can guarantee any ally of Polaris a zero percent chance of survival outside of peace mode in the top 300 ranks. Tech sellers may evolve and cycle as they wish, but nations will at some point cross that 170k threshold and we will be there waiting, with no expiration date. Ask the former eQ coalition how the post-war destruction/rebuilding went for their super tiers, I will wait. As for specific alliances in question, such as TOP, Bob hit it on the head. We recognize a state of war with all of NpO's treaty base, and while they are on it, we consider them enemies of our state. We are cognizant, however, of the mutual ally situations that may exist and will not forsake allies solely for the purpose of satisfying an OWF bloodlust. I'm certain Polaris will take a similar approach to their declaration. It will be a very interesting next couple of years, since neither of us is going anywhere anytime soon, and we both have a lot of friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Levistus Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Shrug. Regardless of what you've told mutual allies, I've considered us at war for nearly a year now. Membership has avoided top end growth for that reason. This changes very little, just puts it out in the open. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Waiting is overrated. DBDC declared war on TOP just as much as Polaris just declared war on DT, MK, and DS. You'd really like that to be true, wouldn't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Your obsessive NO U responses to me are adorable. Also, lets be fair to me (I know you are capable of it)... I am not bandwagoning anything. I have been on the front seat of the LOLTOP train for well over a year now. Uh, no one is obsessed over you Rush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KahlanRahl Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Shrug. Regardless of what you've told mutual allies, I've considered us at war for nearly a year now. Membership has avoided top end growth for that reason. This changes very little, just puts it out in the open. This was my first thought as well. Most people know better than to allow growth within your reach, Cuba. I hope you have something else to entertain yourselves with. :v: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 (edited) I will do whatever you want. Go to the OWF making an announcement that you are a genius and I an unworthy worm. Do us a favor and make it something everyone doesn't already know about you. Like, Prodigal is a genius and you wear your grandmother's panties. Edited November 16, 2014 by Schattenmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 (edited) This is not the first time DBDC's tech suppliers have come under direct threat, and it certainly won't be the last. It's a well-known, though surprisingly ineffective tactic and requires a lot more commitment and infrastructure than anyone at Polar has prepared. It's not to say it cannot be done, but it's an exercise in futility and as I stated before, will be Polar's undoing if they follow through on even a portion of what they've assigned themselves. I'm with OsRavan on this one, I think it's a lot of banter and posturing to please a constituent base that has probably already made up its mind. I would have advised waiting until the political climate was more in their favor, but then again, that's why I'm not on that side of the treaty web. It's all conjecture until someone does something about it, and I'm confident in the ability of our tech suppliers to defend themselves bravely. What is real is DBDC's recognition of war with every aspect of Polaris, from their tech supply chains to their leadership and treaties. As Prodigalmoon alluded to earlier, it's best to not pick a fight with an enemy that has little to lose, though it's unfortunate he wasn't capable of distinguishing which party that is. DBDC will take very little direct damage from such a moronic foreign policy as Polar's "hit the tiniest nations at will" and can guarantee any ally of Polaris a zero percent chance of survival outside of peace mode in the top 300 ranks. Tech sellers may evolve and cycle as they wish, but nations will at some point cross that 170k threshold and we will be there waiting, with no expiration date. Ask the former eQ coalition how the post-war destruction/rebuilding went for their super tiers, I will wait. As for specific alliances in question, such as TOP, Bob hit it on the head. We recognize a state of war with all of NpO's treaty base, and while they are on it, we consider them enemies of our state. We are cognizant, however, of the mutual ally situations that may exist and will not forsake allies solely for the purpose of satisfying an OWF bloodlust. I'm certain Polaris will take a similar approach to their declaration. It will be a very interesting next couple of years, since neither of us is going anywhere anytime soon, and we both have a lot of friends. They were already waiting already, so again -- not much of a change. I guess everyone will just have to wait until you're bored or admin realizes & acts on nations declaring on nations with more land than currently exists on an actual planet or strength and cash reserves that makes playing untenable as something that needs to change. Until then I guess we'll have to wait a while for the next long post of this nature -- which is unfortunate, because I think DBDC could otherwise be an interesting addition to CN and the game is worse off for the lack of interaction because of it. Edited November 16, 2014 by IYIyTh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonewall14 Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 (edited) Six aid packages from four nations since this 'decree' was promulgated. Zero attacks by Polaris. (Protip for Polaris: One of the nations aiding DBDC is unaligned. You can hit him without repercussions. Don't say I'm not being helpful.) Well include me and many others in your "war" plans if you hit the LN nation who was obviously fulfilling prior commitment and I'm sure has no idea about this "war threat"/tech embargo...I will hit anyone who hits him plus two more of your nations regardless of size or consquences...o7 Edit:starting tomorrow when nuke anarchy ends of course...:p Edited November 16, 2014 by Stonewall14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 You'd really like that to be true, wouldn't you? It goes both ways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 They were already waiting already, so again -- not much of a change. I guess everyone will just have to wait until you're bored or admin realizes nations declaring on nations with more land than currently exists on an actual planet or strength and cash reserves that makes playing untenable something that needs to change. Until then I guess we'll have to wait a while for the next long post of this nature -- which is unfortunate, because I think DBDC could otherwise be an interesting addition to CN. they're probably already bored from the looks of itif i were them i'd probably be doing the same shitwhat else is there to do? purposefully make mistakes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardonic Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 I told OSRavan to stop blathering because he thinks he is clever when he is not. Yeah you have zero room to talk like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 (edited) they're probably already bored from the looks of it if i were them i'd probably be doing the same !@#$ what else is there to do? purposefully make mistakes? Either advocate for the changes themselves, turn on current allies, delete their nations or call the alliance shindig over is really all that's left. As for mistakes -- they've raided about 70-80% of the game that keeps this whole thing moving over the past year -- it's not that they can't make mistakes -- it's just that it's completely impossible for anything to be done about it. The vast majority means at some time or place they've triggered a defensive treaty with every major alliance in the game and yet they've not a scratch. It stands to reason the game would've had a more collective response if there was something that could be done. Don't get me wrong I'm with you -- I don't blame them, I just think at some point admin would be like "maybe it's not a good thing if the current game mechanics allow a handful of players to make such a thing actually doable." Edited November 16, 2014 by IYIyTh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Either advocate for the changes themselves, turn on current allies, delete their nations or call the alliance shindig over is really all that's left. As for mistakes -- they've raided about 70% of the game that keeps this whole thing moving over the past year -- it's not that they can't make mistakes -- it's just that it's completely impossible for anything to be done about it. It stands to reason the game would've had a more collective response if there was something that could be done. they care too much to actually advocate in their own best interests (ie. to give themselves opponents and a more level playing field)i probably would too if i spent 10 years and thousands of dongs on building my nation, but then it really shouldn't be up to them to advocate for the entire rest of the world as well as themselvesyou can't blame them for the workings of the almighty or for wanting the same thing we all do, but from a better positionnot that i intend to come off as a shill here - RIA are my allies involved here (now) and they know i back them 100%but, like rush, i think the whole bullshitting on the forum and making it inhospitable to the intelligent is a bad thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 (edited) they care too much to actually advocate in their own best interests (ie. to give themselves opponents and a more level playing field) but, like rush, i think the whole !@#$%^&*ting on the forum and making it inhospitable to the intelligent is a bad thing I don't see why if we all recognize the game is broken why we all have to pretend it's not. That imo makes the forums inhospitable to the intelligent. Edited November 16, 2014 by IYIyTh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helios Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 I don't see why if we all recognize the game is broken why we all have to pretend it's not. "This one alliance is so powerful they can beat us all up really easily, obvs the game is broken I mean come on guys" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Good. It's about time that NpO - DBDC leadership express exactly how they feel about each other in public. This has been boiling for far too long anyway. Maybe I should've said I try not to make my enemies think they have nothing to lose. Ah well. No arguments on the second part. Maybe, Prodigal Moon, it's time you pay less attention to world politics, and more attention to your nukes disappearing. Nightmerica has plenty to lose and I am happy to take it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 I don't see why if we all recognize the game is broken why we all have to pretend it's not. That imo makes the forums inhospitable to the intelligent. i agree entirely. hence why i'm not pretending.*shrug*well, that was a nice deviation, but it looks like we're sinking back into dog shit again (re: helios)enjoy! 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.