Wars Ought To Have Meaning

[The Zigur]

I don't think that it's by any choice of your own that this will be the case.

 

My choice was made over a year ago, when I chose to fight the hordes of Mushqaeda.

[Alexio15]

Fixed, reference added.

--

 

 

The best part was, he then applied to NG. 

You are right I did forget the best part

[Lord Hershey]

Wars do have a meaning, of course. I would not go further into depth in here as certain individuals tend to derail this thread since the thread has potential. So, instead of that, come talk to me on IRC if you wish to have a constructive dialogue with me regarding this intriguing subject.

[CubaQuerida]

Wars do have a meaning, of course. I would not go further into depth in here as certain individuals tend to derail this thread since the thread has potential. So, instead of that, come talk to me on IRC if you wish to have a constructive dialogue with me regarding this intriguing subject.

This is why I nominated him for

 

Quietest Power Player Lord Hershey

[kingzog]

The IC/OOC divide was permanently breached in 2008. Anyone who believes it has existed since then is kidding themselves.

[trimm]

The IC/OOC divide was permanently breached in 2008. Anyone who believes it has existed since then is kidding themselves.

 

QFT.  And it was getting increasingly shaky well before that.

[Starfox101]

Just because NPO is not fighting out of malice, does not mean that we are fighting for no reason.

It is a very narrow minded concept that people must only fight wars to "settle scores" or "get revenge". It makes wars boring and repetitive.

The NPO is simply fighting because it benefits us and our political grouping. Who is on the other side of the battlefield is irrelevant. We will fight anybody, anywhere, anytime with the same level of industriousness, and we will be equally happy to shake hands with them afterwards and walk away, whether we win or lose. I do not believe in revenge or grudges, and if I ever resort to extraordinary harmful actions, it will be because it is intended to create a better future, not to "get even" for the past. If we keep screwing each other over because we were screwed over before, this game will devolve into something ugly and everyone loses.

How does this war benefit NPO?

[The Zigur]

Fixed, reference added.

--

 

 

The best part was, he then applied to NG. 

 

Reasons for joining Non Grata? To bring civilization to this barbarian hold

[James Spanier]

How does this war benefit NPO?

 

They're maintaining and gaining some powerful friends by participating as they have, and will win the war thus not taking the same sort of economic penalties imposed on them when they lost the last war they fought against, well, you.

 

 

edit: minor spelling error

Edited December 20, 2014 by James Spanier

[supercoolyellow]

Just because NPO is not fighting out of malice, does not mean that we are fighting for no reason.

It is a very narrow minded concept that people must only fight wars to "settle scores" or "get revenge". It makes wars boring and repetitive.

The NPO is simply fighting because it benefits us and our political grouping. Who is on the other side of the battlefield is irrelevant. We will fight anybody, anywhere, anytime with the same level of industriousness, and we will be equally happy to shake hands with them afterwards and walk away, whether we win or lose. I do not believe in revenge or grudges, and if I ever resort to extraordinary harmful actions, it will be because it is intended to create a better future, not to "get even" for the past. If we keep screwing each other over because we were screwed over before, this game will devolve into something ugly and everyone loses.

 

While I cannot speak for what you and your alliance would find the most entertaining, for me the most enjoyable wars are the wars when I get to knock around some one I do not care for. I think malice is an excellent reason to fight some one. Now don't get me wrong, too much malice is a bad thing and a grudge that holds too long or goes to deep is not healthy, but this game is better when we bring passion and emotion into the mix.

Edited December 20, 2014 by supercoolyellow

[Schad]

RP and the treaty web weren't really connected concepts long before DBDC. It's weird to say they're destroying it when it's been dead and buried for years now. The fact of the matter is the reason things like raider/antiraiding divide never really took root was because they in themselves weren't self sustaining enough to generate two full sides. A large enough pool of participants just did not care enough or find it interesting enough to perpetuate. Antiraiding alliances were always willing to sign treaties with alliances that did raid. Alliances that were against harsh terms were always willing to support alliances that imposed them.

 

I don't know if that's a failure to RP so much as a failure of RP. As a community, we've always chosen political expediency over grandiose principle. Alliances that make that choice win wars and get to decide how to continue imposing their will over others. Natural selection has taken over.

 

On the raiding/antiraiding thing: grew up in an alliance that had a staunch anti-radiing bent, and that's precisely the reason why we discovered that it made for an inadequate raison d'etre; alliances don't sort themselves by ideology in this game, but rather by more immediate interests. Raiders ally non-raiders; 'serious' alliances ally less restrained ones. Looking for a grand overarching narrative for any given war is purposeless, because most coalitions are comprised not of two dichotomous ideals of the world, but rather several dozen narrowly-focused short-and-medium-term goals. 

[The Zigur]

I've always found meaning and delight in combating hubris filled tyrants.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Tywin Lannister

[The Zigur]

On the raiding/antiraiding thing: grew up in an alliance that had a staunch anti-radiing bent, and that's precisely the reason why we discovered that it made for an inadequate raison d'etre; alliances don't sort themselves by ideology in this game, but rather by more immediate interests. Raiders ally non-raiders; 'serious' alliances ally less restrained ones. Looking for a grand overarching narrative for any given war is purposeless, because most coalitions are comprised not of two dichotomous ideals of the world, but rather several dozen narrowly-focused short-and-medium-term goals.

I think the main issue with DBDC is not that they raid nonaligned nations (Ive never had a problem with it personally) but rather that they raid established alliances that are part of the civilized world, that they break their word, that they grow increasingly bold and self-aggrandizing in nature.

Of course, I did predict they would become tyrannical last year. Just look at Cubaqueridas replies in this thread, let alone his past actions and parasitical playing style IC. One might say it was fated that the most unscrupulous and cunning actors would rise to the top, just as it was fated that a few players would stand and fight against oppression and exploitation.

[Schad]

Stop trying to hijack this for your wankery; for the thousandth time, it's OOC. Any more and you'll be irreversibly chafed. 

Edited December 20, 2014 by Schad

[Austrailia]

You're almost four years late on the "The is the end of the CB". I'll direct you to Doomhouse's "Everything. Must. Die." DoW.

 

I believe the term CB is used in a more general sense within this thread. While Everything Must Die was a preempt, it still had meaning. NPO was staying out of a war while the two other groupings fought, allowing it to grow more powerful relative to the other two. It was preempted to avoid such a scenario. It might not be a justifiable reason in the eyes of some people but it's a good one. This thread though is about wars that don't have any reason at all, that occur simply out of boredom.

[Saxplayer]

 

 

Spoiler: That isn't a CB. Sorry to break it to you but you don't understand what you are talking about.

 

 

 

I'm aware of this, and tbqh, I still think that SNX shouldn't be with Polar.

[The Zigur]

I'm aware of this, and tbqh, I still think that SNX shouldn't be with Polar.

Yes, they should clearly ally ODN instead!

[keeology]

 

I'm aware of this, and tbqh, I still think that SNX shouldn't be with Polar.

 

Thank you for your thought we will keep in mind for when we need FA advice

[Devialance]

The biggest problem with a CB war is as pointed out by many the outcome is already known, just like this war that had no CB (so people think, just because one was not posted does not mean there wasn't one) yet the outcome was known months before any wars happened.

 

Though out all of CN, it is well known no one starts a war they think they could lose, so they spend months getting an army together to make sure they win, the funny thing is you think a Cb would change this?

 

Also going on the OP, you can simply say in your CB, I dislike NpO so ive got my army we are going to roll them now, job done, it still will not add meaning.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Devialance

[scolar visari]

it's always amusing when the plebs of bob try and decipher the machinations of the 1%

[Dochartaigh]

it's always amusing when the plebs of bob try and decipher the machinations of the 1%

 

It really isn't that hard to decipher bro. 

[Monster]

 

I believe the term CB is used in a more general sense within this thread. While Everything Must Die was a preempt, it still had meaning. NPO was staying out of a war while the two other groupings fought, allowing it to grow more powerful relative to the other two. It was preempted to avoid such a scenario. It might not be a justifiable reason in the eyes of some people but it's a good one. This thread though is about wars that don't have any reason at all, that occur simply out of boredom.

 

I mean, I'd rather not get into this since I've wasted a lot words in the past on this topic, but that's a common misinterpretation. There is a reason NPO was claimed to be the flagship alliance of the Polar coalition in terms of the cushioning provided and it's not because NPO was going to stay out forever.  It just says that Polar was positioning people ahead of NPO's entry to provide the most NS possible ahead of them due to a lot of alliances on Polar's side not being fond of NPO. There was intel that NPO and its allies were coming in and we got tired of waiting as more alliances continued to join in for Polar and we wanted to make the war about the NPO since rolling Polar was a divisive issue within the traditional SuperGrievances/PB/proto-XX coalition. It would also give us potential additional alliances that would not consider entry into a purely Polar rolling or would be on the Polar side otherwise.

 

Many people who had misgivings about rolling Polar did not believe NPO would enter and thought it would just be a rolling of sphere they had some ties with ie. Ragnarok entering but Legion not was a huge wedge especially when considering how Ragnarok had to be handled. Similar to how  a lot of people felt x alliance they don't like or alliance x they do like wouldn't enter this war. Keeping certain alliances out until the right time even if it's an extended delay is a strategy Polar seems to have continued to employ.

 

 

About a year or so after, Dajobo said the plan on Polar's end was to call Legion in last out of their allies if DH hadn't declared on NPO, similar to how Fark and MHA have come out last in terms of XX, and hit FOK(I believe), and I believe NPO would likely have chained from there once Legion was countered.

 

edit: clarified

Edited December 20, 2014 by Monster

[RevolutionaryRebel]

Recall even the Mushroom Kingdom could not long absolve itself of all treaties without returning to it.

Your ignorance and revisionism is legendary.

The reset was performed to allow for reflection and complete re-evaluation of obligations based on the present rather than holding onto obsolete holdovers of the past. It had nothing to do with any silly political narratives outside of that.

 

Those that are not entirely stupid can be self-aware. Those are wholly idiotic have no capability to detect their own flaws. You are welcome to remain in your echo chamber.

Edited December 21, 2014 by RevolutionaryRebel

[Londo Mollari]

I heard that MCXA had WMDs

so I attacked

but no WMDs were found

[The Zigur]

Your ignorance and revisionism is legendary.
The reset was performed to allow for reflection and complete re-evaluation of obligations based on the present rather than holding onto obsolete holdovers of the past. It had nothing to do with any silly political narratives outside of that.
 
Those that are not entirely stupid can be self-aware. Those are wholly idiotic have no capability to detect their own flaws. You are welcome to remain in your echo chamber.

It just so happens I was a member of NPO at the time and wrote an essay shortly after it occurred:




Recently the Mushroom Kingdom canceled their treaties with most of their allies with the reason being that "the treaty web is a malady, sapping the lifeblood from this planet." Naturally this historical political move piqued my interest along with the inaccurate portrait painted of the "treaty web" and I decided to write a brief analysis on the matter if I found the time.

Before we discuss the meat of the issue let us more closely observe the manner in which the treaty cancellations were presented.

Quote

It's been a while, and I wasn't intending on doing this, so you'll have to forgive me for the lack of detail, eloquence, or whatever else you may be hoping for from this most monumental of announcements. So, let's get on with it, shall we?

As of earlier today, notice of cancellation has been served to every single treaty partner the Mushroom Kingdom hashad. I won't bother listing them all out, as the pieces of digital paper are more or less irrelevant now. There are two exceptions to this. Alchemy and Aloha. As you will see to some degree in what follows, this actually makes sense. But, quite simply, it'd be a cold move to abandon them. So don't mess.


Notice the casual air of indifference that is presented, as if the cancellations were simply a minor affair that was discussed over a fifteen minute lunch break and then assigned to Archon to publish "on behalf of the Ruling Government." But let's continue:

Quote

The prevailing question seems to be - why? Not a bad question, actually. There are people in a far better position than myself to answer this question, I would say, so there isn't terribly much I'm going to be willing to say publicly.


Quite understandable. If I was Archon I wouldn't be willing to discuss the PR motivations behind the cancellations either. But this aside let's continue to the most important part of the announcement...

Quote

the treaty web is a malady, sapping the lifeblood from this planet. It entraps and entangles. It prevents. And, most criminally of all, it dictates. It defines who your friends are. It defines who you respect and who you don't. It divides the world into poles and ties you to people you may not have consented to.


This is a dramatic rendering of politics, although unfortunately not very accurate. From a materialist perspective we must analyze the state of affairs that our world is currently immersed in. Survival is the original and primary motive of the sane nation ruler, and to provide the opportunity of growth and freedom of potential is in the self interest of his nation.



As nations form an alliance and appoint a sovereign, they remove themselves from the state of nature and become more or less civilized, abiding by a constitution, laws, and/or the decisions of the sovereign. It is impossible to overstate the importance of these written codes of conduct. They provide a stable foundation for the security and prosperity of the alliance, allowing member nations as well as foreignors to know and comprehend what conduct is considered acceptable. With this basic legal framework established nations can plan for the long term knowing that their future is not subject to chaos.

Naturally as Order became the norm and the world as a whole moved further from the state of nature, written codes of conduct soon spread to treaties between alliances. From non-aggression or commercial pacts to joint military agreements, all nation rulers with a little research could discover exactly what conduct was stated as acceptable between various alliances along with intra-alliance laws, and with deeper inquiries could become familiar with the underlying power structure. Civilization had gone global.

The impact was enormous. The world slowly but surely organized into a profitable and relatively stable society of nations with a culture that respected law and legal custom. Inevitably Pacifica came to lead the world and elements of Francoist philosophy became mainstream "common sense," with breaches of conduct generating public condemnation.

However, even Pacificans are human, and mistakes were made by the Hegemony that allowed the enemies of Order to sway many rulers away from the established law-respecting culture and instead idealize chaos and primitivism. With a handful of abuses and the prosperous and stable state of affairs the philosophically chaotic alliances, lulzmeisters and defeated warmongers cunningly persuaded large swaths of the public to believe that stability is stagnation and prosperity is boredom, as I noted in a recent essay.

During the Karma war a new Hegemony coalesced and is now lead primarily by Mushroom Kingdom; for the first time in world history a coalition that idealizes chaos and does not grasp nor endorse materialist analysis has risen on the backs of popular discontent. With many rulers noting the negative similarities between the current Hegemony and the old Order, the Shrooms are forced to placate their supporters demanding the absurd notion of a treaty free world or else lose the support of the forces of chaos.

The obvious solution to this growing PR problem is the elimination of their portion foreign legal framework, accomplishing several things. The most obvious gain from this move is the appearance of embracing chaos while in reality maintaining the equivalent of secret treaties; verbal agreements of defense that are not made public. Thus an invisible hegemony is maintained, deceiving many into believing that the power structure was dismantled and that the perceived "problem" has been addressed. For a while longer public opinion can be appeased and the leaking ship is temporarily plugged with rags.

There are other benefits as well. As MK's political power and influence slowly wanes it is to their benefit to disguise their power. If and when they finally force themselves into an untenable corner, at least their "friends" cannot cancel treaties leaving them looking weak. Even if they fight alone they have influenced others into believing they have made a noble and idealistic stand for chaos, rather than simply being another failed lulz alliance destined by history to failure.

With all this we can see how MK is simply another alliance promoting its' self interests of survival, and hardly part of a noble cause or the bringer of idealistic notions of "freedom." By deceiving the public it promotes its own security while leaving people confused about what the power structure really is.

It is all in all a brilliant political move