The Zigur Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 I'm not suggesting that an upper tier is the end-all-be-all of an alliance. However, being in the micro-tier with slowly depleting warchests does cripple your ability to protect yourselves and your allies. Despite all your narrative, in the end, a nation at 1k infra cannot sustainably send out aid. Perpetual war strains all your resources, not just the NS of your upper-tier nations. (Who by now aren't upper tier any more...) Our Emperor never said that our intention is to fight an eternal war, those threats have been delivered by our Enemy. What our Emperor does seek is to defeat the will of those who would enslave our alliance or otherwise impinge on our sovereignty and freedom. He demands that we have the ability to exist on equal terms with other alliances, and have the right to grow to the upper tier should we choose to do so. You are a diplomat on our forums and you can see that our morale is higher than ever. The question is whether our Enemy will be able to impose terms on us and cripple us in the long term... and our Emperor is resolved that that should not happen. We fight this war on OUR terms. We will end this war on OUR terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemania Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Our Emperor never said that our intention is to fight an eternal war, those threats have been delivered by our Enemy. What our Emperor does seek is to defeat the will of those who would enslave our alliance or otherwise impinge on our sovereignty and freedom. He demands that we have the ability to exist on equal terms with other alliances, and have the right to grow to the upper tier should we choose to do so. You are a diplomat on our forums and you can see that our morale is higher than ever. The question is whether our Enemy will be able to impose terms on us and cripple us in the long term... and our Emperor is resolved that that should not happen. We fight this war on OUR terms. We will end this war on OUR terms. I think on a personal note that if you want to achieve these goals on has to 1. Accept defeat to move on. 2. change the our terms to mutual terms. Then once you have reached them two goals .. work like hell FA wise to put yourselves into the position to do what you want to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue sam3 Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 This just in... the lower your NS, the less likely you are to be attacked. More at 11. Ranked #69 of 307 alliance nations Pretty awful coverage you've got there. Seriously, the alliances fighting us only need to cover 5 or 6 nations each to get total coverage down to me. Seriously, this is the single worst coordinated beat down I've ever been on the receiving end of. Are you sure that it is "dignity", and not just plain pride? Pride is, as you might be aware, not a virtue. Excess pride only hurts you. You'd be much better served by getting peace and then rebuilding your position -- not just nation-wise but also politically -- instead of keeping this fight going for some disordered sense of "dignity". I'm fairly happy with our political position, right now. We have allies that we can trust and who trust us, and we have the respect of pretty well every alliance I give a damn about. Puckering up to DBDC's arse wont help with either of those things. When peace is available on reasonable terms, we will consider it. Until then, we'll keep the nukes flying. I'm not suggesting that an upper tier is the end-all-be-all of an alliance. However, being in the micro-tier with slowly depleting warchests does cripple your ability to protect yourselves and your allies. Despite all your narrative, in the end, a nation at 1k infra cannot sustainably send out aid. Perpetual war strains all your resources, not just the NS of your upper-tier nations. (Who by now aren't upper tier any more...) What depleting war chests? If we need to, we're perfectly capable of keeping this war going at its current level for a whole lot longer than the rabble of alliances fighting us have the will to do. The alliances fighting us are taking a beating too, in their most vulnerable, and in some ways, most valuable (good luck growing your upper tiers when your tech sellers are all on fire). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted January 23, 2015 Report Share Posted January 23, 2015 Hail to the parties. Good luck. You are a diplomat on our forums and you can see that our morale is higher than ever. The question is whether our Enemy will be able to impose terms on us and cripple us in the long term... and our Emperor is resolved that that should not happen. We fight this war on OUR terms. We will end this war on OUR terms. Oh good, this is exactly the sort of pomposity Tywin would display when he believes a deal is about to be made. Glad to hear it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 Ranked #69 of 307 alliance nations Pretty awful coverage you've got there. Seriously, the alliances fighting us only need to cover 5 or 6 nations each to get total coverage down to me. Seriously, this is the single worst coordinated beat down I've ever been on the receiving end of. I'm fairly happy with our political position, right now. We have allies that we can trust and who trust us, and we have the respect of pretty well every alliance I give a damn about. Puckering up to DBDC's arse wont help with either of those things. When peace is available on reasonable terms, we will consider it. Until then, we'll keep the nukes flying. What depleting war chests? If we need to, we're perfectly capable of keeping this war going at its current level for a whole lot longer than the rabble of alliances fighting us have the will to do. The alliances fighting us are taking a beating too, in their most vulnerable, and in some ways, most valuable (good luck growing your upper tiers when your tech sellers are all on fire). You must have missed Equilibrium, When the losing side , for 3+ months MASSIVELY outwarred the winning side for the only time in CN history, if you think THIS is the most poorly conducted beatdown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorSoul Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 You are a diplomat on our forums and you can see that our morale is higher than ever. The question is whether our Enemy will be able to impose terms on us and cripple us in the long term... and our Emperor is resolved that that should not happen. We fight this war on OUR terms. We will end this war on OUR terms. Literally no one is imposing terms. Your martyr complex is getting the better of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlmightyGrub Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 Literally no one is imposing terms. Your martyr complex is getting the better of you. You speak of terms like there are any offered Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 Literally no one is imposing terms. Your martyr complex is getting the better of you. You're going to force the Polar coalition to accept that their upper tiers will forever be raided, and support the alliances doing so, R&R has done a spectacular job assisting RIA in their defensive war against DBDC by the way. I'm certain it's appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorSoul Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 You speak of terms like there are any offered Heh, as I understand it, we're not the one staying away from peace negotiations here. Hell, I even got on irc at an inconvenient time the other night, only to hear that Polar had suddenly refused to come to the table. You're going to force the Polar coalition to accept that their upper tiers will forever be raided, and support the alliances doing so, R&R has done a spectacular job assisting RIA in their defensive war against DBDC by the way. I'm certain it's appreciated. I'd invite you to hit me up elsewhere. Seems a bit unbecoming to hash this out publicly, don't you think? Perhaps our sensibilities are different on that matter, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 You realize through your alliance's direct actions you ensured that Polar did not receive the full support it could, yes? You want Polar to get peace, put your nation where your mouth is, otherwise you're just a trash ally who clearly chose to throw their lot in with the winning side at the cost of their allies on the losing side. "Putting my nation where may mouth is" could involve many things, including partnering with IRON, FTW, Umbrella, or VE in their attacks or in defense of them against people who countered them. Indeed, the treaties we have with those allies are equally valid given the circumstances that Polaris went to war. I get tired of being told by some of the "upright and righteous" people of Planet Bob that Valhalla is a bad alliance and I should feel bad. Fuck that. You aren't us, you don't know how the decisions were made that got us where we are. Hint: it had nothing to do with preserving pixels for pixels sake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 "Putting my nation where may mouth is" could involve many things, including partnering with IRON, FTW, Umbrella, or VE in their attacks or in defense of them against people who countered them. Indeed, the treaties we have with those allies are equally valid given the circumstances that Polaris went to war. I get tired of being told by some of the "upright and righteous" people of Planet Bob that Valhalla is a bad alliance and I should feel bad. $%&@ that. You aren't us, you don't know how the decisions were made that got us where we are. Hint: it had nothing to do with preserving pixels for pixels sake. Polar defending their allies against a CBless attack is certainly terrible, and I would have had more respect for Valhalla had they actually committed to one side or another rather than staying silent and then making a THE DECLARATIONS STOP HERE announcement an hour before Fark and MHA enter, and then claim it was just a coincidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 "Putting my nation where may mouth is" could involve many things, including partnering with IRON, FTW, Umbrella, or VE in their attacks or in defense of them against people who countered them. Indeed, the treaties we have with those allies are equally valid given the circumstances that Polaris went to war. I get tired of being told by some of the "upright and righteous" people of Planet Bob that Valhalla is a bad alliance and I should feel bad. $%&@ that. You aren't us, you don't know how the decisions were made that got us where we are. Hint: it had nothing to do with preserving pixels for pixels sake. You are always welcome to share the real reasons behind your decisions with your allies in your embassy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarkin Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 You speak of terms like there are any offered You speak of offers like Dajobo didn't refuse to meet for negotiations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 You speak of offers like Dajobo didn't refuse to meet for negotiations. My understanding is The Emperor cancelled a scheduled meeting due to duplicitous actions by members of your coalition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 (edited) My understanding is The Emperor cancelled a scheduled meeting due to duplicitous actions by members of your coalition. Fark hits WFF, gets hit by Int, then Polaris freaks out over this escalation because its not a new war when Fark does it! Peace is on the table, Polaris has just decided they would prefer to remain at war. Edited January 24, 2015 by Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 (edited) Fark hits WFF, gets hit by Int Oh ok, so you guys do know the reason then, so now ya'll can stop pretending it is some big mystery :rolleyes: Edited January 24, 2015 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geerland Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 Knowing the reason does not make it a good one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
protoa Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 I personally will aid any WFF nations that needs help. You know how to find me. PM me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razgriz24 Posted January 24, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 I personally will aid any WFF nations that needs help. You know how to find me. PM me. Thank you good sir! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 That's good, because at Polaris' current rate of "progress", that's exactly what they'll have. A quick check shows you have exactly one nation left above 100k NS and only 2 left above 70k.It's a wonderful thing when Valhalla is shitting on Polar in public about the war effort going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helios Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 I'm not sure why Helios has such a hard time understanding the idea of an elite lower tier producer alliance. I'd rather have an army of hardened warriors in the low tier than a horde of infra-hugging sycophants in the upper tier. Funnily enough, my own alliance at present comes quite close to that description. I understand the concept perfectly, adapt to survive, I get that. But we both know it's a massive step down from what you were before, where the goal was to flourish and not just survive. If I am wrong then describe to me exactly why a 160k NS nation is so much more important than a 60k NS or 6k NS nation. This is just moronic, even for you. A 160k nation makes a damn sight more cash than a 60k or 6k nation ever will and would be extremely useful in replenishing the cash reserves of lower tier nations, both during war and more importantly, after it. Money is responsible for rebuilding efforts and it's how wars are won, combined with a little willpower and politics here and there. Hypothetically, if you come at me with a large force of sub-160k nations, chances are my 160k guys will hammer you down to the 90k, 60k and 30k meatgrinders. Once that purpose is fulfilled, they can spam cash to the other tiers week in week out while you have nobody who can do that, except perhaps allies, only they'd still not have the same freedom because they'd have their own issues to deal with. Granted, you'll likely have a wonder advantage the further down you go and you'll win a lot of combat when you hit rock bottom. But I have similar assets and over time, your only option becomes extended, heavy use of peace mode to preserve what few nations you have that still possess significant reserves of cash. Meanwhile, my guys are constantly rotating in and out of hippy with replenished nukes and are 54m to 108m better off. You could certainly opt to fight for a long time in some kind of low-tier crusade but so could me and mine, only we'd be doing it with a completely unhindered upper tier. What depleting war chests? If we need to, we're perfectly capable of keeping this war going at its current level for a whole lot longer than the rabble of alliances fighting us have the will to do. The alliances fighting us are taking a beating too, in their most vulnerable, and in some ways, most valuable (good luck growing your upper tiers when your tech sellers are all on fire). You're not doing anything to tech sellers that wouldn't ordinarily happen anyway. As for your warchests, haha yeah I don't think so buddy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 (edited) This is just moronic, even for you. A 160k nation makes a damn sight more cash than a 60k or 6k nation ever will and would be extremely useful in replenishing the cash reserves of lower tier nations, both during war and more importantly, after it. Money is responsible for rebuilding efforts and it's how wars are won, combined with a little willpower and politics here and there. Can a 160k NS nation produce more cash aid for his alliance in a pinch than a 60k nation? No, not really. Not as part of a sustained effort either. In fact, I think a 60k NS ntion would be FAR more willing to give to his alliance than a 160k nation who is only concerned with procuring more 6/200 tech. Producers tend to come in all shapes and sizes, but by no means is 160k NS nation more valuable than a 60k or 6k nation solely on account of that NS. Hypothetically, if you come at me with a large force of sub-160k nations, chances are my 160k guys will hammer you down to the 90k, 60k and 30k meatgrinders. -snip- You are describing a situation where you enjoy numerical superiority like in this war. What about a war of equal or lesser numbers? Where you don't have the low and mid tier forces to continue grinding away for you? Edited January 24, 2015 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EViL0nE Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 Hypothetically, if you come at me with a large force of sub-160k nations, chances are my 160k guys will hammer you down to the 90k, 60k and 30k meatgrinders. Once that purpose is fulfilled, they can spam cash to the other tiers week in week out while you have nobody who can do that, except perhaps allies, only they'd still not have the same freedom because they'd have their own issues to deal with. Granted, you'll likely have a wonder advantage the further down you go and you'll win a lot of combat when you hit rock bottom. But I have similar assets and over time, your only option becomes extended, heavy use of peace mode to preserve what few nations you have that still possess significant reserves of cash. Meanwhile, my guys are constantly rotating in and out of hippy with replenished nukes and are 54m to 108m better off.Go talk to Umbrella, Deinos and TLR about fighting Fark a few wars ago.Granted, TLR was about as active as a sloth and Deinos.. well, was Deinos.However, we essentially made the vast majority of Umbrella irrelevant, pulled those in our range down into the meat grinder and ran it to a white peace that came on our terms when we were ready for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musmahhu Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 We'll get right on that....hold your breath and I will be right back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dajobo Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Don't worry Helios, Polaris has plenty of people who enjoy growing their nations large expressly so they can fight for longer.Being able to dominate an NS range (high or low) isn't about giving up on anything, it's about massing enough people in that range to be difficult to handle. Polaris will bounce back and quickly at that! 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.