Lucius Optimus Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 (edited) Off topic- Libertarian Kashmir? WTF? http://www.cybernations.net/alliance_stats.asp?ID=10170 Edited July 22, 2015 by Lucius Optimus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenMorningstar Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 That's funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 It's also nothing to do with any annoying types who don't know they're beat. I'm actually annexing the alliance on behalf of Libertarian Socialist Federation one word at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 SRA + Kashmir, I'll give you 1000 tech if you add decommissioning wonders to the peace terms. If they're gonna moan about it, it might as well be in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Optimus Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 It's also nothing to do with any annoying types who don't know they're beat. I'm actually annexing the alliance on behalf of Libertarian Socialist Federation one word at a time. Does that mean Kashmir is no more? Are they staying a yellow team alliance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenMorningstar Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 They are moving to brown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Optimus Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 They are moving to brown To join Meth? or counter Meth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingNeptune Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Does that mean Kashmir is no more? Are they staying a yellow team alliance? That's a shame, bu-bye Kashmir. I guess the war was just too much for them. :awesome: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles the Tyrant Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 "I literally don't know when I'm defeated" Quintus: People should know when they are conquered. Maximus: Would you, Quintus? Would I? Seems oddly fitting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duderonomy Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 To join Meth? or counter Meth? My guess is that a political struggle on brown will soon ensue. Politics is warfare by more efficient means. It'd be hilarious if the LN faction countered by moving to yellow. Sounds like both sides are still having fun. Otherwise the white peace would have been accepted no matter what form it took. I do not know enough about the war, or care to, but I expect SRA/Kashmir to start encouraging opposing nations to join a PoW AA. That's if they really think those nations are getting a raw deal. Losing membership might make the other side take notice and be more accepting of a peace deal. It also could cost Methrage a senate seat, if a requirement for a nation's surrender was switching to a more politically stable color. War is about morale and discipline, as well as about pure strength. Not every AA has strength as a primary goal, although I can't speculate on what Methrage/Sigrun expect to get out of this war. All in all, this war has been full of enough spin to make a milkshake, on both sides. I'm enjoying it thoroughly and wish all involved the casualties they desire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 War is about morale and discipline, as well as about pure strength. Not every AA has strength as a primary goal, although I can't speculate on what Methrage/Sigrun expect to get out of this war. Honestly we didn't start it and we didn't choose it. We'd have been happier to be enjoying the peace and working on our brown trade circles, but when attacked we fight, what is so strange about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duderonomy Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Honestly we didn't start it and we didn't choose it. We'd have been happier to be enjoying the peace and working on our brown trade circles, but when attacked we fight, what is so strange about that? If your goal is damage or setting a precedent, that's fine. Non Grata has burned strength for damage and relationships before, because that is what we value. Just don't expect me to believe your goal is peace when it has been offered to you. Making your case is fine. Wanting to burn your enemy is fine. Insulting my intelligence is not. Making me doubt your intelligence or sincerity is not. Own up to your goals. Celebrate them. Don't misrepresent them. Surrender is a small-minded word for rulers who value pride over results. I don't respect anyone who values it on either side. Actions speak louder than words. Smart AAs check the scoreboard, not the propaganda. I'm perfectly fine with MI burning if you and Hitchcock are. Hitchcock thinks he has a better idea of Non Grata's interests than we do. He's welcome to keep sharing them, while he sits at ZI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murtibing Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 All in all, this war has been full of enough spin to make a milkshake, on both sides. Could you present any examples of spin on the part of SRA Coalition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted July 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 My guess is that a political struggle on brown will soon ensue. Politics is warfare by more efficient means. It'd be hilarious if the LN faction countered by moving to yellow. Sounds like both sides are still having fun. Otherwise the white peace would have been accepted no matter what form it took. I do not know enough about the war, or care to, but I expect SRA/Kashmir to start encouraging opposing nations to join a PoW AA. That's if they really think those nations are getting a raw deal. Losing membership might make the other side take notice and be more accepting of a peace deal. It also could cost Methrage a senate seat, if a requirement for a nation's surrender was switching to a more politically stable color. War is about morale and discipline, as well as about pure strength. Not every AA has strength as a primary goal, although I can't speculate on what Methrage/Sigrun expect to get out of this war. All in all, this war has been full of enough spin to make a milkshake, on both sides. I'm enjoying it thoroughly and wish all involved the casualties they desire. The reason we are at war with SRA goes back further than Monster Inc or Kashmir being involved, which was SRA attacking us while we were at war with several other alliances. I've been consistently outdamaging almost everyone I fight and none who were fighting me when SRA attacked were beating me. SRA and Kashmir haven't shown themselves capable either. We've gotten used to long wars by now. The whole time I was fighting III% I didn't even have trades due to sanctions, but was still outdamaging them heavily. In the most recent wars by Kashmir and SRA on me, I'm outdamaging them heavily still. SRA is more stubborn than the others we were fighting when they attacked, but haven't been any closer to beating us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the rebel Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Could you present any examples of spin on the part of SRA Coalition? Dreamweaver being an unsupported rogue and it not being state sanctioned. Lots of words to spining it as that, but actions of remaining a member of the alliance spoke louder than the spin. But of course that's an example from the start of the war and you might not be thinking that far back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Dreamweaver being an unsupported rogue and it not being state sanctioned. Lots of words to spining it as that, but actions of remaining a member of the alliance spoke louder than the spin. That's the big lie around which their entire campaign is built. Or at least that's the one that's on the surface for everyone to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freelancer Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 . The whole time I was fighting III% I didn't even have trades due to sanctions, but was still outdamaging them heavily. In the most recent wars by Kashmir and SRA on me, I'm outdamaging them heavily still. SRA is more stubborn than the others we were fighting when they attacked, but haven't been any closer to beating us. I sure hope you could, having every advantage ("wonder") this world has gives you that god complex doesn't it? The reality, the god tier kicked the shit out of you and you ran away so bloodied, battered and humiliated that now you think it's all cool being a bully on the elementary school playground. 3 kinds of people in my world. Wolves, Sheep and Sheep Dogs. Your colors were exposed long before SRA & Kashmir got involved. Again, look up the words humility, take a good personal inventory of everything this so called conflict has accomplished for you, when it's all said and done with and if your honest with yourself you'll realize you're a cross genetic mutated hybrid with rabies that needs to be put down. When the rest of the world see's that and the back room boys start doing there thing, it will be just matter of time, This all begins and ends with you, swallow that pride and do what's best for you & your comrades, not because "you and sig" can wage a long battle that in the end no one wins but because it's the right move in grand scheme off things. Lets face it if this was a real world exercise you'd be dead 20 times over and no amount of hubris would be stopping that Thomas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duderonomy Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) Could you present any examples of spin on the part of SRA Coalition? I'm seeing a lot of rhetoric about coalitions being defeated and not a lot of numbers. I'm a numbers guy. Plus I'm lazy. Can I see a lot more damage taken vs. inflicted totals, please? Or indications that nations have gone into bill-lock? It sounds like Monster's Inc. is in trouble, since both sides agree on that. However, Lord Hitchcock is continuing the fight, which is admirable no matter what I think about him personally. Don't know enough about his AA, but I know fighting at 1000 infra can be a lot of fun if you have enough aid. Nuking newbies is a hobby that I will miss. As for all of this fighting over a simple word, again, I'm not a guy that puts a lot of stock in words alone. This has turned into the "War of the Word" and neither side wants to back down. Surrender is meaningless. Damage totals and warchests are everything. Here, let's examine the word a little bit. Let's do an experiment. "I, Duderonomy, hereby surrender to Emperor Junka and his wacky tobacky." Hmm. Not a lot seems to have changed. Let's try something else. "I, Duderonomy, hereby declare white peace with Emperor Junka and his wacky tobacky." Nope. SNX has still lost 3.5 mill NS and the only guy I actually fought still lost thousands of infra, went into bill-lock, and is now scraping by on techdeals with no money to rebuild. I'll be back at 4999 infra at the next collect (and only then because I'm a cheapskate). SNX has no leverage against me and anyone who checks the numbers knows it. Not a word that matters one way or the other. If SRA/Kashmir thinks they are winning, then offer terms and fight if they are refused. If the LN/CA coalition thinks they can win but aren't satisfied, then keep fighting. It'll all come out when nations go into bill-lock. But fighting over a word does not garner my respect. Fighting to win, does. Edited July 23, 2015 by Duderonomy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) Again, look up the words humility, take a good personal inventory of everything this so called conflict has accomplished for you, when it's all said and done with and if your honest with yourself you'll realize you're a cross genetic mutated hybrid with rabies that needs to be put down. Nice rant but no connection to reality. We didnt start this fight. We are only defending ourselves. Perhaps Methrage *should* try to be a little more humble but his point is good and true. Those who attacked us thinking we could be bullied miscalculated badly. And they are paying the price. Amazing how many people you can really offend by daring to defend yourself and your allies around here. For the moment at least I'll resist the temptation to speculate on what might cause such a malfunction. Edited July 23, 2015 by Sigrun Vapneir Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted July 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 I'm seeing a lot of rhetoric about coalitions being defeated and not a lot of numbers. I'm a numbers guy. Plus I'm lazy. Can I see a lot more damage taken vs. inflicted totals, please? Or indications that nations have gone into bill-lock? It sounds like Monster's Inc. is in trouble, since both sides agree on that. However, Lord Hitchcock is continuing the fight, which is admirable no matter what I think about him personally. Don't know enough about his AA, but I know fighting at 1000 infra can be a lot of fun if you have enough aid. Nuking newbies is a hobby that I will miss. As for all of this fighting over a simple word, again, I'm not a guy that puts a lot of stock in words alone. This has turned into the "War of the Word" and neither side wants to back down. Surrender is meaningless. Damage totals and warchests are everything. Here, let's examine the word a little bit. Let's do an experiment. "I, Duderonomy, hereby surrender to Emperor Junka and his wacky tobacky." Hmm. Not a lot seems to have changed. Let's try something else. "I, Duderonomy, hereby declare white peace with Emperor Junka and his wacky tobacky." Nope. SNX has still lost 3.5 mill NS and the only guy I actually fought still lost thousands of infra, went into bill-lock, and is now scraping by on techdeals with no money to rebuild. I'll be back at 4999 infra at the next collect (and only then because I'm a cheapskate). SNX has no leverage against me and anyone who checks the numbers knows it. Not a word that matters one way or the other. If SRA/Kashmir thinks they are winning, then offer terms and fight if they are refused. If the LN/CA coalition thinks they can win but aren't satisfied, then keep fighting. It'll all come out when nations go into bill-lock. But fighting over a word does not garner my respect. Fighting to win, does. For me white peace is like a win, since I usually white peace everything regardless of how much I'm winning. I let the damage speak for itself, since like you I care more about damage. So of course we're fighting to win, we do not consider losing a real option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurnipCruncher Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 For me white peace is like a win, since I usually white peace everything regardless of how much I'm winning. I let the damage speak for itself, since like you I care more about damage. So of course we're fighting to win, we do not consider losing a real option. Then take the offer and let those who have fought hard for your side get their breath back. You can still go at each other about who started what and damage stats without the war continuing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted July 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) Then take the offer and let those who have fought hard for your side get their breath back. You can still go at each other about who started what and damage stats without the war continuing. The war with Kashmir and LN has just begun. Already I'm winning both my wars they declared on me, as well as against the SRA nation on me. I'm not the only one fighting who is winning most of their battles or who doesn't think surrender should be an option. Those at ZI can't be bill locked, since bills are almost nothing at ZI. They can back collect from ZI and make a big infra jump with some aid if they sit there. So them still being at war isn't causing them extra destruction. Monsters Inc already has had almost everything destroyed by Kashmir they had to lose, they might as well wait it out as Kashmir and SRA lose more trying to win. After the war we can all rebuild, but there is no need to surrender against someone losing against you because some nations have been ZIed. Edited July 23, 2015 by Methrage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) CA has made it very clear that we consider white peace the only possible outcome here. We will not ask for or accept anything more from our opponents, nor will we give them any more. I don't see peace as having anything to do with 'winning' or 'losing' it just means both sides recognize that there's no profit in continuing to fight. IF SRA were pursuing some sort of political goal here that they had some chance of accomplishing, then it would make sense for them to continue, but they are not. It seems their only goal is to cause us to bow to them, and we just dont swing that way. It'll all come out when nations go into bill-lock. http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=407151 He had $131,254 on hand on the 17th and does not appear to have logged in since. TO: Dre4mwe4ver | FROM: Sigrun Vapneir TYPE: Defeat Alert | DATE: 7/21/2015 4:17:51 AM Your nation has been defeated in battle. You do not have enough troops to defend your nation and your government has been thrown into Anarchy. You have lost all of your tanks, 10 spies, 4.44 infrastructure has been destroyed, 20.24 technology was lost and $5,345.37 of your money reserves was destroyed due to the invasion and resulting riots. What troops you did have deployed have also been returned home. You can do the math I am just going to eyeball it and say he's very broke. I almost feel bad for him, but he's the one that attacked first, so it's fitting he's the first one to hard bill-lock. http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=469405 I genuinely feel bad when I hit this one. May not be bill-locked yet but he's right on the knifes edge. His damage ratio against CA so far is right about 19.5:1 in our favor, and Pulisher has him for the next week. http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=454583 This one has escaped bill lock twice. Has received 90million in aid so far, got out of it the first time with all slots full of aid, got out of the second time because I felt so bad I skipped attacks when I should not have. Still has taken a heavy beating and no money, in PM and staying there if our opponents have any sense at all. That makes three I think I will stop there rather than continue and give our opponents too much information for free. But you can also look at it the other way, who do they have in our range that is not at least halfway shredded? They got one nation. With an AA seniority of 1 day. Edited July 23, 2015 by Sigrun Vapneir Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duderonomy Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Ah, now this is what we should be talking about, not misunderstood peace terms. I look forward to the SRA/Kashmir rebuttal because I am an awful person who loves casualty talk. :popcorn: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted July 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 That's 3 out of the 7 real SRA members above my range Sigrun mentioned. Once Smurth and Walsh's war chests run out it, it will likely be over unless they want to keep fighting on aid. They have more lose to by continuing than us and are the ones who will have a harder time rebuilding the longer this stretches out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts