Disposal of Caustic Elements and Hazardous Materials

[Tevron]

5 minutes ago, rabonnobar said:

 

MONGOLS caused you guys plenty trouble and headache. In fact, someone (maybe you, but I don't recall) complained upthread about NG not helping with MONGOLS more. If they were handled with ease, the number one alliance in the game in a bloc with the 2nd, 5th, 6th, and 8th biggest alliances in the game and allied to a bloc with the 3rd, 4th, 11th, and 12th biggest alliances in the game (rankings as of this moment, I don't have historical rankings but I assume it was similar), with most of the non-disbanded and non-neutral remainder aligned with you in some fashion, should not be complaining about not receiving enough help from the mere (insert NG rank at the time here)th biggest alliance in the game. You had essentially the entire game against a small band of merry fellows and one (percentage-wise) small group of players in that "essentially the entire game" portion didn't participate enough (probably because they were busy trying to stir up conflicts worth a damn) and it was enough of an issue that you remembered and brought it up here.

 

I do not know MONGOLS' peak preparedness or whatever, but I am skeptical that the gap, if it exists at all, is of any meaningful size.

 

I think their point was that you're hypocrites and were bad allies, not that they couldn't handle it without your sorry bottoms. (You being NG)

Edited August 6, 2019 by Tevron
Clarity

[Maelstrom Vortex]

1 hour ago, Stewie said:

 

The OP explicitly says, EZI.

Blatant disinformation. I read the OP.. it gave a group rogue status. EZI was not specified.

C'mon Stewie.. at least make it a challenge to discredit you.

Everyone's slacking these days.. like me.. I can't remember the last time I changed my avatar and sig.... *goes to change his avatar...*

Edited August 6, 2019 by Maelstrom Vortex

[DeathAdder]

2 minutes ago, Tevron said:

 

I think their point was that you're hypocrites and were bad allies, not that they couldn't handle it without your sorry bottoms. (You being NG)

 

That about sums it up, yes.

[rabonnobar]

1 minute ago, Tevron said:

 

I think their point was that you're hypocrites and were bad allies, not that they couldn't handle it without your sorry bottoms. (You being NG)

 

Right, but one would only be a "bad ally" when failing to help someone who needs it, or when the aid was requested and not given. 

 

For the #1 alliance in the game, which had the assistance of the #2 alliance in the game and many many many others, to even request such aid is my point.

 

I was not in NG at the time nor was I ever in NG before a week ago, but just speaking for myself, if they were trying to stir up actual trouble (read: fun) instead of joining a coalition of several alliances constituting 500+ nations to curbstomp a grouping a tiny fraction of the coalition's size, then, eh...

 

NPO needing the help of a few dozen nations when it already had many hundreds proves MONGOLS' impact.

[DeathAdder]

4 minutes ago, rabonnobar said:

 

Right, but one would only be a "bad ally" when failing to help someone who needs it, or when the aid was requested and not given. 

 

For the #1 alliance in the game, which had the assistance of the #2 alliance in the game and many many many others, to even request such aid is my point.

 

I was not in NG at the time nor was I ever in NG before a week ago, but just speaking for myself, if they were trying to stir up actual trouble (read: fun) instead of joining a coalition of several alliances constituting 500+ nations to curbstomp a grouping a tiny fraction of the coalition's size, then, eh...

 

NPO needing the help of a few dozen nations when it already had many hundreds proves MONGOLS' impact.

 

To pretend roguery doesn't impact would be an asinine argument...

 

They're mechanically guaranteed to inflict more damage than they receive.

 

You kids are really bad at comprehension of simple mechanics.

Edited August 6, 2019 by DeathAdder

[rabonnobar]

2 minutes ago, DeathAdder said:

 

To pretend roguery doesn't impact would be an asinine argument...

 

They're mechanically guaranteed to inflict more damage than they receive.

 

You kids are really bad at comprehension of simple mechanics.

 

Of course I know that. I am directing that reasoning at various people in this thread minimizing the impact NG will have.

 

Thanks for proving my point.

[DeathAdder]

Uh, the amount of the people with massive WCs in MONGOLS, SPATR, etc vs. NG's one or two is what made the impact greater than what NGs will be..

[rabonnobar]

There have been several instances in this thread of folks in NPO and other power structure alliances essentially arguing against the very idea of war at all.

 

I ask this of those folks, and other folks in those alliances:

(1) Should wars be avoided when possible? Impossible meaning rogues, etc.

(2) Do you desire another war on this world between alliances?

(3) Do you think that another war on this world between alliances would be good or bad for this world?

 

Let's define NG as not-an-alliance, as I want you guys' perspective, and that seems to be the position of your coalition.

[rabonnobar]

1 minute ago, DeathAdder said:

Uh, the amount of the people with massive WCs in MONGOLS, SPATR, etc vs. NG's one or two is what made the impact greater than what NGs will be..

I don't pretend to have warchest data for other NGers or for MONGOLS and co, so I guess we'll have to see how it shakes out. I'm skeptical we'll be much less effective than those guys, overall, but we'll see.

[DeathAdder]

2 minutes ago, rabonnobar said:

I don't pretend to have warchest data for other NGers or for MONGOLS and co, so I guess we'll have to see how it shakes out. I'm skeptical we'll be much less effective than those guys, overall, but we'll see.

 

It takes a really long time to deflate a 12b+ WC that's dropped to the low tier of a singular nation, Rabb.

[rabonnobar]

5 minutes ago, DeathAdder said:

 

It takes a really long time to deflate a 12b+ WC that's dropped to the low tier of a singular nation, Rabb.

 

This will be fun, then.

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by rabonnobar

[DeathAdder]

15 minutes ago, rabonnobar said:

There have been several instances in this thread of folks in NPO and other power structure alliances essentially arguing against the very idea of war at all.

 

I ask this of those folks, and other folks in those alliances:

(1) Should wars be avoided when possible? Impossible meaning rogues, etc.

(2) Do you desire another war on this world between alliances?

(3) Do you think that another war on this world between alliances would be good or bad for this world?

 

Let's define NG as not-an-alliance, as I want you guys' perspective, and that seems to be the position of your coalition.

 

I (and I think most people) have argued against the community looking at NPO/IRON as crucial for their ability to war. That's a nonsense argument that is just their reluctance to want to lead a war effort.

 

I have argued against roguery as being harmful to the community.

 

I have argued against months/years long war as being harmful to the community.

 

2 minutes ago, rabonnobar said:

This will be fun, then.

 

Yep.

[Tevron]

22 minutes ago, rabonnobar said:

There have been several instances in this thread of folks in NPO and other power structure alliances essentially arguing against the very idea of war at all.

 

I ask this of those folks, and other folks in those alliances:

(1) Should wars be avoided when possible? Impossible meaning rogues, etc.

(2) Do you desire another war on this world between alliances?

(3) Do you think that another war on this world between alliances would be good or bad for this world?

 

Let's define NG as not-an-alliance, as I want you guys' perspective, and that seems to be the position of your coalition.

 

I don't think I've taken up these but they are good questions to ask:

 

(1) It depends on what your alliance stands for. GATO is supposed to be a supporter of peace, it's in our charter so I feel obligated to support it to some extent. It's part of the whole democracy thing.

 

(2 & 3) do you mean a global war? Deathadder is right that longer wars are worse for the game, but sadly it's usually the leadership of the enemy coalition who refuse to opt for a peace swiftly these days.... @Lord of Darkness or @Monster posted statistics at some point that showed that wars lead to the most deletions in the community. 

[King Cyan]

2 hours ago, DeathAdder said:

You will either surrender and give up your crusade against IRON "until our warchests run dry" to quote Caustic, or you will be bled dry and left to start from scratch.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems this time around IRON came knocking at the doors and gates of Non Grata first here.

[DeathAdder]

17 minutes ago, Tevron said:

 

I don't think I've taken up these but they are good questions to ask:

 

(1) It depends on what your alliance stands for. GATO is supposed to be a supporter of peace, it's in our charter so I feel obligated to support it to some extent. It's part of the whole democracy thing.

 

(2 & 3) do you mean a global war? Deathadder is right that longer wars are worse for the game, but sadly it's usually the leadership of the enemy coalition who refuse to opt for a peace swiftly these days.... @Lord of Darkness or @Monster posted statistics at some point that showed that wars lead to the most deletions in the community. 

 

Not to mention, the majority of this thread have openly acknowledged they're too lazy to log in and aid their alliance. Which naturally means they're too lazy to log in and trade efficiently. Which corresponds to having poor war readiness, which corresponds to other alliances needing to pick up the slack.

 

Then, of course, you have the ones whining "I haven't been in a war in <insert time here>!"

 

Whose fault is that?

 

Especially when Pacifica, prior to 2019, was in a permanent state of Open Warfare for three years.

 

I'm sure as hell not going to keep NPO in a perpetual state of war just so people can rarely pop around when they have nothing better to do, war for a while, and then go away. It is ludicrous.

[DeathAdder]

8 minutes ago, King Cyan said:

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems this time around IRON came knocking at the doors and gates of Non Grata first here.

 

I am still unsure why you think we should've given the benefit of the doubt that you were just blowing smoke out your ass.

 

Especially when that was literally your very first act upon 'disbanding' and going rogue when NG left Oculus.

 

But, of course, trolls will be trolls. 

 

You would never act on a pre-empt against someone you thought was a threat. Oh no. 

[Finster Baby]

1 hour ago, rabonnobar said:

 

This will be fun, then.

 

More than one MONGOL had that much.  12-18 months of constant war drained them.  It was a slog, but we've done it before, and we can do it again.

[HeroofTime55]

8 hours ago, DeathAdder said:

 

Actually, they chose it when they left Oculus to go rogue for a year and a half. And then reaffirmed it by threatening our ally with war until "their billions run dry"

 

You could always do something if you feel so strongly, HoT.

 

Too much work for you?

Oh, DeathAdder, you poor little failure.  I'll let you know why I'm here.  It's because NG hitting FTW was hilarious, and all of you detected fun being had, and decided you had to try and stop it.  This is proven in multiple posts in this thread, with a leak from Canik and White Chocolate openly professing that they want the world boring and war-free.  The only people driving people out are people with that attitude.  You are the ones who have killed this world and driven out more people than anyone going rogue could possibly dream of.  Besides having an admin who long ago stopped giving a &#33;@#&#036;, that's the second biggest reason for decline.  Boring, washed up nobodies and failed leaders who somehow found themselves next in line after everyone with balls or skill have left, and who want to hold on to spreadsheet stats above all else.  Long ago, this game was amazing, leaders were legendary in stature, we went to war and engaged in meaningful politics and it was glorious.  Nowadays, you have made not only war pointless, but politics itself pointless, because it's either tether yourself to the power structure or have no hope of a future.  The game is dead, and it is cowards and pixel-huggers like you who caused it.  We are below 3,000 nations because of cowards like you.

[King Cyan]

2 hours ago, DeathAdder said:

 

I am still unsure why you think we should've given the benefit of the doubt that you were just blowing smoke out your ass.

 

Seems you've got me confused for someone else there.

 

2 hours ago, DeathAdder said:

Especially when that was literally your very first act upon 'disbanding' and going rogue when NG left Oculus.

 

That war got peaced out IIRC.  I personally wasn't around Non Grata for that at the time here.   
I said "this time around," so I don't really know how that's relevant here now, unless that first war vs IRON is also supposed to be part of the CB here too somehow.  I'm here for Round 2 vs IRON now though! 

 

2 hours ago, DeathAdder said:

But, of course, trolls will be trolls.

 

You're free to think that, but if you at least choose to reply to a "troll," then it shouldn't be too hard to answer
their questions, right?  I don't think that question was too hard to answer either.

 

2 hours ago, DeathAdder said:

You would never act on a pre-empt against someone you thought was a threat. Oh no. 

Thinking and knowing are still two different things.

 

Clearly this whole thing is way, way more than some trumped up "poaching" charge.  Didn't Non Grata do way more for NPO pre-Oculus than help stop some microgues, if that's what's being implied?  Pretty messed up way to repay them, if you ask me; some people having disagreeable attitudes doesn't change that. 

 

Either way I'm down to spar you guys too!  I'm actually getting some decent fights from NPO, and that's way more than I can say for FTW.

Edited August 6, 2019 by King Cyan

[Lord of Darkness]

12 hours ago, Stewie said:

Good thing we're not rogues.

 

We're fabulous darling.

 

There is one... complication. You see, your Holy Pope has already ordained otherwise:

 

caustic 07/13/2019
Non Grata
We officially disbanded
But stuck together to rogue out as a crew
We've been on our terrorism binge for close to a year now
Still plenty in the tank
We raided SUN into the dirt, &#33;@#&#036; on TTK
IRON
Now FTW

 

2 minutes ago, HeroofTime55 said:

Oh, DeathAdder, you poor little failure.  I'll let you know why I'm here.  It's because NG hitting FTW was hilarious, and all of you detected fun being had, and decided you had to try and stop it.  This is proven in multiple posts in this thread, with a leak from Canik and White Chocolate openly professing that they want the world boring and war-free.  The only people driving people out are people with that attitude.  You are the ones who have killed this world and driven out more people than anyone going rogue could possibly dream of.  Besides having an admin who long ago stopped giving a &#33;@#&#036;, that's the second biggest reason for decline.  Boring, washed up nobodies and failed leaders who somehow found themselves next in line after everyone with balls or skill have left, and who want to hold on to spreadsheet stats above all else.  Long ago, this game was amazing, leaders were legendary in stature, we went to war and engaged in meaningful politics and it was glorious.  Nowadays, you have made not only war pointless, but politics itself pointless, because it's either tether yourself to the power structure or have no hope of a future.  The game is dead, and it is cowards and pixel-huggers like you who caused it.  We are below 3,000 nations because of cowards like you.

 

The consistent nation decline trend says otherwise.

 

[Lysergide]

On 8/3/2019 at 12:22 AM, DeathAdder said:

 

You never say hi anymore Lyser.  Our BSing back in the day was fun.

 

Sup?

 

How would I say hi, you don't exist on our Discord. You also seem to be drinking that kool-aid pretty hard in this thread.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

1 hour ago, Lord of Darkness said:

The consistent nation decline trend says otherwise.

 

 

And you have been at the top of the chain since the game's creation. Still a pretty valid correlation, your presence = decline

 

There does look to be a brief spike in July '09, funnily enough that's when the Karma War happened and forced you to adopt some humility in order to survive. That's long gone now.

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Johnny Apocalypse

[jerdge]

7 hours ago, DeathAdder said:

We don't have an EZI policy. Nor even PZI. We have a ZI/ZT/ZM policy when permawar is threatened against us/our allies.

Thank you.

 

 

7 hours ago, Stewie said:

The OP explicitly says, EZI.

Where? There's some rhetoric about stuff being burnt and salted, but that's just rhetoric.

 

 

6 hours ago, Stewie said:

Also, if that's all thats needed to get Oculus to blow their load I've got a new flag for the bloc

That's actually a cool concept. Pun intended, but it's really not bad.

 

 

6 hours ago, Keysariyt Hanssen said:

That wouldn't be effective. Dynamic IPs are commom, VPNs are cheap, and it's easy to get your hands on someone else's Wi-Fi. It would be no trouble at all for someone to return under a new identity without you being able to connect their IPs together.

Excuse me, I know that you probably didn't intend your comment to be dickish, but what you wrote is exactly the kind of crap that was used ages ago to try spin EZI policies so that the masses could more easily swallow them. Despite the scented varnish, they remained total crap.

A player isn't just an individual in the outside realm, it's someone with relationships and links in this world. Basically anyone that ever participated in CN (as it's meant to work) developed a social and political persona: effectively forcing them to hide their previous identity from all the friends and contacts they had is not fair. No other player should engage into that.

Moreover, claiming that people that don't go out of their way to scramble their Internet fingerprints in a game would or could deserve to be griefed by the enemies they had in any previous reincarnation is similarly silly. Players shouldn't be forced to do anything to be allowed to play the game, other players have no authority over them.

(Before the same old objections to my words are made, I clarify that, yes, it's wise not to give any personal details to strangers met on the internet; and yes, an alliance is justified in fighting against someone that rerolls to then again conspire against them. None of which is what I've been talking of.)

[Lord Hitchcock]

4 hours ago, Finster Baby said:

More than one MONGOL had that much.  12-18 months of constant war drained them.  It was a slog, but we've done it before, and we can do it again.

 

The mongol nation who had that much decided to stay up and their war chest drained- other members like Murtibing had that much too and dropped fast... and is still fighting in Cobra, with still a giant war chest.

 

A side note: If we were actually ‘rouges’, by the literal definition you keep claiming, then why haven’t we been sanctioned?

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Lord Hitchcock

[Tiberius]

7 hours ago, rabonnobar said:

 

MONGOLS caused you guys plenty trouble and headache. In fact, someone (maybe you, but I don't recall) complained upthread about NG not helping with MONGOLS more. If they were handled with ease, the number one alliance in the game in a bloc with the 2nd, 5th, 6th, and 8th biggest alliances in the game and allied to a bloc with the 3rd, 4th, 11th, and 12th biggest alliances in the game (rankings as of this moment, I don't have historical rankings but I assume it was similar), with most of the non-disbanded and non-neutral remainder aligned with you in some fashion, should not be complaining about not receiving enough help from the mere (insert NG rank at the time here)th biggest alliance in the game. You had essentially the entire game against a small band of merry fellows and one (percentage-wise) small group of players in that "essentially the entire game" portion didn't participate enough (probably because they were busy trying to stir up conflicts worth a damn) and it was enough of an issue that you remembered and brought it up here.

 

I do not know MONGOLS' peak preparedness or whatever, but I am skeptical that the gap, if it exists at all, is of any meaningful size.

Yes Mongols et al caused us issues because they were low tier fully wondered Nations with huge warchests and we had a handful of Nuke Nations in those tiers. We now have plentiful Nations designed to combat these type of Nations. I never said it was easy. What I did say is we dealt with them and wiped their warchests out in the majority of cases. My preparedness comment is of course pointing out NG only has one Nation who has a warchest even close to what Spatr/Mongols had. Yes, NG would have been of great assistance in grinding them out back then while instead they were moaning for more war.