Ogaden Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 (edited) I have been analyzing the existing structure as well as the opposition to the existing structure and the conflicts between the existing structure and it's aforementioned opponents and it really comes down to the desire of many to say whatever they want and do whatever they want to whomever they want, and those opposed to this brand of anarchy in general or at least when it comes to their own alliance. Both sides to this debate have their benefits and drawbacks. While those fighting for law and order such as my alliance the NPO tend to be much better organized than our opponents, and therefore have strong economic and military structures in which to grow and fight, those favoring freedom and liberty tend to be able to recruit new members more successfully, and have fewer problems with discipline, but cannot grow as quickly or fight as effectively due to the lack of structure. It is my belief that the "free" alliances will always grow very quickly, but are inevitably doomed to fall before the "ordered" alliances. Edited March 8, 2009 by James Dahl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margrave Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 It is not so much that I disagree with you. It is more that I find your argument lacking in the "human element". While one can make the abstract argument that the present spirit of conflict by what is essentially a non-power entity and a powerful one is a battle between order and chaos, you must also realize the human element in this. Personal vendetta's, blood feuds, beliefs and ideas about the way the order of things should be...all these feed the fire. This includes those who, not speaking in public against the "Order", nurse the secret fires of revolution in their heart, and guide their alliances to that end. Lesson: The New Pacific Order must at all times maintain the mentality of sudden, immanent warfare. It can emerge from any sector, and the possible consequences could be its very end. Thus, whatever is required in order to protect Pacifica from that fate is a virtue inasmuch as the action protects Pacifica*. *This applies to all alliances; the highest virtue being to safeguard and advance one's own members, and the greatest evil being destruction and defeat. Any alliance has the ultimate responsibility to safeguard itself against enemies, and in this case Pacifica has many, both public and private. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theArrowheadian Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Do yourself a favor and skip the OP and read this because it sums it up. The stronger willed always prevail. I feel like some great dictator lived by that mentality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 You're right, of course. The point you're missing is that people who play in "freedom" alliances do so because they value such above "winning". This is simply a matter of opinion, and they are free to make that choice. How circular. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margrave Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Do yourself a favor and skip the OP and read this because it sums it up. The stronger willed always prevail. I feel like some great dictator lived by that mentality. One: Dear God, RnR is still around, that's amazing. Two: the correct answer is this: The stronger Will will always prevail. The one that is more dedicated will eventually triumph. Only history will tell us which side it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Before you start telling us about the state of the world, try to live in it first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margrave Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Before you start telling us about the state of the world, try to live in it first. that's somewhat generic. Of course he's experiencing things differently from the relative safety of Pacifica, but then, who is to say that safety isn't ultimately illusory? He sees the same world, and I'm relatively convinced that most people, regardless of their alliance, can view a subject without a great deal of bias. There are always those few retards that ruin that argument, but his experiences and ideals are not made invalid by his diplomatic immunity/safety from outside dangers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted March 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 (edited) that's somewhat generic. Of course he's experiencing things differently from the relative safety of Pacifica, but then, who is to say that safety isn't ultimately illusory? He sees the same world, and I'm relatively convinced that most people, regardless of their alliance, can view a subject without a great deal of bias. There are always those few retards that ruin that argument, but his experiences and ideals are not made invalid by his diplomatic immunity/safety from outside dangers. Being in the lower echelons of the NPO is not a safe place to be, due to FAN. I fought FAN nations for most of my first month in NPO. Them and also Vox Populi and lately Jarheads makes newbies to NPO get a heck of a lot of combat time. The only breaks in fighting I've had for the last 2 months I spent rebuilding my warchest for the next series of wars. Edited March 8, 2009 by James Dahl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margrave Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Being in the lower echelons of the NPO is not a safe place to be, due to FAN. I fought FAN nations for most of my first month in NPO. But you have the guarantee of victory; at least in the present system, and guarantee of aid and restoration. You know you can't lose any fight you get into as long as its within alliance parameters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 his experiences and ideals are not made invalid by his diplomatic immunity/safety from outside dangers. I agree. They're not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margrave Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 I agree. They're not. So tonight is generic, vague statements night? Cool. Let me try: "The way...is not the way. You have to find the Way inside yourself." So...Internets? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theArrowheadian Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Being in the lower echelons of the NPO is not a safe place to be, due to FAN. I fought FAN nations for most of my first month in NPO. Them and also Vox Populi and lately Jarheads makes newbies to NPO get a heck of a lot of combat time.The only breaks in fighting I've had for the last 2 months I spent rebuilding my warchest for the next series of wars. So you're a victim of your alliance's own success? And do you have any insight on these next wars will be. One more thing by "wars" do you actually mean war or do you mean what has been going on for the past 9 months? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted March 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 But you have the guarantee of victory; at least in the present system, and guarantee of aid and restoration. You know you can't lose any fight you get into as long as its within alliance parameters. There are no guarantees of victory. Ever. NPO help each other, this is true, and we look out for each other, but you have no idea how many nations fight us on a daily basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted March 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 (edited) So you're a victim of your alliance's own success? And do you have any insight on these next wars will be. One more thing by "wars" do you actually mean war or do you mean what has been going on for the past 9 months? The lower echelons of NPO are the victims of the higher echelon's successes, but this is by and large a good thing. By the time an NPO nation is large enough to get involved in inter-alliance wars, they usually have several months worth of combat experience. What's been going on for the last 9 months is "low intensity" warfare, like in the jungles of Congo. If you think it's any less bloody and vicious than "high intensity" warfare, then I suggest you try it sometime. Edited March 8, 2009 by James Dahl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 (edited) Being in the lower echelons of the NPO is not a safe place to be, due to FAN. I fought FAN nations for most of my first month in NPO. Them and also Vox Populi and lately Jarheads makes newbies to NPO get a heck of a lot of combat time.The only breaks in fighting I've had for the last 2 months I spent rebuilding my warchest for the next series of wars. but you've yet to fight in a war where you didnt have back up or aid. There are no guarantees of victory. Ever.NPO help each other, this is true, and we look out for each other, but you have no idea how many nations fight us on a daily basis. with NPO, victory is assured simply because NPO has the most treaties and ns attached to said treaties, until that changes NPO will always win, and I see alot more Agressive Wars than defensive, not to mention your opponents are quite small at that point and 15 million can rebuild more than you'd lose, you've experienced war, yes, but you've yet to experience the losing end of war. What's been going on for the last 9 months is "low intensity" warfare, like in the jungles of Congo.If you think it's any less bloody and vicious than "high intensity" warfare, then I suggest you try it sometime. It is alot less bloody and vicious, I've experienced both, when you're getting hit with a nuke and losing 200 million worth of infra, land and tech, it hurts alot worse than getting nuked in the 10-20k range and losing 20 or 30 million worth of infra/land/tech, not to mention as I stated before, you always have 2 other people attacking the same single target you're facing, as opposed to being on your own against 3 or more opponents. Edited March 8, 2009 by Mogar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margrave Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 (edited) There are no guarantees of victory. Ever.NPO help each other, this is true, and we look out for each other, but you have no idea how many nations fight us on a daily basis. Because I didn't fight alongside NPO in every major conflict before the UJP War, and have no idea how war is/was conducted on the alliance level. I can read the war screen just as well as you can, and I do know how it feels to be a small nation under constant assault. Please don't assume ignorance from anyone, especially people who have stood by Pacifica and fought alongside its banners as long as I have. In NPO, victory is guaranteed, same as victory was guaranteed if you were in Initiative back in the day. It isn't as though you won't ever get aid or help from the organization. Edited March 8, 2009 by Margrave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacky Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Those favoring freedom and liberty tend to be able to recruit new members more successfully, and have fewer problems with discipline. I can see two reasons why you will be scolded for this post. Firstly, you admitted your opponents are inherently right and fight for freedom and liberty. And secondly you make mention to having problems with discipline at the same time as posting without (my assumption) having earned posting rights, or atleast having your topic reviewed. Thus proving a point you weren't supposed to make. Well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 (edited) There are no guarantees of victory. Ever.NPO help each other, this is true, and we look out for each other, but you have no idea how many nations fight us on a daily basis. In the real world, you are correct. In Planet Bob, there are clear defined rules of the universe that are known to everyone, and under those current rules it would take an incredibly organized and impossibly large force allied against Pacifica and allies. There does not exist such a force. In CN warfare, in the end it is all about the numbers. Pacifica has enough numbers by themselves and with their allies to be able to militarily defeat any enemy. There are few alliances capable of mounting a coordinated resistance against the NPO, and not many capable of launching coordinated military strikes on the receiving end of Pacifica and friends to cause more damage to Pacific than makes a conflict worthwile. So, in the current system, with the current rules in place, Pacifica is unstoppable. Its all about the numbers. I can see two reasons why you will be scolded for this post. Firstly, you admitted your opponents are inherently right and fight for freedom and liberty. And secondly you make mention to having problems with discipline at the same time as posting without (my assumption) having earned posting rights, or atleast having your topic reviewed. Thus proving a point you weren't supposed to make. Well done.When I was in the NPO you didn't have to do anything special to be "allowed" to post. I'm not aware of any "posting rights" you are referring to. Edited March 8, 2009 by Caliph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 So tonight is generic, vague statements night?Cool. Let me try: "The way...is not the way. You have to find the Way inside yourself." So...Internets? I apologize that I have not provided you with sufficient specificity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted March 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 (edited) but you've yet to fight in a war where you didnt have back up or aid.with NPO, victory is assured simply because NPO has the most treaties and ns attached to said treaties, until that changes NPO will always win, and I see alot more Agressive Wars than defensive, not to mention your opponents are quite small at that point and 15 million can rebuild more than you'd lose, you've experienced war, yes, but you've yet to experience the losing end of war. I have never been offered reconstruction aid, and I've only ever seen it given to NPO nations that were absolutely destroyed. I've been in brutal wars where it really would have helped as well. I'm sure that day will come eventually, when we fight a war that we lose. When that happens I'll know exactly how to fight a brutal guerrilla insurgency, thanks to FAN. There isn't just this massive entity called "the NPO", it's made up of individual nations. Sometimes people lose sight of that. Edited March 8, 2009 by James Dahl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margrave Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 Maybe you'll even be the target. I sincerely hope you do not represent the entirety of what the Academy is putting out these days. The NPO I know would never make such awkward, unreasonable threats to give their speech credence. You have failed to represent a solid point, and now you fail to represent the Pacifica that I have known and fought alongside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 It's easy to take things for granted when you have a near limitless supply of aid and support in comparison with your current enemy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted March 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 (edited) I sincerely hope you do not represent the entirety of what the Academy is putting out these days. The NPO I know would never make such awkward, unreasonable threats to give their speech credence. You have failed to represent a solid point, and now you fail to represent the Pacifica that I have known and fought alongside. Margrave, I wasn't making a threat, and I apologize if it was construed in such a way. I have removed the offending sentence, I realize it was a bit threateningly ambiguous. I was trying to make the point that I am prepared for the day that the NPO's fortunes are reversed. Edited March 8, 2009 by James Dahl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodrow Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 I have never been offered reconstruction aid, and I've only ever seen it given to NPO nations that were absolutely destroyed. You know very well where you should request aid. If you do not, feel free to PM me on the NPO boards and I'll help you through the process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margrave Posted March 8, 2009 Report Share Posted March 8, 2009 You know very well where you should request aid. If you do not, feel free to PM me on the NPO boards and I'll help you through the process. Exactly this. I remember when I got NPO aid through Initiative during/after GW3, I was kinda doubtful of someone in Pacifica insinuating they didn't have aid access. 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.