uaciaut Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 I think "go the hell" responses were more driven by pure envy and bitterness of some here which tends to show in light of our success. And it makes it that much sweater. Errr, why would i be envious of you reaching 1 mil tech? Again, I mean no offense to Gramlins. My point is simply that we're different types of alliances and it does not make sense to compare us by the same metrics. Bilrow's comparison is the closest i'd find to a possible one (top NPO 118 nations etc). But yeah you're right on that one. Also thread delivers. Out of curiosity though, has the influx of tech in NPO ever been as high as post-MK war. Now the best way to compare is to probably see over what period of time the reps were made, multiply that with by 1.5 (since if you would have paid for all the tech as one slot deals all slots would have been occupied for 30 days at a time instead of 20) and see how much tech you got in that period of time. I'm really curious how it is compared to the ammount MK paid to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Frankly, the tech means very little in light of the rest of your existence. I'm liking the bitter jealousy in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTTofAK Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) And you have no Moldavi or Sponge to negotiate for you. If you think that the Orders survived for any other reason but the skill of our negotiations you're deluding yourself. Had Chris Kaos had his way there would be no NPO now. Yeah we know, spongenations etc etc etc. Edited March 23, 2009 by GTTofAK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morte Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 No, they underestimated us. They saw us as weak, and they were wrong. Not in GW1 and certainly not in the later conflicts were you viewed as weak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 I'm liking the bitter jealousy in this thread. My actions are purely motivated by jealousy for Pacifica's delicious technology. Someone, please, kill me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Yeah we know, spongenations etc etc etc. Your ignorance of your own alliance's history explains a lot of the things you say, actually. You probably wouldn't be so sycophantic if you take a step back and see how NPO has treated those it owes the most to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTTofAK Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Your ignorance of your own alliance's history explains a lot of the things you say, actually. You probably wouldn't be so sycophantic if you take a step back and see how NPO has treated those it owes the most to. I didn't know it was possible to be on a cross and a high horse at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mussolandia Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) I think "go the hell" responses were more driven by pure envy and bitterness of some here which tends to show in light of our success. And it makes it that much sweater. Or maybe it's just pure hatred, like we had for LUE. It's a two way street. EDIT: the analogy sucks, btw. Not because it's wrong (which it is), but because they're meant to be simple. Edited March 23, 2009 by Mussolandia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 I didn't know it was possible to be on a cross and a high horse at the same time. If GOONS really was going to hit NPO, then Sponge did you all a huge favor. Take that as you will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTTofAK Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 (edited) Getting back to the point that the NPO would be destroyed. Its wishful thinking by those who have no understanding of the actual mechanics of war. Its seems that people likes sponge and Mogar think that everything is relative. That there is no difference between now and 2 years ago. What happened then can happen now. But that is a pipe dream. The mechanics of war are not relative they are in fact quite static. You may think that killing the NPO is like killing FAN. The NPO is a 22 million NS alliance. Killing it off is not the same as killing off 7 million NS FAN. Its 3 times as hard. Killing off the 7 million NS(I'm guessing) FAN was a brutal drag out fight and required the most dedicated soldiers. While the Vox zealots my be all for it what they want is for others to do it for them and no one has the stomach for that task. The state of affairs is that given the mechanics of war unless you can cause the alliance to break through internal strife there is no way you can destroy any of the top alliances. It is simply too hard and daunting of a task. And that is the reality. Edited March 24, 2009 by GTTofAK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homura Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 I didn't know it was possible to be on a cross and a high horse at the same time. Oh come on now, Sponge and Ivan did some pretty great stuff once upon a time. OOC: I seriously loled though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 The correct word you're looking for is "sweeter". :eng101: OOC: Thank you for the correction. Indeed I do tend to make mistakes in my English, more often when I am in a hurry. Was just taking off to work. Part time, dealer at poker tournaments. Its a sweet little job. IC: Look's like someone's still hurting from having their illusion of superior military efficiency and stigma against nukes beaten into dust by an alliance they'd thought they could get another easy tech raid out of. Now, that would be rather silly of me seeing how it all went down in the end, would it. Pretty good for us that is. Do not know about what I am suppose to feel hurt about from that war, honestly. Also, funny how you recognized yourself in my post, didn't named anybody. I did use the word "some" also clearly meaning I didn't thought that about all that made a response here. Regardless Dwarf Warrior of Belegost, as tamerlane wisely reminded you I did take a moment to thank our foreign sources which also contributed. As such I thanked you for contributing your little drop by name even, although some pointed out that may come across as condescending. You really can not please them all, now can you. tamerlane is smart like that, you can tell he was once in Order you should listen to him. Or maybe it's just pure hatred, like we had for LUE. It's a two way street. Could be,..it does make the world (OOC: game) more alive doesn't it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anenu Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Getting back to the point that the NPO would be destroyed. Its wishful thinking by those who have no understanding of the actual mechanics of war. Its seems that people likes sponge and Mogar think that everything is relative. That there is no difference between now and 2 years ago. What happened then can happen now. But that is a pipe dream. The mechanics of war are not relative they are in fact quite static. You may think that killing the NPO is like killing FAN. The NPO is a 22 million NS alliance. Killing it off is not the same as killing off 7 million NS FAN. Its 3 times as hard. Killing off the 7 million NS(I'm guessing) FAN was a brutal drag out fight and required the most dedicated soldiers. While the Vox zealots my be all for it what they want is for others to do it for them and no one has the stomach for that task. The state of affairs is that given the mechanics of war unless you can cause the alliance to break through internal strife there is no way you can destroy any of the top alliances. It is simply too hard and daunting of a task. And that is the reality. With the exception of the fact that when FAN was destroyed it was over a year ago when NPO was according to the 1st page of the Amazing Sanction Race at 49.02 which is slightly more than Sparta who is at 12 million NS now. So relatively to the time destroying NPO or any alliance that had 1 year of prosperous growth would be as hard as killing the alliance 1 year ago. So relatively speaking the mechanics of war are in fact the same, had 1 year ago the top 5 nations with the exception of NPO attacked NPO the same thing would happen as if it happened to day. Its not a matter of how much stronger you got but more of a matter of how much stronger others have grown relative to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Now, that would be rather silly of me seeing how it all went down in the end, would it. Pretty good for us that is. Do not know about what I am suppose to feel hurt about from that war, honestly. Also, funny how you recognized yourself in my post, didn't named anybody. I did use the word "some" also clearly meaning I didn't thought that about all that made a response here. Regardless Dwarf Warrior of Belegost, as tamerlane wisely reminded you I did take a moment to thank our foreign sources which also contributed. As such I thanked you for contributing your little drop by name even, although some pointed out that may come across as condescending. You really can not please them all, now can you. tamerlane is smart like that, you can tell he was once in Order you should listen to him. Pyrrhic victory Though I suppose the recognition of our contribution should be hedged a little, since more than half of it was just making up for the tech destroyed during the war. You probably came up about even on tech actually, since the slots being used for incoming tech could have been buying tech normally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTTofAK Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 (edited) With the exception of the fact that when FAN was destroyed it was over a year ago when NPO was according to the 1st page of the Amazing Sanction Race at 49.02 which is slightly more than Sparta who is at 12 million NS now. So relatively to the time destroying NPO or any alliance that had 1 year of prosperous growth would be as hard as killing the alliance 1 year ago. So relatively speaking the mechanics of war are in fact the same, had 1 year ago the top 5 nations with the exception of NPO attacked NPO the same thing would happen as if it happened to day. Its not a matter of how much stronger you got but more of a matter of how much stronger others have grown relative to you. Uh no. The nations size means nothing. The mechanics of war are not relative. Just because you are 3 times as large you do not do 3 times the damage. Wars stop being relative very very early in a nations growth. People need to stop living in the past. The notion that any alliance or coalition of alliances can bare the task of completely destroying one of the major alliances is folly. You are living in the past if you think you can do it. Edited March 24, 2009 by GTTofAK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Uh no. The nations size means nothing. The mechanics of war are not relative. Just because you are 3 times as large you do not do 3 times the damage. Wars stop being relative very very early in a nations growth.People need to stop living in the past. you might want to read up on how the war system works, getting nuked by Syzygy will be a hell of alot worse than getting nuked by me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trout Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Oh happy days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 (edited) Pyrrhic victory I am fascinated by this historical judgment of that war, seeing the end result and the fact you could have easily now been in a FAN situation or disbanded right now as we speak if not by our good will, but honestly I have already noticed that you have some strong illusions about that war and I really do not see anything changing by further debate. Keep the posture, dwarf warrior, its cute. Though I suppose the recognition of our contribution should be hedged a little, since more than half of it was just making up for the tech destroyed during the war. You probably came up about even on tech actually, since the slots being used for incoming tech could have been buying tech normally. Well, thats why its called reparation I guess. Nulling your damage, getting back on track as nothing happened, not really the case for you but somebody gotta loose...sweet "Pyrrhic victory" if I may say so. You and your sympathizers went into this thread calling out Mk, so in a good manner which I posses I also thanked you as well. Well if you now say its not due, then you people are really sending out some mixed messages lawl. Anyway, dwarf, to keep this on topic Ill just end this posturing game here I guess. In regards to it, you can be kept warm at night by your dreams of our Pyrrhic victory over you and I will be kept warm by NPO's 22,053,822 NS and 1,003,594 tech levels. Everybody wins that way and isn't that just great. Edited March 24, 2009 by Branimir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTTofAK Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 (edited) you might want to read up on how the war system works, getting nuked by Syzygy will be a hell of alot worse than getting nuked by me. How did I know that was coming. Its not the same. I didn't say it was purely static. However, it is close enough to static that even with the added damage of the rare tech heavy nation like Syz it is no where near the growth of the nations. It is not a relative or anywhere close. Its far more static than it is relative. You are dreaming if you think for one second that anyone can through war alone destroy on the top alliances. That phase has passed. It passed about a year ago. And thats completely forgetting the part that those who are tech heavy enough to do some descent damage would also be the first to bail. It cant be done. You can threaten it. You can dream. And you can continue to dream but that age has past. I know how hard it was to chip through fan. The notion anyone can stomach what it takes to destroy a 22 million NS alliances is laughable. Edited March 24, 2009 by GTTofAK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 Uh no. The nations size means nothing. The mechanics of war are not relative. Just because you are 3 times as large you do not do 3 times the damage. Wars stop being relative very very early in a nations growth.People need to stop living in the past. The notion that any alliance or coalition of alliances can bare the task of completely destroying one of the major alliances is folly. You are living in the past if you think you can do it. Um, NpO? Granted they have recovered very nicely, but they could have been beaten to total destruction or FANlike status. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 How did I know that was coming. Its not the same. I didn't say it was purely static. However, it is close enough to static that even with the added damage of the rare tech heavy nation like Syz it is no where near the growth of the nations. It is not a relative or anywhere close. Its far more static than it is relative. You are dreaming if you think for one second that anyone can through war alone destroy on the top alliances. That phase has passed. It passed about a year ago.And thats completely forgetting the part that those who are tech heavy enough to do some descent damage would also be the first to bail. It cant be done. You can threaten it. You can dream. And you can continue to dream but that age has past. I know how hard it was to chip through fan. The notion anyone can stomach what it takes to destroy a 22 million NS alliances is laughable. FAN had a different culture than NPO has, NPO has gone so long without losing a war, you really think you'd keep 100% of your membership after a few weeks of gangbanging? even NpO lost about half their membership, I'd expect NPO to lose more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OPArsenal Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 The NPO has 1,000,000 tech. And nothing of value was lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 I am fascinated by this historical judgment of that war, seeing the end result and the fact you could have easily now been in a FAN situation or disbanded right now as we speak if not by our good will, but honestly I have already noticed that you have some strong illusions about that war and I really do not see anything changing by further debate. Keep the posture, dwarf warrior, its cute. Where we could have been makes no difference on if it was a pyrrhic victory for you or not. I know we lost, but I also no that you lost quite a bit as well and got very little for your victory. (OOC)All the defenders of the Alamo died too.(/OOC) But keep up your delusions. I'm sure you also think that NPO won GW1. Well, thats why its called reparation I guess. Nulling your damage, getting back on track as nothing happened, not really the case for you but somebody gotta loose...sweet "Pyrrhic victory" if I may say so. Congrats, you broke even on one stat. The tens of billions in lost infra was a more permanant one. You and your sympathizers went into this thread calling out Mk, so in a good manner which I posses I also thanked you as well. Well if you now say its not due, then you people are really sending out some mixed messages lawl. Anyway, dwarf, to keep this on topic Ill just end this posturing game here I guess. In regards to it, you can be kept warm at night by your dreams of our Pyrrhic victory over you and I will be kept warm by NPO's 22,053,822 NS and 1,003,594 tech levels. Everybody wins that way and isn't that just great. I was helping you out actually by pointing out that you really did do it yourself more than people give you credit for. But hey if you don't want the help. One million tech is a very nice accomplishment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 I know we lost, but I also no that you lost quite a bit as well and got very little for your victory. We gotten beaten MK and lost small amount of strength in relations to our size. Thats something, I know you all felt it was something Congrats, you broke even on one stat. The tens of billions in lost infra was a more permanant one. And you did not take any damage in that war, right? In war you receive damage, point is though, to win over your opponent, destroy his military capabilities and to dictate peace after. Check, check, check. I was helping you out actually by pointing out that you really did do it yourself more than people give you credit for. But hey if you don't want the help. One million tech is a very nice accomplishment. If you believe I would need help in pointing out how your part in our success is of at best, minor value, then lol. Its rather obvious like that. Still, does not mean I can not be nice to you and you to me. Also thank you, and yes I do suck at fallowing my own rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 We gotten beaten MK and lost small amount of strength in relations to our size. Thats something, I know you all felt it was something And you did not take any damage in that war, right? In war you receive damage, point is though, to win over your opponent, destroy his military capabilities and to dictate peace after. Check, check, check. The point is to come out ahead over potential rivals. Since we were always an artificial rival and have recovered nicely, that didn't happen. The losses might have been worthwhile if you were taking out someone like FAN who was a big rival and threat to you and so you gained in relative power, but you didn't. You lost relative power. Our military reputation increased significantly while yours at best didn't fall (I know we "lost" but there's a lot more to it than that even if you pretend otherwise). Your stigma against nuclear weapons largely fell apart (we have our terms, but look at other alliances like NpO). You get to put up another chalk mark on the column of wars you won against someone you outnumbered 5-1, but that's about it. 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.