How NPO lost the game

[In Spades]

Can't say that I completely agree with all of it, but there are some interesting points in that wall of text.

Good luck in the new digs.

[Commisar Gaunt]

NPO members aren't good at battle. I've fought them, and they are meh at best. Fighting 3v1, or 6v1 because they called all of their friends, however, is another story. So obviously it isn't NPO's fault, but the fault of the treaty web and the lack of ability for many alliances to follow through on the treaties they've been signing.

[Cortath]

So, let me sum up here:

Your thesis is: "NPO, do worse."

Your premise is: "NPO reduces war; I want war; NPO is bad."

Then you get war: "I have war; I will not fight."

Seems like you just defeated your premise, comrade.

[Ferrous]

@zigbigadorlou: Get off your lazy behind and contribute to your alliance. Seriously.

Let us take the meaning of an "alliance." As a friend of mine told me in a private conversation, an alliance is a group of individuals who help each other achieve their goals. The most fundamental goal of an alliance is to protect it's members (for most alliances, anyways), and in order to do that effectively, they need organization. Organization requires manpower, and manpower requires a little bit of work. It doesn't have to be a whole lot, but there needs to be some. That's just the most basic level of necessity for most alliances, or else they aren't alliances any more and just a chaotic horde.

It's one thing to not do work because you didn't volunteer. Not everyone who plays this game to be a leader or an organizer, but I believe that most players can contribute in some way. However, openly stating that you will not contribute because it's not "fun" doesn't exactly add to the game.

[bobjohnny]

Well i just lost the game. Because i thought of it.

*facepalm*

[zigbigadorlou]

Yes, there is a difference. The purpose of cybernations is not just to play a game like the term 'game' brings some specific defintion of rules to the table, such as those you propose. In fact, a geo-political simulator ought to be exactly what the name implies: a simulation. A simulation is conducted by the actions of its partaking members, and these members take it as a serious political system. How do you intend to argue this is inherently wrong or confused?

In any case, If you don't want to have fun with the game, that's your prerogative. Don't try to pull out semantics and topicality: it just muddles up the point. If you're going to try to disprove me, do it legitimately.

Well, he definately got the jist of what goes on there in his time in the alliance. Wasting your time though attempting to bring change to them. The NPO is what it is because the majority of the members like it as it is. It is what the NPO is about. Many of the players enjoy putting in the work and seeing what comes out of it.

Yes it may be like a part time job but they seem to think the reward is worth it so good on them for that. The NPO is what it is.

That is how the vocal people are. The NPO is what it is because the "lower class" just accepts what the uppers who desire the work's goals etc. as right.

Not only NPO, but also every single one of you, have just lost the game.

I think thats the point he's trying to make.

YES

I always disliked when a target didn't want to fight back. If that's your style, carry on, but remember, a defeat message is also a way of losing you know? I'm just saying...

[OOC]

Whatever game you play, it can essentially be classified as work. The term "work" is more of an IC term, meaning you play the game and have fun by working IC. When you kill something in a game it doesn't make you a murdered, or does it?

[/OOC]

Good grammar . But seriously, I'm not going to let you have a legitimate reason to attack me. I understand that I committed a crime and are paying for it, but I also know the moment that I press that big red button, I'm on the ZI list.

The daily alliance work can get pretty boring and monotonous wherever you go, Pacifica fails to be unique in that respect. Take some time off, and learn that you can enjoy yourself if you make it enjoyable.

Good luck with the NSO.

NSO declined me. And in that respect, I was making a general statement to the world.

Officially, you're correct jerdge, he's being attacked for leaving NPO during an active war.

jerdge nods

In fact:

1. The NPO drove a perfectly coordinated attack on his Nation, starting only five minutes after this thread was published, with a second wave less than ten minutes later, and a third attack just after update (to execute the stagger). I was told that the NPO machine is good, but I daresay that even them can't organize that in five minutes.
   
2. Mary the Fantabulous already explained that the NPO has been aware of his leave for some (unspecified) time (he is charged to have been ghosting/exploiting the NPO AA after having applied to another alliance).
   
3. I can't recall a single case of a Nation attacked by the NPO for any post in any OOC forum.
   
4. I can instead very well recall that the NPO is officially at war, and that they have a policy that forbids to leave during a war (unless authorized, but this wasn't obviously the case).
   

Yeah...someone just happened to stumble across his application, told us about it, and then when confronted about it, started a bunch of crap.

The thing is, as you said, we are at war. No one is allowed to leave unless authorized by Moo(which has recently happened, so its not impossible.)

The huge problem with zig, is just last night he gets on and insults leadership of the alliance. His attitude was not one that fit well into the NPO culture. Believe it or not... we don't just sit in the private chan thinking about !@#$ to troll. Josef Thorne maybe.. but not so much us anymore. Just the other day he played one of his "trolling" games where he decided to prove to everyone that $%&@ was ok. But yeah... *we* lost the game.

I think you're missing some things here. Quote from my application

"And before you allow me in, 2 things:

If you fail, I will leave. Passion > Peace.

And I still need to resign from the former alliance."

I did apply, but I made it specifically clear that I had no clearance to leave. I had not resigned yet

And seriously, if you think I can type up that wall of text within the less than 15 minutes between getting demoted and posting, you don't know me. I'd also like to point out that I was not confronted with it either. The first time I knew I had been demotes was when I tried to post OP on the NPO forums (which failed). If you'll notice, just as you said, my attitude is not one that fits the NPO. There was a reason why I left. I didn't fit. I understand that I was not allowed to leave, but that is hardly cause for ZI. Running from a war that I forgot existed MAY be cause for, you know, reps, maybe? ZI? A little out there. And the charge of "exploiting your AA" seems a bit sketchy when there was nothing to exploit and the delay came only because of the wall of text. I also find it interesting that other than the slight mention by Bilrow about "whats with you applying to NSO" thing, there was no talk of this. In fact this is the first direct contact from someone from NPO other than the scathing PM's that I got from my attackers.

[zigbigadorlou]

It's a little ironic, I think, that after a post about how NPO has lost the game, they immediately begin to cause you to lose the game. I appreciate little things like that.

Loathe them or love them, NPO and her rulers are very good at what they do. Have they gotten a few lucky breaks to get there? Absolutely, but then again everyone on top needs a little luck every now and then. Any alliance who eventually supplants them will need just as much luck and just as much talent. I've fought against them nearly as much as anyone remaining in this game, and I swear fighting Dilber is about as much fun as you can have in the game.

Sorry for that little tangent. Do I think NPO has won the game? No, absolutely not; this is a game that is constantly in a state of flux, being brought about by the dynamics and quirks of the personalities in charge of multiple alliances, as well as the convoluted backstage politics (which is, to be honest, the real bread-and-butter of CN) that keeps everyone around discussing when the next Great War will be. Then again, I don't think they're losing the game, either; while their situation is perhaps more tenuous than it was at the end of GW3 or the UJW due to their seemingly unstable allies across the game, they are still number 1 for a reason.

I do agree with you about fun, though. This is a game, and true "work", as we know it, isn't something that the majority of the 30,000 players are interested in. In every alliance, no matter how big or how small, there are a select few who do the vast majority of the work. NPO's pool is statistically much larger to draw on than everyone else's, especially considering they have many players who were working in their style of alliance for many years before Planet Bob was created.

Regardless, I'll end this little rant here. Good luck in CN.

Really you agree with me. They have achieved "victory" but have lost the ultimate goal of having fun with it. This applies directly (except for the combat section) to just about every other alliance. I'm not saying they aren't good at what they do, but being good at killing babies doesn't make you good.

So, let me sum up here:

Your thesis is: "NPO, do worse."

Your premise is: "NPO reduces war; I want war; NPO is bad."

Then you get war: "I have war; I will not fight."

Seems like you just defeated your premise, comrade.

Over simplifying makes everything better :lol:

But seriously: I'm not saying NPO should do worse, I'm saying they need to let everyone else be better. This "better" and "worse" seems to be confusing people seeing as we have different definitions, yours being the normal version, mine not. Also, its not inherently []war[], its conflict. And I'm not going to further risk ZI just so I can get some action.

@zigbigadorlou: Get off your lazy behind and contribute to your alliance. Seriously.

Let us take the meaning of an "alliance." As a friend of mine told me in a private conversation, an alliance is a group of individuals who help each other achieve their goals. The most fundamental goal of an alliance is to protect it's members (for most alliances, anyways), and in order to do that effectively, they need organization. Organization requires manpower, and manpower requires a little bit of work. It doesn't have to be a whole lot, but there needs to be some. That's just the most basic level of necessity for most alliances, or else they aren't alliances any more and just a chaotic horde.

It's one thing to not do work because you didn't volunteer. Not everyone who plays this game to be a leader or an organizer, but I believe that most players can contribute in some way. However, openly stating that you will not contribute because it's not "fun" doesn't exactly add to the game.

The first is secondary as I was trying to say. This is loyalty, which has no inherent value in this setting. It is a tool just as backstabbing is. Be loyal when it suits, kill when it suits. As I said, I'm not against work, I'm against unproductive work. If my effort led to some entertainment, I'd do it. But if it (specifically Factbooks) prevented entertainment, I'd decide not to do it. I did one fact book, true (very poorly), and it essentially was the first step away from NPO.

[Vladimir]

This thought, that one must work for greatness [...], is despicable.

What an inspiration.

[Loodoyaye II]

I find it very interesting that NPO is now so concerned about their members leaving while alliance is at war with Jarheads(!).

Since NPO is constantly at war with at least 1 alliance, I guess that those 945 members are stuck there forever now?

[Ogaden]

No u.

[WarMaster Kerr]

Well, he definately got the jist of what goes on there in his time in the alliance. Wasting your time though attempting to bring change to them. The NPO is what it is because the majority of the members like it as it is. It is what the NPO is about. Many of the players enjoy putting in the work and seeing what comes out of it.

Yes it may be like a part time job but they seem to think the reward is worth it so good on them for that. The NPO is what it is.---

That is how the vocal people are. The NPO is what it is because the "lower class" just accepts what the uppers who desire the work's goals etc. as right.

wrong, no one in the NPO jsut 'accepts,' there are many many ways to make your voice heard, you could have done a number of things such as propose a change which we wouldve voted on. let alone stating your case and requesting to be removed legally from the NPO. and isnt that the point of an alliance anyways? to NOT be rolled over in constant war? or is it just winning wars you want to do?

so you left because it was 'boring,'

let us know if you're having fun after everythings settled.

[joracy]

I find it very interesting that NPO is now so concerned about their members leaving while alliance is at war with Jarheads(!).

Since NPO is constantly at war with at least 1 alliance, I guess that those 945 members are stuck there forever now?

For some reason I feel like this has been covered before...

[zigbigadorlou]

wrong, no one in the NPO just 'accepts,' there are many many ways to make your voice heard, you could have done a number of things such as propose a change which we would've voted on. let alone stating your case and requesting to be removed legally from the NPO. and isnt that the point of an alliance anyways? to NOT be rolled over in constant war? or is it just winning wars you want to do?

so you left because it was 'boring,'

let us know if you're having fun after everythings settled.

Had I posted something similar to this, what would have happened?

Ejected

I did this the way I did for a reason.

I could have stated my case and asked for removal, but never before have I ever even thought to do that. In fact I've done the same thing with every other alliance that I've been in without complaints.

Furthermore, you, like most, miss the point of this. its not solely WAR, but the propagation, drama, and strife. War is but one means of which I focused on. The problem, as I stated, was the end not being reached.

If I wanted to, I could add the conquering of the Red team to this list. There is no intercolor drama because the NPO conquered it. They gained victory which made them lose. That is the theory at its heart.

[Lord of Destruction]

So... we lost because we did a good job?

That makes no sense.

[Mongrel]

Face it NPO you lost. zigbigadorlou keeps saying it so it MUST be true.

Now go ahead and admit your defeat so we can end this already.

[zigbigadorlou]

Face it NPO you lost. zigbigadorlou keeps saying it so it MUST be true.

Now go ahead and admit your defeat so we can end this already.

Go back to Sweden, you troll. The point is not to face that they (or anyone) lost, but to influence actions based upon that ideal.

[Jack Diorno]

Furthermore, you, like most, miss the point of this. its not solely WAR, but the propagation, drama, and strife. War is but one means of which I focused on. The problem, as I stated, was the end not being reached.

If I wanted to, I could add the conquering of the Red team to this list. There is no intercolor drama because the NPO conquered it. They gained victory which made them lose. That is the theory at its heart.

In my own eyes NPO has won so they won.

The other alliances that tie themselves to NPO with metal chains because NPO is the strongest are the alliances that have lost.

The mentality of; "NPO has won the game, I am now allied to them so therefore I just won the game". That, is losing.

[Greg23]

Did you just basically say that the there really is no "winning" in this game and that almost everything we do is a waste of time and boring.....wow thanks for that wonderful insight. Winning means number 1 and atm npo is number 1 and therefore they are currently winning...

[JayOvfEnnay]

So... we lost because we did a good job?

That makes no sense.

From what I can understand he's alluding to the fact that during the time that you did a good job, you ruined it with the constant revision of history and the banning of anyone intelligent or large enough to stand any chance at possibly undoing that "good job". If this is what he's thinking, he wouldn't be far off.

[Timitz]

I think that that is what he is getting at. I would argue that winning or losing is defined by the alliance in question.

[Lord of Destruction]

From what I can understand he's alluding to the fact that during the time that you did a good job, you ruined it with the constant revision of history and the banning of anyone intelligent or large enough to stand any chance at possibly undoing that "good job". If this is what he's thinking, he wouldn't be far off.

I think that's you putting your twist on it, not what he said.

[Fokker Aeroplanbau]

Glad to see someone on CN knows how to cobble a few paragraphs together and post them up. I don't see enough of that on a regular basis, that's for sure. Content wise; meh, don't really care.

[Woodrow]

Go back to Sweden, you troll. The point is not to face that they (or anyone) lost, but to influence actions based upon that ideal.

You see, this makes no sense to me. You pride yourself on being such a great troll, yet when someone allegedly trolls you, you get angry about it, and come back with remarks like that.

[WarMaster Kerr]

Had I posted something similar to this, what would have happened?

Ejected

I did this the way I did for a reason.

I could have stated my case and asked for removal, but never before have I ever even thought to do that. In fact I've done the same thing with every other alliance that I've been in without complaints.

Furthermore, you, like most, miss the point of this. its not solely WAR, but the propagation, drama, and strife. War is but one means of which I focused on. The problem, as I stated, was the end not being reached.

If I wanted to, I could add the conquering of the Red team to this list. There is no intercolor drama because the NPO conquered it. They gained victory which made them lose. That is the theory at its heart.

haha, and thats why you act so suprised that were acting this way? the fact that you pretty much just said every other alliance is like the next just shows how untrustworthy you are to actually be accepted into one that knows what its doing.

But drama and propagation, hard to come by much in a text game like this, other than that, youg et thsoe from alliances, drama is caused every day if you pay attention, and if you want repetition of war and all those goodies, you dont get a great war every day.

and if youve got a problem with the NPO having influence over red, then whyd you join? you HAD to have known we did even before you joined, every applicant goes through this... and NPO can pretty much influence the red team as they wish because they can, and its for the better as well, but hey if you're the "great reckoning" thats supposed to come to the NPO then get in line with vox and im sure we will test your theory, if something so outlandish and fantastical can be tested whatwith everyone playing this game how they like.

Edited March 26, 2009 by WarMaster Kerr

[Fokker Aeroplanbau]

One would think that after a certain amount of time, everyone who hates and/or loves the NPO would come up with something new to say.

The only thing that seems to change in these threads is the avatars and the people's names; The Grinch isn't here anymore but we have solid NPO Party Liners like WarMaster Kerr who are more then capable of slamming home their 'point' with all the elegance and grace of a dying rhino. Which is almost as awe inspiring as the like minded attempt by the 'haters' whose arguments have all the depth, and magnetic attraction, of a bag of toe nail clippings.

These threads make me think of only one thing: The Battle of Stalingrad. Everyone hopes you both lose.