arentak Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 The way people from opposite sides refer to it as nocb or War of the Coalition reminds me of the North referring to "the Civil War", and the South referring to "The War Between the States", or sometimes as "The War of Northern Aggression" I support War of the Coalition for 2 reasons. 1. The wiki article refers to it this way 2. Victors write the history, the NoCB/FBI (Friends Before Infra) side lost (but I agree, the starting Hyperion CB was not firm) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fallen Fool Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 I prefer calling it the Second Patriotic War since I was in Polar at the time of the conflict, and that's what we called it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 The way people from opposite sides refer to it as nocb or War of the Coalition reminds me of the North referring to "the Civil War", and the South referring to "The War Between the States", or sometimes as "The War of Northern Aggression"I support War of the Coalition for 2 reasons. 1. The wiki article refers to it this way 2. Victors write the history, the NoCB/FBI (Friends Before Infra) side lost (but I agree, the starting Hyperion CB was not firm) These aren't the greatest reasons, but noCB war can honestly refer to a lot of them. The War of the Coalition is recognizable, different, and fairly unbiased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayOvfEnnay Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 NoCB war may be a bit of a biased name, but it's the best name proposed as of yet and WotC is a stupid sounding name for certain. =_= How about we compromise and call it the "are you polar too stupid to read" war, or "ARPTStR". I think that would work just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 (edited) Victors write the history, the NoCB/FBI (Friends Before Infra) side lost (but I agree, the starting Hyperion CB was not firm) You are saying TOP went to war because of a weak to no CB. This is a damning condemnation of your own government and quite a few alliances you are strongly connected with. This attempt to rename the war is nothing but a PR stunt because of the high tensions on Bob at the moment. Edited April 20, 2009 by Alterego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rajistani Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Uhhhhhh why only two choices? Other names (should be added): - The Final Countdown - The End of Fanicide - The Almost... about to be there... might happen... is gonna happen... isn't gonna happen... has to happen eventually... war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Uhhhhhh why only two choices?Other names (should be added): - The Final Countdown - The End of Fanicide - The Almost... about to be there... might happen... is gonna happen... isn't gonna happen... has to happen eventually... war. Think past, not future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruthenia Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 (edited) Victors only write history due to winning generally giving their side of the story more credibility or eliminating opposing sources. It's not like some peace term where the losers say "oh you won well you can say whatever you want I guess." Colloquially I usually just call it "the war" though when I call it by a name I use noCB War. If the Coalition insists their war with Polar was a separate conflict (I'm not sure if that's the party line any more but I remember it used to be) then that leaves the war MK fought otherwise nameless. EDIT: Well, I guess there's the Hyperion War too though that implies it was about Hyperion when as far as I know Hyperion was merely an excuse to get at other alliances. Edited April 20, 2009 by Matthew George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taget Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 I preferred BLEU - Continuum War. Neutral and described the two major blocs that drew everyone else in to either side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 noCB war. But of course the winners will not reffer to that war as noCB war. So useless topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manetheren Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Second Great Patriotic War Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleh32 Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Both of those names are stupid. Can someone please come up with one that sounds good? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potato Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 I preferred BLEU - Continuum War. Neutral and described the two major blocs that drew everyone else in to either side. It's also incorrect but don't let get that in your way. The whole BLEU vs Q, as you name it, happened AFTER Hyperion, GR, MK ... had been hit for no good reason. Hence why it should be called the noCB war. GGA/Valhalla had no decent CB to attack (in fact, they tried to force one out of Hyperion) and Polar got attacked while its allies were occupied somewhere else. Despite what some of I'm friends and allies now say, I am still convinced "the Coalition" wouldn't have moved had GR, STA ... not been at war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 (edited) Both of those names are stupid.Can someone please come up with one that sounds good? Second Great Patriotic War. or War in a frozen hell. <- I create this one. Edited April 20, 2009 by D34th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Second Great Patriotic War Gets my vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunstar Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Names used for general reference (including Wiki) should be uncomplicated and neutral. War of the Coalition fits the bill in that regard. On their own, each individual or alliance can refer to the war any way they choose. Whether it is NoCB war, the Second Patriotic War, or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 The First Spongeonic War This upcoming war will be the Second Spongeonic War, or the Battle of Spongealoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brotherington Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 I always call it 'the NPO war', or 'the time we got rolled'. Been trying to think of something snappier... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingSuck Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 I swear we had an almost identical poll a few weeks ago War or the Coalition Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleh32 Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Second Great Patriotic War Gets my vote. This name is biased though. We need an unbiased and neutral name for it. The First Spongeonic WarThis upcoming war will be the Second Spongeonic War, or the Battle of Spongealoo I don't think this is good either, as it only refers to one person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 I don't think this is good either, as it only refers to one person. It's perfect for the exact same reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiawatha Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Second Great Patriotic War Gets my vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 The way people from opposite sides refer to it as nocb or War of the Coalition reminds me of the North referring to "the Civil War", and the South referring to "The War Between the States", or sometimes as "The War of Northern Aggression" OOC: The South calls it the Civil war, and the North calls it the War Between the States. You got it backwards. That being said, I usually say BLEU-Contrinuum war or Great War V. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 For the last time... they were two completely seperate wars - do not drag the Coalition down to the levels of the likes of GGA and Valhalla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kremlin Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Biased vs unbiased name call it what you want though 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.