Haflinger Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 We should call it Great War 23. Then the next one can be 22. That will solve all the problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teriethien Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 I think it could be said that for this war 'Great' is simply insufficient to describe the conflict. With the number of alliances and nations involved it is truly a World War. But [ooc] just like the Great War IRL is retroactively called WWI so that WWII has a II[/ooc] this should be the Sixth World War, not the first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Reverie Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Yes I agree. How dare the karma nations buy wrcs, nukes and build up warchests? That's totally unfair. can you blame us, we had all those screenshots of the NPO's war chest policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miley Cyrax Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 This honestly wasn't epic enough war wise (everyone surrendered super fast) The only big deal is the NPO has been dethroned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 I find it amusing that the Hegemony's justification for starting the war in such haste and making such huge mistakes is that they thought they would come under attack anyway, and wanted to strike while the web was in their favour. I've heard it from elsewhere, so it's not just Mogar making things up. I never said I agreed with it, just attempting to show a side other that the only one I really see presented on these forums, and thank you for admitting I'm not just here making things up . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Great War VI: The Karma WarGreat War V: War of the Coalition Great War IV: The Unjust War Great War III: The Epic War Great War II: The Farklands War Great War I Exactly this, as Chairman Hal listed. I've never heard GW3 called the Epic War. Yeah it says that in the wiki, but everyone at the time and everyone now just calls it GW3. There are a lot of stupid names in the wiki. I'm against calling all wars Great Wars but the first three. Labeling everything GW# is lazy, but the first three don't have widely used and acceptable alternatives. The other wars, however, do and because everyone gets all prissy about the numbering it's safer for all of us to just call them by their names. Some people don't consider UJW a great war, but NoCB a great war; others don't consider either a great war, but the Karma war a great war, making this war potentially GW4 or GW5, or GW6. It's just stupid. Great Wars 1 - 3 were the wars fought between the Orders and their meatshields and the CoaLUEtion and its successors. It's important to keep their names unique to make this distinction. All other 'great wars' are stand alone conflicts, and have their own unique names. Don't muddy up the colourful history of this planet with your lazy war naming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 I never said I agreed with it, just attempting to show a side other that the only one I really see presented on these forums, and thank you for admitting I'm not just here making things up . Actually, I believe he said you aren't the only one making things up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potato Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 How on Earth is the noCB war a Great War? Or even a great war? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruthenia Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 How on Earth is the noCB war a Great War? Or even a great war? Yeah I don't get it either since usually most of the people arguing for continuing the Great War sequence after GWIII go "WELL a great war usually seems kind of even at least at first!" but the noCB War was pretty lopsided from the beginning - it was the reviled curbstomp taken to the extreme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleh32 Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 First off war of the coalition (horrible name) can not be a great war because it was way too lopsided. Same thing goes for the unjust war. Second off, this war CAN'T be named world war one because there is already a war named that: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/World_War_I The first war ever. Foolish people need to remember their history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Actually, I believe he said you aren't the only one making things up I do think NPO would have been attacked, though I wish it had occurred that way rather than the way it did, since it would have been just NPO getting curbstomped instead of the rest of the hegemony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 I do think NPO would have been attacked, though I wish it had occurred that way rather than the way it did, since it would have been just NPO getting curbstomped instead of the rest of the hegemony. Even if that were true (and we'll never know now) any coalition that would have attacked the NPO would be missing a large portion of the force that wound up uniting because they started it, and almost certainly lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uaciaut Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 The retribution and return of GRL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orkules Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 were you around for GW3? nobody had seen ODN or Legion in war for over a year and we honestly expected a lot more out of them, and I doubt they did either, but they certainly managed to piss off any semblance of winning this war by offensively declaring without notifying their allies, sort of screwed themselves over. I was around for GWIII and I knew we were boned pretty damn quick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orkules Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Unless the alliance is run by some kind of farm animal, they couldn't possibly have been so stupid as to have deliberately designed this war so that they would lose. I saw what you did there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cirrus Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 I was around for GW3. It was obvious that Legion and ODN at full strength weren't enough to beat the Initiative with the rest of the old League still smarting from GW2, and especially with GATO having been weakened by NPO's attack. The fact that ODN was supposed to handle the much larger GOONS should tell you something. Then it was especially obvious that the Aegis had no chance after FAN and TOP so clearly outperformed Legion on the very first day of their involvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 (edited) I was around for GW3. It was obvious that Legion and ODN at full strength weren't enough to beat the Initiative with the rest of the old League still smarting from GW2, and especially with GATO having been weakened by NPO's attack. The fact that ODN was supposed to handle the much larger GOONS should tell you something. Then it was especially obvious that the Aegis had no chance after FAN and TOP so clearly outperformed Legion on the very first day of their involvement. Correct. If anything, this topic is utterly and painfully pointless...And frankly don't see a point outside of attention-whoring. I think it could be said that for this war 'Great' is simply insufficient to describe the conflict. With the number of alliances and nations involved it is truly a World War. But [ooc] just like the Great War IRL is retroactively called WWI so that WWII has a II[/ooc] this should be the Sixth World War, not the first. That's nice. But you weren't around for the first great war...and quite frankly, this seems to be the only conflict worthy of that title since the original three. Edited May 9, 2009 by ReturnOfChron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cybren Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 If you think there's been a that many wars that's outcome wasn't decided before it started I've got a bridge to sell you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fatbeard Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 I like "First Karma War" as a name, personally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SynthFG Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 I like "First Karma War" as a name, personally. That imply s there will be a 2nd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fatbeard Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 (edited) That imply s there will be a 2nd That's what I was implying and why I added the Edited May 11, 2009 by Captain Fatbeard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cirrus Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 (edited) I will say this about GW3: The one time the outcome seemed in doubt was when /b/ entered. With the entry of formerly neutral /b/, for a few precious hours Aegis could hope that IRON (plausible), GUARD (plausible) and GPA (no way) would enter as well and tilt the balance. That hope faded pretty fast. Then things were back to normal. Now GW2... that one was in doubt. League might have won if NAAC had unleashed its nukes, or if Legion and ODN had come in then instead of months later. Edited May 11, 2009 by Cirrus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junkahoolik Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 (edited) That is the mentality of the NPO and their falling and rising meatshields, not ours.You have absolutely no evidence on which to base your assumption that we would have behaved in the same manner. In fact, seeing as how some Karma alliances have been on the receiving end of this mentality throughout history and those former hegemony alliances in our ranks left in disgust at some of this behaviour, and that we've been a coalition of bleeding heart moralists, it is far more likely that we would have never started this war even if we did have a valid CB. Perhaps we may have come closer together and seemingly isolated the NPO, but any attempt to aggressively take on the NPO without cause would have certainly resulted in our coalition falling apart. honestly, after reading a pretty darn funny conversation about conspiracy theories regarding the war that was promised by probably the leaders of alliances in the OWF one or two months ago about a war that was brewing, after reading about it in IRON's forums in december stating it will happen in about 3 months, after reading about it in ODN's forums in february (about when i read the convo in the OWF), i'm surprised people live in denial. sure, a CB with NPO attacking some weak little alliance that poor little her, couldn't defend herself (although dunno why but usually alliances go to war with other alliances for spying, they don't usually don't just punish the nations that were involved in the information trade) is a good excuse for alliances the like of ODN to join in your cause. if it wasn't this CB it would have been another. NPO played it's cards wrong though so there ya have it!! congrats on the win. now stop acting all wussy and be honest. the active people knew a war is brewing. sure, only a handful knew the actual plan, the rest of us had to live through it, but what's with the denial you are pretending to still live in, i don't know. Edited May 11, 2009 by junkahoolik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 I started the same time as you, so this is defiantly not my first world war, but it is defiantly the biggest and funnest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthey Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 I vote yes, this war is far too significant to just name it the Karma war. We didn't call the real WWI, the war of the central powers or the war of the allies; wether its actually called WWI or WW whatever I think it would make sense to create a sort of naming system for very significant wars that mark the end of an era 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.