Vladimir Stukov II Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 It's my members who then got to eat all the extra nukes that were suddenly in their range because they didn't get absorbed in the upper tier where they started. You do realize that when TOP entered the war we only attacked 5 high end Echelon nations that had 3 open war slots right? So our nuke policy effectively changed nothing for RIA except giving you some extra targets when they dropped out of our range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 it's equally stupid to imply that it automatically does affect you, I'd tend to see most things as situational but maybe that's just me. No, it's actually quite logical to imply that it affects him as he's the other alliance fighting the people and because of your no nuke policy the only alliance who'd be absorbing all the extra nukes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 I made it clear to each of my opponents during this war that I wouldn't offensively nuke, most of them took me on my word and I only nuked one of my opponents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nizzle Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 So if your friends don't do something, you arn't allowed to? What kind of alliance loses its soveignty to its allies decisions? These posts keep getting better and better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorbolt Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 How is that even comparable to a "No U" statement? How can you even say something like that without saying "You know what, the example you used isn't that stable either!" You know what, I just might agree with you on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixoux Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 I made it clear to each of my opponents during this war that I wouldn't offensively nuke, most of them took me on my word and I only nuked one of my opponents. what does this have to do with TOP's nuke policy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 These posts keep getting better and better. and yours keep having less and less content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nizzle Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 and yours keep having less and less content. Well as you receive people responding to responses you made to other people's responses, they say less and less about the context of the response and more and more about how your response would be taken were it to be a stand alone statement. Also, NO U. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nananana Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 You know I didn't consider that to be considered sarcasm at all until I read your AA given how you've responded before to this point.I'll give you an example. One nation is at war with 4 nations They all have SDIs On average it takes 3 nukes to get through on each nation. The nation has 20 nukes to start with. He's out of nukes in 10 days, less if they're spied away which they should be. Now imagine a war lasting several rounds, and a few of those nations not having to be nuked. Where can this nation focus its nukes on? I'll give you 3 chances to figure it out. Professor plum...... in the library....... with the candlestick your scenario is gaping wide with a lack of details, warchest levels, WRC's, HNMS, spy levels and/or CIA. But you just want to say that there's some one size fits all, that would make sense for someone who calls themself WarriorConcept instead of WarriorPractice. p.s. I liked Ninja_R better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 I made it clear to each of my opponents during this war that I wouldn't offensively nuke, most of them took me on my word and I only nuked one of my opponents. So you let your alliance mates and allies eat the extra nukes? Admirable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Well as you receive people responding to responses you made to other people's responses, they say less and less about the context of the response and more and more about how your response would be taken were it to be a stand alone statement.Also, NO U. you have been saying next to nothing other than "that is not what I meant" or "you don't know what I am saying" with no attempt at clarification for at least two pages now you have also tried to dismiss every counter argument to you with 0 actual fact to dismiss it. You truly are remarkable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nizzle Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 So you let your alliance mates and allies eat the extra nukes? Admirable. Here's a clue to avoid messy situations like this: Don't fight a war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOLtex Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 assuming 1 nuke gets spied away a day and the nation has a WRC and 25 starting nukes. Also assuming that everyone's SDIs perform at an average level. That means it would take 9 nukes a day to nuke 3 nations a day while still only netting 1 nuke a day from purchase. The nuking nation will then be down to 18 nukes after day one of nuking 10 after day 2 and as of day 3 he can not nuke 3 nations a day anymore. It's a bit easier to win a war with friends. If one of your friends nukes a target, then you don't need to, thus saving you more than 3 nukes a day. In an equal fight, you'd be right; but I'm pretty sure the forces of the Coalition outnumbered Hegemony. If there were two TOPpers on one guy and someone else declared on him, then it's his own damn fault for getting involved. If a TOPper declared on a target already taken by other forces, then I could see a point. Since both happened during this war, I think the blame game point is quite moot. Or Moo, as you guys would say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOLtex Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 I'm "whining" because you didn't use nukes in a nuke fight. Wasn't our nuke fight, chief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Professor plum...... in the library....... with the candlestickyour scenario is gaping wide with a lack of details, warchest levels, WRC's, HNMS, spy levels and/or CIA. But you just want to say that there's some one size fits all, that would make sense for someone who calls themself WarriorConcept instead of WarriorPractice. p.s. I liked Ninja_R better. You realize it doesn't change the final outcome at all as he can focus all his nukes on less targets, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nananana Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 So you let your alliance mates and allies eat the extra nukes? Admirable. I forgot, this is high school and when all the kids are nuking each other, you should be nuking too. Screw it if you're sacrificing whatever beliefs you have, fake friendships are so much more valuable than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nizzle Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 you have been saying next to nothing other than "that is not what I meant" or "you don't know what I am saying" with no attempt at clarification for at least two pages now you have also tried to dismiss every counter argument to you with 0 actual fact to dismiss it. You truly are remarkable. No one has asked me for clarification. Also, if I haven't given substance then you haven't given substance. You are, technically, guilty of the same charge you accuse me of. Just sayin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMMELHSQ Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 (edited) nm Edited May 30, 2009 by ROMMELHSQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Here's a clue to avoid messy situations like this: Don't fight a war. Do you ever respond to content with content? Just wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 When you tell your opponent that if they don't nuke you, you won't nuke them, and you are TOP, they will then avoid nuking you and instead send all of their nukes against the rest of us. And using up spy slots for things other than spying away nukes because you weren't engaged in a nuclear war with the nations in question was really appreciated by those of us who were eating nukes, let me tell you. Wow TOP really did that? There goes a lot of the respect I had for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Wasn't our nuke fight, chief. Hence my "I wish TOP hadn't joined the war" comment that got me down this sidetrack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uaciaut Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 (edited) I think you're ignoring the fact that TOP knows the least of all major alliances about the game and it's mechanics. I think Delta is right and you're just throwing a retarded "i'm TOP i know best" line that is not doing TOP any favours. Please stop posting. Edited May 30, 2009 by uaciaut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 I forgot, this is high school and when all the kids are nuking each other, you should be nuking too. Screw it if you're sacrificing whatever beliefs you have, fake friendships are so much more valuable than that. Or you know it's a war system based on simple math and basic logic and the best way to help out your alliance members and allies are fighting all out for them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nizzle Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Do you ever respond to content with content? Just wondering. What content did your post have? Do you all organize on IRC to come up with talking points? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Wasn't our nuke fight, chief. Then you should have stayed the $%&@ out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts