Desperado Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 If you can't organize now how can you later.. is that serious?...why do you think Blitz are so effective? not just because you get 2 hits at once but also the shock factor the attacked alliance is highy disorganized always because they can't know exactly when it happens usually... and when multiple alliances do it it multiples the shock factor. You completely missed the point. I meant as a group not as individuals. Yeah an alliance can have a couple guys work together for an update quad but can a group of alliance leaders work together in the same room? As it currently appears, they are struggling mightily in this aspect and thus are struggling to work together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Well I am glad you are happy with your alliance but you should take a look into the recruiting corps of your alliance. If you do such you will understand why you received only one letter from NPO. That is because they make mailing lists of new nations and then hand those out to individual recruiters so that new nations do not get more then one recruitment message from NPO. Why do they do that? Because they get their recruiting numbers show that your response is not limited to just yourself but many others feel the same way as you. I felt the same way when I joined NPO. No one will say the NPO doesn't know how to handle their alliance building business. They are Very good at it. I'm still not sure if how it's somehow bad of NPO to recruit during the war and somehow fine for Karma alliances to do the same. Which I think was what he was originally trying to say on that subject. You underestimate the depth of NPO culture within their own forum. Not at all. What I'm saying is those hard feelings are likely to be there anyway if the war goes long enough or terms are harsh enough etc. Just the same as those hard feelings that exist among Karma members are not the result of propaganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yggdrazil Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) The man said educated but without seeing any of the information supplied some proclaim "brainwashing" .The anti-hegemony crowd proclivity for out right distortions of logic reaches epic dimensions.Does the NPO view the same facts with a different view than the anti-hegemony-of course.Is this "brainwashing" or a cultural outlook? I applaud your courage; to view what was arrayed against your alliance of choice and you still joined. Edited June 9, 2009 by Yggdrazil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 You underestimate the depth of NPO culture within their own forum. People said the same thing about FAN and they lost most of their members (granted it took several years) but he was referring to a conflict of that length. The man said educated but without seeing any of the information supplied some proclaim "brainwashing" .The anti-hegemony crowd proclivity for out right distortions of logic reaches epic dimensions.Does the NPO view the same facts with a different view than the anti-hegemony-of course.Is this "brainwashing" or a cultural outlook? The only reason that the NPO wants new nations is to try to cover the huge number of nations that have left them over the course of the war, and perhaps to keep their nations around by giving people something to do while having essentially no other 'legit' things to do. I expect that their internal culture is probably being occupied with all sorts of games or contests at the current time, along with long threads from IOs about 'the situation' and how NPO was wronged in it but that they will 'come out on top!' I highly doubt that their government has told them the reasons that this war occured, and why so many people are glad to see this war happen. Well actually I imagine they have, and it probably goes along the lines of 'we were betrayed by our allies, and so many people did not want to see us at #1 anymore and so they orchestrated a war against us to take it away from us.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrideAssassin Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 That's quite an unusual opinion you have there, but please don't state it as a fact. GR prides itself not on power, but friendship and honor, just to give one example. It's quite simple-minded, honestly, to assume that power is the only thing to strive for in the world. Power is derived from friendships and honor. Being able to claim righteousness with sincerity and having friends to back you up is power. I'm going to be accused of playing semantics again, meh, whatever, just pointing it out. Soft power is power, and as recent events have shown sheer numbers can overtake hard power in a jiffy. Tell me... How do you choose your friends? Are you friendly with everyone? Wanna be my friend? MHA won my eternal respect, and I will forever feel... not right in warring with a Hitchiker because of their honorable conduct. They deployed their most awesome weapon against me... They got to know me. They respected me. Hell, they worked with me. Knowing your "enemy" is terrible, because they're just like you. Sorry. Can't do it. Hands were shook.Though there isn't a piece of cyberpaper stating it's a bloc, for practical purposes, I don't see how it's any different than a bloc in the current situation. A defacto bloc, if you will. Sure, when the war's over it won't be a bloc, but for time being the only difference is paper. Thanks you. Ok, so it is a defacto temporary bloc brought together in response to an action of the NPO. Vindication. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 It makes you wonder who the real tyrants are. I'm pretty sure its the people who attack this game's younger nations, or more aptly called, children. You realize your alliance is made up of self-professed baby eaters? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicea Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 This war shifted domination and power from one group into several larger groups, also it will cause new ties to be formed and others to be broken. The change in mentality and structure will depend on former hegemony and karma alliances to be able to sit around a table with eachother, if that is not achieved changes that happend here in the last month that were perceived negative will come back to haunt both sides of the war. There is quite a bit of hostility, all understandable, but only some justified. Personally I hope that people can drop their first perception when they talk to me and they might see that we have more in common then they would ever think they have. If I can do the same, wouldn't that be a true revolution? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Stranger Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 The problem now, is the new leader(s) think they're justifiable and honourable, which they think gives them carte blanche to do the exact same things as the last leaders, except they're doing it under the guise of change, and progress, and other lies and !@#$%^&*.It's hypocritical and dishonest to label your actions as this sort of poetic justice when all you've succeeded in doing is assume the throne that you did nothing to deserve in the first place. There's no change. There's no freedom. Now everything is about public relations, about getting good press and showing the world at large how great you think you are for being hypocritical and dishonest, but getting away with it. I can't help but agree with that in all its entirety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime minister Johns Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) Nope, nothing will change. Six months to a year from now some alliance will be the ebil overlord that everyone is complaining about and there will be a whole lot of threads on the forum denouncing them and a major war. Basic human nature will virtually guarantee this since everyone wants their alliance to be #1 and only one alliance can have that position so there will almost certainly be a war to be the top alliance of planet Bob no matter who is number one. Edited June 9, 2009 by Prime minister Johns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeroicDisaster Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) Nothing has changed, there will always be a hegemony. There will be a fight who will be the next hegemony, when that ends. The stagnation will return just as it did during the Q era. Edited June 9, 2009 by HeroicDisaster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Nothing has changed, there will always be a hegemony. There will be a fight who will be the next hegemony, when that ends. The stagnation will return just as it did during the Q era. So you are saying Citidel shall become like a hegemony? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 So you are saying Citidel shall become like a hegemony? Where in his post did the word "Citadel" appear? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) Where in his post did the word "Citadel" appear? He didn't, he said there will definately be another Hegemony and currently the Citidel is the strongest bloc in the world officially and if you add in its unofficial close allies such as MHA and FOK for example then it is definately the frontrunner for the Hegemony title. So when you see a member of FCC say there will definately be a hegemony then one can be lead to believe that there are some within the Citidel that believe they will have a modicum of control over the world when this is all said and done. Edited June 9, 2009 by HeinousOne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 So you are saying Citidel shall become like a hegemony? Citadel quite simply can't be the next hegemony, because most of the game can't even hit them, they're removing their "threat" by being too damn big, superfriends is much more likely to be the next "hegemony" or at least the next hegemonic bloc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Citadel quite simply can't be the next hegemony, because most of the game can't even hit them, they're removing their "threat" by being too damn big, superfriends is much more likely to be the next "hegemony" or at least the next hegemonic bloc. Why do you think that the original idea of Bastion was being made by Citidel? What bloc is MHA in? What bloc is FOK in? What bloc is Sparta in? The world has yet to form up as it will be post Karma War. You are making assumptions based on incomplete data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innerspeaker Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 I think it solved the issue of the Continuum and game stagnation. The potential for more war is higher than it has ever been, with so many potential powers vying for a position at the top. Hell, there are probably 5 huge blocs right now that I can already imagine are studying each other and sitting in the back channels, plotting. You've got Superfriends, Citadel, Frostbite, C&G, the disContinuum (who will return to politics eventually), and relatively few treaties interlocking them (at least when compared to previous treaty webs, and I mean relatively speaking). I'm confident that Cybernations will experience more drama in the coming year than it has ever experienced before, and mostly because the giant NAP toilet seat is out of the way. And I welcome it (the drama). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Why do you think that the original idea of Bastion was being made by Citidel? What bloc is MHA in? What bloc is FOK in? What bloc is Sparta in? The world has yet to form up as it will be post Karma War. You are making assumptions based on incomplete data. I consider the first 2 to be part of Citadel defacto, since MHA and Grämlins arent going to be parting ways any time soon, and FOK is allied to just about all of Citadel, Sparta could go anywhere, but my point was most of the world can't even hit Citadel so they're not really a "threat" due to how the war system works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 I consider the first 2 to be part of Citadel defacto, since MHA and Grämlins arent going to be parting ways any time soon, and FOK is allied to just about all of Citadel, Sparta could go anywhere, but my point was most of the world can't even hit Citadel so they're not really a "threat" due to how the war system works. But for the most part would you not say alliance leaders generally are some of the larger nations in an alliance due to the time that they have been in the alliance? That means they are the closest to being in range of the Citadel powers. To say that doesn't loom on the mind of a leader while making decisions would be a bit idealistic for my tastes. If you add in the growing number of smaller allies that Citadel alliances have brought close to them then it begins to appear even more like a hegemony then the last hegemony because They are untouchable by most yet their allies can touch those that might not "obey". Now that is painting a very bleak picture of the Citadel powers and I truly do not believe them to be so cold. That does not undo the fact that when this is done that they could be the most likely to be a hegemonic power. Once again, this is not me making a statement about the Citadel as I actually believe they are not likely to form up a two bloc hegemony like the tC/1V hegemony nor do I believe they are going to want to drastically change the face of Citadel by allowing in more wide ranging alliances into it. I do believe though that we are missing a bloc from the final picture that will be presented after the war and whether or not Citadel and that final bloc have official ties or not, many of the member alliances will have cross ties. I do not see how that could not happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 I do agree that we'll see a bastion/Citadel+ bloc, but I'm doubting it's going to be that huge, Citadel seems to be a tight knit group and I don't think they'll make it that easy to get into their family, not to mention they don't seem to have any global control ambitions, at least not yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Why do you think that the original idea of Bastion was being made by Citidel? What bloc is MHA in? What bloc is FOK in? What bloc is Sparta in? The world has yet to form up as it will be post Karma War. You are making assumptions based on incomplete data. The original idea of Bastion made by Citadel? Never heard of that one. As for your information, FOK is a member of LEO and we intend to keep it that way. Speculations about us joining Citadel are just that, speculations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 The original idea of Bastion made by Citadel? Never heard of that one. As for your information, FOK is a member of LEO and we intend to keep it that way. Speculations about us joining Citadel are just that, speculations. you can be a member of two blocs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 The original idea of Bastion made by Citadel? Never heard of that one. As for your information, FOK is a member of LEO and we intend to keep it that way. Speculations about us joining Citadel are just that, speculations. Certainly you remember the outing of that group by certain personalities of Vox? MHA was heading up the charge to put together an alliance codenamed Bastion. To see who the potential members were to be and to see which alliances jumped ship from the tC is to see near identical lists. That is a rather large occurance to swallow as mere coincedence. So no, Citadel did not create the idea of Bastion but Gramlins brothers and sisters in MHA certainly were toying with the idea. Also I do believe my statements agreed with your statement about FOK not being a member of Citadel. When one thinks of 1V do you not think of them as an extension of tC? The original idea of Bastion would be similiar. Due to that we may not see it but even then, individual ties still create a similarity. That in itself is not hegemonic, its how those ties that bond are used. At this point it is indeed just speculation because past intentions can indeed change. If it was a sure thing it wouldnt be as interesting to talk about though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) He didn't, he said there will definately be another Hegemony and currently the Citidel is the strongest bloc in the world officially and if you add in its unofficial close allies such as MHA and FOK for example then it is definately the frontrunner for the Hegemony title. So when you see a member of FCC say there will definately be a hegemony then one can be lead to believe that there are some within the Citidel that believe they will have a modicum of control over the world when this is all said and done. Not to nitpick, but I actually think Superfriends + Chestnut accords is far stronger in pure NS terms than Citadel - might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's accurate. And it's quite a reach to claim that because someone in FCC thinks there will be another Hegemony he is claiming he believes they will become the next hegemony and control the world. Edited June 9, 2009 by Heracles the Great Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixoux Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Not to nitpick, but I actually think Superfriends + Chestnut accords is far stronger in pure NS terms than Citadel - might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's accurate.And it's quite a reach to claim that because someone in FCC thinks there will be another Hegemony he is claiming he believes they will become the next hegemony and control the world. SF + Chestnuts is roughly ~45m due to the ties between the maroon alliances in SF and the rest of the sphere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) Not to nitpick, but I actually think Superfriends + Chestnut accords is far stronger in pure NS terms than Citadel - might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's accurate.And it's quite a reach to claim that because someone in FCC thinks there will be another Hegemony he is claiming he believes they will become the next hegemony and control the world. Hey, my question to that member of FCC was an honest one. It was not a leading question. My responses to those who responded to that question are seperate from the question. As of yet neither the one I asked nor any other member of Citadel has actually answered that. Your point about SF and Chestnut is a very good one though. That would have both sides appearing very much like tC/1V. A bipolar hegemonic world. That ought to be interesting. Edited June 9, 2009 by HeinousOne 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.