Walt Schmidt Posted July 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 (edited) So long as NPO is NPO resonable terms I do not believe will be given. ...I, too, believe many feel that way. Consider though... CN, 'permits' those who 'organize' to reap the benefits of such organization. This is how it is, and how it should be structured... it is a war game after all. While RISK has a multitude of variants, I don't believe there is one where all the players do is build their respective countries. You build, you war, you attempt to take over the world. NPO had been a top-dog -- we are no longer. The rest of the CN players have achieved that. We're going on 90 days of warfare. I suggest the timbre of CN is presently being affected in a way that is not so healthy for CN taken as a whole... one reason I started this thread. Edited July 17, 2009 by Walt Schmidt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Schmidt Posted July 20, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 (edited) I presume most of you know the war is over. Terms Can we discuss them? Edited July 20, 2009 by Walt Schmidt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilkenny Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 I presume most of you know the war is over.Terms Can we discuss them? I find it interesting that the terms last for 6 months, or until the reps are paid....yet there is a term that states they will "Never" do something. I mean a year or so sown the road if NPO decides to do it, and has the muscle and allies to back it up then how will they stop them?? It seems to me that a terms has been built in to start the war back up again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nc1701 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 I presume most of you know the war is over.Terms Can we discuss them? They are signifigantly harsher than the last set... The combination of requiring the tech to be paid by the top nations and not allowing any NPO nations to receive tech means NPO will be eliminated as a military threat at the upper ranges more or less permanently. I do find it amusing that NPO took these terms which are much worse long term, but rejected the ones which just involved their banks fighting a round of war, which would have been far easier to recover from long term. Strategic error on NPO's part I think, but I won't complain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The AUT Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 I was merely conscripted into the Egyptian army. I was a paratrooper and did basic training. I really don't deserve the praise these other men and women get. I've neither served in active combat or done anything of any significance. I'm no longer in the military. For those who are and have, thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Peters Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Little late to the party, but I'm here. Army ROTC Program here. A freshman in college. Becoming a Combat Engineer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Lightning Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I'm just posting here to mention Preatorian. He was in ONOS>CORE and later TOP. One of my best friends on this game and last I heard from him he was in a hospital after being hit by an IED in Iraq. I hope he is ok, but having not heard from him for about a year, I kinda fear the worst. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Schmidt Posted July 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 Preatorian... last I heard from him he was in a hospital after being hit by an IED in Iraq. I hope he is ok, but having not heard from him for about a year, I kinda fear the worst. ...in our thoughts and prayers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain B Bear Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 If I got it wrong, or missed entirely, let me know...Captain B Bob Army should be Captain B. Bear got that out of the way. Well from what I am hearing the new set of terms is not going to help things settle down, I feel that the animosity will only fester. "karma" will come back and bite KARMA on the a$$. I figure this will take a year or two before things get going again, and perhaps this time no alliance will be left out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regent of Omerta Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 I myself have not served in this capacity but my father is retired army SFC and served in Vietnam and was in Cuba during the "Bay of Pigs" crisis. My brother is a retired senior CPO with 25 years in the USCG. Brother was on watch when Andrew devastated Homestead Florida as he was stationed at COMSTA Miami. I have worked for the past seven years in Emergency Management and although I have seen no combat, I have seen more than my share of pain, suffering and even death. I am not comparing this to what any of you have seen but want you to understand that not only do I support each of you who have served, I thank you for doing so with all of my heart and soul. I only wish I had been able to serve but a childhood illness ruined any chance of that for me. As for the comparison of RL to this game, Death and destruction are a whole different ball game when they're up close and personally staring you in the face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbulaM1 Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 The terms given to NPO will not prevent NPO from coming back to haunt the dreams and futures of the alliances the terms were given by. The culture of NPO is relatively unchanged and obviously their morale has not taken a hit while their top banks are still flush with money. While I still find it horribly dishonorable for their top brass to stay out of the conflict entirely, it was a good move and will severely hurt their enemies in the future. The beat down was hardly a curbstomp and I can forsee their internal operations will be going just fine. If Karma where able to continue an assult on NPO instead of letting RoK continue to take the brunt of it, then I see a different outcome. But the lack of coordination between Karma alliances, in fact what seemed like a complete break down of the group, prevented them from hurting NPO in the later stages of the war. Karma I believe lost on that point that they I do not believe will win the over all "war" if it is yet to be over. There will be another war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Schmidt Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 The combination of requiring the tech to be paid by the top nations and not allowing any NPO nations to receive tech means NPO will be eliminated as a military threat at the upper ranges more or less permanently. I'm not MilCom; I question the 'real' benefit in battle that tech passed a certain point plays. Anyone? I do find it amusing that NPO took these terms which are much worse long term, but rejected the ones which just involved their banks fighting a round of war, which would have been far easier to recover from long term. Strategic error on NPO's part I think, but I won't complain. Three attackers, two battles per day, 1mil loss per battle equals 6mil per day, OR, a 'defeat alert' which means they will automatically be placed into Anarchy, up to 5 defending spies may be killed, 5% or up to 10 technology levels, 20% or up to 40 infrastructure levels, and 5% or up to $5 million in money may be destroyed (not stolen). Again, I'm not MilCom... anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Schmidt Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 Well from what I am hearing the new set of terms is not going to help things settle down, I feel that the animosity will only fester. "karma" will come back and bite KARMA on the a$$. I figure this will take a year or two before things get going again, and perhaps this time no alliance will be left out. I'm not sure if we'll even get to a second year. We our paying out quite a bit. We are being told... who gets what. What we aren't being told, understandably, is how 'who gets what' is being determined or who is making this determination. That determination could become a hot issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk11 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 hawk_11 Civilian That's Cadet hawk_11. The only thing is I haven't contracted yet due to some medical record holdups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk11 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 While I still find it horribly dishonorable for their top brass to stay out of the conflict entirely, it was a good move and will severely hurt their enemies in the future. Whoa ho. As an IOFA who lost all 22k of his nation strength, I take some serious offense there. I'm sure the other IOs would also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanveldez Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 That's Cadet hawk_11. The only thing is I haven't contracted yet due to some medical record holdups. none the less still a cadet = civilian. the worst cadets are always the ones that want the enlisted to treat them like LT's never works out well for them. In fact I recently had a cadet put on my Infantry fire team and the first thing he told me was that he was just a joe. at that minute he earned my respect and was called sir if I didnt respect him it would of been cadet. As for the war, it was hard fought on both sides and I always found my NPO opponents to be honorable and hard fighting, there were times where I thought that they were gunning for me as I am sure there were times where I am sure they thought the same so on that front they earned my respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nc1701 Posted August 5, 2009 Report Share Posted August 5, 2009 I'm not MilCom; I question the 'real' benefit in battle that tech passed a certain point plays. Anyone?Three attackers, two battles per day, 1mil loss per battle equals 6mil per day, OR, a 'defeat alert' which means they will automatically be placed into Anarchy, up to 5 defending spies may be killed, 5% or up to 10 technology levels, 20% or up to 40 infrastructure levels, and 5% or up to $5 million in money may be destroyed (not stolen). Again, I'm not MilCom... anyone? For high level nations tech is vital for it's increase in damage. For large nations with WRC tech increases damage inflicted by 20% per 1,000 tech. So to take me as an example (I have almost 8,000 tech) I do the standard amount of damage every attack, plus a 160% of the base in tech bonus damage. Which comes to 52 infrastructure destroyed in air and ground attacks, and 390 in nuclear attacks. Compared to the base of 20 and 150, this multiplier affects tech and land damage as well, so nations with more tech can destroy and loot far more items per attack. Obviously that is invaluable in war. Two weeks of war might cost your banks 1-2B each, but if they are half decent banks they should be able to recover from that a lot better than your whole alliance will be be able to recover after being stripped of it's tech and blocked from tech dealing for close to a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Schmidt Posted August 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 Something new to talk about... A New Day Approaches, Joint TDP - COJ - TMF - CG - Monolith- NPO Announcement Red Dawn - http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=65853 Forums: http://reddawn.pacificorder.net/ IRC: #Red Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk11 Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 (edited) none the less still a cadet = civilian. the worst cadets are always the ones that want the enlisted to treat them like LT's never works out well for them. In fact I recently had a cadet put on my Infantry fire team and the first thing he told me was that he was just a joe. at that minute he earned my respect and was called sir if I didnt respect him it would of been cadet. I'm not sure how a cadet can even say something like that with a straight face, the whole "treat me like an LT" thing. We're bottom wrung, and they clearly didn't pay attention to the class where we had that hammered home. Edited August 11, 2009 by hawk_11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banned Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 (edited) USN 6 years. OEF and OIF. What CN events in particular were you interested in discussing? Edited August 11, 2009 by Banned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pericles8th Posted August 12, 2009 Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 Navy depper here going to bootcamp in 4 weeks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philp110 Posted August 12, 2009 Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 I'm not sure how a cadet can even say something like that with a straight face, the whole "treat me like an LT" thing. We're bottom wrung, and they clearly didn't pay attention to the class where we had that hammered home. As with any rank in the military, there are high-speed cadets and low-speed cadets. The low-speed ones do sometimes turn out alright after a few NCOs set them straight, but typically turn out to be horrible LTs as you might guess. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Schmidt Posted August 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 What CN events in particular were you interested in discussing? Any and all. My premise (so far 'proved' true) is we (ex)military, many who have seen real-life combat, can discuss CN (IC or OOC) with a little less hysterical unsupportable BS than finds its way into other Forum areas. As such, any topic is germane. My hope (so far falling short) is for enough traffic so that when asked, Admin gives us our own Forum Section. In any event, about Red Dawn... [ smile ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgrum Posted August 12, 2009 Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 (edited) My hope (so far falling short) is for enough traffic so that when asked, Admin gives us our own Forum Section. I dont know if there will ever be enough traffic of vets for that Walt. a guy like me who is 39 really views the game as entertainment as life is filled with other things. Im willing to bet the demographics of CN are such were the majority are much younger civilians. Now an alliance with military vets? Thats the ticket in my view. Creating that community outside of the OWF would likely garnish a more positive outcome. While some of us dont post a lot, most of us do read. cheers Edited August 12, 2009 by Thorgrum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Schmidt Posted August 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 I dont know if there will ever be enough traffic of vets for that Walt. a guy like me who is 39 really views the game as entertainment as life is filled with other things.... While some of us dont post a lot, most of us do read. Understood. At 62, this is (as those before it over the decades were also) 'fun' with enough details to allow me to delve into the details when the spirit moves me. Going through message after message of 'They are... no they're not... yes they are' is not fun. p.s. Lurk Mode I also understand [ smile ] 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.