From someone who's been on both sides

[Lonely]

Coursca was a member of IRON at that time, just as a point of fact.

I'm quite aware, but he is now a member of TOP and has served as a member of government.

[The AUT]

Well, yes, I read it. Twice, actually. And that claim was so ridiculous you kept pointing out useless facts when I challenged you on it. "Yeah, but, Athens had to send out a lot of tech as reps!" "What does that have to do with anything? NpO went from rolling random alliances to, well, not rolling them. That means the world's more free, right?" "But GGA didn't have a very good CB" "Are you going to address my points?" "No"

That's pretty much the reason nobody should even waste their time. You just spew off random stuff instead of addressing their points. Kind of like accusing me of not reading above when I clearly read it all.

No, it's not that simple, but RoK wasn't a part of the Hegemony and you're absolutely clueless if you think they were. What did you expect, for them to go off and attack NPO the first time they disagreed with something they did? RoK showed their stance on NPO during the Karma war, as did about half of CN. The true Hegemony showed their stance, too.

Edit: and true to your form, you didn't address my point that none of what you made up happened during the WoTC. People weren't being EZId for fighting as you claimed in your OP. You want to back that one up or admit that you're completely full of it, Aut?

No, I don't think you read. Hell, you're deriding the topic off course with your "NpO was so evil hitting alliances with so many lefts they was begging for rights!" talk. Did the NpO ever force an alliance to disband? No. Did the NpO ever use fake methods to contrive a war? No. Were they shoddy CB's? Yes. But were they contrived and used for malicious intent? I don't think so. But what does that have to do with the thread?

People weren't EZI'd for fighting, again you didn't even read what I said. I said those that fought off AA's that weren't part of a true alliance were seen as rogues and then EZI'd. You can't dispute that fact, it happened. If you joined Vox? That's EZI on the spot. So how the hell is that not EZI'ing someone for fighting? That's pretty much as clear cut as it gets.

As for the Hegemony talk, how is Karma showing their true colors? By breaking off in the last minute in a vehement protest against the Hegemony? Then what the hell took them so long? It was over a year overdue. No, there was something more behind it, and it had to do with holding ill wills toward the NPO and taking a shot at them while they were about to go down.

Again, you didn't read.

[janax]

We have 2 former Voxians in Argent....must not be too eternal.

[Bob Janova]

Lol at 'double standard Bob'. Love you too Branimir . But you're not correct about the terms being crippling (although they are not light either), your terms relating to paying off tech from limited nations are only a little worse (proportionally) than those given to NpO and they'd paid theirs off by now. Only half your top 10 is bothering to send reps, too.

I'm not getting into a political argument here in an OOC forum but the facts are valid here

[The AUT]

We have 2 former Voxians in Argent....must not be too eternal.

I recall Reyne actually fighting for OG in the past war, didn't she? I think she's the one who put up the declaration against GR if I'm not mistaken.

[Penkala]

No, I don't think you read.

...yes, I did. Are you dense?

Did the NpO ever force an alliance to disband? No. Yes, they forced multiple alliances to disband. Do you know history? You speak of it as if you do. Did the NpO ever use fake methods to contrive a war? No. What do you mean by this? Were they shoddy CB's? Yes. But were they contrived and used for malicious intent? I don't think so. Yes, they were. But what does that have to do with the thread? YOU brought this up. Nice try, though

Commented in there.

People weren't EZI'd for fighting, again you didn't even read what I said. I said those that fought off AA's that weren't part of a true alliance were seen as rogues and then EZI'd. You can't dispute that fact, it happened.

Yes I can dispute that "fact". Prove it.

If you joined Vox? That's EZI on the spot.

What? That's not 'fighting off the AA'. That's NPO and co. EZIing members of an AA that dedicated its existence to fighting them. And that wasn't "us" doing it - it wasn't SF or Cit. You didn't mean Vox and you know it.

As for the Hegemony talk, how is Karma showing their true colors? By breaking off in the last minute in a vehement protest against the Hegemony? Then what the hell took them so long? It was over a year overdue. No, there was something more behind it, and it had to do with holding ill wills toward the NPO and taking a shot at them while they were about to go down.

No, you're being ridiculous. Of course SF wasn't going to attack NPO for their actions. 1) They didn't involve us, 2) We would have beaten down and then NPO would have continued on. I've addressed this before. The whole argument is foolish. Of course, the Hegemony would have *loved* for alliances to throw themselves at NPO as their threshold of BS was passed so that NPO could beat them down one by one. But then people would still be getting EZId today.

Yes, I read it. Stop being dense and thinking that going "LOL YOU DINT READ" is making your weak arguments any stronger. I pointed out BS parts of your post. That doesn't mean I didn't read your thread, so deal with it and can it.

Edited December 2, 2009 by Penkala

[Lonely]

We have 2 former Voxians in Argent....must not be too eternal.

Two that you're aware of, heh.

If someone is put on ZI for nine months, and is chased when they reroll, that's EZI. It doesn't mean literally forever, because you can be removed from an EZI list.

[The AUT]

What? That's not 'fighting off the AA'. That's NPO and co. EZIing members of an AA that dedicated its existence to fighting them. And that wasn't "us" doing it - it wasn't SF or Cit. You didn't mean Vox and you know it.

NpO didn't force anyone to disband, the only case would be \m/ where Sponge has stated numerous times he didn't accept peace because he wanted them to continue to fight. Just like how you all wanted the NPO to continue to fight. The OP never states anything about the OP or if NpO deserved to be attacked, hell I bypassed the war. I just said the terms handed down after that war was harsh, again, you didn't read.

On the issue of EZI, how are you still rambling on about this? There were many that were EZI'd for fighting and not being part of an affiliate. Come on, were you that isolated from the rest of us? Vox is included, EZI is EZI doesn't matter who it happens to. There were people who joined Vox because Hegemonic leaders said they'd never see peace. There was panic and resentment. It was a very terrible time, how you can still dispute the fact that people were EZI'd for baseless reasons is beyond me.

No, you're being ridiculous. Of course SF wasn't going to attack NPO for their actions. 1) They didn't involve us, 2) We would have beaten down and then NPO would have continued on. I've addressed this before. The whole argument is foolish. Of course, the Hegemony would have *loved* for alliances to throw themselves at NPO as their threshold of BS was passed so that NPO could beat them down one by one. But then people would still be getting EZId today.

What?

Yes, I read it. Stop being dense and thinking that going "LOL YOU DINT READ" is making your weak arguments any stronger. I pointed out BS parts of your post. That doesn't mean I didn't read your thread, so deal with it and can it.

Funny, you have to resort to editing my posts just because you can't figure things out for yourself.

It's funny how most of the points you made, namely picking on the NpO and its past history, wasn't even mentioned in the OP.

Edited December 2, 2009 by The AUT

[Lord Brendan]

No, I don't think you read. Hell, you're deriding the topic off course with your "NpO was so evil hitting alliances with so many lefts they was begging for rights!" talk. Did the NpO ever force an alliance to disband? No. Did the NpO ever use fake methods to contrive a war? No. Were they shoddy CB's? Yes. But were they contrived and used for malicious intent? I don't think so. But what does that have to do with the thread?

Umm... NADC War? The justification was in-game spying, despite the fact that anyone could plainly see no spying had taken place within 30 days of the war. No form of proof was ever produced in public and several ex-leaders from BLEU (mainly Echelon and MCXA) later made statements about how Polar had assured them there was proof but never showed any.

[Branimir]

But you're not correct about the terms being crippling

Give me a break, Bob. Seriously, you don't need to ruin your credibility more although I don't mind (). I already explained myself so will not go there any more. The terms are crippling, saying otherwise is ludicrous. Victors could do it and did. Fair game, what can I say, to victors go the spoils. Those that man up and say we wanted revenge. All fine. Those pretending something that is not while we can all see that it is, cant have my respect. That is just weak and lame. As is the IC subject you were a part of.

Why d you left anyway, if you don't mind me asking?

Edited December 2, 2009 by Branimir

[cookavich]

Umm... NADC War? The justification was in-game spying, despite the fact that anyone could plainly see no spying had taken place within 30 days of the war. No form of proof was ever produced in public and several ex-leaders from BLEU (mainly Echelon and MCXA) later made statements about how Polar had assured them there was proof but never showed any.

Not interested in starting a debate on the BLEU-NADC war but:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...p;#entry1593450

[The AUT]

Not interested in starting a debate on the BLEU-NADC war but:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...p;#entry1593450

Beat me to it, just looked it up. I didn't go all that way to not just post the link, so I'm posting it anyways http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1593450

OOC: I'll be away from the comp for awhile, be back next week. Enjoy the forums without me, but if I don't respond anymore this is why.

Edited December 2, 2009 by The AUT

[Iotupa]

Yeah we definitely did give implicit support to a lot of policies by being allied to certain alliances (more than just NPO practiced things like that). I think Crymson's initial response was more inclined to the OP where he singled Crymson out as if he had been an avid supporter of EZI. I don't think Crymson's post was saying we were innocent. He was stating for times long before WoTC TOP and it's members have stated their dislike of EZI and that singling us out as supporters of it was odd. There's no written treaty that says we despise EZI, as VE did, but that's more just in the way TOP operates. Much of the same reason we don't sign NAP's anymore (Sorry GPA). Did that stop us from being allied to people who did it and therefore implicitly support? No, it didn't as you rightly pointed out.

We're still allied to alliances that tech raid too despite our dislike of it. Gremlins I guess it's just one of those things that comes with being allies.

As far as VE goes, that "anti-P/E-ZI" treaty was a COMPLETE farce. They make this treaty yet still had at least one, if not more, people on their lists, as well being allied to a large number of alliances who supported the practices. That's hypocrisy at its finest, so I'm glad TOP didn't sign that and at the same time implicitly support it by being treatied to guilty alliances. You deserve kudos for that, at least.

Karma was fairly well run militarily given the sheer amount of alliances involved. Every major war from here on out is going to be that much more of a challenge to keep everyone on the same page.

When it came to target selection and who was hitting who, Karma was perfect. Execution varied across the board and that really comes down to the amount of nations that were involved.

I'll be honest, I was just happy not to be on the losing side of a major war for once.....that gets old after a while.

This is actually one of the key places Karma was NOT perfect, and why people continue attempting to say it was boggles my mind. The main military leader of Karma has admitted to making mistakes and one of them was in this area. As for keeping everyone on the same page, I'm not really sure how different ~ and Karma were size-wise, but I know I personally, as one of the main leaders of ~ tried to talk to every alliance every day (something I know wasn't occurring in Karma, because when I was a member of RAD, no one from Karma EVER talked to anyone in RAD leadership, despite RAD being a part of the war effort), and I certainly didn't make comments in private channels about how the smaller alliances "don't matter at all, because they're worthless." That kind of egotistical behavior was not something I expected from the people whom I heard it from, some of whom lead small alliances now.

Make no mistake who created these terms for your alliance - it was yourselves.

Wrong. The forces of Karma created the terms. But, thanks, you basically just proved my whole Revenge War theory correct in one post. If interested in proving they were better than NPO and actually stood for everything they had fought against from the NPO for so long, the forces of Karma could have stuck by their principles. Instead, they turned around, and, because it seems fitting to put it this way, "NPO'd" the NPO by giving them ridiculous terms. Hypocrisy.

No, I don't think you read. Hell, you're deriding the topic off course with your "NpO was so evil hitting alliances with so many lefts they was begging for rights!" talk. Did the NpO ever force an alliance to disband? No. Did the NpO ever use fake methods to contrive a war? No. Were they shoddy CB's? Yes. But were they contrived and used for malicious intent? I don't think so. But what does that have to do with the thread?

This was already covered by someone else, but basically everything you said in there is false.

Edited December 2, 2009 by Jonathan Brookbank

[Lord Brendan]

Not interested in starting a debate on the BLEU-NADC war but:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...p;#entry1593450

Interesting read, I certainly didn't see it the first time around.

However I'm not sure how it really makes that war look any better. Basically a single government member of NADC (who happened to hate the alliance) engaged in spy operations against Polar nations.

Bismarck played myself and others for his own agenda and for that NADC suffered.

I might buy the "we were bamboozled into killing NADC" thing if not for the fact that they later ZIed terms violators.

[iC]If you've been fighting someone for what you believe to be a just cause, and then you find out that your justification was all a hoax by someone out for revenge, white peace would be a reasonable response, maybe even an apology. Requiring the destruction of military wonders and 300M in reps... not so much.

Edited December 2, 2009 by Lord Brendan

[Delta1212]

As for keeping everyone on the same page, I'm not really sure how different ~ and Karma were size-wise, but I know I personally, as one of the main leaders of ~ tried to talk to every alliance every day

Just for informational purposes, Karma had approximately twice as many alliances in it as ~.

[Blue Lightning]

As a leader in both ~ and Karma, I can vouch that the karma coalition was a lot harder to coordinate due to the number of alliances and the diversity of political stances and opinions.

[edit]Not that I take much credit for either...

Edited December 2, 2009 by Blue Lightning

[Lusitan]

With all due respect you Sir are a moron. The numbers were quite equal, the Karma coalition prior to TOP's engagement and prior to the Coalition of Cowards incident were roughly 2m score advantage. Liquid Mercury or others surely can provide you with exact numbers. (Check the timline here and you get a rough estimation of the numbers in the begining http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/NPO-OV_War)

That Karma won that war was due to perfect military organisation and brutal military incompetence from Hegemony side. I´m not talking about a single alliance, i´m talking about a concert, Karma knew when, where and who to hit, Hegemony not so much. Somewhere deep down the halls there is an IRC log, taking place some hours after the Coalition of Cowards incident different Hegemony HC talked what to do now, it was a brilliant read and after reading that every Karma HC was quite sure we can win that war.

While it's true the organization levels, specifically the timing, were very messed up among Hegemony - I was there, I saw - the fact we believed the commitment some alliances made when they signed certain treaties meant anything was a big strain. How could the Hegemony know who to hit, when it didn't even know who was going to honour their treaties, who was going to run like cowards and who was going to just plain backstab their allies?

[Sigrun Vapneir]

How could the Hegemony know who to hit, when it didn't even know who was going to honour their treaties, who was going to run like cowards and who was going to just plain backstab their allies?

That's the problem with building your Empire on lies and betrayal.

[Penkala]

NpO didn't force anyone to disband, the only case would be \m/

And Genmay. And yes, he made them disband as much as NPO ever made anybody disband. So knock off the act.

Also, you stated that hopping around different AAs fighting for Polar would have gotten one EZId. This never happened. So you made it up. That's what makes your arguments terrible - you discredit actual proof, don't know history, and make up 'facts' to further your agenda instead of just sticking to the truth.

For example, you keep saying I'm taking this off-topic while completely disregarding the fact that you're the one that brought it up.

It's almost as ridiculous as your claim that "SF and Citadel freed Planet Bob" bit.

You're really bad at this and should probably stop defending your points and just admit you're wrong. Because making things up to back up your ridiculous claims in your OP simply isn't going to fly here. People are far too smart for it.

Please keep stating that I didn't read when I've told you I read, twice. It just proves that you'll make anything up to support illogical and baseless accusations against people because you don't like them.

I'm sure it was a rough time for you, though. Some of your favorite alliances were held accountable for what they did to others, just as NPO would be 6 months later. You'll get over it.

Edited December 2, 2009 by Penkala

[Iotupa]

Just for informational purposes, Karma had approximately twice as many alliances in it as ~.

Thank you. I was hoping someone would come in here with that, I honestly had no idea. Overall organizational mistakes can certainly be overlooked in this situation.

That's the problem with building your Empire on lies and betrayal.

Well, that's silly. Why should members of Karma be excused for being liars and breaking treaties solely because they were breaking them with people in the NPO party? Once again, that's called hypocrisy, to expect NPO to honor their treaties and chastising them when they don't and then turn around and say it's okay for Karma alliances to do that.

[cookavich]

And Genmay.

Oh please, give me a break.

[flak attack]

And Genmay. And yes, he made them disband as much as NPO ever made anybody disband. So knock off the act.

I'm 99% sure Genmay never entered surrender talks.

[Penkala]

I'm 99% sure Genmay never entered surrender talks.

I'm 100% sure they disbanded due to Polar's actions.

[flak attack]

I'm 100% sure they disbanded due to Polar's actions.

That's still not forcing them to disband. Being hit while you're unstable may lead to your disbanding, but it doesn't mean you were forced to disband.

[shahenshah]

What do you think would have happened if IRON had been ready to smash Rok in a counter? Or MCXA was ready to counter VE? You could have done some serious damage to them, and possibly made a whole lot of people rethink their positions. When you guys bailed out, you made a whole lot of people forget their reservations about fighting you. People weren't worried about preserving nations to pay reps because they knew we would win. You had a chance to make a massive show of force there, and you blew it. If you hadn't, quite a few of those late joiners wouldn't have shown up.

The ratio you give there is a bit misleading as well, since individual terms had already been released and hegemony forces had taken quite a bit of damage. You weren't operating at what should have been full force.

Ok, first of all, thanks for clarifying the PoV on a PM,

You are underestimating yourselves and overestimating Hegemony. Hegemony as a political entity was already weakened for weeks before the war. What remained was the beatdown/war. Again I do not think there would have been a different outcome, score may have been bit different but the outcome was sealed with Citadel choosing to be part of Karma. You are absolutely right the start of the war was v. much screwed up.

The Ratio widens for majority of the timeline of Karma war, apart from maybe a first few hours, but thats really illogical, it was a big volcano waiting to erupt.