A Brosian Rant on the War and Assorted Other Things

[bros]

I would start out this wall by discussing the casus belli used to start this war, but that appears to be impossible, as no casus belli was used to start this war. Last I checked, preemptive striking is not a valid CB, nor has it ever been. This war most likely would not have happened if it were not for the perfect storm of events in the Cyberverse. First off, TOP and MK have mutually disliked each other for a while. Secondly, Citadel was getting crumblier than a crumb cake. Thirdly, everyone was rather ornery after The Blue Balls War fizzled away and out of our memories. But then Grub, the moral beacon of CN, decided to attack \m/ for one of the silliest reasons I can remember in CN. Everyone knows what happened after that. But no, there was no conspiracy to do it. Nobody is that good at manipulating

On the war itself, TOP has acted rather silly, such as in the case of Trace, an MK member. Trace asked TOP if he could be allowed to slip into peace mode, due to RL problems. He came back recently and came out of peace mode. TOP proceeded to yell at him because [b]they think they should've been able to attack him after he exited peace mode.[/b]

No TOP, that is not how war works. War has not worked like that for a while. War is not a prim and proper affair in which the general wears the brightest coat with the most feathers in his hat. War is a process in which you hit whatever you can get as quick as you can. TOP, you are being TOPpled, you do not dictate rules to the winner. The main players on your side will never get white peace. Should be fun to watch you kick and scream while we rend the tech from your nations.

On GGA: Congratulations on another coup. But I must ask, why did you not follow the tradition of MDPing the enemies of the GGA pre-coup? That is what Bilrow did when he couped the best emperor GGA ever had, Prodigal Chieftain. PC was an interesting character. He was pretty much the antithesis of the New Pacific Order. One of the more entertaining leaders CN has ever had.

On Toast: Best prepared with peanut butter. Rosemary toast with peanut butter on it is delicious.

Discuss.

[Cotillion]

I love a good bros topic. I agree with it all, bar the section on toast, where I don't believe that I am qualified enough to comment.

[Shinpah]

Toast sounds pretty good right now, although I am quite fond of English muffins with honey and peanut butter

[shadeybob]

Now I have a craving for rosemary toast -- DAMN YOU!!!

[bros]

[quote name='King Puffington' date='23 February 2010 - 12:44 PM' timestamp='1266947052' post='2199198']
I love a good bros topic. I agree with it all, bar the section on toast, where I don't believe that I am qualified enough to comment.
[/quote]

You may be qualified to comment on the toast section if you like toast

[quote name='Shinpah' date='23 February 2010 - 12:45 PM' timestamp='1266947114' post='2199200']
Toast sounds pretty good right now, although I am quite fond of English muffins with honey and peanut butter
[/quote]

english muffins are also good. Especially if you use them as buns for burgers

[quote name='shadeybob' date='23 February 2010 - 12:49 PM' timestamp='1266947353' post='2199203']
Now I have a craving for rosemary toast -- DAMN YOU!!!
[/quote]

You are welcome.

[Locke]

[quote name='bros2' date='23 February 2010 - 12:40 PM' timestamp='1266946810' post='2199196']
First off, TOP and MK have mutually disliked each other for a while.
[/quote]
Whatever happened to the "no TOP, we don't hate you, the people actual power in the alliance or neutral or like you, your pre-emptive strike was silly" stance?

[ktarthan]

[quote name='Locke' date='23 February 2010 - 09:55 AM' timestamp='1266947724' post='2199209']
Whatever happened to the "no TOP, we don't hate you, the people actual power in the alliance or neutral or like you, your pre-emptive strike was silly" stance?
[/quote]

I don't see a single thing in the OP that debunks that stance.

Edit: Also, the feelings of MK towards TOP one way or another do not make the pre-emptive strike less silly.

Edited February 23, 2010 by ktarthan

[Leetopia II]

[quote name='bros2' date='23 February 2010 - 12:40 PM' timestamp='1266946810' post='2199196']
On the war itself, TOP has acted rather silly, such as in the case of Trace, an MK member. Trace asked TOP if he could be allowed to slip into peace mode, due to RL problems. He came back recently and came out of peace mode. TOP proceeded to yell at him because [b]they think they should've been able to attack him after he exited peace mode.[/b]
[/quote]

I don't get this, is it just worded wrong? Why wouldn't TOP be able to attack someone that leaves peace mode?

I wouldn't really expect this to ever happen, but if some alliance you're at war with lets you slip into peace mode because of RL problems then you should simply take that as an exit from the war and stay in peace mode for the remainder.

But it's their fault for being nice I guess though, doubt you guys will be seeing that courtesy again any time soon.

[bros]

[quote name='Leetopia II' date='23 February 2010 - 01:03 PM' timestamp='1266948223' post='2199222']
I don't get this, is it just worded wrong? Why wouldn't TOP be able to attack someone that leaves peace mode?

I wouldn't really expect this to ever happen, but if some alliance you're at war with lets you slip into peace mode because of RL problems then you should simply take that as an exit from the war and stay in peace mode for the remainder.

But it's their fault for being nice I guess though, doubt you guys will be seeing that courtesy again any time soon.
[/quote]

He told them he would be in peace mode for around 10 days.

TOP came to him like a day or two after exiting peace and were like "RAWR YOU DIDN'T TELL US AND NOW YOU ATTACKED US D:"

TOP wanted him to tell him when he left peace mode, and allow TOP to anarchy him. He declared war on 3 TOP nations upon exiting peace mode. TOP could still declare on him, but they saw it as odd.

[Caffine]

[quote name='Leetopia II' date='23 February 2010 - 01:03 PM' timestamp='1266948223' post='2199222']
I don't get this, is it just worded wrong? Why wouldn't TOP be able to attack someone that leaves peace mode?

I wouldn't really expect this to ever happen, but if some alliance you're at war with lets you slip into peace mode because of RL problems then you should simply take that as an exit from the war and stay in peace mode for the remainder.

But it's their fault for being nice I guess though, doubt you guys will be seeing that courtesy again any time soon.
[/quote]

Yeah, it seems like I'm missing something here but with just the information presented in the OP I don't see a problem.

EDIT: Appears bros answered directly above me. Still slightly convoluted though.

Edited February 23, 2010 by Caffine1

[Leetopia II]

Well it is kind of odd, but I guess it's not [i]so[/i] bad if he really did say when he was coming out.

Still though, I probably wouldn't have let him go in the first place. Not in a war like they're in.

[Kryievla]

[quote name='bros2' date='23 February 2010 - 10:40 AM' timestamp='1266946810' post='2199196']
I would start out this wall by discussing the casus belli used to start this war, but that appears to be impossible, as no casus belli was used to start this war. Last I checked, preemptive striking is not a valid CB, nor has it ever been. This war most likely would not have happened if it were not for the perfect storm of events in the Cyberverse. First off, TOP and MK have mutually disliked each other for a while. Secondly, Citadel was getting crumblier than a crumb cake. Thirdly, everyone was rather ornery after The Blue Balls War fizzled away and out of our memories. But then Grub, the moral beacon of CN, decided to attack \m/ for one of the silliest reasons I can remember in CN. Everyone knows what happened after that. But no, there was no conspiracy to do it. Nobody is that good at manipulating

On the war itself, TOP has acted rather silly, such as in the case of Trace, an MK member. Trace asked TOP if he could be allowed to slip into peace mode, due to RL problems. He came back recently and came out of peace mode. TOP proceeded to yell at him because [b]they think they should've been able to attack him after he exited peace mode.[/b]

No TOP, that is not how war works. War has not worked like that for a while. War is not a prim and proper affair in which the general wears the brightest coat with the most feathers in his hat. War is a process in which you hit whatever you can get as quick as you can. TOP, you are being TOPpled, you do not dictate rules to the winner. The main players on your side will never get white peace. Should be fun to watch you kick and scream while we rend the tech from your nations.

On GGA: Congratulations on another coup. But I must ask, why did you not follow the tradition of MDPing the enemies of the GGA pre-coup? That is what Bilrow did when he couped the best emperor GGA ever had, Prodigal Chieftain. PC was an interesting character. He was pretty much the antithesis of the New Pacific Order. One of the more entertaining leaders CN has ever had.

On Toast: Best prepared with peanut butter. Rosemary toast with peanut butter on it is delicious.

Discuss.
[/quote]

I'll take your word on the rosemary toast, but nutella is definitely win on regular toast. Better than peanut butter and/or strawberry jam.

[Ejayrazz]

To say only TOP has been silly is similar to saying the average CN player has a higher IQ than a bullfrog.

I am against TOP in this war and I have seen more !@#$%*ing, crying, and moaning from OUR side than theirs.

Edited February 23, 2010 by Ejayrazz

[bros]

[quote name='Caffine1' date='23 February 2010 - 01:12 PM' timestamp='1266948753' post='2199229']
Yeah, it seems like I'm missing something here but with just the information presented in the OP I don't see a problem.

EDIT: Appears bros answered directly above me. Still slightly convoluted though.
[/quote]

Sorry had to leave for class

[quote name='Leetopia II' date='23 February 2010 - 01:13 PM' timestamp='1266948811' post='2199231']
Well it is kind of odd, but I guess it's not [i]so[/i] bad if he really did say when he was coming out.

Still though, I probably wouldn't have let him go in the first place. Not in a war like they're in.
[/quote]

Yeah, they could've beat on him for 10 days and he wouldn't have cared

[quote name='Kryievla' date='23 February 2010 - 01:26 PM' timestamp='1266949563' post='2199244']
I'll take your word on the rosemary toast, but nutella is definitely win on regular toast. Better than peanut butter and/or strawberry jam.
[/quote]

Nutella looks like baby excrement imo

and rosemary bread is amazing.

Edited February 23, 2010 by bros2

[WcaesarD]

Fairly honorable by TOP to let Trace drop into PM, I'd say as long as he told them when he would be returning, and that he would resume the warring it's not an issue. But if he took advantage and used it in a way he didn't specifically say he would, well then that's pretty lame.

Other than that, interesting thoughts on the wars beginnings and the transition from NpO vs. \m/ into the cluster$%&@ we have now.

[Trace]

[quote name='WCaesarD' date='23 February 2010 - 01:52 PM' timestamp='1266951121' post='2199290']
Fairly honorable by TOP to let Trace drop into PM, I'd say as long as he told them when he would be returning, and that he would resume the warring it's not an issue. But if he took advantage and used it in a way he didn't specifically say he would, well then that's pretty lame.

Other than that, interesting thoughts on the wars beginnings and the transition from NpO vs. \m/ into the cluster$%&@ we have now.
[/quote]

While I don't think this needed to be broadcast all over the CN Forums bros that is effectively what happened. I told them I'd be out of town (as silly as it sounds, I'd gotten so caught up in just fighting a war, I didn't realize I'd be gone for a week a few days after it happened), so I asked them if I could slip in to PM to avoid having to get a sitter (I don't like the idea of someone else fighting with my nation I guess). Although I did say I would understand if they chose not to, cause I mean, it is war. They agreed, I went in, came back a week later, got out of PM (low on nukes cause I had been away) and hit 3 TOP targets like any good soldiers.

I don't hold anything against TOP and their feelings that I should have notified them and let them anarchy me, so that I couldn't stagger 3 TOP nations and prevent them from hitting PM (as everyone on our side who comes out of PM has been doing). I don't really understand why they thought I'd do that, but that's just a difference in viewpoint. The only stipulations given to me before they let me hit PM was that I don't carry out the attacks against the two folks on me I hadn't yet hit that day. Given that I had like 7K infra and 8K tech at that time vs the 12K infra and 13 or 15K tech of my opponents, I figured it was worth it.

[bros]

<3 trace

[Mechanus]

[quote name='bros2' date='23 February 2010 - 09:40 AM' timestamp='1266946810' post='2199196']
I would start out this wall by discussing the casus belli used to start this war, but that appears to be impossible, as no casus belli was used to start this war. Last I checked, preemptive striking is not a valid CB, nor has it ever been. This war most likely would not have happened if it were not for the perfect storm of events in the Cyberverse. First off, TOP and MK have mutually disliked each other for a while. Secondly, Citadel was getting crumblier than a crumb cake. Thirdly, everyone was rather ornery after The Blue Balls War fizzled away and out of our memories. But then Grub, the moral beacon of CN, decided to attack \m/ for one of the silliest reasons I can remember in CN. Everyone knows what happened after that. But no, there was no conspiracy to do it. Nobody is that good at manipulating

On the war itself, TOP has acted rather silly, such as in the case of Trace, an MK member. Trace asked TOP if he could be allowed to slip into peace mode, due to RL problems. He came back recently and came out of peace mode. TOP proceeded to yell at him because [b]they think they should've been able to attack him after he exited peace mode.[/b]

No TOP, that is not how war works. War has not worked like that for a while. War is not a prim and proper affair in which the general wears the brightest coat with the most feathers in his hat. War is a process in which you hit whatever you can get as quick as you can. TOP, you are being TOPpled, you do not dictate rules to the winner. The main players on your side will never get white peace. Should be fun to watch you kick and scream while we rend the tech from your nations.

On GGA: Congratulations on another coup. But I must ask, why did you not follow the tradition of MDPing the enemies of the GGA pre-coup? That is what Bilrow did when he couped the best emperor GGA ever had, Prodigal Chieftain. PC was an interesting character. He was pretty much the antithesis of the New Pacific Order. One of the more entertaining leaders CN has ever had.

On Toast: Best prepared with peanut butter. Rosemary toast with peanut butter on it is delicious.

Discuss.
[/quote]

I'm confused about this post. You first go into some sort of complaint about how this war lacks a CB (did it not meet a certain requirement level by your side?) then rattle on about how silly the CB for the NpO-\m/ war was. Then you turn around and try to state how war works in another paragraph and even say [quote]War is not a prim and proper affair in which the general wears the brightest coat with the most feathers in his hat. War is a process in which you hit whatever you can get as quick as you can.[/quote]. Did you want to sound like you haven't a clue on what you're talking about in this post? That's how this post comes across to me. You try to claim how two sides of a coin work without ever showing understanding of either one.

/me shrugs

Do whatever you want, rant about whatever you want. Planet Bob is well enough done on that bit of [i]procedure[/i]. But a stone is a stone, no matter how you want to view it. TOP believed their reason was good enough to declare war by. Why does it matter if you agree or not?

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='Mechanus' date='23 February 2010 - 02:46 PM' timestamp='1266954409' post='2199363']
I'm confused about this post. You first go into some sort of complaint about how this war lacks a CB (did it not meet a certain requirement level by your side?) then rattle on about how silly the CB for the NpO-\m/ war was.
[/quote]

The two CBs are unrelated. TOP had no valid CB to attack CnG and Grub declared war on \m/ because a couple members used bad words in the middle of "diplomacy" (read: lurking in a hostile channel). Neither invalidates the other and I don't see anything confusing about bros' post.

[Mechanus]

[quote name='Chief Savage Man' date='23 February 2010 - 11:52 AM' timestamp='1266954768' post='2199371']
The two CBs are unrelated. TOP had no valid CB to attack CnG and Grub declared war on \m/ because a couple members used bad words in the middle of "diplomacy" (read: lurking in a hostile channel). Neither invalidates the other and I don't see anything confusing about bros' post.
[/quote]

I think you missed the point of my post. How can he claim that TOP had no valid CB then go on to state how NpO's CB was 'the silliest CB ever' then a few short sentences later say that 'war doesn't work like that' or that it isn't some 'prim and proper affair'? If war doesn't work like how the past few wars have happened, and that the wars are the result of dirty methods, then exactly how does war work?

People sit around and complain about lack of wars, and that even saying "We don't like you" is a valid CB. Yet the OP clearly states that TOP's reason for war is not a valid CB and that NpO's CB was silly. This is my confusion. How is the OP any more certified in reasons for CBs than anyone else here?

[D34th]

So for you, raiding alliances just because you can and racist insults ist just a silly reason to start a war. I wonder what is a good reason then.

[delendum]

Oh !@#$, it's bros!

*delendum calls the van

Edited February 23, 2010 by delendum

[The Big Bad]

First of all I don't get where people pretend to be suprised by preemptive strikes. We have seen it moving in this direction for sometime. Coalition warfare ruins OPSEC so pretty much everyone knows who moves in next against whom as soon as it is decided. It is so common in fact that half the time counter attacks start at the same time or even slightly before the wars they are acting to counter begin. TOP wisely or not had just taken the next logical step. If they did not do it someone else would have. Of course anyone who has watched the evolution of warfare on Bob knows this, just as anyone also knows that using it as propaganda will be par for course.

Of course you know all this as you make it very clear when you said [quote]No TOP, that is not how war works. War has not worked like that for a while. War is not a prim and proper affair in which the general wears the brightest coat with the most feathers in his hat. War is a process in which you hit whatever you can get as quick as you can.[/quote]

As for this war being planned or manipulated, well of course people have been working to get a war like this going since before the Karma war. Just as Karma was required to change the power structure, this war was required to remove the temporary power structure that was set up post Karma. The playing field is being leveled and while not directed by anyone it has certainly been encouraged by certain people. The fact of the matter is no one will win this war. No doubt one side or the other will claim they have but, in the end this will be the very definition of a Pyrrhic victory for all sides.

And as for toast? Forget it, give me a bagel and cream cheese.

[WcaesarD]

[quote name='Trace' date='23 February 2010 - 02:03 PM' timestamp='1266951834' post='2199309']
While I don't think this needed to be broadcast all over the CN Forums bros that is effectively what happened. I told them I'd be out of town (as silly as it sounds, I'd gotten so caught up in just fighting a war, I didn't realize I'd be gone for a week a few days after it happened), so I asked them if I could slip in to PM to avoid having to get a sitter (I don't like the idea of someone else fighting with my nation I guess). Although I did say I would understand if they chose not to, cause I mean, it is war. They agreed, I went in, came back a week later, got out of PM (low on nukes cause I had been away) and hit 3 TOP targets like any good soldiers.

I don't hold anything against TOP and their feelings that I should have notified them and let them anarchy me, so that I couldn't stagger 3 TOP nations and prevent them from hitting PM (as everyone on our side who comes out of PM has been doing). I don't really understand why they thought I'd do that, but that's just a difference in viewpoint. The only stipulations given to me before they let me hit PM was that I don't carry out the attacks against the two folks on me I hadn't yet hit that day. Given that I had like 7K infra and 8K tech at that time vs the 12K infra and 13 or 15K tech of my opponents, I figured it was worth it.
[/quote]

I guess it does look a little like taking advantage of the situation to me... maybe not staggering them would have been the proper thing to do, rather, just re-entering the war on one target or something. I dunno, it's that IC/OOC line there in addition to the fact that it is a fairly hostile war... I doubt that one nation will make a huge difference in the end either way. And I think this might be a fairly decent example of the relations between TOP and MK at the higher levels, no?

[bros]

[quote name='Mechanus' date='23 February 2010 - 03:02 PM' timestamp='1266955326' post='2199395']
I think you missed the point of my post. How can he claim that TOP had no valid CB then go on to state how NpO's CB was 'the silliest CB ever' then a few short sentences later say that 'war doesn't work like that' or that it isn't some 'prim and proper affair'? If war doesn't work like how the past few wars have happened, and that the wars are the result of dirty methods, then exactly how does war work?

People sit around and complain about lack of wars, and that even saying "We don't like you" is a valid CB. Yet the OP clearly states that TOP's reason for war is not a valid CB and that NpO's CB was silly. This is my confusion. How is the OP any more certified in reasons for CBs than anyone else here?
[/quote]

Silly is different from baseless.

Prim and proper = think of how the british fought in wars circa Revolutionary War. Marching in lines, no guerilla crap, just walking being all dandy and getting pissy when people broke that.

War works through valid CBs. GW1 was a mostly-valid CB. Polar War 2 wasn't. GW3 was a funny CB, so I let that one slide. CBs started getting silly around UjW or when VE was killed.

"We don't like you" is not a CB. "WE DON'T LIKE YOU AND WE ARE SPYING ON YOU SEE LOOK HERE ARE OUR SEKRIT SPYING FORUMS" on the other hand, IS a valid CB.

I've fought in every war in this game, minus CATO-INC, Polar Wars 1 & 2, and the color-specific wars. I've been leadership of LUE and MK. I'm basically the goddamn CN Methuselah, i've been playing this game for four years.

[quote name='D34th' date='23 February 2010 - 03:07 PM' timestamp='1266955655' post='2199414']
So for you, raiding alliances just because you can and racist insults ist just a silly reason to start a war. I wonder what is a good reason then.
[/quote]

The alliance that was raided held no treaties whatsoever, so yes, it was valid to attack them.

I'm not saying it was smart.

But it was valid.

And it was resolved for 2-3 days before Grub attacked. That is the fact everyone loves to gloss over.

[quote name='The Big Bad' date='23 February 2010 - 03:48 PM' timestamp='1266958086' post='2199520']
First of all I don't get where people pretend to be suprised by preemptive strikes. We have seen it moving in this direction for sometime. Coalition warfare ruins OPSEC so pretty much everyone knows who moves in next against whom as soon as it is decided. It is so common in fact that half the time counter attacks start at the same time or even slightly before the wars they are acting to counter begin. TOP wisely or not had just taken the next logical step. If they did not do it someone else would have. Of course anyone who has watched the evolution of warfare on Bob knows this, just as anyone also knows that using it as propaganda will be par for course.

Of course you know all this as you make it very clear when you said

As for this war being planned or manipulated, well of course people have been working to get a war like this going since before the Karma war. Just as Karma was required to change the power structure, this war was required to remove the temporary power structure that was set up post Karma. The playing field is being leveled and while not directed by anyone it has certainly been encouraged by certain people. The fact of the matter is no one will win this war. No doubt one side or the other will claim they have but, in the end this will be the very definition of a Pyrrhic victory for all sides.

And as for toast? Forget it, give me a bagel and cream cheese.
[/quote]

MK wasn't planning a preemptive strke. srsly

We didn't want the war to escalate because of our allegiances to both sides, but things worked out nicely.

Attacking before the DoW is a sign of a sloppy alliance. I can only think of one case in MK where that happened and it was rather hilarious. He was mocked for a while.

So being prepared for something always means you should utilize it? If you keep a pet hamster in the event of the world ending so you have some food, but you are tired of waiting for the world to end, will you eat the hamster? TOP ate the hamster.

Also, C&G will win the war PR wise and diplomatically. TOP dropped the ball massively.

Nobody will win it militarily (except for MK, we're the only ones fighting worth a damn that i've noticed)

Everything Bagel with Cream Cheese is amazing.