wickedj Posted July 16, 2010 Report Share Posted July 16, 2010 [quote name='WalkerNinja' date='16 July 2010 - 11:37 AM' timestamp='1279298238' post='2374595'] If the last war is any indicator, the next war will look like a pack of chimpanzees trying to hump a football. [/quote] BWHAHAHA you owe me a new keyboard you !@#$%^& Back on topic, #1 or #5. it wont be any major players like NPO or Athens who cause it but likely someone a few chains down ala OV in Karma and \m/ in the "chimpanzee humping a football" war unless someone have a momentary lapse in using their brain and gifts the other side a good reason to kick their $@! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KagetheSecond Posted July 16, 2010 Report Share Posted July 16, 2010 [quote name='WalkerNinja' date='16 July 2010 - 09:37 AM' timestamp='1279298238' post='2374595'] If the last war is any indicator, the next war will look like a pack of chimpanzees trying to hump a football. [/quote] An American football? Or the other one? Also, I think that the old Citadel members are going to rogue everyone else on that 10-10-10 thing they have planned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daikos Posted July 16, 2010 Report Share Posted July 16, 2010 [quote name='Sande' date='16 July 2010 - 02:12 PM' timestamp='1279303935' post='2374769'] I don't know which scenario will occur but I know 100% that it will begin with a 200-page topic where people whine over the CB. [/quote] This man speaks the truth. I'd say the next war will likely occur from some idiocy that occurs between smaller / mid sized alliance who have ties with heavy hitters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omniscient1 Posted July 16, 2010 Report Share Posted July 16, 2010 I think #3 is the most likely. It'll be some alliance that isn't seen immediately as a raider alliance though. GOONS is usually pretty careful with their raids and do their research. #2 won't happen as long as everyone thinks NPO is still gunning for them. It keeps everyone together. I've always thought if #2 did happen though it'd be over someone in Polar's sphere pissing off someone in SF's sphere. CnG has alot of links over there while SF not as many. That's just a random thought though, no secret knowledge on that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uralica Posted July 16, 2010 Report Share Posted July 16, 2010 (edited) #1 - I'm with Mirreille on this one. #2 - It won't happen in the near future. #3 - it wouldn't surprise me, but it would have to be from someone in the middle of the tech-raid opinion continuum, or from someone who has incredibly lax TR policies. Usually, those alliances who despise tech-raiding or only marginally allow it (like TOOL for example) would rather boot an offending member than go to war over something they don't believe in. On the other hand, you have GOONS and PC and \m/ and the like, who especially after UJW2/BiPolar/whatever the heck you wanna call the thing, are overall far too smart to let something like a tech-raid explode out of hand. They know their raid diplomacy altogether too well, barring the odd glitch. #4 - would agree with the OP here. The boredom level would have to be astronomical for people to even consider this in passing. Unless one of said neutrals did something legitimately dumb and/or nasty. #5 - The unpredictability factor comes into play here. But like the OP said, not likely. CN has honestly become like [OOC]a Switzerland vs. Tunisia soccer match[/OOC]. No one wants to make a mistake. Edited July 16, 2010 by Uralica Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banksy Posted July 16, 2010 Report Share Posted July 16, 2010 The next war will be C&G and SF fabricating a CB on the NPO and rolling you again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 Unless it's going to be a(nother) boring one sided stomping it will require Supergrievances to fracture, because at the moment that pseudo-bloc and the associated fringe alliances has a majority of usable strength so any war where they all fight on the same side will be a stomping. (TOP and IRON were basically knocked out of the other side in Bipolar, and a lot of other alliances took a lot of damage, whereas SG lost only Grämlins and no important alliances really got beaten up during the main war.) I don't see that happening for at least the medium term (a few months) so I reckon it's going to be pretty dull on the war front for 2010 (after the spectacular start it made too). I expect somebody [i]will[/i] get bored and fabricate something on NPO (or heck, they might slip up and actually give a legitimate excuse) by winter if nothing else turns up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fernando12 Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 That's a great list. Let's do them all! Imagine the fun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzzptm Posted July 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 I agree with the consensus that a Pacifican Revenge! war would have to be in a world without a SF-C&G closeness. I also like the comments about a grudge war breaking out, which could be either from a #3 or #5 situation. And, yes, the tech raid gone wrong would likely be from an alliance that doesn't do it often enough to know how to deal with it diplomatically. Polaris vs. SF came up, as well. That could be a potential conflict that tears through the heart not only of the SF-C&G bond, but through all major blocs. The fallout from a war like that could lead to some really bad blood that would last for a long time to come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uralica Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 [quote name='zzzptm' date='16 July 2010 - 05:57 PM' timestamp='1279328217' post='2375270'] Polaris vs. SF came up, as well. That could be a potential conflict that tears through the heart not only of the SF-C&G bond, but through all major blocs. The fallout from a war like that could lead to some really bad blood that would last for a long time to come. [/quote] If such a war happened, I have absolutely no idea what side my alliance would be on. I s'pose it would come down to which of our treaty partners was attacked first, and why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzzptm Posted July 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 [quote name='Uralica' date='16 July 2010 - 08:02 PM' timestamp='1279328526' post='2375274'] If such a war happened, I have absolutely no idea what side my alliance would be on. I s'pose it would come down to which of our treaty partners was attacked first, and why. [/quote] Exactly. It would be very messy, very quickly. Some alliances would go with the overall defender in the conflict, others would judge their entry based on who they loved most that was at war, and still others would exercise a particular treaty to make sure they got to fight a particular foe. It would strain lots of relationships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uralica Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 [quote name='zzzptm' date='16 July 2010 - 06:08 PM' timestamp='1279328876' post='2375278'] Exactly. It would be very messy, very quickly. Some alliances would go with the overall defender in the conflict, others would judge their entry based on who they loved most that was at war, and still others would exercise a particular treaty to make sure they got to fight a particular foe. It would strain lots of relationships. [/quote] I could imagine. Some relations would be strained if a given alliance entered [i]at all[/i], too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Greenberg Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 (edited) What will the next war be like? Hopefully not as odd as the last one. Neutral war would be fun. Edited August 1, 2010 by Ryan Greenberg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathias Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 Option 6: We live in an era of peace and harmony under the glorious rule of SuperGrievances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HalfEmpty Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 (edited) Next war will start when GanTanX loses his translation of Make Nuke and Influence Peeps. Edit: Also Toothless? O rly? Ima join Gray Team in 9 months and ambush heem! Edited July 17, 2010 by HalfEmpty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Strike Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 [quote name='zzzptm' date='17 July 2010 - 05:28 AM' timestamp='1279297695' post='2374586'] 5. [b]Micro AA war getting out of control.[/b] The 57th Overlanders nearly did it, too! [/quote] Are you referring to the situation with GLOF? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memoryproblems Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 By the time that the old gang such as Sparta would be willing to come back together with Pacifica, the tide would have already turned and Pacifica would already have enough power to win without them, so I see no reason why they'd want to allow the gang to get back together and allow those alliances to dodge being the losing side of a war that would inconvenience them (again). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoomzoomzoom Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 Taking out the neutral alliances would be one of the best ideas in my books. They provide absolutely nothing to this community and sap much needed nations into their boring midst. After that, we take out every micro alliance. Of course certain alliances would never stand for such a travesty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Apocalypse Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 [quote name='Chief Savage Man' date='16 July 2010 - 05:57 PM' timestamp='1279299419' post='2374626'] The next war will be like the last one. Totally off the wall and unexpected. [/quote] The next war will be started by the dadaists, and you won't even know it's happening let alone what to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banksy Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 [quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' date='18 July 2010 - 12:09 AM' timestamp='1279364939' post='2375704'] Taking out the neutral alliances would be one of the best ideas in my books. They provide absolutely nothing to this community and sap much needed nations into their boring midst. After that, we take out every micro alliance. Of course certain alliances would never stand for such a travesty. [/quote] Killing off the micros sounds good. Because we'd be attacking a numerically superior foe we could even claim it's not a beatdown!!1! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OsRavan Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 Is it just me or does anyone else sometimes get the vibe that certain people feel like if they can just say 'SF/CnG fight each other!' loudly enough or often enough they can make it happen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzzptm Posted July 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 There seems to be a certain upswell of wanting to take out a neutral alliance. There is some hesitancy to actually [i]do[/i] it. Is this to imply that being neutral is an automatic one-way MDP with "alliances that care" and their treaty partners? They themselves offer no support, so that's an interesting arrangement. The idea of a crusade to take on all Micro AAs is intriguing. Would it involve forced annexation or just war without end? Who would be the architects of such a movement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Boris Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 Barring anything catastrophic to the web, the next war will look exactly like the last several damn wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornelius Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 [quote name='zzzptm' date='16 July 2010 - 01:04 PM' timestamp='1279299825' post='2374643'] NPO-TOP-IRON leading a bloc, then? [/quote] You're looking for the long-term then, as IRON hasn't even been able to start its rep payments yet. The conspiracy theorists would say that it was intentional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biff Webster Posted July 17, 2010 Report Share Posted July 17, 2010 The neutral hate is funny. Most alliances need protectors, double digit treaties, etc to achieve the same thing they do by themselves. 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.