Fernando12 Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='nitropenta' timestamp='1280571442' post='2395879'] @Corinan: Well, if the treaty web is too complicated for you, you might want to play Monopoly. It has a maximum of 4 players, and is simple enough to grasp by 12-year-olds. [/quote] My greatest respects to Corinan but... [quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1280575299' post='2395893'] Boring is good. Exciting and small is usually dead. The bulk of the treaties in CN are signed by sanctioned alliances. Most sanctioned alliances have double didgit treaties. Thats where the real problem is, not small alliances having 3 or 4 treaties. [/quote] This could be another approach. Larger alliances stop protecting and basically aiding in the development of new alliances. Then also alliances can cancel treaties with these insignificant alliances that should disband or merge. No treaties/protection, the vultures would take care of finishing the remains that don't leave the AA. Harsh, but its doable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted July 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='commander thrawn' timestamp='1280552428' post='2395745'] So although it may make you guys feel good to get under Sparta's skin it really doesn't accomplish anything. [/quote] If you look at my list again you'll see that I really didn't do anything to single out Sparta on it. It was only when their King came in here and flipped his lid that the !@#$ hit the fan. All the Sparta bashing you're seeing in this thread? They did it to themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Fernando12' timestamp='1280576093' post='2395897'] This could be another approach. Larger alliances stop protecting and basically aiding in the development of new alliances. Then also alliances can cancel treaties with these insignificant alliances that should disband or merge. No treaties/protection, the vultures would take care of finishing the remains that don't leave the AA. Harsh, but its doable. [/quote] Most of their treaties are with other large alliances. If you smashed the treaty web at the top the smaller alliances would suddenly be very important to large alliances. This in turn would lead to a multitude of sides and lots of excitement. Edited July 31, 2010 by Alterego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalasin Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 Come on guys, why hate on Sparta when there are idiots like Alterego walking round? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1280577934' post='2395902'] Come on guys, why hate on Sparta when there are idiots like Alterego walking round? [/quote] They can do both. For those in ODN its called multitasking. Kind of like being someones ally and at the same time stabbing them in the back and leaving them to be attacked alone. Multitasking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgrum Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1280577934' post='2395902'] Come on guys, why hate on Sparta when there are idiots like Alterego walking round? [/quote] Idiots abound on our planet Kalasin. As much as I dont care for him , Alterego isnt one of them. Nor are the sith, nice distraction here fella's cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalasin Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 (edited) This post is removed. Edited July 31, 2010 by Kalasin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1280579681' post='2395917'] Perhaps someday you'll master the art of thinking and typing at the same time, but my hopes aren't high. I'll settle for thinking before you type. [/quote] Feel free to comment on my post relating to this thread if you like. Edited July 31, 2010 by Alterego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffro Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 lolsome people actually take this computer game this serious...lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tequila Mockingbird Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1280577934' post='2395902'] Come on guys, why hate on Sparta when there are idiots like Alterego walking round? [/quote] Everyone likes an easy target! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='Hyperion321' timestamp='1280569795' post='2395871'] which then left us with no other option but to defend our friends. [/quote] This quote is absolutely fantastic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucasSnow Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 "no u" What? Isn't that basically the tune of this entire thread? Have some decency and let this die already, it's already degraded enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotFace Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 Corinan.... deadlock is the only possible outcome, no matter how many alliances you have. You can either have the type that you're referring to, in a "Cold War" setting where everyone is armed and uses their armament and political ties as a deterrent to war, or, you could have a full-scale global war, which would simply end with one group dominating over another, still resulting in a deadlock. And so you see, with deadlock being the only possible outcome regardless of what is done here, the real question is whether or not you would want your alliance to be the subject of another alliance's reign. If there was no such thing as surrender terms, and alliances were forced to disband as a result of war, then perhaps you'd get your wish. However, in the end, you're going to be left with the same phenomenon. If there were any good reason to force alliances to disband, it should be to assist the clustering of CN's best players - enabling the creation of nearly perfect alliances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='Hyperion321' timestamp='1280559415' post='2395821'] I was in Sparta gov at that time. We were not part of any "coalition" nor had any knowledge of such a thing. Sure, we saw the lines as clear as anyone, but we never took part in any sort of planning. We were in the middle of a whole lot of guns pointed between our friends on both sides, and when one group of friends violated our trust in the most devious and back stabbing of ways, we ceased to be their friend and sided with our true comrades (you know...the people who don't attack our allies). So if you guys in Gremlins were truly planning anything against NPO, we wouldn't have known about it.[/quote] so essentially, you are saying your friends plotted to attack NPO, an ally of Sparta, and you do not care. which leads me to think that the only reason you would have kept the treaty was.... well i am not sure. obviously you had no love for NPO at all at that point. and if your friends were as close as you say, they would have told you about the attack and if they did not..... yep clearly it was as simple as you put it. [quote]Um...existed according to who? If MHA, our mutual ally, said that it was void in their eyes than what prey-tell still keeps that alliance in tact. NPO couldn't just say "we're allied" and it would suddenly be true. [/quote] nice that they canceled that treaty as well. NPO can easily state they were still allied at that time and have it become true. The treaty that is the word and bond of any alliance stated so. if the spirit and friendship behind the treaty is gone then you cancel it. That is purely MHA's fault. you cannot simply consider a treaty void but maintain it. so yes, Sparta did in fact, without a doubt, 100% true, hit an ally of an ally which is far worse than hitting the ally of an ally's ally. no matter what spin you put on it, will not make the truth go away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Brutus Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='D34th' timestamp='1280552624' post='2395751'] Sparta is the new GGA. [/quote] This thread made me think about them in the same way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pezstar Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='Unholy' timestamp='1280552660' post='2395754'] You apparently miss my point, I wasn't addressing Sparta's state in this game, merely the reasons for which the historical Sparta fought. As for your statement, that is your opinion. [/quote] I thought it was to extort absurd amounts of tech from alliances who only entered wars defensively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qazzian Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='Jgoods45' timestamp='1280568813' post='2395867'] So much hate for Sparta. Sparta, we will always stand by your side. Ignore the haters for their [b]words will mean nothing when push comes to shove[/b]. [/quote] Kind of like a treaty with Sparta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senator Mark Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 GGA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingEd Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 Disband ? NO! The more alliances, the more "idiots" get to lead and thus a higher possibility of some random war breaking out. Not calling anyone in specific an idiot, since I too am an AA leader. More AA = More odds of War ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennox Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1280586876' post='2395972'] Disband ? NO! The more alliances, the more "idiots" get to lead and thus a higher possibility of some random war breaking out. Not calling anyone in specific an idiot, since I too am an AA leader. More AA = More odds of War ? [/quote] I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you are wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1280586876' post='2395972'] Disband ? NO! The more alliances, the more "idiots" get to lead and thus a higher possibility of some random war breaking out. Not calling anyone in specific an idiot, since I too am an AA leader. More AA = More odds of War ?[/quote] The snowballing nature of war and the risk-adverse nature of alliances means that an increase in the number of alliances doesn't translate into an increase in the number of wars. On the contrary, the more alliances there are the greater the collective action problem for revisionist powers -- that is, the harder and riskier it is to build up a counter-hegemonic force (especially since this drive must largely come from within the hegemonic bloc itself). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uralica Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 [quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1280575299' post='2395893'] Boring is good. Exciting and small is usually dead. The bulk of the treaties in CN are signed by sanctioned & large alliances. Most large alliances have double digit treaties. Thats where the real problem is, not small alliances having 3 or 4 treaties. source wiki Fark: 17 allies GPA: Neutral MHA: 5 allies MK: 18 allies NPO: 7 allies but would have more if not isolated NpO: 22 allies ODN: 11 allies Sparta: 16 allies TDO: See GPA Legion: 7 allies, until recently had over 10. Once the switch is made more will follow TOP: 9 allies but had more when in Citadel. VE: 19 allies. This trend continues with big alliances outside the sanction zone. The 10 non nutral sanctioned alliances have 131 allies/treaties. * includes protectorates [/quote] Question - how many of these treaties are MDP+? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Brutus Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Uralica' timestamp='1280593510' post='2396035'] Question - how many of these treaties are MDP+? [/quote] Probably most of them Edited July 31, 2010 by Emperor Brutus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Uralica' timestamp='1280593510' post='2396035'] Question - how many of these treaties are MDP+? [/quote] Its possible some could be ODP the titles people put on treaties dont help. I have included protecorates as MDP. I have also counted treaties at both ends. Eg the MK/Polar one was counted twice once for polar and once for MK. Fark: 15 , tied to 2 other sanctioned alliances (Sparta,MHA) GPA: Neutral MHA: 6, tied to 1 other sanctioned alliances (FARK) MK: 18, tied to 2 other sanctioned alliances (Polar,ODN) NPO: 7, tied to 1 other sanctioned alliances (Legion) NpO: 19, tied to 1 other sanctioned alliances (MK) ODN: 11, tied to 2 other sanctioned alliances (MK,Sparta) Sparta: 13, tied to 3 other sanctioned alliances (ODN,MHA,FARK) TDO: See GPA Legion: 6, tied to 1 other sanctioned alliance (NPO) TOP: 7, not tied to any other sanctioned alliance VE: 18, not tied to any other sanctioned alliance [b]If you remove the two neutrals the next two alliances are as follows[/b] Fark: 15, tied to 2 other sanctioned alliances (Sparta,MHA) MHA: 6, tied to 1 other sanctioned alliances (FARK) MK: 18, tied to 2 other sanctioned alliances (Polar,ODN) NPO: 7, tied to 1 other sanctioned alliances (Legion) NpO: 19, tied to 1 other sanctioned alliances (MK) ODN: 11, tied to 3 other sanctioned alliances (MK,Sparta,GATO) Sparta: 13, tied to 3 other sanctioned alliances (ODN,MHA,FARK) Legion: 6, tied to one other sanctioned alliance (NPO) TOP: 7, not tied to any other sanctioned alliance VE: 18, tied to 1 other sanctioned alliances (FOK) [b]FOK: 12, tied to 2 other sanctioned alliances (MK,VE) GATO: 7, tied to 1 other sanctioned alliances (ODN)[/b] Edited July 31, 2010 by Alterego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted July 31, 2010 Report Share Posted July 31, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1280598943' post='2396127'] Its possible some could be ODP the titles people put on treaties dont help. I have included protecorates as MDP. I have also counted treaties at both ends. Eg the MK/Polar one was counted twice once for polar and once for MK. Fark: 16 , tied to 3 other sanctioned alliances (NpO,Sparta,MHA) NpO: 19, tied to 1 other sanctioned alliances (MK) [/quote] Fark is tied with NpO but NpO isn't tied with FARK? Also we have a PIAT with FARK so it isn't a MDP+ Edited July 31, 2010 by D34th 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.