Creative Annihilation

[kevin32891]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1288198472' post='2494313']
Because "two weeks of nuclear war" is the only thing that happened to MK. Try living in our position for as long as we hav, and see how you feel coming out of it. Or you could try actually surrendering after the two weeks mark in a war you are in.

Also, feel free to enlighten me: what was so hard on Invicta?
[/quote]

He wasn't talking about his alliance. He was just pointing out that MK didn't go through enough hardship as opposed to some others.

Nice spin though.

[potato]

[quote name='kevin32891' timestamp='1288200109' post='2494332']
He wasn't talking about his alliance. He was just pointing out that MK didn't go through enough hardship as opposed to some others.

Nice spin though.
[/quote]

He was. In his earlier reply to me.

Nice try though.

[kevin32891]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1288200322' post='2494334']
He was. In his earlier reply to me.

Nice try though.
[/quote]

My mistake, I didn't read the entire thread.

[Petrovich4]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1288197411' post='2494307']
... FAN and TPF were both destroyed by their extended wars; both still exist in name but as shadows of their former selves.
[/quote]

[u]FAN's 'peak' prior to WUT & World vs FAN[/u]
Nukes: About 1800
Membership: 600+
Total NS: Just over 10 million (during tech inflation)
Military Wonders: negligible
Wanting to bulldoze some alliances: Priceless.

...

Getting backstabbed, harassed and many members getting ZI'd many times in nearly a 2 year period

...

[u]FAN Oct 2010[/u]
Nukes: 2895. Expect 3000 in about 3 weeks.
Membership: Stable, whining and active at 190
Total NS: 5.5 million (post tech inflation)
Military Wonders: 20 WRCs, 61 SDI's and 140 MHP (73.7% penetration) (much more then some other prominent alliances in those various categories)
Wanting to Bulldoze some alliances: Still priceless.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


The masses of CN that are crying about our supposed spilt milk and being a shadow of our former self... please politely keep that ignorant talk to yourself. Boo-hoo, we haven't replicated a June 6th-like blitz since coming out of terms. FAN takes some time to rearm, re-equip and try to catch up to you all and because of that we are a shadow of our former selves!

Those soon to be 3000 nukes will definitely erase YOUR shadow if we decide to launch to show our poor FAN is doing.


P.S. Only reason I quoted you Half is because, well, you're simply the most recent example to state the not so obvious. You got thick skin, and I know you can take it

[Nobody Expects]

[quote name='Petrovich4' timestamp='1288201389' post='2494348']
[u]FAN's 'peak' prior to WUT & World vs FAN[/u]
Nukes: About 1800
Membership: 600+
Total NS: Just over 10 million (during tech inflation)
Military Wonders: negligible
Wanting to bulldoze some alliances: Priceless.

...

Getting backstabbed, harassed and many members getting ZI'd many times in nearly a 2 year period

...

[u]FAN Oct 2010[/u]
Nukes: 2895. Expect 3000 in about 3 weeks.
Membership: Stable, whining and active at 190
Total NS: 5.5 million (post tech inflation)
Military Wonders: 20 WRCs, 61 SDI's and 140 MHP (73.7% penetration) (much more then some other prominent alliances in those various categories)
Wanting to Bulldoze some alliances: Still priceless.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


The masses of CN that are crying about our supposed spilt milk and being a shadow of our former self... please politely keep that ignorant talk to yourself. Boo-hoo, we haven't replicated a June 6th-like blitz since coming out of terms. FAN takes some time to rearm, re-equip and try to catch up to you all and because of that we are a shadow of our former selves!

Those soon to be 3000 nukes will definitely erase YOUR shadow if we decide to launch to show our poor FAN is doing.


P.S. Only reason I quoted you Half is because, well, you're simply the most recent example to state the not so obvious. You got thick skin, and I know you can take it
[/quote]

Aye BAPS are getting some Flak in this thread too, currently we have more WRCs than FAN, are at 2m NS again which is just 200k NS short of our peak prior to the BAPS War, and 300k NS short of our highest ever which was prior to the last war. Our Infra Tech ratio is just shy of 1:2 and our avg NS 35k, with a capacity for @ 1000 nukes. We have never been stronger, had a more devoted membership, had bigger warchests, or been more ready to kick behinds.

Edited October 27, 2010 by Nobody Expects

[Sandwich Controversy]

[quote name='Petrovich4' timestamp='1288201389' post='2494348']
[/quote]
No disrespect but your 20% WRC coverage, 30% SDI coverage, and spitballs you call nukes aren't much to brag about.

[Goldie]

[quote name='Nobody Expects' timestamp='1288205118' post='2494369']
Aye BAPS are getting some Flak in this thread too, currently we have more WRCs than FAN, are at 2m NS again which is just 200k NS short of our peak prior to the BAPS War, and 300k NS short of our highest ever which was prior to the last war. Our Infra Tech ratio is just shy of 1:2 and our avg NS 35k, with a capacity for @ 1000 nukes. We have never been stronger, had a more devoted membership, had bigger warchests, or been more ready to kick behinds.
[/quote]

This is hopefully the only instance of a thread in which I agree with Alterego over Bob, but as you say, NE, BAPS clearly is doing very well for itself, and don't think they needed to be associated at all with the point Bob was trying to make.

[Felix von Agnu]

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1288198570' post='2494315']
You can name over 200 alliances who were beat down by a coalition for more than two weeks in nuclear war? Good for you Haf, I surely couldn't do the same.

To imply that MK never faced great hardship is naive. To outright say it is ignorant.
[/quote]
In the interest of fairness, he is partially right. I don't think hardship can be defined as just war though. MK certainly had a lot of pressure with NPO eyeing them up for destruction, a lot more pressure than other alliances have faced. They may not have had the trial by fire that a lot of alliances have, but they have survived the trial by pressure and have done rather well for themselves.

[Nobody Expects]

[quote name='Felix von Agnu' timestamp='1288212200' post='2494421']
In the interest of fairness, he is partially right. I don't think hardship can be defined as just war though. MK certainly had a lot of pressure with NPO eyeing them up for destruction, a lot more pressure than other alliances have faced. They may not have had the trial by fire that a lot of alliances have, but they have survived the trial by pressure and have done rather well for themselves.
[/quote]

MK turned the other cheek and tossed all their allies onto the fire to keep themselves safe after the UJW, thats not withstanding pressure, that's being weak as hell and caving into it because you don't have the balls to stand up for what is right. MK are not an example of what to be, they are an example of what not to be.

Edited October 27, 2010 by Nobody Expects

[Haflinger]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1288198472' post='2494313']
Because "two weeks of nuclear war" is the only thing that happened to MK. Try living in our position for as long as we hav, and see how you feel coming out of it. Or you could try actually surrendering after the two weeks mark in a war you are in.
[/quote]
Someone needs to update his war history. There was this minor war you may have heard about a few months back; it all began when your former allies at Polar attacked \m/.

And yeah. Two weeks of nuclear war. What else is so terrible about what happened to MK? Some people wouldn't sign treaties with you. Cry me a bloody river.

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1288198472' post='2494313']
Also, feel free to enlighten me: what was so hard on Invicta?
[/quote]
We fought for longer in Bipolar than MK did in WotC, against heavier odds.

[Tautology]

[quote name='Nobody Expects' timestamp='1288214898' post='2494455']
MK turned the other cheek and tossed all their allies onto the fire to keep themselves safe after the UJW, thats not withstanding pressure, that's being weak as hell and caving into it because you don't have the balls to stand up for what is right. MK are not an example of what to be, they are an example of what not to be.[/quote]
Where did you get that understanding from?

Also, I don't think you understand the idea behind turning the other cheek.

[Mirreille]

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1288205783' post='2494372']
No disrespect but your 20% WRC coverage, 30% SDI coverage, and spitballs you call nukes aren't much to brag about.
[/quote]

I'd actually disagree, did you ever see their stats right after they got peace? I'm not even sure if they had [b]ONE[/b] WRC to their names. Since then they have built up rather nicely. I'm sure from your perspective they are not performing at an elite level, but they seem to be doing just fine by their lights.

[Xiphosis]

[quote name='Nobody Expects' timestamp='1288205118' post='2494369']
Aye BAPS are getting some Flak in this thread too, currently we have more WRCs than FAN, are at 2m NS again which is just 200k NS short of our peak prior to the BAPS War, and 300k NS short of our highest ever which was prior to the last war. Our Infra Tech ratio is just shy of 1:2 and our avg NS 35k, with a capacity for @ 1000 nukes. We have never been stronger, had a more devoted membership, had bigger warchests, or been more ready to kick behinds.
[/quote]

Yeah, but BAPS to FAN isn't really an apt comparison.

[Felix von Agnu]

[quote name='Nobody Expects' timestamp='1288214898' post='2494455']
MK turned the other cheek and tossed all their allies onto the fire to keep themselves safe after the UJW, thats not withstanding pressure, that's being weak as hell and caving into it because you don't have the balls to stand up for what is right. MK are not an example of what to be, they are an example of what not to be.
[/quote]
Well, I wasn't around for UjW, so I was basing my opinion around the period around NoCB where NPO was pretty obviously gunning for MK.

[MagicalTrevor]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1288197411' post='2494307']
MK's a terrible example.There are literally hundreds of alliances that have been through more. Surviving two weeks of nuclear war is not great hardship.NPO's probably the only decent example. FAN and TPF were both destroyed by their extended wars; both still exist in name but as shadows of their former selves.
[/quote]
MK are the only alliance i can think of that survived the continium era while always being on the opposite side to it and having no ties onto the inner circle at all. The discipline that had to be enforced by the leadership to ensure the members didnt make even half a mistake is what kept them alive for so long. In the end they were baited out by a war that everybody knows was complete bollocks after NPO resorted to begging MKs friends to give them a CB. MK then executed a military plan that wrecked NPOs stigma of untouchable and crushed them (for the first time) in a PR war.

All of this was possible because nearly everybody in MK wanted just 1 thing, a shot at those who have wronged them. When they got that shot they took it and pushed it on even further and now stand where they are today. Add onto that the comparitive size of warchests between that war & these days, 2 weeks back then is a lot longer in real terms.


[quote name='Nobody Expects' timestamp='1288214898' post='2494455']
MK turned the other cheek and tossed all their allies onto the fire to keep themselves safe after the UJW, thats not withstanding pressure, that's being weak as hell and caving into it because you don't have the balls to stand up for what is right. MK are not an example of what to be, they are an example of what not to be.
[/quote]
After the UJW MK actually worked to become an alliance that could do something with itself when the time came, their so called allies had all thrown themselves off a cliff in retarded fasion, or in TPFs case had betrayed them. The path MK chose was one that lead them to being harassed by the controlling powers of the game for over a year, how was it a weak decision in anyway shape or form?

[Banksy]

[quote name='Mirreille' timestamp='1288223556' post='2494577']
I'd actually disagree, did you ever see their stats right after they got peace? I'm not even sure if they had [b]ONE[/b] WRC to their names. Since then they have built up rather nicely. I'm sure from your perspective they are not performing at an elite level, but they seem to be doing just fine by their lights.
[/quote]
They had pretty awful stats, but they purchase nukes at too low an infra level without enough economic wonders which restricts growth. The lack of SDIs means that they might be able to damage their opponents, but they are incapable of sucking up nukes. The low infra level caused by the relatively high bills also means they will have smaller warchests on average than other alliances and will not be able to wage war for as long (although, admittedly, they are in the lower tiers so the opposition wont be able to suck up their warchests at a huge rate).

Essentially, they have grown a lot, but due to some decisions they are growing at a much lower rate that they could potentially be if they held off nukes until 6k infra and 4-5 economic wonders.

[Xiphosis]

[quote]After the UJW MK actually worked to become an alliance that could do something with itself when the time came, their so called allies had all thrown themselves off a cliff in retarded fasion, or in TPFs case had betrayed them.[/quote]

This is a good time to mind your tongue, MT. That's not true.

[Petrovich4]

[quote name='Nobody Expects' timestamp='1288205118' post='2494369']
Aye BAPS are getting some Flak in this thread too, currently we have more WRCs than FAN, are at 2m NS again which is just 200k NS short of our peak prior to the BAPS War, and 300k NS short of our highest ever which was prior to the last war. Our Infra Tech ratio is just shy of 1:2 and our avg NS 35k, with a capacity for @ 1000 nukes. We have never been stronger, had a more devoted membership, had bigger warchests, or been more ready to kick behinds.
[/quote]

We're the patient ones. Going under the radar (up til now) is a good thing at times.

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1288205783' post='2494372']
No disrespect but your 20% WRC coverage, 30% SDI coverage, and spitballs you call nukes aren't much to brag about.
[/quote]

No disrespect was taken from your post. Also, we don't brag. I was simply commenting on the fallacy that we are a shadow of our former selves. In terms of member quantity, yes we are. In other areas, no way - we have excelled. Also, we like our spitballs, the teacher is impressed with the size and growing 'omph' of the power of our [size="1"]spit[/size]balls.

[Petrovich4]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1288229232' post='2494716']
They had pretty awful stats, but they purchase nukes at too low an infra level without enough economic wonders which restricts growth. The lack of SDIs means that they might be able to damage their opponents, but they are incapable of sucking up nukes. The low infra level caused by the relatively high bills also means they will have smaller warchests on average than other alliances and will not be able to wage war for as long (although, admittedly, they are in the lower tiers so the opposition wont be able to suck up their warchests at a huge rate).

Essentially, they have grown a lot, but due to some decisions they are growing at a much lower rate that they could potentially be if they held off nukes until 6k infra and 4-5 economic wonders.
[/quote]

Thank you for the compliment, however, to reference your first and second paragraph as vaguely as possibley ... to 'grow, grow, grow' at all costs is counterproductive to our geostrategic niche.

[Banksy]

[quote name='Petrovich4' timestamp='1288263144' post='2495086']
Thank you for the compliment, however, to reference your first and second paragraph as vaguely as possibley ... to 'grow, grow, grow' at all costs is counterproductive to our geostrategic niche.
[/quote]
Oh, i'm fully aware of what you guys are trying to do. I just think it's a bit of a waste, and that you could be significantly larger than you are now if you used more conventional growth tactics.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Tautology' timestamp='1288222246' post='2494561']
Where did you get that understanding from?
[/quote]
Nobody Expects was in BAPS during the Unjust War. He was allied to MK. He's talking from personal experience here.

[quote name='MagicalTrevor' timestamp='1288226445' post='2494625']
MK are the only alliance i can think of that survived the continium era while always being on the opposite side to it and [b]having no ties onto the inner circle at all.[/b]
[/quote]
This is obviously false, as Grämlins cared about MK and they were in the Continuum.

[quote name='Petrovich4' timestamp='1288262670' post='2495085']
No disrespect was taken from your post. Also, we don't brag. I was simply commenting on the fallacy that we are a shadow of our former selves. In terms of member quantity, yes we are. In other areas, no way - we have excelled. Also, we like our spitballs, the teacher is impressed with the size and growing 'omph' of the power of our [size="1"]spit[/size]balls.
[/quote]
You needed allies to take on Valhalla, for crissakes. The old FAN fought both Orders and made them bring in allies in order to defeat it.

Take on both Orders again by yourself and see how you do.

[Petrovich4]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1288266232' post='2495097']
You needed allies to take on Valhalla, for crissakes. [/quote]

We didn't ask.

Double check my post in regards to you, particularly our member count. Our past and current member count coupled with the timing of the war will hopefully illuminate our past strengths and weaknesses.

Because this:

[quote]The old FAN fought both Orders and made them bring in allies in order to defeat it.

Take on both Orders again by yourself and see how you do.
[/quote]

is based on ignorance.

We are not here to entertain you and prove ourselves to any external groups. We have already proved ourselves and will continue to prove ourselves based off of our standards. Your alliance has done jack all and will continue to do jack all like many other alliances that are simply [i]there[/i]. Be proactive.


Also, FAN have never been defeated.

[leprecon]

I can honestly say, had it not been for the destruction of the VE and the shattering defeat of GPA (no offense guys) I would not be interested in CN politics at all and I would have probably deleted a long time ago.

[Bob Janova]

[quote]The old FAN fought both Orders and made them bring in allies in order to defeat it.[/quote]
That's not really true, NPO's counter-blitz on FAN pretty much nailed them in military terms. FAN managed to do a lot of damage to the Orders through a guerilla campaign for many months, but the Orders were quite sufficient to defeat them.

[quote]Also, FAN have never been defeated. [/quote]
You signed surrender terms at the end of the first part of VietFAN. (Remember NPO claiming you broke them?) Even by the e-lawyer route, you lost that one. You might try to claim that they were 'peace terms' not 'surrender terms' but FAN was bound by several punitive terms and NPO was bound by none and was the enforcer of yours, so that was a surrender. Not that there's any shame in losing to the entire hegemonic bloc of the time.

[quote]This is obviously false, as Grämlins cared about MK and they were in the Continuum.[/quote]
I think he meant treaty ties. Before noCB, Grämlins were effectively blocked from signing an MDP with MK by TOP and secondarily Continuum alliances (secondarily in the sense that we cared much more about what TOP thought) and therefore there were no treaties binding MK to Continuum or Citadel. However, through GR they were chained into the Polar part of the 'inner circle' so it's only a three-quarter truth.

[lebubu]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1288266232' post='2495097']
This is obviously false, as Grämlins cared about MK and they were in the Continuum.
[/quote]

This does not refute his statement. Grämlins were not willing to sign with us or defend us.