Il Impero Romano Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1290928535' post='2525182'] MK might have that ambition, but anyone else in a position to challenge MK within the Coalition of the Bored would rather suck up to them. Hence, stagnation. [/quote] Challenge them for what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalaskan Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1290928819' post='2525185'] I wouldn't say no one. [/quote] Are you implicating VE as "the one?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1290929313' post='2525190'] If I turn out to be wrong on this I'll happily admit it. But not only have I seen no action...I haven't really even seen talk [/quote] Look in better places. [quote name='Chalaskan' timestamp='1290929563' post='2525194'] Are you implicating VE as "the one?" [/quote] VE clearly wants the old MK flag back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1290929432' post='2525191'] Challenge them for what? [/quote] Influence. Which they have, and your alliance certainly doesn't get a say over MK in this world. [quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1290930801' post='2525203'] Look in better places. [/quote] Eh, I don't care to dig around. If there really is drama going on amongst the Coalition of the Comfortable, I'm sure I'll learn about it via the method explained before. Never fails, and rarely teases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1290931405' post='2525207'] Influence. Which they have, and your alliance certainly doesn't get a say over MK in this world. Eh, I don't care to dig around. If there really is drama going on amongst the Coalition of the Comfortable, I'm sure I'll learn about it via the method explained before. Never fails, and rarely teases. [/quote] I don't believe TORN is as of the importance as it once might have been truth be told. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1290931996' post='2525209'] I don't believe TORN is as of the importance as it once might have been truth be told. [/quote] And...? I don't really contest that, even. But anyone who has to resort to saying that is conceding the point, really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 (edited) [quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1290931405' post='2525207'] Influence. Which they have, and your alliance certainly doesn't get a say over MK in this world. [/quote] You live in a very funny place, Mr. Woody. Problem is, there is no influence monopoly like there was in your hay day. Instead, there are peers. Keep operating under the assumption that MK is some NPOesqe boogyman puppeteer though, it really does make life easier when those across the fence are ignorant. [quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1290932077' post='2525212'] And...? I don't really contest that, even. But anyone who has to resort to saying that is conceding the point, really. [/quote] I believe what he was getting at is that as a result, you really don't have any idea whats going on anymore. Edited November 28, 2010 by Il Impero Romano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1290932077' post='2525212'] And...? I don't really contest that, even. But anyone who has to resort to saying that is conceding the point, really. [/quote] The method is valid if the overall situation is one that requires a side to garner support in order to fight, if one does not need it then why waste the effort? It's not really a slight at TORN, more saying that you can't rely on it when one side doesn't even need to start "acting friendly" to an alliance they normally wouldn't to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1290932133' post='2525213'] You live in a very funny place, Mr. Woody. Problem is, there is no influence monopoly like there was in your hay day. Instead, there are peers. Keep operating under the assumption that MK is some NPOesqe boogyman puppeteer though, it really does make life easier when those across the fence are ignorant. [/quote] *whoosh* I don't think MK are (trying) to be puppeteers, they're just top dog. Other alliances in the Coalition of the Comfortable give deference to them. Think like the alpha male in your pack, while most of the rest of you ride behind. Finally, your "across the fence" comment misses the point. There is no across the fence. The chances of a war with similar sides to the last two wars is almost zero. If you think otherwise, you'll probably draw the short straw when the time comes to see that you're wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1290932307' post='2525219'] The method is valid if the overall situation is one that requires a side to garner support in order to fight, if one does not need it then why waste the effort? It's not really a slight at TORN, more saying that you can't rely on it when one side doesn't even need to start "acting friendly" to an alliance they normally wouldn't to. [/quote] You'd be surprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 (edited) [quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1290932354' post='2525221'] You'd be surprised. [/quote] The fact that you don't know what's going on just confirms the fact to me that you're the one who'd be surprised truth be told. Edited November 28, 2010 by WarriorConcept Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1290932467' post='2525222'] The fact that you don't know what's going on just confirms the fact to me that you're the one who'd be surprised truth be told. [/quote] There's always "something going on", but rarely is it really anything but a tease to those involved. Believe me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1290932320' post='2525220'] *whoosh*[/quote] Haha, oh man, "woosh" with stars on both sides and everything. Golly gee, you got me good. [quote] I don't think MK are (trying) to be puppeteers, they're just top dog. Other alliances in the Coalition of the Comfortable give deference to them. Think like the alpha male in your pack, while most of the rest of you ride behind. [/quote] See my last post. A politician loosing touch is like a race horse not being able to run, might be time to go out to pasture big fella. [quote]Finally, your "across the fence" comment misses the point. There is no across the fence. The chances of a war with similar sides to the last two wars is almost zero. If you think otherwise, you'll probably draw the short straw when the time comes to see that you're wrong.[/quote] I was speaking of you, a long time, very vocal opponent. You most certainly are "across the fence", AA or lack thereof notwithstanding, simply because you are just that damn consistent with your attitude. Sorry for the confusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1290932951' post='2525228'] See my last post. A politician loosing touch is like a race horse not being able to run, might be time to go out to pasture big fella. [/quote] Something about attacking the messenger without making a real point would apply here. [quote]I was speaking of you, a long time, very vocal opponent. You most certainly are "across the fence", AA or lack thereof notwithstanding, simply because you are just that damn consistent with your attitude. Sorry for the confusion. [/quote] To be honest, I'm not really an opponent of VE as you aren't really an alliance worth being concerned over. As far as I care, in the next war we could be on the same side or different sides. Won't really factor into our decision either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1290932593' post='2525224'] There's always "something going on", but rarely is it really anything but a tease to those involved. Believe me. [/quote] It has to start somewhere, and something going on is in itself an indication that alliances are trying to stir something up, not just MK. Just because you haven't heard of it doesn't mean things aren't happening. Anyway, 'night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1290933108' post='2525231'] It has to start somewhere, and something going on is in itself an indication that alliances are trying to stir something up, not just MK. Just because you haven't heard of it doesn't mean things aren't happening. Anyway, 'night. [/quote] I'm pretty sure I have heard of what you're referring to, I just don't take it seriously. Once those sides start looking for backup, I'll know it's serious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koona Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1290932133' post='2525213'] Problem is, there is no influence monopoly like there was in your hay day. Instead, there are peers. Keep operating under the assumption that MK is some NPOesqe boogyman puppeteer though, it really does make life easier when those across the fence are ignorant. [/quote] You see peers, I see lack of ambition and drive, with you claiming to be so in sync you might as well all merge into 1 alliance, well you couldn't all claim to be alliance "leaders" then. As far as "culture" (MK certainly has it's distinct style) goes, you're pretty much all the same. And that is why MK is viewed by the world at large the leader of this merry band because they're unique. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 I agree with the people saying that the people at the top need to make the next move. NPO was the bad guy before, but they kept things going on because they were squashing those who rebelled against them, which kept everybody else in line because they didn't want to be demolished. Then, someone would get ballsy, and it would repeat. There were people who didn't have power but wanted it, and those who had power and wanted to keep it. The thing is, the rest of the world realized that if they banded together they could beat NPO with the help of some of their ex-allies, and now this situation no longer exists. PB, SF, and CnG are content knowing that all three of them have a pretty equal amount of power, and that if one of the blocs got out of line, the other two could band together and eliminate it. They also know that currently, the rest of the world can't challenge them, and if they start to get big, they can be squashed. While this is a very good point to be in if you're one of those 3 blocs, it's not if you're anybody else, and it's not if you really really like war. So, for something truly interesting to happen, the only thing I can see would be 2 of the 3 aforementioned blocs ganging up on the other one and getting rid of it, be that for whatever reason they might have. I could see it happening if bloc A was growing exponentially faster than blocs B and C, and then B and C destroyed A to keep it from taking away their power. Similarly, I can see it happening if bloc A lags far behind B and C in growth, and B and C want to expand their power by eliminating a competitor. Or maybe 2 of the 3 would gang up on bloc A anyway. And this is where either B and C or A can recruit the alliances left to come to their aid, to either make things into a total curbstomp, or to help even things out a bit. The problem then is that all of the people in blocs A, B, and C, are for the most part, friends with each other. This may be why we haven't seen anything happen yet, or maybe it's already in the making and I'm just out of the loop. Or maybe I am in the loop and trying to warn bloc A that it's about to get smashed Regardless, my point is that no significant actions can really be started off by members of the 'ex-hegemony' as we know them. Most of these alliances are pretty ostracized by the powers that be, and it's going to take a change in the layout of power, as well as the passage of time, for that to change and them to become major players again. Tl;dr - Just be patient, there's plenty of war left to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='Tautology' timestamp='1290902126' post='2524907'] More bread and circuses? [/quote] Yes, indeed. Bread and circuses. There are only two things that are interesting in this game, one is the political principles that some alliances espouse and the other is bread and circuses. Since most modern alliances do not really talk about political principles anymore (exceptions mostly being the older alliances like GATO, ODN and NPO), that means all you got is bread and circuses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Qaianna' timestamp='1290926262' post='2525162']I could've sworn a few folks over in Francograd smiled in delight at other results in the new world order, including a certain old Green alliance's fate ... [/quote] I am sure there was, though I just felt pity for them. From the moment Silverhawk said how GGA doesn't need WRCs as NPO has them for them, I just felt pity. GGA was harmless and irrelevant. Only people that could gloat over a demise of such an entity, had to have something personal against it as otherwise--its just sad and not worthy of strong emotions. [quote name='Qaianna' timestamp='1290926262' post='2525162']Still, it takes a few 'ins' to start thinking of the 'outs' as useful at some point for things to change, doesn't it?[/quote] I suppose. But as said, at this point in my game experience I am not motivated to hang on neither by posibility of changing or keeping any structures. I just want to see some burn to a crisp--and they be on all and every sides. Edited November 28, 2010 by Branimir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairna Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 My main worry is this whole "Friends > Infra" thing. Frankly, it's caught on far too well. This game only really works if you care about your infra. There's no real politics to be played out unless you care about your infra. Maybe we've just mastered the game mechanics so well that we can't really make drama that easily anymore. I mean, part of what made the GW's so awesome was because people could really mix stuff up with strategies. There's not much to do ( albeit, there's still military prowess differences and small things you can do) and so maybe CN's just gotten too comfortable. We should just merge the big alliances into micro-alliances with newbie leaders and let them have their go. Everybody: pick a micro ( I dibs PPF, regardless of what Opethian says ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='Cairna' timestamp='1290967385' post='2525342'] My main worry is this whole "Friends > Infra" thing. Frankly, it's caught on far too well. This game only really works if you care about your infra. There's no real politics to be played out unless you care about your infra. Maybe we've just mastered the game mechanics so well that we can't really make drama that easily anymore. I mean, part of what made the GW's so awesome was because people could really mix stuff up with strategies. There's not much to do ( albeit, there's still military prowess differences and small things you can do) and so maybe CN's just gotten too comfortable. We should just merge the big alliances into micro-alliances with newbie leaders and let them have their go. Everybody: pick a micro ( I dibs PPF, regardless of what Opethian says ) [/quote] I dibs CD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairna Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1290967655' post='2525346'] I dibs CD [/quote] CB is the only thing we'd ever want in us anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1290887566' post='2524727'] When were these days? [/quote] You must remember then! Remember when you were put on PZI if you used nukes? Oh wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uaciaut Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 [quote name='koona' timestamp='1290942219' post='2525257'] You see peers, I see lack of ambition and drive, with you claiming to be so in sync you might as well all merge into 1 alliance, well you couldn't all claim to be alliance "leaders" then. As far as "culture" (MK certainly has it's distinct style) goes, you're pretty much all the same. And that is why MK is viewed by the world at large the leader of this merry band because they're unique. [/quote] Problem existed since long ago, didn't bother you guys much because you took advantage of it, on the contrary you did everything possible to maintain it. Maybe we should be bringing down the hammer with big swings more often too. Then again we wouldn't rush into allying people who hate our pollicies and are bound to end up on the other side next war. I don't really get the culture thing, what do you think makes alliances apart from one another only ammount of ambition and drive? 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.