Leaderboard

Sorry to interrupt your regular pixel burning, but I felt like talking about the pig-disgusting habit of pixel huggery. As Orbis is where it should be (with - almost - everyone reking each others' pixels), I thought it was a good time to reflect on this fascinating phenomenon, which directly correlates to war dodging. Over the years I've been playing this game, I've come to observe many people, and a few alliances in particular, repeatedly war dodge. The 2 best examples are Dark Brotherhood and RnR. DB is yet to participate in an alliance war (Yoda did fight a bit in Knightfall which led to some TKRsphere nations hitting DB but it ended quickly), having been around for a considerable amount of time. RnR, which has several nations that originated from the former (and also pixel hugging) RnR, plus a bunch of other nations versed in the ways of war dodging, is also yet to take part in an alliance war. Imo this requires a lot of skill, mainly political. I would have thought for sure that joining NPO's side would inevitably make DB finally fight, but apparently I was wrong. I hope at least they're serving as cash cows for their allies, which would somewhat help justify their pathetic existence. RnR is a slightly different case. Led by one of the biggest pixel huggers in the game (thanks for the embargo on my alliance btw honeybuns :*), you merely have to take a look at their war stats to come to the conclusion that we're talking about pixel hugging / war dodging professionals. Politics aside (I've pretty much stopped caring about them since Knightfall ended), I think this is where we as a community have failed. We used to talk trash about GPA war profiteering. This is much worse. These are neutrals disguised as real alliances. When you see several nations (some of them with incredibly low city count) with ridiculously high amounts of infra in one alliance, and p much the rest of the game is burning, you come to the inevitable conclusion that these folks have been outsmarting the rest of us pretty hard. So I just hope one day someone (I don't care who although I hope I'll participate) will finally roll this pixel hugging trash into the dirt, and make them see they can't always play in peace mode. I for one have been doing my part and will give a forum cookie to anyone who's kind enough to calculate the total damage I've dealt RnR with my solitary roguery.

As high gov, this is as good as stating permawar. This is one piece of why peace talks have not and will not happen in the foreseeable future. The other piece is this war is not yet decided. There has still not been any sort of description from the other side as to what their definition of victory is. We've submitted our narrative and it's relatively digestible. I am eagerly awaiting your metrics for how we are losing the war and will lose decisively. I think I've made it clear to at least one member of your coalition's high gov that I am for white peace, because the best we believe you can hope for is a draw, and a draw in 3 months. See response above. I am with Thrax here. I don't agree with the salt the earth rhetoric, but I can understand where it came from. I can't speak for Scarf or Sketchy, but I was about as upset as someone can be at a nation sim when t$ and then NPO entered. I deleted the t$ embassy from our discord. This is to say, we say things when we are pissed. On the first paragraph, I believe I addressed it in my above response. For the rest, permawar and harsh terms are directly threatening to the existence of an alliance. While these threats have been made out right, we are not surrendering. Which brings me to NPO. Again I agree with Thrax, logic doesn't mean what people think it means. You can act on incorrect assumptions and still be logical, and this is the argument we make. If the assumptions made by NPO were true, they'd be correct. They are not and are not founded on strong evidence, so we find the assumption lacking and cannot agree with the following assumptions. In sum, we won't surrender, you won't end the war unless we surrender. I am open to any and all talks without precondition, which is not what is being proposed by the opposition, and as far as I am aware is not the united front of the opposition, just BK and TCW.

Do you though? Aside from some low tier guys who I'm sure are making bank, there's precisely one unrolled big nation left in all of Chaos. Unless of course you're talking about the survivors in Rose and GoB, who I'm sure will be happy to fund your rebuilds since you guys are all one big happy family! But sure, the bumblers who couldn't even win the whale tier after a couple weeks are definitely keeping us all down economically. Whatever helps you sleep better Thrax.

I disagree with you here. What's their experience in this game? They do nothing but log in and buy their pixels. It is fun to grow in cities, land, and infra, but eventually they gets boring. Are they really having fun with the game? I imagine they're also very fragile. What would happen if DB and RnR got hit really hard? Got sat on for a while? How would their community perform? Would they shed a lot of members? They probably would. There's no resilience there. I don't think they've been outsmarting anyone. I do think their government might deserve praise for being able to avoid war for so long. That is rather difficult to pull off. However, I think it's all very brittle and there's no virtue in a house of cards. Sorry if this post reads weird. For some reason my thinking is very fragmented rn lol.

Its funny so many approved and yet Alex didnt listen he ignored us for too long. Now we rise up once more. As stated in the post above Water would serve as a food like resource with modifications. It would be needed in order for the nation to properly function like you see with food. It can also be traded like any resource in the Market. Here are some ideas with what you can also do with water. Water would be produced via Water Pumps which would be worth one improvement slot each. Power Hydroelectric Power Plants - this would turn water into elecriticty similiar to Oil, Coal and Nuclear Plants. Hydroelectric Power Plants are the most efficent power sources. Costs to build hydroelectric plants should be high but maintaining one should be pretty low as it would be irl. Nuclear Cooling - water would be used in order to keep Nuclear Power Plants at a safe level, a small amount of water would be used as to not make running nuclear power plants not worthwhile. If a nation doesnt have water the Nuclear Power Plant will shut down not being able to produce power until water is bougnt with a small chance of an explosion occuring which would destroy the Power Plant, destroy 300 to 700 infra, and give radation levels similiar to a nuke in the city. Military Water would be also used to keep Military Troops well maintained and operational. If troops dont have enough water they will be unusable like an actual military force would. Disease/Pollution Once a city reaches a certain size, water would began acting polluted and would raise disease and pollution levels, to combat this players would need to build Water Treatment Centers to combat this, they would work similiar to how Recycling Centers, Hospitals, and Police Stations work and the ratio of water pumps to treatment would be between 6:1 to 10:1. Projects Water Reclamation Plant - This would cost one project slot and once built will boost water production in every city buy an additional 25%, they would have no affect on water pollution rates. It would also be fairly cheap. If you have any more ideas with water please feel free to shate them.

There is indeed a paralel in the other direction, where the side that felt it was winning wanted to hold out for a surrender. T'would suggest that wanting it isn't enough to get it. I don't think many on our side think you can't try for a surrender, we just don't think the war situation warrants it. I can say personally, if I felt we had decisively lost, I would be willing to surrender. Rightly or wrongly, that is not how we see things. In any case, I found it funny that people now suggesting white peace is innapropriate for aggressors had themselves demanded that for their own aggression. You can tack on the other way as well, though I think less strongly. History repeats itself I guess.

You never had to rely solely on my word for this decision but, unless I'm missing something major here, I don't think I've ever given you a good reason not to trust my word. Feel free to hit me up in DMs if I am missing something and you want to discuss it. Ignoring everything I've claimed after the fact though and just focusing on what was said before you expanded things, there was an entire coalition full of people that saw me push for the opposite of what you're claiming, me directly telling your allies we weren't expanding the war because we believed you to be a separate war/entity from BK and that we had no intention of working with KETOGG post war, and a record of me stating the former publicly, all of which was fantastic PR ammunition if we'd gone against it. We had no interest in expanding the war to you and we had no reason to hit you in revenge for your isolated opportunistic hit on Guardian/Grumpy. Given that you're talking about "impressions" and "tone" and have said you don't have logs, it seems pretty obvious to the rest of us just how far you're stretching to make this CB. Saying I supposedly deleted something in a DM with one of your allies that directly implicates us, seems incredibly suspect, especially combined with the tones and impressions arguments. It's also interesting to see you publicly state that we were a threat but you supposedly now have no concern about TGH and KT doing what you claimed we were planning when it's their ally you hit and after stating just yesterday how poorly you're taking Sketchy's angry shittalking and Scarf's frustration at feeling like the game was over after you hit. All throughout this war, even after your hit on Guardian/Grumpy, we've been pushing against expanding it and focusing instead on our war with BK and the people who posed an immediate threat to us, which we didn't believe you did. Clearly we were wrong to believe that given your actions.

1. You have consistently attacked NPO's CB 2. You publicly defended that CB I linked despite it being less valid than NPO's current one 3. Just because something happened yesterday doesn't mean it's irrelevant. In fact, hypocrisy and double standards are always relevant. By your logic we shouldn't judge people on their actions which is literally retarded. Either accept that GW5 was a bullshit CB and since you defended it you therefor have no grounds to criticize NPO's current CB or publicly admit you're untrustworthy and sit down and shut up so people who are morally consistent can debate properly.

Our entry in the Knightfall war was optional. I chose to assist when Partisan asked us for help. Admittedly we considered leaving Knightfall earlier but the decision was made to stay till the end after talking to some people. TKR was extremely persistent and nuked us till the very last day of Knightfall. It certainly did not "end quickly" As for the current war, I originally wanted to assist CoA with their front but three high gov members were on vacation overseas so the plan had to be shelved. Some of my gov members are teenagers; I can't expect their parents to leave them alone at home to fight a war in a browser game while the rest of the family goes on a family vacation.

The best part of this is that you put in euros and it gives you dollars.

That's ridiculous, it's unfair! Sometimes friends can only be pushed so far. Sometimes we have to take matters into our own hands... Everyone reach for the sky! Put the money in the bag! We're not leaving unless it's 2 billion (or more)!

Same as above for you, Roq. I definitely do believe someone is lying/spinning things beyond recognition here and I know it's not me. If you want to discuss this more in depth with me, the same offer exists.

House Stark isn't passive. They just conduct all their foreign affairs via drive-by memeing.

"Keshav's excellent post". hahaha. Good one. Getting a good chuckle out of Hodor assuming good faith, too. Poor guy. The war was pointless from the start: wasn't our side that wanted it. But it's nice to see you admitting you want to force terms instead of having a white peace, especially considering how much your alliance has leaned on your coalition to bail you out of your own leak and failed try at making a curbstomp. There's really no incentive for our side to take terms from you as far as I can see, because with how your coalition has behaved we stand more to gain from keeping all of you from making revenue: bear in mind, more of you than there are of us, and we have people who are still up economically and you do not. Forcing terms requires either leverage or faith, and you don't really have either.

Please, PLEASE, tell me you're not this dense... Just read my posts.

I will try and state this once more and then I’ll give up. In no uncertain terms, it’s been stated here the condition of peace is our surrender. I’ve made it abundantly clear we are not entering into peace talks with that precondition. I literally conceded this point? I’m not sure who you’re arguing with? I don’t think I’ve ever said anything about this? So how am I being disingenuous? You’re being very antagonistic in response to a very bland post dude. I’m on mobile but if your truly believe this I can provide logs and forum quotes to discredit the whale portion. I don’t doubt that NPO did feel like we were a credible threat. I don’t think anyone will convince you otherwise so I’ve not attempted to argue that. I have made narrow arguments because those are the arguments that are important to discuss. I’m not here to reopen toxic topics like these. I don’t know what else to say to this given in this thread preconditions were given and you keep switching your argument. I’m sorry, but again, what do you think I’m doing in this thread? I’ve not been antagonistic until now because, and I genuinely mean this, I do not think you’re understanding what I’m saying. I’m on my phone, but I just couldn’t see my words so wrongly misinterpreted. Forgive the brevity.

The picture is gone, but TS was not named in it. It was a generic "enemies of npo" type deal.

Antagonism begets antagonism, that much is obvious. If antagonism (concessions) is the the tool to discourage antagonism, we’re going to be stuck in the cycle forever.

Literally these were posted in THIS thread mere posts above your own: I'll make the same statement I usually make. I'll assume you're arguing in good faith and eager and that's why you didn't actually read my post in detail. I made clear my stance and you seemed to miss that part. As for operational control, I do think this is a good metric, thank you for presenting it. The counter argument I've made to this is two fold. Operational control *should* be reflected in the stats. If you are preventing military buildup, while still inflicting damage, you will be netting small gains in net damage. This is supported by what the stats show right now AND what we've been saying that you may have operational control but the rate at which you do damage once it's established is so slow that you won't flip damages for months, if ever. Additionally, in order to continue to exert operational control it requires a relatively large amount of effort and coordination that is also a drain on economic activity for both sides. I've posed this to Roq and I'll pose it here. NPO entered due to fear of CHAOS/KETOG taking advantage of the fact that their whales lost their infra and they would use this advantage to hit NPO to minimize damage to themselves. You've pulled our whales (except the ones you actually wanted), so you've created the insecurity you were afraid of. Low infra whales with not much to lose who are able to thwart an all planes strat with ground and naval buys. In sum (this is the important stuff), I don't expect to convince you of our narrative, and you shouldn't hope to convince me. We have our rationales for our actions. What's important is we understand that neither is talking out their ass and is engaging in dialogue in good faith. There are few people in this game's leadership that I know of that lack that ability, so I'm optimistic. No. Your reading comprehension is lacking. I literally said " I am open to any and all talks without precondition" I'm not sure what is more clear than that? I'm not really sure what the word decisively is supposed to mean in this post... I addressed the rest of your points above.

I don't balme DB tbh, all of the nations there who wanted to war are now in GS also live news from yoda that was live about a month ago (said in a public chat) DB would be top 15 if we hadn't stolen his members no shit, but these peeps were going to leave anyway, we just have them cos they our friends I invite anyone around the 14-24 city count who wants to experience either half (or potentially both!) if the name of the game to come to GS with an open mind, we don't want you if your going to tell us what to do ? #sellout

Do you call this persistent? Do you really want to see how really persistent looks like?

As someone who disapproves of PC culture and bending over because someone is offended, I personally welcome this alliance. Many alliances, groups, games, etc hold alliances, nations, and the such with themes derived from a multitude of cultures, government types, and history that all include bad shit. Being an American and someone who not only celebrates history, but enjoys history as a thing that shouldn't be forgotten, erased, or shit on - but remembered, celebrated, and learned from - there ain't nothing wrong with a confederate themed alliance. Just like there ain't nothing wrong with a soviet, chinese, communist, socialist, nazi themed alliance. There is a line between a theme and actually pushing rhetoric of hate. Just because you as a person are weak and are told something is bad and should be erased doesn't mean it needs to be. You can disagree and share an opinion, but pushing for something to go away because you are awfully uneducated isn't how it works. Additionally, shouting at newer alliances that happen to be small isn't any way to act in a community - micros quite literally never appear on the radar of larger alliances in terms of actual gameplay unless they do some dumb stuff and raid - in which case, just play the game. New people and new alliances should never be made to feel unwelcome in this community. The community should grow and prosper. That being said, there needs to be a way to organize. Back in my day of moderation, albeit there were some shit moderators who moderated incorrectly, things were kept pretty simple. This new moderation team has allowed for certain things to happen which in my experience only happens when someone cannot separate their moderation identity from their in-game identity. Swifter moderation and moderators who actually cruise the forums is what is needed to move things before they derail out of control like this thread. Separating forums was something I've always been against, however at this time it would seem that it is the best option - My suggestion would be to separate by alliance rank. Normally, those within the higher ranks are more relevant politically with relevance dropping as you move further down the list. The issue here would be alliances dropping in rank in war...but if you did something like top 50 alliance affairs forum vs the next 50, that covers 100 alliances. So maybe just 3 forums tiered by rank for news. This should create an easy system for moderators to simply move to the desired category.............instead of micro tags or a simple micro forum, because as @Alex said, which I agree, defining micro is a bit broad.

For me and you, yeah, they don't seem to be having fun k. But the fact that they've been at it for ages makes me think they are. I personally think weak alliances (composed of members who can't cope with war, which might even make them ragequit) have, or should not have, a place in this game. Economically yes, they have been outsmarting the shit out of us. Would I have fun if I were them? Certainly no, but that's not my point vro. EDIT: my point is that we used to flame those who had the guts of owning their pixel huggery, aka GPA with their neutrality and TFP with their name, and we've been doing nothing to alliances who consistently hide behind treaties to get ahead of the rest economically. So I do hope some day we put politics aside and roll the shit out of them.

Complaining about some infra selldowns a month and a half after they happened? Man, talk about myopic. I think the thing you fail to grasp Ronny, is that Sphinx sold down that infra because it was going to be destroyed anyway, and so he could get lower and help out his members and allies clear out the mid and upper tiers through downdeclares - you know actually contributing something of value to the coalition he's a part of. This is of course in stark contrast to the bumblers in GoB, who have spent this war whining about "muh 3.8 billion" and doing nothing to assist their allies while they all got rolled. Then of course when we got to you guys, you waited patiently to die or even worse built tanks and expensive infrastructure to preserve your precious nations for another week. All GoB has been good for is padding our stat sheets - maybe you should've sold down too, eh? If given the choice between Sphinx and a hundred weak, selfish GoB members, I'd choose him every time. I know I'd get something of value in the trade.

69/10 water should be already in-game. But Africa shouldn't be able to have water.

Yeah he paid me back from his winnings. Otherwise I would've repo'd his nation..... lucky bastard. I can't speak for the rest of the stuff but that's how he grew to 22 cities. I also loaned at the same time another $2b loan to Alexio. EDIT: For the record he's beaten me pretty decisively to 30 cities. I built my 30th at 786 days old, EM did it 650 days. Not sure how he did it quicker than me, since I was at peace for 15 months in Pantheon and sold every single thing I had so I didn't have a WC the entire time, but doesn't really concern me, congrats EM.

I do accept it. This exchange has been quite nice. But a non-executive member of NPO government talking to a non-executive member of TGH government won't change the tenor of the relations between our alliances or our coalitions, no matter how polite or accommodating we are here. The substance of what's been said far more often, in far more contexts, by more important people than us is that Roquentin and Keshav are hypocrites and liars whose actions are breaking the game, and that Buorhann and Sketchy have, together, been toxic, hostile, and deliberately obtuse about the way minispheres can reasonably be expected to function.

>we don’t do secret treaties Uh, well, that is awfully interesting. I’m guessing NPO moving in on Guardian/Grumpy, then later on TKR was just a huge coincidence then? Or could it be that Roq wanted to maintain a healthy relation/contacts with BK? Which I’ve had multiple references of (And one of which was posted publicly indirectly from a log drop). We’ve already held arguments about why it wouldn’t make sense to move onto Syndicate/NPO after the war. You also claim that you haven’t had any threats from KETOG side, but NPO and it’s current treaty ties struck us first. So what is it, @Shadowthrone?

Wrong. The cb was a the recruitment message specifically naming ts as an enemy in a political context of gradual consolidation of treaties among paragon, covenant and more recently, npo (who paired with alpha whom we'd had a falling out with and allied specific paracov majors/rivals of tS). The meme carryover was in bad taste but its not why we went to war. We went to war because we identified a very specific threat to our security. I'd say the cb was better than half we have seen in this world.

You set them back a few days of income. Sadly, that's a bit of a drop in the ocean of profit their war dodgery has netted.

Yeah, I think the issue is, you don't want to believe us. We're standing our ground on the matter. We didn't expect you to agree with what we did. You had your own goals and us acting in what we perceive to be our best interest runs contrary to them. The problem is there are three possibilities: what is said by us is in good faith or I totally made it up or we hallucinated it and it didn't happen. The only positions I've seen most people on the other side earnestly take are #2 and #3 and in a partisan environment that's to be expected, but also means we don't have to be concerned as much with what those people think as it's a lose-lose and the other thing we learned is if they get an edge even if they thought the odds were initially against them they'll go for the jugular instead of not pushing their luck. The reason I didn't bother replying to Adrienne's post is 1. I stopped reading the topic after I posted the last time to avoid wasting further time on circular arguments. 2. It's pretty clear that the response would be that evidence was tampered with. 3. It ends up with two people who spoke with Adrienne and derived the same impression despite not having any ill will towards her at all having been the ones wrong as opposed to just Adrienne. I know who I'm inclined to believe. You're inclined to believe and your coalition chose to rally around TKR. That was your decision. Personally given the history of limited fronts, I was never inclined to believe there would be no retaliation and other people pointed out what had happened. So everything was reliant on a non-existent level of trust, but it wasn't really the same as just thinking that it would be opportune to pursue a separate conflict when the main opposition was brought down and they would pursue a divide and conquer approach and get the big fish they were constantly antagonizing. No one would have taken the external posturing as non-hostile and the gladhanding last minute doesn't really count as removing any suspicion. For me, knowing there was a goal of removing peripherals meant many actors would be left unoccupied and many were available to counter when we entered. They weren't all selling down or doing anything against Cov/BK. On the secret treaties topic, you can see with all the exits and clashes that this wasn't a cohesive group from the get-go while coalition unity has been more or less 100% on the other side. When Arrgh did a bank robbery in the last war and CoA pointed out it was their money, no one gave a hoot outside of their direct allies, us, and HS and the worst that happened was an inconsequential term was removed while they got all the money from the heist. In this war, Arrgh complied with their coalition's wishes.

I mean I'm quite certain every sentence is logically valid. Far more valid than claiming BK supports slaves. But I mean go on, teach me how to english senpai. That's not true. There's no real fantasy over why we've entered. You can disagree with the reasons, does not make it a "fantasy" lol. I mean that is not true. We entered because we believed in TKR looking to roll us, and had people tell us the same. The question at the end of the day is how much trust/faith you place in the words of folks and in this case, the events made sense. We looked at how things played out and the options on the table and what could happen, and took the one we believe was our best choice. We spoke to tS/HS about it at length, but at the end of the day, we were threatened and took the best option to defend ourselves. No logs of what? My DM's with folks? Those exist, those were shared with relevant parties. I'm not burning friends for your pleasure. Those conversations that were in my DM's were shared and we ran a different set of arguments, looking at our options. Given that non-expansion of the war at that point was counter-productive for our safety, given the knowledge of TKR wanting to eventually swing around to hit us, made us act lol. I'm just posting how things were received by the NPO and how the information added up. Lol. I wish I had a paperless tie to BK at this point just to troll you tbh. But the only agreement that was ever made was something discussed with Kayser on defending mini-spheres, regardless of whom. That went to shit when he went AWOL and seemingly didn't mention it to everyone involved when the sphere was being created. Lessons learnt Lol okay. I mean if you want to start peace talks, feel free to lay your terms to the appropriate parties. Aragorn/Sphinx have spoken what they'd like to have seen, but we're a coalition and at a coalition level is where the peace works. If you want a victory condition, it's quite straight forward. I've always considered operational control as the key factor to deciding a war. We have operational control and access to keep pushing up, while your coalition is on the backfoot, with far lesser number of planes, and definitely not destroying more planes than we're able to rebuy in a day. You aren't able to maintain the said control across the board. While the war is no way yet decided, seeing the trends, I do believe we can maintain operational control and ensure that your nations sit in the grinder for however long you wish them to be there. Given that GoB is sitting pretty and those whales are far too busy hiding from getting down to help folks, and that the only real number of nations left are about 20-25 in Guardian/GoB and about 8-9 coalition wide, its a valid assumption to make that we have the command of the commons as such within this war~ Our assumptions are not incorrect, as much as you'd wish them to be incorrect. There is no level evidence that you'd find acceptable given the fact that we are in the position of warring you. There is no PR to be found within KETOGG/Chaos for the NPO and none that we want either. We believed that TKR posed a threat, we received information regarding their intent, and we acted upon it. It's at the end of the day down whether I believe Adrienne with her word, and I do not. Akuryo asked earlier why I point to Roq agreeing with the information? From my dealings with him for the better portion of the last decade, he's probably the hardest individual I've come across when its dealing with information. Our gov has seen all of the information and it has been vetted and we are in agreement that there was a credible threat. It's not ideal when I had to tell them I don't have the specific logs of Adrienne but there is this information and looking at how the war was playing out, we believed it was credible. It wasn't the easiest decision to make, but I for one have zero regrets and do not believe our information was bad. I mean I haven't seen any precondition here. We aren't interested in approaching y'all for peace yet, and you are content to continue the war, so I don't see where the question of peace arises at the moment. We're content to keep it going as long as you want it, and if you want to start peace talks, feel free to hit up the coalition through official channels. Given how there has been minimal discussion regarding peace and the conditions of it as a coalition wide level outside of jokes/troll terms, I find it weird to assume we have specific preconditions or have designed a set of terms (we have not done either iirc). With regards to the NPO's stance, I'll leave that for Roquentin to answer via the multiple communication channels you have to reach him. I haven't seen any of your denials up till this post. If you have posted elsewhere, I may have missed it, but up till this post, it seemed Sketchy's opinion on how to run the war was an acceptable position of TGH. NPO/BK do not do secret treaties. If I wanted a treaty with BK, I'd sign it. The only real relationship that exists between BK and the NPO at this point is that we are in the same coalition together ?‍♀️ Let's break this down shall we? 1) Someone posted claiming we're toxic since Roq/Leo (specifically) were rooting for perma-war and disbanding alliances. I pointed out how that's false and the only leader to publicly state that was Sketchy here on the boards. 2) If you're really trying to twist what I've said, try harder. I'd say Paksy has a better grasp of doing that, than you at this point. 3) Yes, from TKR. Never once did we state the threat arose from TGH/KT/Empyrea. The original entrance on GoB/Guardian and the N$O plan hinged on fighting upper tier consolidation. Given what we heard from TKR, it became imperative for the NPO to expand, N$O disagreed but that was our call at the end of the day. There was a credible threat from TKR. You have not seen me mention threats from KT/TGH/Empy because I have not heard of any. What I have seen though is your leader calling to salt the earth and your member(s) calling for our disbandment. The latter is out of your control, the former like I mentioned above I haven't seen denied up till the post. Let me point you back to point number 1) as to why I brought up Sketchy, rather than trying to extrapolate an argument that does not exist

Dude, that Gif Quality is phenomenal. Take my Upvote.

My Infra was doomed anyway, it was a better use of our coalitions only mega whale (I'm 4 cities bigger than the next largest on our side, Who also happens to be a tCW member) if I dropped score and helped out people with suicide hits in the lower tier and mid tier, winning the war and helping my alliance and coalition allies is my main priority so I'm willing to make whatever sacrifice I must to ensure that happens. Not every hit has gone well for tCW, but knowing tCW is the only alliance on our side with any decent number of whales (Apart from a few guys in AK) with the capability to hit the largest in KERCHTOGG means that we've got a vital role to play, we adjusted our normal military start to run only planes because doing anything other than that would put us even more out of range of allied support and we want to be a useful addition to our allies, which was the whole idea of what I wanted when I originally said I hoped to "restore tCW's military reputation", since the rep I wanted to restore wasn't what war enemies thought of us (I don't care if they think we're trash). Instead the rep I wanted to restore was our reputation towards allies. Since in KF we fell apart and were pretty much a dead weight for Grumpy, TKR and Guardian. Since tCW is still remaining strong 2 months after this war started, our morale is rock solid and our member numbers are unchanged and infact grown slightly its safe to say we've had a massive improvement since KF, but more work is still needed but tCW is back in business.

If by hide in the upper tier you mean sell 3.8 billion in infra and only buy planes to keep your NS low you are correct, you are hiding from us. As for your military competence, the 3 dudes you sent after me last round (including yourself) you lost all your planes, one dude ran out of gas/munitions mid fight, and the last guy, that actually had me dead to rights, shot missiles and nukes at me. You boys are at the top of your game.

@Akuryo @Pasky Darkfire Aku you should realise by now not to take what I say on the RON server (Unless its clearly marked as official) to heart. I love shit talking on that server, especially with you, which you should obviously know. Also the difference between what I said and what Scarf and Sketchy said, is their intent towards who they directed it to. S&S, were clearly directing their talk of 'disbanding us' towards anyone even remotely close to BK/NPO, which happens to include the entire coalition to some degree. I merely spoke of Aku's group and those tied with them, (That doesn't include Chaos or KETOG etc) which is a small portion of your side. Regardless I've got no interest in seeing an alliance disband (After all Orion has a loan with you, why would I want a customer to disband?). But considering this is attempt number 4001 of KERCHTOGG trying to sway the narrative, gotta give you guys brownie points for trying. Looking forward to seeing what new topic attempt number 4002 will be. The war's still very fun for my members and I, so we're continuing for however long we need to secure victory.

Brilliant idea! I love the idea of water! One of my friends is water (shout out to @Fiji God) so I really like this idea. Now, I'm leaving this comment here to hopefully boost this. I don't know the algorithms of the forums, but I'm going to assume that comments means that it's pushed higher up. 10/10. Could be apart of my "I'm Not High! You're high!" series. I mean it's perfect.

The conversion rate in today's economy is insane.

I respect the departure from the sphere but i don’t know where you’re going ? best of luck I guesss

Forgive me if there's an obvious explanation for this I'm not privvy to but I happened to look at your nation. How and why did a nation under two years old buy up to city 30 in the middle of a war?

whatever you say there chief

Back to OP, as stated in another recently locked topic many think war mechanics are "broken" allowing for long ass global wars, while I think that is true to a large degree, leaders/people are "broken" also- grudges, delusional thinking of equalising the "damage gap", more damage done being the only thing deciding the winner, soon there be harsh reps, willingness to drag shit on in hopes the other side looses more members then you, meaningless or not a treat alliances getting hit just because lulzs, unwilligness to put your membership first and give diplomacy a chance, stubbornly demanding ludicrious shit from the loosing side as peaceterms, neutralism similar to racisism only directed at neutrals, huge egos just not able to let shit go, hegemony building - Orbis has seen it all. There used to be wars here, even big ones, that were done in a month some conflicts even lasted under 5 rounds and stuff got handled, AAs could go back to normal peacetime shit, now that´s impossible and yes over all amount of resources plays a role but so do the people and memberships of AAs that are willing to accept long boring conflicts just in hopes the "other side" will give up first... So in closing this war I totally can see lasting till Christmas or New Years, maybe even longer...

And if you were familiar with what that term actually meant, you'd realize that doesn't actually help his case but in fact makes it so much worse.

While I agree, it would be nice to eliminate this weird mechanic, I don't really know how to go about it in a meaningful way. I mean the simplest answer would be just to eliminate looting of alliance banks altogether. While that's not ideal, and basically makes funds/rss untouchable, that's more or less the de facto status quo anyway. It would eliminate all the extra 1-3 nation alliances clutter, and there's be less of a penalty to some nations/alliances for not being clever enough about hiding their stuff. The mechanics would more or less be the same as now; you could hide all of your money/rss in a bank (your alliance bank) and if you got Blockaded you'd be screwed. I don't know, I don't like it, but it wouldn't really make anything different than it is now.

They ARE an upper tier threat. Especially since they hang on the coattails of two alliances with massive upper tiers. Guardian actually is mostly upper tier. Why they protect them i don't know. There's so much potential you could with that alliance but instead it's wasted. Too much mushy-gooey friendship crap here. This isn't a My Little Pony episode, smh. More pragmatic slaughter, less hippy-dippy nonsense.