Leaderboard

Waffle House Declaration of existence Credit to Evie for writing this! *The scene opens, introducing our main characters, Jacob Apple and Duncan Croford. Duncan invited Jacob out for breakfast at a Waffle House, saying he had a huge bombshell of a proposal to offer him. We arrive now at the beginning of their discussion.* Jacob:” Greetings Duncan. Please have a seat, I was just about to place my order.” *He waves him over, with a friendly smile on his face* Duncan:” Hey Jacob, why did you arrange this meeting?” *Duncan sits across from Jacob, placing his order as well* Jacob:” Oh, I have my reasons. But come on, relax, enjoy a meal. It’s been a while since we have done that, old friend.” Duncan:” I suppose you’re right.” *Their orders arrive, and as they are eating Jacob brings up his proposal* Jacob:” So, you're still in charge of the Brotherhood Family?” Duncan:” Always have been. Same with you for the Stratosphere Marine Corps?” Jacob:” You know it. Now, I've been thinking. Our alliances are doing well on their own, but just imagine how much better they would be if we merged together. Just imagine it. Our merged alliance, moving on up to at least top 20. Don’t you agree it’s a good idea?” *Duncan sits and ponders what he is bringing up, as he begins to speak* Duncan:” You’re painting a very pretty picture to me, Jacob. I would love to take you up on your offer.” *They shake hands, both of them grinning from excitement* Jacob:” Now, what would this alliance be called? Stratosphere Family? Brotherhood Corps?” *Duncan sits and thinks, and suddenly gets a grin on his face* Jacob:” What are you grinning about over there, Duncan?” Duncan:” Why don’t we name our alliance after the place we made the decision in?” Jacob:” Waffle House?” Duncan:” Waffle House.” *They both stand, and recite the same line” Both:”As of this day, Brotherhood Family and the Stratosphere Marine Corps are now merged, and our new alliance shall be known as Waffle House.” FIN

Hey Greene! Wanted to give you a heads up that courtesy of a gov member that decided not to deal with your BS, your entire gov chat has been leaked to RON. See ya!

-

9convert.com_-_Didnt_ask_Dont_care_plus_Youre_white_Martin_Cabello_III.mp4

GoB isn't the bloated size it is today because it has grown through the traditional means. GoB grew entirely through immigration of the games biggest whales from their traditional/original alliances and spheres to GoB. You are an example of that. No one in t$ would ever encourage nor want an alliance to disband. GoB is a community and those community members have every right to be and play together.

several months ago in the Grumpy t$ embassy...

I mean, a bunch of CTO's ties were involved in counters, with their MDP's own ties being hit. It's not exactly surprising they'd max soldiers as a precaution. As for the builds; you max slots for what you intend to buy to get the largest buy you can. Even if it's just one buy. You then decide whether to keep the imps or sell them once you've got the buy in. It's not really outside of what you had been informed.

I'll correct a few things in turn. He told you it was max for 30+, rest got a buy. Rose did mil after everyone else. As I've said before, I don't mind you milling as a precaution. CTO had gone max soldiers because we had gotten involved on the KT thing so it was a reasonable precaution on their end, and upped it following your mass swapping. HS also started milling after HW's response. As for e$... really? Need I elaborate that they're an extension of t$? Yes, naturally things such as MMR's are going to be standardized between both alliances. If you genuinely thought that they were a separate entity and that changes in it were outside of the response given to you, then that's frankly on you. The rest's been covered by W/Adam, so I won't expand upon it.

heavy drinking bad

This is absolutely hilarious if true. Is all of this another scheme to route out leakers? Or are they going insane from their inability to route out said leakers? Either way, their methods to reduce leakers seem to ironically produce more leakers.

Google doc with all the images would be easier next time. That way you can put all your images on one doc and not have to deal with the limit.

lol, "Alex can I automate giving you ad revenue?" Alex:

Neo has, for the past few weeks, been actively engaged in a plot to harm the Lazarus Order of the 770, to generally usurp any authority from the leaders of this alliance, before summarily departing and creating a new alliance with our allies. Against the wishes of our allies, he has also been attempting to foment discord and disunity within their respective ranks so as to make a forced merger easier. For these and other reasons, he has been banned from the Lazarus Order of the 770. The long and short of it is that a single member of our government decided he could do a better job of leading everyone. He has from the onset, been trying to force the Archs into completely changing how we operate. 770 was built on a freedom to play the game the way our members want to play, and that is incompatible with the way that Neo wanted the alliance to operate. We launched the DEFCON-5 wars as a means of testing certain readiness and other things. It has been eye-opening that one person would be able to damage our abilities so soundly. Neo was instructed to help everyone learn the war system against a more competent (as in coordinated), not inactive opponent. Up until now, our members have only gone against inactive targets. He didn't do his job. Instead, he tried to force us and other alliances into a merger with him at the helm. There is documentation backing this up made public on our discord. He got the swift kick out of the monastery. As per Duncan Croford, of the Waffle House, they were intending to sign DEFCON-5 all along, however wanted to hold off to see how DEFCON-5 was able to defend and hold up before hand. Indeed, there is a common history and background shared between both alliances. Equally, when 770 withdrew from The Johnsons to form our own bloc, the treaty that existed between our two alliances was always merely a nominal one that was destined to be cancelled. It was purely that neither of us got around to doing so. With the Waffle House merger, it was now time. There will be the deluge of individuals who doubt my representations. That is their choice. 770 is built on personal choice. With this, I shall now return my attention to the people and congregations of the Most Right and Holy Lazarus Order of the 770. Go in Peace, + Rev. Greene Arch and First Priest of the Order

You finally returned I see, you must've spent the whole day drumming this up did you? In the meantime I had my 20 day old Junior Associate write me up a 10 page essay titled "How to cope with being a has-been in Politics and War". I will have it sent to you right away so you can start the healing process. Salty tantrum🤣Check your f**king posting history from the past week bro. It's so desperate I pity you at times.

Not being familiar with your history of issues with Grumpy, I will for sake of discussion assume your purity of intent to contribute to 'game health'. Yes of course we all look to improve game health, though it seems to me (and analogous to RL - sim or what hey??) one does not achieve it without a certain degree of consensus about: a. what the issues are that are in need of addressing, and b. how said issues are to be addressed. It appears to me that neither of these points have been suitably addressed, even if you've attempted to, at least not in public. I don't consider Rose joining in as contributing to any sort of majority consensus due to the muddying effect of the much more recent history of tit-for-tat between us, nor it being mentioned in their somewhat empty DoW (for now the only issue I see with this paucity of substance is that it does nothing to contribute to moving forwards in what is quickly becoming a fairly stale and predictable relationship - hardly contributing to 'game health'). Anyway I'm not here to dump on Rose, was happy that the last war had created some sort of balance to recent history. As for half of the alliances having no way to combat Grumpy, well they've no reason to! It's not like Grumpy has the ability to militarily dominate the vast majority of players, the meta prevents this. Grumpy does their thing which clearly impacts t$ as a competitor, but to assume that GG dominance of the upper/whale tiers is an Orbis wide issue massively impacting on 'game health' ought be convincingly demonstrated should it be seen as a valid component of your CB. Somewhat following this, I'm also aware that people have argued the dogpile in this instance was unnecessary and damaging and whatever other reasons. I'm not fundamentally against dogpiling, a valid tactic to accomplish an end goal and I guess in this instance it marries well with your stated outcome of 'game health' by reducing the power of a consolidated whale tier, and hopefully quickly. Though I suggest that the potentiality of other less clear motives driving this war will become more likely the longer it carries on, and I look forward to seeing it play out. I cannot really determine the verity of much of what else you're stating here as it is rapidly turning into a case of the devil being in the detail embedded in embassies and private chats. I'm not calling you dishonest, however I know both Ben and Cooper to be of great integrity (Cooper knows me to be quite argumentative, but he absolutely has my support and respect as one of our FA leads). Ultimately I strongly suspect there may be something else at play here yet to be elucidated which has driven such a rapid breakdown in IC relations and a GW between our such recently allied alliances. Have a great day

That isn't unique to Grumpy. I'd remind you that TJest is usually a T$-centric venture. Oblivion was also quite active in the counter even against their own members. I'm not here to justify it just to say that this point deserves no mention in any discussions even close to your CB. Yes, that's tantamount to making a similar level threat as what SRD said in the radio show. We didn't hit you. You were briefly considered as a target. You weren't the target. In both cases, I can see a reason for some antagonism but not even close to a case or even support for a CB. As an addendum, I'm perfectly happy to dig in to the meta conversation about GG, but we need to be clear that we're past the other excuses about ghosting and SRD's comments. Both of which are a bit hypocritical coming from T$ and not relevant to your actual reasoning. We can't have a cogent conversation on the validity of your actual CB "the threat of GG/upper tier" until we move past this. Otherwise, we talk about GG and tiering and the back-and-forth just becomes circular until you bring back up these shallower reasons. For all intents and purposes, we had an informal notice weeks back. While we were agreed on a mutual breakup, you sprung up a timeline that we weren't prepared for. HW was our only option at the time. We didn't really have much of a choice given that TKR/TO/BK would not stand on its own as a sphere being from 1/3 to 1/2 the size of other spheres plus the lack of trust for Rose that public ties were all that were present. One of the key reasons why T$ was rejected as a target so quickly out of hand is because of the understanding of our position (informally going to break but not yet official), and what we saw as a relatively ok breakup. That said, we did not get the war we were pushing for, which was against Rose (and HM). You guys talk about being consistent on being against GG. Well, our consistent stance since KF (and for the entirety of my tenure in FA) has been for transparency and against secret ties. I get why you guys didn't want to hit them due to differing priorities and a vacillating Nexus, but we saw TLR as a war to respond to your concerns with &/Alexio. Our numbers versus Rose were in the range of 1.3:1 meaning we had about a 30% force advantage. At the time, we had a lot of respect for Rose's milcom, and we expected this wouldn't be an easy fight. I think the odds were in our favor, but among the closest of any war since Surf's Up. And we had a reason that we didn't make secret internally or externally. We disagreed with their FA style of sneaking around and failing to publicly acknowledge their ties for the PR cover. The goal was ~2 weeks and a recognition that folks should value transparency. We didn't expect Rose not to be militarized nor for the shenanigans with Oasis and half of MI (nor their failure to fully militarize either). And I can only hope y'all will be as gracious as we were in peace talks. Friend, I feel like that's what you did to me. You took my statements out-of-context, and then tried to show them as some gotchas of not being consistent despite a little bit of nuance perfectly explaining my positions. Read where I mentioned TJest above and where Oblivion was among the most active in countering KT. I read back in the embassy, and see myself also reacting favorably to the post. That's Adrienne and Cooper. There were other further clarifications in both public and private spaces. This was abundantly clear and made a public position for TKR that we wouldn't have endorsed a hit on T$. For DMs, it was you who chose to reach out to Adrienne. If you were concerned about Adrienne's opinion to being enough, you could've reached out to someone else to get confirmation. Communication is a two-way street, and we've been responsive and consistently engaging you in our embassy, in public, and when otherwise contacted. Our original militarization was prompted by two factors. First, we saw build changes in of E$ and CTO. Second, Rose's recent experience in GnR taught us a lesson. We told you that immediately when asked on 8/15. Ben messaged you both around noon. He got confirmation from Harry that they were interested, and was waiting on you after you sent a message at 2 and he got back to you at 5. People have lives and work. This is a very poor excuse of evidence that we didn't communicate. And given that you guys had a full blitz done, you guys were already locked and loaded. I have very hard time believing that this was just knocked up in the span of a couple of hours because Ben can't respond the second you sent a message. When we saw evidence of militarization beyond what you suggested and a rationale that wasn't fully fitting of the need. We were also upfront about this in our response to Eclipse and when Ben messaged you. If you need it to be explicit, we stated: "Ok. Inquiry time. And truth/telling time. If you guys really built up fro KT, and we built up because of you, and rose built up because of both of us, what are the chances that you me, SRD, and Valk can get in a room and figure out how to structure a decoy rather than shedding pixels without a reason?" It was all out on the table. You blitzed later that day. You also never reached out to us once. Only Eclipse did.

I don’t know if this is the right place for this, I’m not exactly in the best of mind after learning this. PnW player and friend to many, Gojira has passed away. He kept in contact with some of us as he underwent surgery earlier this year and we all had hoped for the best. Unfortunately, we have learned he has passed on. For those of us who were friends to him it’s devastating, he leaves behind his family and they have a go fund me to help during this time. Please help how you can, and if you knew goji remember them well. https://gofund.me/feff7989

The difference is based on ethos, I think. I don't believe we've had the chance to meet, but your government is well aware of who I am and what I have stood for. NPO waged a scorched earth war, a war where there could be no winners. They cheated and bullied their way through the game, without a sense of decency. Perhaps my comparison to KF isn't a perfect allegory, especially given the events that followed, but as someone who fought TKR in that war, then became their ally in CoS, I think I have some historical legitimacy. Let me make this as clear as I can, I have not and will not ever advocate for the policies NPO pursued in-game. I found these policies both toxic and incredibly harmful to the health of the game. However, Grumpy's alliance with both Guardian and then TKR presents a stratification of whales in one single place, which while admittedly is probably less harmful than the OOC politics NPO drove, is still harmful to the game. I've said this before, but I quite like many members of your alliance, the fact that I have been able to have many pleasant conversations with them despite the ongoing war is a testament to this. Our goal isn't to drive TKR and her allies from the game, force them to disband, or attempt to bully their members into leaving the game. The goal has always been to use in-game actions to reduce the in-game harm that the pairing could cause. Forgive me if I came off as upset or defensive about the actions of NPO, the scars of that war still cause me much sorrow.

"Your story is weak and half assedly come up with to cover a grudge." "The stance dates back to literal years and upheld several times even by people who had no beef on the situation simply because they weren't there when a bunch of stuff happened." "Haha lol your story is weak and I won't actually address anything of you've said in my rehash of my first post." 10/10.

I think the reasoning behind WANA mentioning the ghosts was lost in translation a bit, so I'll make it clear as it's own point. It wasn't "OMG LOOK HW IS GHOST HITTING US???" it was "Oh look, Grumpy members who constantly go raid and then go back to Grumpy the second they get bored with 0 consequence are at it again". Grumpy is a threat and needs to take damage. Look how effective it is! Ronny can barely string words together as he watches his alliance finally take some damage early in a war. Grumpy is objectively bad for the meta. There's a few others that are too, but Grumpy is easily the number one issue currently. We discussed this in the embassy. t$ has been steadfast on this point at least since I joined, and even longer than that from what I've heard. SRD actively flaunted Grumpy's inability to be hurt/lose/etc and straight up said t$ was a target that had been floated but that the only reason we weren't hit is because Quack had just split. Don't pretend TKR wouldn't have taken that as a threat if you'd been in our situation. We both know you would have. As far as I'm aware this is accurate - though my gov is free to correct you if it isn't. Here's the issue, Coops. HW and BW didn't start off on a good foot. T$ found out you were making war plans behind our back during a war while we were still allies and had an information clause and before we'd even given an official notice. It was during our notice that we realized you weren't prepping for rebuild, while t$ was in the process of starting. I was getting a few messages from parties I won't mention here asking what was going on, and I had 0 clue despite still being allied to you at the time. This is after I'd probed Adri/Ben a few times on your post-quack plans and was met with silence despite giving you a heads up on what our plans were. Once the treaty dropped, you debuted your new allies in an offensive war against the only other sphere that you, SRD, and others claimed could "definitely fight GG guys" with the entirety of TKR's half of Quack, plus BK and all of HM. Let's break that down a bit and restate a few things. You: -Hit Rose with an overwhelming force while allying a group you knew we took issue with for various reasons, making essentially a new Quack. -Made these plans behind our backs despite the information clause in our treaty, knowing we'd be less than thrilled about the idea, and refused to tell us anything about your plans. -During the war, twisted my words more than a few times and used my broad number statements while ignoring the statements I made about tiering. Forgive us if we're less likely to trust you and consider you an honest party.

Expecting Camelot to conduct themselves with any semblance of honour is always going to end in disappointment.

how exactly did they manage to let him become leader

>Epi destroys Pantheon by slithering into the leader role >Many argue that Epi = Camelot >Epi also destroys Camelot by slithering into the leader role >The two situations are far too similar, so one may argue Pantheon = Camelot >If Pantheon = Camelot and Camelot = Epi... >Then Epi = Pantheon >Pantheon destroyed Camelot #ItWasPantheonAllAlong

Camelot have always and will always be a toxic force in this community, I cannot think of another alliance that has had such a poor reputation that their leader posted a public apology for his alliance. The only thing more shocking to me than seeing Arthur's apology a couple of years back is that the alliance hasn't changed a bit since.

what do you except from an alliance that literally allows its members to whatever they want including being inactive, and have no discipline. Its gonna be shit. Have fun winning your war.

Most interesting...

Couldn't Fight Cause Everyone Were Laughing At Camelot War

Tbh, I think this only proves that tS vs Grumpy (in a 1v1) would be a difficult fight and not one that can be won immediately or within a few rounds. Often ignored is the fact that tS only has to drag a Grumpy nation one at a time and that any pinned Grumpy nation can never rebuild entirely by virtue of numbers alone, whereas any zeroed tS nation can rebuild by virtue of there being 100 nations below c30 in eS + tS to prop them back up onto their feet. The underdog mechanics and spy mechanics ensure that military rebuilds are pretty much decimated day-to-day for Grumpy (ensuring they will eventually be ZMd when you also consider the numbers advantage tS has). In tS vs Grumpy, tS's victory is inevitable in a direct war and the fact that c40 costs like 3b ensures that tS will inevitable catch up to Grumpy once their scores of nations slowly (but faster than Grumpy c40s) acquire cities. However, I also think that not wanting to waste a month or two to prove tS can win a legitimate 1v1 is also valid, and damned be the narratives that preach "you are too scared for a fair fight", since I don't recall the last GW or major war that wasn't an attempted dogpile (plus wars lasting months are boring as hell). But claiming Grumpy is near OP and/or invincible, in a 1v1, is laughable, it took about a day to pin HW with BW + Rose, and so it'd take longer w/o Rose, but it isn't impossible. TLDR: BW should be transparent in its CB and just state that as a direct rival to HW they want them knocked down a peg and don't want to fight for 1-2+ months to do so (a boring waste of time tbh), which is completely fine IMO. I just think the difficulty of beating Grumpy/GG is greatly overstated.

The one thing that has been around forever, but makes no sense is the Alliance War Page not actually showing if the member had won or lost the war. Instead it just states Victory/Defeat. On the other hand the nation war page displays the actual result. So I suggest changing the alliance war page to include the exact war result of the participating alliance member. Alliance War Page Nation War Page

Hey everyone, For the last month or so I've been working on drafting out a new set of game rules. There are a number of reasons for this, and here are the main ones: I want to move away from a "3 strikes and you're out" moderation policy where strikes never expire. I think it does not make much sense to treat all offenses with the same punishment, and adopting a more nuanced set of rules where different offenses have different punishments makes more sense to me and I think ought to be better for you all (the players.) I want to bring on some game moderators to help ease my workload for relatively simple moderation cases. Daily, we get people signing up with some variation of the name "hitler", a nazi flag, use of slurs or other offensive language, etc. that could be easily handled by another moderator. My hope is that by transitioning some of this workload off of myself it will free up more of my time to work on the development of new mechanics, content, and overall improvements for the game. I also wanted to outline a new set of community guidelines to be as transparent as possible about our moderation practices. For example, in the past we have stepped outside of what has happened in "official" P&W channels (in-game, this forum, and our official P&W Discord server) to take moderation action against players. Examples of cases like these are the Guinea Pig Whaling Corps / NPO ordeal, previous instances of players trading real-life money for in-game money, instances of doxxing and sharing of other players' personal information and photos, instances of players engaging in predatory behavior toward other players, etc. This new draft of the rules includes a "Community Rules" section, which is broadly intended to serve as codified and transparent guidelines for how we expect members of our community to behave, and in what types of situations I might consider actions and evidence occurring outside of official P&W channels. Please note that this is not a big shift in moderation practices; I have essentially already been doing this for years in very limited, specific, and extraordinary circumstances, and that by including this in the rules I am only intending to be more open and transparent about what is happening. I don't think that you will find anything that new or surprising in the content of the new rules. I did try to be more clear and specific about certain things, but largely they are a combination of the existing Game Rules and the Forum Rules integrated together comprehensively. What Would Change in the New Rules Compared to the Current Rules? The biggest change is to the actual moderation system itself. Instead of a "3 strikes and you're out" policy, I assigned a set of "Moderation Points" to each rule offense. Instead of going with a specific amount for any given offense, which does not leave much room for nuance, I have instead outlined a range of points to be issued at the moderator's discretion. I believe this is important; for example I hope that we can all agree that an otherwise innocuous nation with a Nazi flag is not behaving as badly as an all-out white supremacist nation showcasing the Nazi flag, Hitler, etc. and should not be punished equally under our "no Nazism" rule. Each rule violation also includes a set expiration time. This means that you are not stuck with your moderation points forever. I know there are players that have strikes that are 3, 4, or even 5 years old now that they would like to see removed from their accounts. I agree that people can change, and by building in expiration times, which are different and related to the severity of the offense, we can accommodate for this better in this new proposed system. A Note About In-Game Moderators Something else important that I'd like to note is that the involvement of any additional in-game moderators is going to come with heavy supervision, logging of all actions taken (so any abuse can be caught and corrected after the fact if it does occur), along with a requirement that at least 2 moderators approve all moderation actions being taken which will help eliminate any individual biases. I have not gotten very far into looking at bringing on in-game moderators yet as I wanted to establish a framework of new rules to work with first. Similar to the forum moderators, in-game mods would remain anonymous. This is to prevent other players or alliances taking in-game action against the mods for a decision that they disagree with. We have a long history now of this type of practice with forum moderation, and it has gone very well over the last several years, and I expect that would continue in-game. The only exception here would be that the player Dr. Rush, who is our Discord Team Lead, would be a public semi-mod. The reason for this is that he has access to our Discord support tickets and could serve as a really useful liaison to the in-game moderators about anything reported via Discord. But Dr. Rush would not be participating in any major game moderation decisions. Appeals I did include this explicitly in the draft of the new rules, but essentially if a player takes issue with any in-game moderator decision they would be able to appeal it to me. What Now? Where Are the Proposed New Rules? Thank you for reading this far. I hope that the above context will help clear up any misconceptions about this proposal. At this point, these rules are not going into effect, I am just opening them up for public feedback. I know that in the past couple of weeks people have leaked these rules and made all sorts of wild claims about how everything is going to change for the worse. I can assure you that that is not the case. However, I do want to take a thoughtful approach and see if there is anything that I am missing in these rules, as well as learn more about what the general community consensus is on these rules. With all that said, you can read the draft I wrote of the new rules here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/149Owwee_ntvphR0j60BLl7vTVKvG1XRNP1VR6c1Oa7E/edit?usp=sharing Please ask any questions you have or any feedback you have here in this thread. Thank you for your time and your consideration.

[TLDR] Greene: "Merge into 770." Us: "No, thanks. We're good, let's be friends." Greene: *sends raids, sees them getting smacked down and nuked repeatedly because we don't care about the cost because we're experienced low tier raiders who decom'd cities or entire nations to begin with* Greene: Uuhhh... pls mrg?.... Waffle House: 770, we respectfully decline to retain you as protectorate. Waffle House: Replaces 770 with DEFCON-5 as protectorate Us: *kek* Mr. Greene: When your member informed you she was leaving 770 to join a new alliance being formed, she was very nice about it, and even gave you a parting donation. She didn't have to do either, but that's just her, so she did. You were like ok cool I understand, then the day after we form, you're sending raids at us. And your government members seemed to mostly be in the dark about that (examples below). The only thing you've managed to do is having Waffle House replace you with us as protectorate when they dropped you, and make yourself look... Well.... Anyway.... To the other who Archs: What's up with Greene? lol.... Seems that within the last couple hours, he just kicked me from the server... To the members of 770 et all: Here's why Greene is sending your 7 - 8 city tier at an 8 member alliance, starting with the conversation between him and Powerpuff. More pics in comments because it says maximum of 1000kB. It gets rather entertaining lol.

We lost many people passing on to the next life, I never met the guy, But i hope he Rest In Peace.

TBF. My time in Camelot was Abit ago (Just under a year ago at this point) but my entire time there after the merger with GG&FU that was another thing if Epis doing that kinda went like this, you were one of the good things that came out of that merger and you were always sensible. Sucks this happened to something that I genuinely watched you work so hard to help for so long.

Whenever I hear something about epi I need a epi-pen

I love Waffle House!

Damn Camelot making everyone mad including their members and their allies

Patrick: "NPO wasn't bad we should have kept fighting. Alex was wrong to ban them. I was just following orders. *Gets kicked* Patrick: "Stop reforming Camelot it was better when we were trying to get people to delete"

I thought Alex has made it so it appears in Notifications, but apparently that change was reversed. If we could have a page that shows all our Espionage Operations and their results.

POV : you have no counter-argument

GET OUT OUT OUT

Declaration of War When word reached us that The Knights Radiant were using the predicament we were in of not being able to declare past the front as a way to lock down the current fronts and then attack us it was a pressing enough threat. This was coupled with reports the lack of expansion was simply due to not having enough coverage. As fronts fell, it was a matter of time in our eyes. Whether it was now or after the war, it was a serious liability. We have been reluctant to sit on the sidelines to wait for it to happen. We have stood idly by with constant antagonism. In every previous war with this scenario of a limited front, the alliances initiating it are usually targeted next and the reactions this time indicated the same. Note this is our decision unilaterally as we could no longer allow our sovereign right to declare a war against people who seek to act against us to be withheld. It is regrettable that we must act outside of the scope with this new conflict. There is no intention of domination or anything. The imbalance this war has introduced made it clear that we could not just sit back and wait for the inevitable. The numbers cited as why the other sphere was so big have not materialized, allowing for manuveurability. We did everything we could to avoid this outcome but here we are. By the day they grew emboldened while our strategic situation deteriorated. We expect to take severe losses here and there is no avoiding that but allowing this status quo to continue has been determined to be untenable, which is why we declare war on TKR.