Krameleon

Courtesy of Team Gardening Grandmas!

@Pascal Let me first summarize how I took this response: Mostly echoing of Vein’s points, consisting of dismissing concerns and reframing my arguments. There were also some outright denial of my claims, and a claim of accountability with no specific details therewithin. All the while you have still yet to substantively address the concerns raised, preferring to dodge and weave through the accusations and throw a buckshot of anti-Rose points back at me. I’ll give credit where credit’s due, I respect a cohesive defense even if it doesn’t actually address the issues presented. My claim was never that no one had reason to criticize Rose and its past actions. If that’s the path you choose to take in response, we’re going to continue to have very different conversations. The point remains that all of Vein’s response was to move away from the claims I was making and point to every reason anyone has to call Rose the bad guy. I won’t really get into how “General belief is not a narrative.” isn’t even true, because frankly I get what you were trying to say there. However, I disagree with the insinuation that Rose’s actions are fundamentally somehow worse than Eclipse’s and therefore more worthy of public scrutiny. Rose simply hasn’t been in public aggressively shutting down the rhetoric against us. Something that, mind you, I still won’t do, and haven’t here. Regardless, the claim wasn’t that Eclipse was the sole catalyst behind the anti-Rose sentiment, but rather that Vein’s arguments took all of the concerns presented in the immediate post and attempted to reframe them as “Rose is the bad guy, not us.” I’ll be blatant here - I have no clue what world you live in that you believe no one else is concerned with the current FA meta. Complaints about NAP length and stagnation in the parties fighting aren’t hard to come by, especially looking just at the forum posts regarding the wars of contention we argue about today. They have existed long before this conflict, and resonate far beyond just Rose. You denying the existence of these concerns and claiming Rose is the sole complainant based on this recent rolling is both overly reductive and disingenuous - it is an easy way to redirect the argument. It’s very possible that this sentiment simply doesn’t reach you, as you’ve proven to a lot of the game to be rather aggressive towards parties who voice disagreement with you. In fact, Eclipse’s aggressive approach toward alliances that don’t align with their goals or criticize their actions is worth considering here. That posture, coupled with Eclipse’s deep integration into the public sphere of Orbis, likely contributes to the disparity in public criticism. While Rose has historically operated more behind the scenes, Eclipse’s dominance in shaping public discourse, directly or indirectly, creates an environment where dissenting voices often remain silent, fearing retaliation. All the while performing the same types of backroom deals as Rose - and as you guys put it, you do them "better." I’d just like to point out that you don’t even bother to fairly represent my argument at this point. Instead of quoting the specific statements you’re addressing, you summarize my argument by calling it “bullshit” and argue that I’m “spinning the same thing every single paragraph.” These statements miss the entire point of building a cohesive argument: I’m tying your misdirections back to my original claims, instead of allowing the widespread attacks coming my way to distract from the point I am making. You again bring up the CB argument which, to be clear if I wasn’t previously, was never meant to be a major point of contention in regards to this conversation but rather an example of a broader issue I would like to push to change. I acknowledge and respect Eclipse’s choice to provide their rationale for the war privately in our embassy, regardless of Rose’s feelings about those reasons. I’ll go point by point here. You begin by talking about the ‘visible part of the iceberg’ and claim our arguing of large MDoAPs is a deceptively innocent argument, yet you don’t address the fact that once a treaty is signed there is no longer an “art to negotiation" in activating that treaty. Your many MDoAPs were, as far as I’m aware (again, feel free to correct me), not signed for a purpose other than to rally more people to be obligated to defend you with no negotiation necessary. You point out that Rose “specializes in backroom FA,” which unless I’m mistaken, every major alliance speaks in back rooms and attempts to plan in them. This is standard diplomacy in Orbis. The only difference with Rose was that we did not also engage in public discourse for a long time. Again, something actively being changed by the current administration, but I understand that it takes time for these things to be cemented. Finally, to address your “political climate” comment - you bring up this political climate and how I don’t question it - Am I not actively questioning it right now? What reasoning can you give as to why you need to have that scale of parties obligated in your defense? Do you fear that if someone doesn’t have an on-paper treaty with you that they will fail to defend you when you need them most? These aren’t accusations, I am genuinely confused by this idea. I appreciate the direct answers. Suggesting Eclipse operates under the same level of scrutiny as Rose can be true, yet something Vein mentioned about the times historically that Rose has made big spheres goes to show that's not always the case. Its been argued in the current debate that Eclipsesphere is fractured, so it isn't as bad as it seems, and therefore that's why you receive no scrutiny for it. Yet as I've pointed out and you wish to downplay, anyone wishing to wage war against Eclipse must deal with all of your M-level allies and possibly even the allies of that already large coalition; anyone who downplays that is either misleading or has never lead a war coalition. Then to say “we are not Rose” in regard to why you don't receive that criticism is not an argument, it’s an excuse, and one that we have noted to being a good one to lay low. Dismissing concerns while simultaneously demanding others take accountability for their history only reinforces the claim of hypocrisy. Rose isn't discrediting the opinions of others for our past actions. We've come to understand and respect many of the grievances and beliefs held by others towards Rose for previous actions. We understand that a higher level of communication and betterment of how we conduct ourselves are things we can address immediately and moving forward. At this point, it's a matter of time and dedication for us to mend the wrongdoings of those before me, which is not something I get to decide the timeframe for, and I accept that. ---------- @Solomon Ben-David It seems, by far and large, I’ve done myself a disservice by framing this as an RoH rather than just posting it independently. Admittedly, I was naively unaware that I didn’t have to have a tag when posting in the Alliance Affairs forum (Rose dumb), and RoH was the closest tag for what the goal of this post was. While coming a week after getting declared on by the opposing coalition, the arguments made within this post truly have very little to do with the war itself. At this point, all parties involved have discussed with Rose their involvement in this war and their intentions behind it. I do find it odd to reference an argument you say is common for Rose, but in that same sentence say you wont comment on, by commenting on it nonetheless. I do agree that the lack of outreach was what TSC had mentioned as their reasoning for this war, but the part of hostility to many of the parties involved was distinctly left out. As far as I can recall, the only actions toward The House by the most recent administration and that of mine have only been "friendly" in nature, namely our joint war in Blue Balled, and one situation that happened during my administration in which House reached out to garner our votes in the Arrgh Reverse Nuke Auction event to get TSC specifically out of the runnings. A move that was intended to show that despite wounds on neither side being fully healed, that the current administration saw it unfit and unbecoming to continue active hostility towards your alliance. I take it that it may not mean much in the grand scheme of things, but it does make me wonder how you felt hostilities from us at that time, and did not bring this to me then or when we first spoke on this war. While I am adamant that this is a new administration and direction for Rose, I am not under the illusion that the leaving of the previous administration absolves the alliance itself of all actions taken up to that point. I understand and respect that many still have grievances with Rose for events in recent history, and we have reached out to many in regards to mending these, something we have long neglected. ---------- @Daveth Hey Daveth. My goal here is not simply to shift blame on to Eclipse or engage in “no u” arguments. Instead, it is my goal to address systemic double standards. You state that to the best of your knowledge there isn’t an equivalent sentiment against them, and that is where my question is raised: Why? The specific details are, of course, more thoroughly explored in my responses to Vein and (more recently) Pascal. I appreciate the acknowledgements of my efforts to distinguish myself from my predecessors. It’s not an easy thing, obviously, and I am aware it cannot be done with a single post. My hope is that in time Rose can be shown to be taking a heading towards accountability and fostering a more balanced discussion about politics within Orbis. I understand that you believe I missed the mark here, though I do believe that my arguments still have merit. However, I am going to continue to engage and refine my approach for future discussions.

Ah, a response from the star of the show himself. Glad I could stir things up for you. Let’s get into it. Dismissive laughter, cherry-picked "facts," and a healthy dose of self-righteousness. I wish I could say I had expected more from a response. Let's break it down. By shifting the narrative, you avoid addressing the double standards and systemic issues in the FA meta, instead framing Rose as the perpetual bad actor, absolving yourself of the responsibility you yourself had in forming and perpetuating it. Who benefits more from this deflection: Those raising legitimate concerns on the long-standing stagnation of Orbis, or those attempting to evade the scrutiny by redirecting the spotlight? It’s amusing that you criticize Rose’s CBs, yet Eclipse has relied on equally dubious justifications in the past. Backroom dealings? Sphere-building accusations? These aren’t unique CBs to Rose, they are staples of FA in Orbis. The only CB reference made in my initial post is the apparent lack of one referenced in any DoW, a commonplace in Orbis politics nowadays that my push intends to change. As for your claim that Rose is "suddenly" upset when the tables turn: we’re not complaining about being targeted, we’re critiquing the unchecked behaviors and double standards that have enabled Eclipse to operate without the same scrutiny others face. This is why our RoH is not targeted at House, or any of the Eclipse-aligned parties who joined them in this war. War is part of the world of Orbis, we have and will be rolled throughout history, that which has been written and that which has to be written. You, as many have here, conflate spheres and coalitions in your dogpile accusations. Rose is not condemning the enemy coalition for dogpiling. Sure, coalitions are often larger than their targets; that's often the nature of coordinated wars. This is distinctly different from stacking MDoAP treaties with a significant portion of the game. If Eclipse was attacked directly, all of the following would be obligated to respond in their defense, per treaties signed in-game: WAP, WEEB, TI, KT, Spectre, Singularity, TEst, and Paragon. Of course, Eclipse could waive this obligation to some of these parties if they wanted to, but that gives all the power to Eclipse to determine how close of a fight they want defensively and to dictate if they want to win or lose in all cases except for a dogpile. I may be in the minority here, but I think that’s a pretty good case for a large “sphere of influence.” Not to mention that any coalition that would want to war against Eclipse directly has to seriously consider the overlap of their treatied allies to those of Eclipse, and must consider chaining treaties pulling more parties in defense of what is already a large sphere. You avoid backlash for this by, for example, selecting which of your MDoAP allies you wish to pull into a hit - which you’ve done here by including House but leaving out large portions of your sphere in order to hide just how overwhelming the numbers are. Each point laid out here is deserving of its own various level of criticism - mass MDoAPs, treaty manipulations, defensive chaining, dogpiles - most of which other parties have received criticism in the past for. However, the problem lies in all these factors combined, and the subsequent lack of criticism that Eclipse has come under for this combination of factors. As you’ve seen, Rose has received scrutiny for many of these as well, and rightfully so in some circumstances. Why then, when you are confronted with these accusations, do you not defend your actions but rather attack ours? Also, the Hollestial comparisons are a reach. The treaty was signed with the specific goal of demilitarizing both spheres while not leaving them open to a Clock chain, and it was not meant to be a form of long-term cooperation between the spheres. Feel free to correct me, but there has been no indication that any of your many MDoAPs are dated or formed for the purpose of defending from a credible, immediate threat. You can criticize the Hollestial treaty, as many did at the time, but to compare that signing and its purpose to what Eclipse has been doing in modern day Orbis is at best a misunderstanding of the facts and at worst a deliberate attempt to mislead. So, the narrative continues. When Eclipse links with House it’s strategic genius, but when Rose does the same it’s ruining the game. Your deflection on the NAP cycle argument is particularly rich. Over three years ago we signed the no-NAP agreement, yes, and then that was followed by a lost war in which a NAP was signed, which wasn't pushed by Rose as you imply. At least Rose attempted the change, which was an attempt to benefit the flow of the game. All the while, Eclipse stood on the sidelines, refusing to engage, only to now claim the moral high ground for not having attempted it in the first place. Not to gloss over the fact that the NAP mentioned in my original post cited for initiating the current FA meta wasn’t just a standard NAP, it was a calculated move to stall the game for Eclipse’s benefit - I won’t deny it’s a good strategy. While Rose, among others, have since participated in this meta, it’s important to acknowledge when this precedent was set, which led to others shaping their strategies around it or being lost to the wind. As people publicly have said, Rose has benefitted from this meta, Rose is #1 in score (or was, during peacetime prior to this war). Yet when people post real graphs to determine alliance overall success over time, like Borg, the picture changes drastically. When you no longer can hide the success of Eclipse behind "score" and the public focus on Rose, will you deflect or step up to the plate? The arrogance here is palpable. Your claim of superiority is a convenient excuse to brush aside legitimate concerns. “Better” isn’t just about winning wars. It’s about leadership, accountability, and fostering a healthy environment. By that measure, Eclipse has a lot to answer for, but the blame is placed on Rose’s doorstep. I am committed to changing, both internally and out, as is exemplified by this post - the first public FA interaction that Rose has majorly participated in for years. Are you? Again, you misrepresent my argument to look as though dogpiling is my concern. The complaints levied against Eclipse in this post are much larger in scope. It’s also quite interesting to me that you seem to have such deep founded opinions as to why Rose is the bad guy based on the strategic choices of our previous administrations, yet instead of holding that administration accountable you waited until now to make the move. What's the reason? Is it that you miss Harry as you've noted multiple times, or were you just waiting until no significant faction would oppose you? In conclusion, Eclipse dismisses criticism as self-pity, when in reality it is an attempt to hold them accountable. Instead of addressing the issues raised, they default to deflection and mockery. For an alliance that apparently prides itself on being “better,” I would’ve expected they could muster a more substantive defense, rather than redirect the complaints back at us. My question, and the purpose of this post, still remains: Why does Eclipse operate without the same scrutiny as others? Why are their actions excused while others are vilified? Until Eclipse can answer these, the conversation isn’t about victimhood - it’s about accountability. I'll never compete with this.

Not me trying to wrap my head around Roberts' completely unexplained and incoherent take, only to realize he's trying to present as fact my obviously exaggerated analogy that I was using to show Kan he was making the mistake of selectively conflating coalitions and spheres. Which, it doesn't look like the analogy clicked.

I don't really agree with your line of thinking on our connection to other alliances, but if I tunnel down that perspective then Eclipsphere would surely now include TKR (really all of House) and definitely Spectre and others. Further inflating their numbers. With respect to Rose participating in the NAP cycle meta. This goes to further reinforce my point about Eclipse fundamentally shaping the meta we live in now, as they not only initiated this meta but continues to push it both directly and indirectly. Rose and several others have since followed that lead for the same reasons others have followed not speaking all that publicly as of late. Thanks for the data, Borg. Definitely fascinating to see the numbers, they paint a good picture. Um, Sketchy. You're taking things too far. This is clearly a meme post, serious discussion will not be tolerated.

Thanks for the engagement, everyone. Working on responding to what I can while at work. I’m not entirely sure what you mean by “blissful nothingness,” Rose has been active in the war department as of late. But I’d be happy to give you flowers, you just have to swing by during office hours next time! Honestly, the score argument is a pretty weak one to make. If we’re talking about benefiting from an FA climate I suppose losses in wars to be the metric of how good/bad it is for an alliance? If so I’d recheck the stats on that to really see who has benefitted from this new meta. This is just the beginning of a new chapter. I expect a good amount of pushback for Rose finally making a public statement, but that is a burden I’m willing to bear to prove the point that this is a new administration. Honestly, HUGE FA failure here. Didn't even consider. Time to wrap this up, Rose is going private again. The criticisms in this post were directed towards the change in rhetoric by Eclipse, not other parties. We don’t deny having once worked with Grumpy, albeit we now find ourselves on opposite sides once more. We are highlighting the change of rhetoric that is now benefiting Eclipse while it would hinder any other party historically.

Let us take a look at this war, and the reality hidden underneath. For years, Rose has been the go-to target for public scrutiny. Our lack of public presence being hailed as bad for the game. The only serious DoW from this war effectively used “Rose Bad” as its casus belli. Meanwhile, Eclipse coasts under the radar, quietly avoiding the kind of backlash that would rain down on us — or frankly, anyone else — if they pulled the same moves. It might be worth considering the reason why that might be. The Eclipse Empire Eclipsphere is now the largest sphere in Orbis, after the addition of The Immortals. Their roster includes Singularity, TI, KT, Spectre, WAP, and WEEB. Imagine the uproar if another sphere tried to consolidate alliances on this scale. There would be hegemony accusations, cries of straining FA, and of how such a sphere is “bad for the game” would dominate the political and public discourse. Yet it's let passed. Eclipse’s sphere size is not the only issue however. Eclipse’s FA strategy has fundamentally shaped the meta we deal with today. They orchestrated the 6-month NAP just to ensure they could isolate their opponents and get their juicy war on TKR/Grumpy. Eclipse used this strategy to ensure no other conflicts could arise to disrupt their carefully planned NAP cycles. It ended up coming out once the one day war came out on how important these nap cycles are for Eclipse; that war also saw some under the table maneuvering from other parties. This nap cycle ensurance was not simply a tactical move — it set the tone for the stagnated FA landscape where we find ourselves. The Double Standard Eclipse having created the largest sphere in Orbis wasn’t enough to content them. They further sought to link up with TKR/Grumpy (who were a victim of the nap cycling), further cementing their dominance and opening the door for another round of NAP cycling. Not to mention that previously, the idea of Eclipse and Grumpy linking up would’ve been condemned immediately. Yet here Eclipse is, dissatisfied with their already large sphere, linking with Grumpy. Those who would once damn such partnerships are largely silent. Eclipse continues to expand unchecked, squeezing out long periods of peace and crafting the FA meta that suits their needs, all while avoiding the kind of backlash that Rose or others would face for doing the same thing. The hypocrisy is staggering. Fin. It’s easy to point fingers at Rose, to accuse us of being inactive in the public sphere. Well, here we are. Maybe it is time to acknowledge the deeper issues at play. Eclipse’s actions and the FA landscape they’ve hand crafted deserve just as much scrutiny if not more for its long term impact to the game. ——————————

The citizens of the Eternal Empire of Rose waited in the quiet evening, assembling in the vast plaza outside the grand palace. The time had come for a new leader to take the helm, following the retirement of Emperor Lucianus. The quiet rumblings of the crowd fell silent as the doors of the palace swung open. The era of Lucianus was drawing to a close, and a new chapter would soon begin. Through the grand doorway, Mike, the election chair, emerged and made his way to the podium. The air was thick with anticipation as he prepared to speak. “I have counted and verified every vote made, and I am pleased to announce the results of this election. The people of Rose have spoken, and their will is clear. Today, we usher in a new era of leadership. Rosians, I present to you your newly elected Emperor—Krameleon!” From the front of the crowd, the newly pronounced Emperor rose from where the candidates had been seated and made his way up the steps to the podium, acknowledging the crowd with expressions of gratitude along the way. Upon reaching the podium, he quietly thanked Mike before turning to face the assembled Rosians. “As I step forward today, humbled and honored, I stand before you as your newly elected Emperor. I, Krameleon, have been entrusted with the responsibility to lead Rose into its next chapter, and I promise to serve you with dedication, vision, and strength. Together, we will grow stronger, rise higher, and create a future worthy of our great alliance. Yet, I do not embark on this journey alone. Alongside me stands a team of exceptional leaders who are ready to guide Rose into this new era. My two High Justices, my left and right hand, Kurdanak and Diamond, will stand beside me to ensure that our path is just and our governance strong. Many familiar faces will return to the cabinet to ensure continuity and success in every aspect of our alliance, while a couple new faces come in to bring fresh ideas and energy to further our progress. At my side to assist me in leading our alliance is Jordan - Horizon Guard of Internal Affairs, Borga - Horizon Guard of Economic Affairs, Mateus - Horizon Guard of Technological Affairs, Odium - Horizon Guard of Military Affairs, and George - Horizon Guard of Foreign Affairs. Alongside them, a host of Knights, Captains, and Skytroopers come with to play key parts in building our future. Most importantly, however, is every single one of you. It is only with the support of every Rosian that Rose’s future can shine. Today marks the dawn of a new era for Rose. Under our banner, we will rise together—stronger, more united, and more determined than ever. Together, we will ensure that the Eternal Empire of Rose flourishes into tomorrow. Let us move forward, side by side, and reach for greatness.” New Rose Government: Emperor (Leader): Krameleon High Justice (2IC): Kurdanak High Justice (2IC): DiamondBlocker10 Horizon Guard of Internal Affairs (High Gov): Jordan Horizon Guard of Military Affairs (High Gov): Odium Horizon Guard of Foreign Affairs (High Gov): George Horizon Guard of Economic Affairs (High Gov): Borga Horizon Guard of Technological Affairs (High Gov): Mateus TL;DR - The Rose elections have concluded, and Krameleon has been elected the new Emperor (Leader) of Rose.

Include an option in the Bulk Improvement Template Importer to be able to toggle which cities you want the Improvement Template to be Imported to, rather than it be all cities or one-by-one. It wouldn't be useful all the time for most, but would relieve a lot of headache in the few situations where it is useful. (Noticed this in the original post in 2019 after commenting this suggestion. I stand by my inability to read)

This is just a few thoughts I have in regards to this change. Take them with a grain of salt because I only 40% know what I'm talking about. If the point of this change is to solve the issue of massive down-declares, why is it also helping up-declares? I understand how a larger city nation declaring on a lower city nation puts the smaller one at a disadvantage, and to what degree that advantage is fair can be a discussion. If fully milled C40s can really regularly down-declare on C20s and create an unfair war environment, then maybe some change is necessary. However, if someone is up-declaring, they are at some level of a disadvantage and they are accepting that disadvantage by declaring the war themselves. By declaring that war they are accepting that by city-count they are at a disadvantage and they still believe they can effectively achieve their goals despite that. I don't think that up-declaring is in trouble, and therefore don't see why it needs to also be buffed with a change such as this. If a smaller nation decides to attack a larger one, they shouldn't be rewarded any extra for doing so. They should accept the disadvantage they are putting themselves in. The purpose of the war range mechanic is to limit a nation's ability to down- or up-declare based on nation score. If down-declaring is really a problem, why is the proposed change not looking at this system instead? Possibly increase the score each city provides, so people with more cities are more quickly pushed out of war range from those with less. Or, if C40-C20 down declares are a huge issue and we're looking specifically at city count, why not implement a downward-only restriction based on number of cities? Like you can only down-declare on nation that have a LEAST a certain portion of your cities, say 3/5 or 3/4. Then have no upside limit, so anyone can up-declare C20-C40 if they want to take on that challenge, so long as they are in war range.

This is an interesting idea. It would add a little more nuance to war, and could make going to war a larger decision. I, however, think this would work a lot better if wars were fought by cities and not by nations. If the wars were city-by-city, you could add these improvements to a city to make a battle at that city more difficult for the attacker. To do it that way would require some fairly large adjustments to the war system. It might work if you got to target a specific city with every attack. But then I feel like some additional changes would need to be made in order to make attacks hold more weight (especially in higher-city count wars). I personally think I would enjoy a major rehaul of the war system, and this would be a change I'd be willing to see. However, many people are probably content with the current war system and don't want it to change. Plus, a rehaul of the war system would take a lot of time and effort that would take Alex and the rest of the dev team's attention away from other stuff that also needs worked on. Overall interesting, but I think it's unlikely to be implemented anytime soon with the current state of the game (and, more specifically, the war system).