Phoenyx

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree :-p.

Oh, they had CBs. That being said, I acknowledge that I originally wasn't sure why Oasis had attacked HM- all their DoW originally said was that HM had broken their hearts. Certainly a place to start speculating as to its deeper meaning, but not much beyond that. However, this was soon rectified by Tyrion, who wrote a post that clarified things to my satisfaction. Cam's declaration essentially said the same.

HM owed Rose nothing, in my opinion. Their decision to hit Rose has no bearing on how good/not good they are as allies. I find that logic puzzling, but I'll leave it at that. I don't agree with your characterization here, as you well know given that we discussed it last war too. With Duck Hunt, we wholeheartedly disagree on the severity of the logs that started that war. As Quack, we perceived a serious threat and we acted on it. You can downgrade that to a rumor, that's your prerogative, but it was accompanied by a plethora of actions that lent credence to it and that is why we acted. To pretend otherwise does everyone involved a disservice. Alright, I'll admit that it was a bit complicated. That being said, I personally found it rather telling that the one piece of information that was latched on to by Partisan and others in Quack was not any logs that preceded the war, but rather something that Ronny said. It was his statement, which combined with his admission that he was drawing on the words of another HM leader that led me to try to find out the identity of this unidentified HM Leader, which was later coined as the "Secret HM Leader". Throughout the entire war, his identity was kept secret from the masses. It was only until well after the war had ended that his identity was finally revealed. Finally, after his identity was revealed by Shifty, I think I can piece together what really happened - put simply, it looks like HM had misinterpreted Swamp's intent for a -defensive- treaty between certain Spheres if Quack were to attack one of them for an offensive one and they then had a small chat about the -possibility- of attacking Quack. As mentioned by Ronny, it came to naught. I suspect something similar happened in the case of Sphynx, who was only at the periphery of Swamp, not at its core. Sphynx himself also clarified that TCM had had no intention of going to war with Quack in the forseeable future, saying that he had more issues with HM than Quack. You're right, you don't need to explain how Last Ride was different. I'm just saying that, from someone who wasn't involved in the political intrigues of that war, it looked like more of what happened during Leaky Faucet. I never said your Alliance goes to war for no reason. That being said, based on my experience of your Alliance's CB in Leaky Faucet, I've come to believe that your Alliance would benefit from being more careful concerning sources. I also certainly agree that wars have been started for far less. That being said, I think there's something to be said about the CB fitting the war. I think it's reasonable that large, multi Bloc wars should have good CBs, if only because a lot of people are getting dragged into them. I also never said that your Bloc was setting out to roll the world per se. That being said, if other Blocs come to believe that a certain Bloc seems to be a little too large and carefree about starting wars, well, I think you can see how they might to give the Bloc a little trim.

For as long as we're allied to them, yes. That's the game - anyone not allied to you can hit you and your goal is to work on maintaining relationships to be able to accomplish your goals. I wouldn't take offense to the hit itself if it were to happen. It would depend more on the other actions surrounding the hit for me. Alright, let's put this another way. Imagine that you had been in Rose's position in a previous war- that is, HM is hit, and you decide to help them out and counter their opponent. I for one would think that HM would be grateful. They would "owe us one", so to speak. If HM were to then hit you a few months later for no apparent reason, wouldn't you consider them not to be that good an ally? I'm still not sure what you're trying to say here. What I'm trying to convey is that your Alliance tends to get into wars that are based on little more than rumours and perhaps some tall talk by people in a game that are prone to barking more than they bite. In terms of serious wars your Alliance has gotten into, I've only really been around for the Leaky Faucet conflict and the Quack's Last time conflict, but both of these events seem to have this same characteristic. It's a type of characteristic that I believe has made other Blocs leery, as they may suspect that if someone whispers a few words against you guys, they'll be on the hit list next. It's also the type of thing that can get Blocs to either create informal "secret" agreements to counter them if they continue such attacks or decide to counter their of their own accord without any agreement at all, but with the simple belief that if they aren't countered soon, it may well be their turn next.

Ah ok. Listening to Fist is generally a bad idea, just for the record. He's well known for maintaining long time grudges against several alliances here and only popping out of the woodwork to spout hate and nonsense and then disappear again. And I'm not sure where you're going with this attempt at a comparison either. Folks had a wide variety of reasons for wanting to hit us then and we gave them the opportunity when we broke up EMC and downsized our sphere. Trying to equate the reason for that war to a predisposition for hegemonical actions shows that you still have quite a bit more research to do. Alright, I acknowledge that my knowledge of what happened in Knightfall is limited to that wiki page there and a few things that have been said here, clearly including God Emperor/Fist. It's not much to go on, so I'll leave that one alone. True. That being said, from the perspective of myself and others, it seemed that you guys were getting overly aggressive, akin to when you attacked HM and Swamp at the start of Leaky Faucet. The suggesting bits has to do with my understanding of your DoW against Swamp in Quack's last time. Now, admittedly, I may have missed some things, the Alliances I tend to focus on had left Swamp by that point, but it seems my impression was shared by others. The impression being that Swamp made a few statements in their inner circle about wanting to attack you guys- tough talk perhaps, but nothing fleshed out and that seems to have been the reason for your CB against them. Now, I fully admit that this interpretation that I and others have may not be fully accurate and more representative of your CB when initiating the Leaky Faucet conflict, but we tend to expect behaviour that we've seen in the past from a given Alliance. Fair enough. But tell me, do you trust them not to hit you a few months after this war? I mean, Rose was part of the counter effort when you guys attacked HM in Leaky Faucet and now HM is attacking Rose... It's based on my recollections of the conversation on Morf Radio yesterday. Hopefully, @Lord Tyrion will clarify this in the future, otherwise I'll just have to leave this as a footnote. No, I'm very aware that different Alliances who were not previously allied may have different reasons for wanting to do so, and I definitely think it applies here. What I'd like you to consider that while yours may be in part due to feeling wronged by Rose during Leaky Faucet, HM's reasons are still rather mysterious. Some suspect that their main reason was the feeling that they could win the war and perhaps get some glory out of it. Now, if Rose hadn't helped counter Quack after they attacked HM in Leaky Faucet, that would be one thing, but they did. If I were a Bloc that had just recently been helped out by another, I'd want to have -very- good reasons for attacking them shortly thereafter and be rather explicit about them too. Otherwise, it might look like I wasn't very appreciative of the help and would also signal that I'm not that good an ally. But to each their own.

Technically, it's now Hollywood, though TKR was in both. The bit about winning is on point though. As I mentioned with Etat, I have nothing against wanting to be on the winning side. But when you sell out your former allies to do so, that doesn't look so good to me.

OWF? I'm guessing you mean that TKR fought along with most Alliances against NPO. Anyway, I'm not saying that you aren't much the same as then. However, I was intrigued by God Emperor mentioning Knightfall, and it looks like, before NPO's last time, you guys were part of the Bloc that others decided had to be trimmed a bit. For those who aren't aware of the history of Knightfall, here's the PnW wiki on it: https://politicsandwar.fandom.com/wiki/Knightfall Let's consider that members of Hollywood were already doing aggressive moves before Hollywood was even formed: 1- HM attacked Delta. Delta, a very small sphere in comparison, definitely didn't want that war and sued for peace terms almost immediately. 2- Quack's last ride, of which TKR was a member was basically initiated because some members of Swamp were talking tough concerning Quack in their own inner circles. Now while this one does seem a tad more justifiable, the idea that even -suggesting- attacking a sphere can result in war is what got Quack in trouble last time, with the Leaky Faucet conflict, of which TKR was also a member. Ironically, it seems that it was Hedge Money itself that did the suggesting. And now, well, you guys are buddies with Hedge. Don't you find that a tad ironic? I mean, it makes sense if the goal is to be the biggest Bloc on the block, but not so much otherwise. Furthermore, In yesterday's Morph Radio show, Tyrion mentioned something about someone of importance in Hollywood intimating that Oasis might be next. Finally, there's the fact that Hollywood hadn't even finished writing their declaration of existence before declaring war on Rose. The declaration of war itself was problematic, especially when it was revealed that the initially hidden CB for this declaration was the fact that Rose had entered the Leaky Faucet conflict, another conflict in which a Bloc was considered too big and aggressive to continue its wars on other Blocs without intervention. Interestingly, in -that- conflict, you were part of the Bloc that attacked HM and Rose was one of the Blocs that came to HM's rescue. You'd think HM would have been a little more appreciative of that, but instead, they're attacking Rose because they... helped them last time? And make no mistake, in any conflict with Quack, Grumpy's Ronny had specifically stated that he didn't want to get into a war with them -unless- Rose was part of the Coalition against them. Strange logic, but hey, if the goal is hegemony, things such as logical CBs don't really matter much, do they?

When you attacked Rose, your block is the one that had the quantity.

Agreed. Now think about this, but from the other side's perspective. Sure, they could just wait while you took out Rose and then took out anyone else you pleased. Other spheres decided it was in their best interests to group together against you guys and have a numbers advantage themselves, at least in various tiers. I mean, as you say, this is manifest in IRL military.

Exactly. Only by multiple spheres combining together was it even possible to take on Hollywood. And yeah, things are looking a bit better for Bollywood or whatever you want to call the group that's formed to counter Hollywood, but it's important to note that even with all these spheres combining their efforts, Hollywood is -still- net positive in planes and ships in the 11-20 and planes, ships and tanks in the 21-30 tiers. Another thing, glomming all city counts above 30 is a bit misleading. If that were to be divided into, say, 31-34, 35-40 and 40+, I think you'd probably see Hollywood dominating in the 35-40 and 40+ tiers. Based on Cooper's numbers in this post, it's clear that even when combing Rose, Oasis and Cam together, Hollywood has 7 more nations in the 35+ zone. Against Rose, it was no contest- Hollywood outgunned them in all tiers but 2, the 31-34 tier and the 0-9 tier. Even in the cases of the 0-9 tier and the 31-34 tier, the fact that Hollywood dominated in both higher tiers strongly suggests that their down declares could more than handle the problem. As to some of the other tiers, the margins against Rose were frequently quite daunting. I get into those margins here:

Ah, silly me, I thought you actually cared about evidence, never mind, carry on.

Ah, but he has :-p.

When what?

Tyrion has been quite adamant that he doesn't use tax money for his funding. Based on all my observations of everything he's ever said, his reputation for saying what he believes to be true is sterling. Furthermore, based on my observations of his time on the market, as well as things he himself his said, I believe he gets most of his money playing it.

I'm pretty sure that TKR can't be as bad as you say, they have nice people in it, but what you say definitely intrigued me.

I'm -guessing- that you're referring to the defensive treaty that I believe Swamp had initiated. If that's the case, it wasn't breathing they were concerned about, it was the possibility that Quack would slowly dominate all of Orbis. This was the same reason that HM joined it.

Personally, I believe that people can change. IQ was composed of people. It seems like the worst of them left the game. I've spoken to some in Cam that seem to be pretty reasonable. And the fact that Oasis let them into their sphere means a lot to me (I hold Immortals and TFP in fairly high regard despite our differences at times). Here's the thing. I honestly don't care -how- big a Bloc is if their CBs sound reasonable. Another thing, when Hollywood attacked Rose, they were clearly outnumbered in almost every tier, in many cases by quite a bit. Only by Oasis joining on their side did that imbalance get rectified (and even favoured the Rose/Oasis combo). And I imagine that Oasis is fully aware that the next war, Hollywood or its successor may decide to go for them, just as certain remnants of Quack decided to go for Rose for getting into the Leaky Faucet conflict. There's no guarantee that anyone will come to their aid if they get attacked by some larger sphere in the future. But they did it anyway, and after Tyrion's explanation, I think they made the right choice.

I haven't seen any evidence that Oasis asked any of their former Bloc mates even indirectly, but again, if you find any evidence that they did, I'd be interested in seeing it. But you repeatedly saying this is what happened isn't actually evidence that that's what happened. Anyway, I think this isn't your main concern, so moving on- you say that Oasis "routinely ignores the things they say they are about", but I haven't seen any evidence of this. As to Oasis being composed of large Alliances, I would certainly agree they're not small, but I also think that they are one of the smaller fish in the big pond. I think that Quack really was the largest sphere and when that broke up, it seems like Hollywood replaced them in that category (with some of the same members too). Anyway, thanks for the compliment at the end if it's sincere. I've all but given up on trying to figure out whether people are being sincere with me or not when they compliment me, so I figure that's a good compromise reaction wise. People who know me know that I am strongly loyal to principles rather than people. This has frequently landed me in hot water, -including- with Alliances and Blocs that I admire in some ways. As you may be aware, my first Alliance was The Fighting Pacifists, which is currently part of Oasis, but we had a disagreement and had to part ways. But just because I disagreed with them on -one- thing doesn't mean I have to disagree with them on everything, and when I think something makes sense, I say so.

Here's the thing- I don't think Oasis called their former Bloc mates. I also seriously doubt Rose called Oasis. No, I think what happened here is that those Blocs looked at what was playing out and decided something had to be done about it and did so. Tyrion never said "Rose called out for help", neither did Cam et al. No, both of them said they looked at what had happened and decided to act on their own. Now if someone from Rose or Oasis comes forward and says "Why yes, I -did- call Oasis/Cam/etc. to come help", I'll be the first to admit I was mistaken. But for now, Vice's last comment rung true to me, just tack on a further negation of any call outs... I notice that Tyrion upvoted it too.

Agreed. Firwof, you know we agree on many things but I think you're getting a tad off track on this stuff. I think we can agree that Hollywood shouldn't have attacked Rose, but now they're paying what I think is a reasonable price for doing so, think it makes sense to just let things take their course now. Also, as a general rule, I have to say, don't underestimate the power of the Adrienne. Seriously, she's popular because she's nice. I remember Tyrion being real nice to her during Leaky Faucet and I think he's on to something.

Exactly.

Not sure what that means. Anyway, my point is that Hollywood's formation and planned attack on Rose were done in secret. Anyone can come out on the day of an attack and say they're being public about it. I'm sure those taking the lumps from such secret plans don't really care if it's because of a secret treaty or just a secret plan of attack.

Alright, so if after Quack had attacked in Leaky Faucett, if HM, Swamp and Rose had written a post saying that hey, they're a Bloc now and by the way, they're countering your attack on HM and Swamp, everything would have been cool? Trying to follow the logic here -.-...