Jump to content

Lord of Puns

VIP
  • Posts

    249
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Lord of Puns

  1. 12 hours ago, Kastor said:

    There is no reason to believe this. 
     

    There is nothing to stop you for just signing TKR again next time they want to start a war. I assume, and others should as well, that you’re just moving with TKR and want to not get targeted for the semi-hegemony you’ve created. 
     

    tS, being shitty allies yet again.

    Did you miss the last few times where t$ rolled TKR, and then TKR rolled t$, and thence again? 

     

    I mean I know you’ve been asleep for like 6 years but this is lazy even for you

    • Haha 4
    • Upvote 2
  2. 1 minute ago, Buorhann said:

    By now, for some of you alliances, 8bn should be a drop in the bucket.

    Starting a war over 8b, understandable.

     

    But you don’t start a war to recoup money. War is expensive. Which is why it’s always punitive. Trying to act like this war was solely to make money back is fake as !@#$ especially given HS’s size, age, and access to sphere wealth.

    • Upvote 4
  3. 14 hours ago, Sketchy said:

    Goals change over time, and spheres shift to adjust. All sphere politics is driven by alliances. Usually when alliances compromise their personal goals for a sphere it's because they are choosing to put one goal over another.

    Right, but I think we all (or maybe 70% of us) can agree that the political climate is much more interesting and dynamic when alliances have prevalent opinions that stand out from their sphere. Which is what I believe Lysander was getting at.

     

    A great example being  Carthago and TFP, both have a very strong individual presence outside of bloc politics 

  4. On 1/11/2023 at 4:04 PM, Charles Bolivar said:

    There are only two poles,with these poles being comprised of multiple spheres linked by common interests, security and their alignment with other alliances within that same pole and most importantly, their opposition to alliances found in the opposing pole.

    See but there isn’t. There are a few alliances that absolutely will not ally themselves with other certain alliances, but for the most part in the past two years everybody done did everything with everybody. This dichotomy that you’re depicting does not exist any more. tS went from fighting rose, to allying rose, TKR went from allying tS to fighting tS. Midguard arose as a tripartite to the typical TKROSESYNDICATE rivalry (which in itself is a set of three poles) HOGG has arisen as a separate sphere again. The idea that the entire world operates around two poles is blatantly false.   Time and time again, the three major players in orbis politics continue to be consumed by other mini conflicts that begin to create new powerhouses. 
     

    The reality is that you’re seeing these divisions because you’re looking for them. Age old rivalries shaped our spheres and our mindsets as players for years. New rivalries and lines are being drawn and it’s not just straight in half. I mean shit, we had three major conflicts occurring with completely different parties in the past two months alone. 

    • Upvote 1
  5. 2 hours ago, Zed said:

    I do think that there are periods where an alliance can say they have "won", in these games. That does not always have to last, and it does not always have to be the strongest military alliance or the one in the #1 AA rank by score. The threshold for that is relatively high, and I would not give that to an alliance that simply won a global war without the impacts of it lasting long-term.

    There are probably 3-4 alliances who can say they have hit that height ever in this game, as it stands right now.

    This is precisely the point. The concept of having “won” the game is fruitless and inevitably the game moves on. Time does not stop because you created an unbeatable hegemony, the world does not pause and congratulate this accomplishment. You don’t receive a reward for this stalemate. When you get to the top of the mountain you find more mountains. 
     

    Since the game has evolved into creating a constant dynamic atmosphere to encourage multiple different spheres to compete and grow, people moved past this archaic idea of the ultimate victory. So we don’t have one villain, we don’t have us vs. them in mass. We have many many different points of view, and the political scene has flourished because of it.

    • Upvote 3
    • Downvote 1
  6. 55 minutes ago, Kastor said:

    The goal of the game is to guide your alliance into a hegemony.


    This is what happens when you leave the political scene for a while. You fall into old tropes. Any person that truly believes that this game can be won forgets the 90 different times people have claimed this “win” or built “the perfect hegemony”. 

    As someone who’s old playstyle was, “!@#$ !@#$es, steal banks” - you should know more than anyone that the goal of this game is whatever you make of it. But most of the game has moved past sustained global domination and stagnation m8

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.