Buorhann

From everything I've seen and heard, I'm sitting here going "What's the big deal?" You claim to step down and you can't move on. (Do report the API key stealing though, that is a serious situation for the player attempting to do that)

You're not taking into account how many deleted nations there were, either from bans or from players leaving.

How'd you know?

You go to Jail.

People shouldn't get too upset about all this drama. It's the most this game has had in awhile. So enjoy it while it lasts! In all seriousness though, if you're running a small/micro alliance and you're thinking about merging - join a more stable alliance, not another micro that has no idea what they're doing. At the very least, joining a more competent government in the game will show you how to better run a future alliance if you decide to create another again.

I applaud the peace terms. 1mo NAP, color bloc war, and upholding previous offers made? Not bad.

He creates it.

He threatened with lawyers about ADA or some BS, and said he has a government contact. It is pretty funny. I'll let @Emperor Adam talk more about it.

As someone who received lots of leaked information while having a "show" at some point, you don't just blatantly throw it out there and show off with it. Sure, you can threaten people with it, you can tease about it, you can sell it off to someone else, but when you finally start dropping logs publicly - expect something to happen. At some point you have to decide - are you an alliance government member or a unbiased news source? If you're part of an alliance dropping logs publicly, you're just pissing off those alliances, and you should expect consequences. If you're just a news source, then there isn't much to hit, now is there?

There are far worse people here if you think that's bullying.

Vice has more credibility to be compared with Alan.

Don't worry, there will be more.

How long till we hear more news of DB merges?

You disagree with his ENTIRE post? He actually made some good points. A lot of the “interesting” conflicts did start from OOC stupidity. Not saying it should go that route, but he’s not wrong on that.

What is exactly Pay to Win in this game? What exactly are you "winning"?

Ooo, go back to the days of having hundreds of spies?!

I feel like half the players in government out there shouldn't answer this, but then again, it'd be interesting to see what they put down.

We need to start a petition to stop this madman from ruining the pristine space of this forum with such threads like this.

All of the above.

What’s the common denominator in all of this? Also, what’s your definition of top tier alliance?

I’ll take the under. Kev creates another AA within 5 months. (Honestly this is impressive with how quick he makes AAs and they get recruited quickly)

Christ, you're hitting all the bad states. I'll be scared when you form Alabama.

Do people really use the growth advantage as an excuse to this day? The resource pool amongst all the major alliances is huge. It's just a matter of actually using it instead of sitting on it, like most people do for some odd reason. I won't try to make the decision for you, but I will explain the decision to you. Setting aside your feelings about people dogpiling you (Again, I KNOW THAT ALL TOO WELL in my history), you establish better relations with one side or the other. Not only that, you act as a balancing act. I think using the whole dogpile excuse is poor. All you're going to do is continue to alienate yourself from the geopolitical scene with that mentality, which will eventually either lead you to become irrelevant (Because you refuse to work with anyone who participated in rolling Eclipse) or become a punching bag in the future once more by another dogpile when you "grow" too much. To answer your initial question though, yeah, I would've gotten involved once Aurora, CTO, and Syndicate joined in. Either to obliterate Florida quickly and have people move on from it or to counter ODOO's spiked growth of assistance. One side or the other would benefit Eclipse in the future. At least on paper smart alliances would do the whole "scratch my back, I scratch yours", but certain alliances out there like to betray their ties. So no, it's not quite logical. Is it understandable with the way you handled it? Sure. Can't fault you for feeling that way about the alliances who dogpiled Eclipse, but consider Eclipse's success in rolling multiple alliances - you had to expect that coming. Take it as a compliment. However, the whole decision process about all of this is more complex. Especially when looking to future deals and moves.

Why am I in that screenshot?? Don’t be revealing my association with Ururutiithihth whatever it is.

I know how that feels all too well, but sometimes you have to look at the overall geopolitical situation. Not criticizing your decision here, but there’s more to making decisions beyond feelings.