Avruch

The plural 'you', I apologize for my complex grammar and promise to use more simple English.

You debated this backstab idea for a month? So it was part of the plan long before the treaty was inked? I know you think you're some Sean Spicer spin wizard trying to pretend that your treachery is irrelevant fake news from the failing "journalists" on the failing "OWF." But I'm under no obligation to proceed as if your plotting didn't exist or can't be considered because it hadn't completed some formal internal process that literally no one else gives a shit about. We should all take a spin through OWF history and see if we can identify how you reacted to SK's plot. I bet a Daily Show style split screen comparison would be entertaining for all.

Nothing improper with 2/3rds of high government discussing how they are going to betray and backstab a brand new ally? Are you sure? Well, of course, I know you are. Welcome back, what Orbis has been missing are incompetent but deeply mendacious machinations that are so visible we all get to be entertained.

I wonder what happened to all those 'I stand with the legitimate VE gov' people now? Wonder how strong they think their ties with TVE are...

I can't speak for Olorin, but maybe he thought the treachery behind signing an ally and then immediately looking for ways to stab them in the back was so far past unpalatable that more 'discussion' would be useless.

It seems the truth is out now, so much for the coverup.

Aha! So this is what tore VE apart from within. VE signed tS as a sham, intending to betray them. But not all its government members agreed, and perhaps its members were uninformed. Do we assume that those who have fled to TVE are now informed and on board? ETA: Wow, Impero. No excuse, eh?

Someday someone will maybe elaborate on why the 'gov talk' was so contentious.

Oh man, this thread. Grealind makes grand claims about VE laws, then self-owns by admitting he has no clue what those laws are... Codonian snatches defeat from the jaws of victory... Impero's head spins, but he still manages to 'discuss the aforementioned matter at issue' like he's lecturing at Arizona Summit Law School... Please, please let there be another bug?

Since this isn't intended for anyone, no one will understand this message. You're welcome.

This is interesting, because the topic of the OP is "NatRP is pretty dead..." Opening with a comment about the state of NatRP, and one idea to address the problems with that state, certainly does seem like an invitation to discuss the state of NatRP. It looks more like you only want people to comment if they agree with you. If that's the case, just say that "This is a thread for people to support my idea and tell me how much they like it and then work out some minor details of our demand to be entertained by Mods." I'd say something about this not being a cruise ship and hired hands not being available to juggle for you, but I feel like that wouldn't fit within your desired framework for this thread.

this thread delivers

Congrats and good luck to tTO!

It doesn't list the wars on applicants, genius.

Do you deny that is what you told people in your alliance?

Kastor's approach in private is about what it has been on this thread - somehow its all our fault and he seems to think he was in a position to be demanding and accusatory.

"We were under the impression from our Leader Kastor that you had given us permission to raid applicants." That is pretty unambiguous. We put some people at applicant while they are temporarily inactive, it has several effects, one of which is preventing raids against them from harming the bank. That does not mean, nor has it ever, that they are open to raiding. For years it has been common practice for alliances to protect their applicants, and for us that hasn't changed. Many have recently asked us if that is still true, and we've consistently said that it is.

Mensa has been raided by Lordaeron, including by two members of its high government. When we defended ourselves, we were informed that Kastor told his members they had my permission to raid applicants (which, of course, they do not - we have never given such permission, nor will we). Kastor has decided that Mensa is at fault for defending ourselves, since even though Lordaeron's leadership attacked us they are much smaller and should be left alone. That's not really how this works, but until Kastor comes back to his senses (if that is possible) we will continue to defend ourselves against the aggression of Lordaeron. ~Avruch, Chairman, Mensa HQ

Why ask for permission? If you are a hard core basic raider, then just raid. Don't come to Buo and then to me and ask for permission, that's just silly. But if you raid, don't get whiny and complain about being rolled. If you hit us you'll get hit back. Its just physics. You do you, we'll do us.

Their decision is opportunistic; I don't think being opportunistic about these decisions is out of character for SK at all.

I don't get why its interesting that SK didn't react belligerently to Mensa or someone else but did to TEst in this instance. TEst made what sound like threats (but to others may be banter) from a position of weakness. That's usually bad strategy, and it backfired in this case. If I were in SK's position I might've made the same decision, even if I interpreted the "splintering" to be smoke and mirrors.

And by SK, yikes.

The big problem is it defeats the purpose of some of the changes and defies the principle that seems most likely to improve the war module. Tanks were changed to reduce the cost, for the purpose of making war more palatable and thus more common. But the infra damage change adds a huge expense to defeat; the only reason it wasn't a massively disruptive change is because fortify means that only inactives or idiots get beiged. But the principle we've been debating here for months is that no war is boring, wars don't happen more often because the damage and disadvantage is so severe, so we can make more war (and more fun for more people) by reducing the pain of war. Alex has at times rejected this principle and at other times endorsed it, but changes that go in both directions result in these weird contradictions.

gg Testes and others, you have been donged

Limit bank to target transactions - so you can only send stuff to a player or other alliance once per day. Then you could limit the amount of stuff you can send at a time. That'd effectively restrict bank hiding, although it would impact other legit uses of banks as well.