[How long will this war go on for?]

24 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

NPO's actions have a logical reasoning to them

 

Correct. Your actions make sense. It's your narrative that's a mess, because you keep trying to deny the simple logic.

[How long will this war go on for?]

Whoa! It's true!

Sketchy and Scarf being sorta dumb totally is a reasonable retort! It totally doesn't matter that virtually everything NPO has said has been proven false by their own actions anymore, because after the fact, two goofballs were sort of rude to them.

At least BK are mostly honest about wanting to be hegemonic weenies. I'm actually starting to think they're the real brains, considering how deranged NPO has been.

[[Bloc] Citadel]

1 minute ago, MinesomeMC said:

Could be his bank history

I mean I saw that. That's part of what I'm questioning.

[[Bloc] Citadel]

Forgive me if there's an obvious explanation for this I'm not privvy to but I happened to look at your nation. How and why did a nation under two years old buy up to city 30 in the middle of a war?

[This is a brave new world we're living in]

2 minutes ago, ArcKnox said:

You're like a month behind on the narrative. Now it's that NPO is FORCED to ally with BK again because TKR man bad or something.

Oh. I guess I got confused because they used that one already for literal years. My bad. By which I mean ORANGE MAN BAD.

Edit: Though it still makes me laugh that NPO consistently treated their real allies as subordinate to BK even in the period they were still pretending.

[This is a brave new world we're living in]

I'm sure it's TKR's fault Roq had to threaten someone with admin action over a treasure transfer. Hopefully Alex can explicitly add "ORANGE MAN BAD" to the game rules so Roq doesn't have trouble enforcing them anymore.

Also did I miss it, or did no one point out that BK hit TFP over something they said to Roq? I thought IQ was still pretending not to be allied?

[This is a brave new world we're living in]

29 minutes ago, Edward I said:

My (unenforceable, sometimes strategically imprudent) rule is that any CB is valid if a) you announce it and b) it's in-character. "Fun" doesn't count, but "we don't like you" or "this is a military training exercise" do.

Any group can develop rules or precedents surrounding CBs if it maintains them with military force or social persuasion. However, precedent seldom works as a justification for war. If an alliance thinks it's got a good CB, the additional claim that the CB is grounded in precedent rarely persuades any previously-unsympathetic person of its validity. This leaves us with the first option: military force.

You're right that a huge plurality, if not a small majority, of Orbis is antipathetic towards NPO, but I doubt that would change because of one or even several CBs NPO employed. We'd have been screwed a long time ago if the only things that mattered were the opinions of the peanut gallery.

My point wasn't about what the peanut gallery thought so much as holding Shadowthrone to the standard he was trying to apply to TFP. I mean. Let's say I was willing to put aside all thoughts of other people's opinions (and the whole, uhhh, "keep declaring war on my ally for reasons I know to be false" thing, heh) : I would want to judge NPO on what their leaders say, and if you guys aren't accountable to your own supposed standard than I'd suggest that might be where some of your "peanut gallery" problem comes from. We could definitely go in circles on this one but generally speaking I don't mind doing it so if you want you can hit me up on discord some time you're bored?

I'm not sure I agree about military force. For me logical consistency and validity is totally separate from what you can enforce. You can say X and you can bash people who don't agree with X for days, but it won't make X any more true.

I think I take your point about fun. I'm a little amused you just said "the only thing I find invalid is fun!" though! Hahaha. Fun can be in character, though, and can be something that has an appreciable (albeit difficult to quantify) morale/community value.

 

Edit: We're like three tangents out probably but who cares at least it's a slightly different flavour on the whole "no u" thing.

[This is a brave new world we're living in]

14 minutes ago, Edward I said:

When has "we are annoyed with you about something you did" not been valid CB?

If it makes you happy, I suppose we could say all our future wars are solely motivated by boredom.

Wasn't really trying to get into a debate on the validity of given CBs. I mean, it'd be a tangent, but if it helps you understand my angle any better, my general philosophy on CBs is "while you don't need a specific reason to declare wars, you shouldn't be surprised if someone later turns your own logic back on you". Sort of a "do unto others", fundamentally.

So from that angle, in my response to Shadowthrone I was drawing on the tone of his own posts to say "it's amusing you think that is a valid CB, since if everyone else ascribed to that you would be screwed".

[This is a brave new world we're living in]

1 hour ago, Shadowthrone said:

He then descended to being a douche about it, quite a straightforward CB.

"Being a douche is a valid CB" - Shadowthrone without a hint of irony, 2019.

 

(also it's not being a douche to tell rude people who groundlessly threaten you with mod action over a treasure transfer to buzz off. :P)

[Self reflection and loss, a thank you to Orbis.]

Sorry to hear, Sphinx. At the end of the day everyone playing this game is a person, and if it ever came off like a personal thing when we've disagreed over dumb game stuff, please accept my apology for being deeply remiss.

I've always found that one of the most useful things about having online friends is that you can unload all your emotional stuff on them. It's part of how I keep myself sane, and how I actually trick people into thinking I'm a functional adult irl. Hehehe.

Loss is a bastard and I think the most reasonable thing that I can say about it is that everyone deals with it in their own way and it's not for anyone else to tell you your way is no good. Do what makes you feel better: deal with things in your way... no need to feel ashamed or apologetic for that.

Anyway. Take care of yourself. If you ever want to chat with someone uninvolved feel free to hit me up.

[How long will this war go on for?]

40 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

Getting arrogant here and saying we're lying and floating logs after all the flak about not posting ours just pushes us into a corner where we have to keep this going regardless of momentum for as long as possible.

"Calling me on lying just means I have to keep being full of it"! Yeah, no. You've had a million chances to do anything different. None of that is on anyone other than you. You're the number one alliance in the game, and your setup is such that 150 nations will do whatever you ask them regardless of how much sense it makes. You have more than enough power to play precisely the way you want to, and that's precisely what you've done.

It's not the fault of anyone else for recognizing it, sorry. Want to make a change? Do it. Otherwise stop the disingenuous whining. Don't forget: everyone was bending over backwards for your supposed desire to do something new. You're the one who crapped on it when you made a lame excuse to hit the same people you have for the last, what, 4 major wars running? Or at least that's what I'd be saying if it seemed like any of that desire was genuine, anyway.

If that's what you're bringing, yeah, go back to being quiet. No one wants to be bored with it anymore. Or at least make your disingenuous hegemonic garbage a sonnet or something, if you can't be bargained with on the actual content.

[How long will this war go on for?]

8 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

Lol what? There was never a plot with Covenant and co with the NPO or any agreement of sort. Our entrance was dictated by the TKR information. We've gone round and round with regards to that, but yeah that is why we entered when we did. If there was a secret agreement, we'd have entered on day one, and not waited for what almost 10 days? xD 

Just in case anyone actually still reads your posts at face value, for some reason:

That's incorrect. You and your allies planned to hit slursphere in mid-june, "coincidentally" at the same time as BK's sphere would have hit ours. The secret agreement was between Kayser and your government, and that in addition to your dogged loyalty to BK (which if it was anyone else you'd decry as a paperless tie) makes it pretty clear this war would have happened as long as you felt you had an opening to do it. You didn't need an explicit agreement with Covenant to know you were going to help BK; that had nothing to do with TKR, because anyone who can read can tell you cobbled that "CB" together out of months-old nuts and bolts and nonsense conjecture.

You would have liked to have the luxury of letting BK fight their own war, because you'd have been able to keep HS and t$ on IQ's side longer. But when the facts on the ground changed you adjusted accordingly.

[Peace Terms.]

4 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

Yes because mercy boards does not involve shaming individuals for making mistakes and isn't one of the more toxic elements brought in from other worlds, practiced by some of the more toxic alliances I've ever seen function. 

 

I didn't mention other worlds or toxicity, actually. But now that you've mentioned it as part of your toxic post referencing another world I start to wonder....

[Peace Terms.]

10 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

Given that you're literally in a bloc with alliances that supported mercy boards and public shaming of folks who make mistakes in this game, and also part of coalitions that have attempted some of the most punitive terms in the history of Orbis its funny to hear you call other alliances toxic. Probably best start clearing house in Chaos first  

Yeah asking people to draw art for mistrades was definitely comparable to deliberately trying to run people out of the game.

 

I'd ask if you ever get tired of being full of it but I already know the answer.

[Peace Terms.]

13 minutes ago, Epi said:

-gibberish-

 

You know, partial credit, because being aware you're a goof puts you ahead of the pack actually.

[IQ declares on IQ]

I am sure UPN is readying themselves to help their protectorate in their time of need!

[Peace Terms.]

10 hours ago, Epi said:

I'm aware of that and I hold my own strong opinions against it. I've just haven't had as many discussions with them on the topic. In general I've found non-IQ more open about pragmatic and kinda immoral politics

"Thank you for providing proof that I'm wrong. I'm aware of it, as evidenced by the fact that I've done nothing about it. You guys do it more, though, and my proof is nothing."

 

Your "opinions" don't matter if you do less than nothing about them.

[Peace Terms.]

5 minutes ago, Akuryo said:

-stuff-

Fun fact, part of the impetus for creating Chaos was how disgusting some of the alliances in our previous coalition were. In my opinion the worst alliances were BK, Acadia, and UPN. Funny how it's always the alliances who need other people to do their heavy lifting that seem to have ideas about punishing other communities, isn't it? I'm glad Sphinx found friends that suit his play style.

[Blatantly Self-Serving War suggestion Volume 2]

It's not about change or not having change in the game. It's about if it's possible to catch up for newer players. And it actually is.

There's no cap on how much money you can pass to someone. Updeclares work just fine, and everything about the way the growth curve works (IE: slowing as a nation gets larger) favours newer players. Same goes for the war declare ranges work.

And don't get me wrong. As an older player, I think that's great, and exactly how the game should be set up.

If the same whales are sitting around whaling it up, that's a political issue: there's nothing about the mechanics that dictates that that has to be. Even in the present war, the only thing that really stopped the largest whales from getting beaten down was in-game politics (and uhhh, I'd posit, poorly handled ones. :P).

 

[Bill Lock]

I had this happen as well, earlier in the war.

I had improvements stop functioning because of a lack of revenue. I got some cash, and waited until the next turn, and the money was deducted. But there was still an odd 5 or so minute pause before the game seemed to recognize this happened, so I still couldn't attack or do anything.

[A super important suggestion]

Just now, Alex said:

Where do you see racism and sexism in the game, on the forum, or in the official P&W discord server?

I can't read/monitor everything, we rely on reports from players. If you have instances of this that you know about that I'm not aware of, I would really encourage you to report it so that people can be warned appropriately (and removed if necessary.)

But so far through this whole ordeal, no one has shown me any specific reports and have just made these general claims that I can't work with. I can't ban/punish people because someone accuses them of being racist or sexist.

It's in the.... other..... thread.....?

The crux of the point I am making is that the guy had a racist name on your forum, your mods punished him, and then he just did the same crap in game. You want to ignore literally everything about discord: I don't agree that it's not useful context, but I understand the utility of drawing a line: fine.

But you can't say "well, this has worked", because it didn't. You changed his name on the forum, so he upped the ante. A nation strike for threatening to lynch someone.... you can't possibly actually think that is appropriate. Why do you want this person in your community instead of the person he attacked? This is why Kosmo is upset, and I don't blame him.

[A super important suggestion]

11 minutes ago, Alex said:

 Racism/sexism/etc. are against the rules and are punished every time it's reported.

This is only true in the most literal sense. Your punishments are inadequate, and that's why your game is full of racism and sexism.

I'm laughing at you downvoting me, though. My point was that you don't deal with this stuff properly: the fact that you seem to think childishly downvoting me on your forum for pointing out this isn't the first, second, or eighth time you'd failed as an admin underscores my point. It's actually more than you've done to address the substance of my arguments, though, so it doesn't surprise me.

No one wants you to be the discord police. We just are grossed out you continually allow this to happen in your game, and on your forums. If your rules allow for this, they need to be changed.

[A super important suggestion]

17 hours ago, Mad Max said:

Ohhh so the best way to motivate someone to do something for me is to yell and act like a complete shit stain. 

Thanks Kosmo, gonna go try this on my mom. 

Acting reasonable doesn't do anything either.

[Changes to score calculations -- Need input.]

 

5 hours ago, Malal said:

The fact that this strategy has existed for 3 years now, it can only be used by the side with more nations, and that there has never been a major increase in its effectiveness proves that the strategy is as effective as it can be.

Lol no. Don't even know where to start with this one hahahaha.

To the point of the thread? I think cities should count a bit more for NS calculations and troops a bit less. The real problem with the way ns is calculated presently, in my opinion, is that you can declare and then double buy over update, which leads to silliness. It might even make sense to count unbought troop capacity as NS if the player is below max on that troop type, thinking about it.

Edit: but honestly, I'm averse to changes at all. Admin is weak, and tends to make them half cocked in accordance with who whines the most, and I'd sooner have that sorted out in the meta.

[A super important suggestion]

2 hours ago, Kevanovia said:

I believe what he’s saying is that Alex is taking each individual offense on its own merit. He can’t take in “discord evidence” as proof of harassment in-game, because it’s a slippery slope. Discord is not his domain, and he can’t verify the culprit via discord. However, there is an avenue of holding people accountable for asshatery on discord by contact discord directly or going to the authorities.

I wish people stop harassing others OOC. It’s sad that there are so many jerks in this world.

You did not read the other thread, I am assuming? Multiple problems with the same guy, across the forums, and the actual game. That has nothing to do with discord; there's enough without any of that. That's why Kosmo is pissed off: Alex is saying "if you bring evidence I will handle it" but every other time people have, he did not take enough action to prevent it from happening again. And it has literally led to a player quitting the game because they no longer want to be the target of racial attacks, which I shouldn't need to tell you, or anyone, is messed up.

 

Edit: I'm replying to you because I know you're actually someone who does care. I've given up on Alex. His statement only makes sense if you divorce it from the actual context of what happened, here.