Sval

Well, you've got a point there.

It's everything I ever dreamed of.

I was going to go after CTO, until I remembered I'm already hitting that.

"All those valid reasons you have for hitting Camelot are not valid!" Signed, Camelot

Not sure what this has to do with anything I said. I'm pointing out that going in with a larger force and an eye to win is, always will be, and always has been a tactic used on Orbis. Few start a war without some advantage, whether that's in numbers overall or tiering. Either way, somebody will brand it a dogpile. It's people spinning narratives, as it always is. Don't like the larger aggressor? "ZOMG a 10 vs 1 dogpile!" Don't like the alliance being hit? "Good luck, have fun!"

It's true. Knowing there aren't 700 nations in Nexus fills me with such undue pride.

I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of those 700 Nexus nations standing at my back. Could you peddle your 10 v 1 narrative a little louder please?

10 vs 1? Imagine my surprise at discovering Nexus had 700 nations... But yes. We waited until Camelot shat the bed and left itself completely devoid of allies, rather than hitting them while they were party to a bloc we have absolute zero beef with. I'm sorry prudent planning does not meet with your approval.

The whole "fair fight" versus "dogpile" narrative has always been a fascinating one. Say whatever you will about the fun of a fair fight, people still like to win. Deliberately balancing wars only really makes sense strategically when the sole purpose of the war is simply to fight and test yourself against an enemy. If you want to pin down your enemy as quickly as possible, and simultaneously minimise your own loses, it's going to be the overwhelming sledgehammer approach almost every time. It's just the most direct way to do it. We're not here to test strategies, we're not going to sit on them for a year to drive them out of the game, and we're not going to be presenting them with ridiculous terms that violate game rules. We're here to give Camelot a black eye for past grievances. This is how it's done.

Absolutely not. I find the idea of trying to run people/alliances out of Orbis to be utterly repugnant. It's exactly what Camelot an their long-lost allies once tried to do to us.

Something something historical grievances

When you're in Camelot this kinda stops being an achievement...

TL;DR: "We have legitimate concerns!" "No you don't!" "Yes we do!" "No you don't!" "Yes we do!"

Expecting Camelot to conduct themselves with any semblance of honour is always going to end in disappointment.

I have no idea what's going on, but I'm proud of myself for almost reading it.