Anarchist Empire

Also fearless leader willing to fight any odds attracts the right kind of members as well. Rather have a smaller AA of nations who aren't afraid, than a bigger AA where they flee if odds don't look great or whatever. (This peace deal, probably a result of to many members in many of these AAs who are afraid to take much damage. Then the leader feel pressured to peace, in order to not lose them. (Of course not saying all the alliances had that issue, but coalition war all like to peace out together. So even those who'd prefer to keep fighting peace out.)

Thanks, every war is winnable. It's just a matter of how many bad moves they need to make depending on their advantage and most people make a lot of them. However do need to roll the dice sometimes, but beige never hurt anyone.

Nations all NAP each other, demilitarize, go to just collecting daily as all they do and don't need to be logging in; sure /raid will give a ton of good targets after this. Only other thing would, current war. Where all these alliances really part of the same war. I don't see anyone signing this. If there is some hidden extra thing to catch onto from your announcement, lack of it being clear on mentioning alliances and any signatures is most blatant if there is more to this. You're the one who said there is some hidden meaning in this announcement. Which is odd, Syndicate would announce on behalf of so many alliances. Did they really all come together to agree to this? I don't know. You can just say what you mean. (I really doubt they all peaced to target me if you're trying to go there, that doesn't make sense. I don't have the slots.) At most 3 can be declared on me at once, then I can choose 5 targets. Math is to my advantage if I pick high loot targets to offset any damage and once defensive slots are full; then can't be countered anymore.I can also shoot 1 nuke and 2 cruise missiles per day, so people who declare on me take more damage anyways.

There will be a ton of easy raid targets now, with so many alliances NAPed and nations bored to log in? I'm not sure.

Maybe that's where they messed up. lol Don't think we've fought ever, but do agree you guys are probably one of the stronger alliances that were on that side. Now you guys can barely raid anyone, glad I'm not part of this.

However our issue with Carthago is over something separate I guess. Not sure why so many alliances would declare just to secure a NAP with Syndicate and others in this. Weird, but nothing against most of the alliances in this. Just surprising to see this was all to secure a NAP. (So now all the spheres can be NAPed together, those who declared today wanted in on the widespread NAP. Seems wasn't bravery driving these wars, but wanting a global NAP; with how fast this happened. Not even trying to damage each other.) Yeah, I don't care I guess if the major alliances want to play this way. I'll do things my own way. I'm in the right and that's all the motivation I need. Even KT's allies seem hate Carthago and hear they screw loyal members all the time if it's mathematically beneficial. So maybe good this frees Carthago members to leave who don't want to be there.

Way announcement looks, Syndicate won? So they can get away with it maybe? Syndicate performed way better than expect to beat so many alliances. If Syndicate attacked after this announcement they made, nobody has to peace current wars. So we'll see. However we're not peacing out current wars & probably will fight more with Carthago, until they pay this back to my member betrayed and slandered; just to rob their deposit. Not war dodging to leave an allaince who actually has peaced and we welcome those not afraid to fight.

-1 Respect for anyone who peaces out this guy who attrition declared on them who I declared on, rather than finish it. (Weak to basically surrender within a day of declaring a war. Syndicate beat you all into this?)

We declare war on carthago, so no peace. lol. For robbing over 200m from my member & their former member. (He was their member when they betrayed him) If they want to pay his deposit back, then they can have peace.

I do see Carthago keeps members who war dodge going into VM on their AA, yet someone is inactive and not war dodging they steal their stuff. Did give them another chance to negotiate and he didn't respond at all to anything. However with the war over, still seems they're not. I have heard since they screw members they know are loyal if it's mathematically beneficial as a normal thing from some. So congrats to the rest on peace I guess, but Carthago is a special case. https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=125702

Carthago claims if they kick someone for being inactive; that person left during the war and a war dodger. (Being kicked for being inactive is the same enough, if I didn't already know the reason; he would have just claimed the member left in the middle of the war rather than admit they were kicked.) How many people can really have their lives revolve around this game enough to always be active constantly in prolong wars? Is being inactive for a bit without leaving, so not avoiding taking damage at all despite not having time to defend; worthy of labeling someone a war dodger after they kick them while stealing their bank deposits? If that's their policy anyone in Carthago who doesn't think they're going to be able to constantly be active for the duration of this war, no matter how long it lasts, might as well withdraw their bank deposit if they're allowed during war and leave now; since they're going to be treated like a war dodger later regardless of how much damage they take for the alliance. So I think that policy is insane and most alliances just put their inactive on applicant, rather than kick them if they want to keep their bank deposits. I'm interested to see if anyone agree with the Carthago definition for war dodger, anyone who fails in their obligation to constantly be active during prolong global wars? I obviously disagree, since war dodgers wouldn't be the types of members I'd want to go out of my way to have and help under almost all circumstances. I'm leaning towards the opinion, leaving Carthago isn't really war dodging because of this; since they've diluted the meaning to the point where it makes no sense for anyone who has a life outside this game to stay. Real life emergency cause you to be inactive in Carthago, what happens to your bank account. (I've also heared from allies of their allies; they hate Carthago, from before this unrelated. So seems like a bad allaince in general, not popular & they steal from members. I spy oped a nation which was sort of inactive & they had more than this guy had in the bank on them. So seems keeping their money on hand is the way to go there. Smarter to keep it on hand than put it int he bank if not always active; since raiders can't steal it all; but more they have in the bank; the bigger incentive they have to boot someone if they're not always active; so they can steal the funds. (If the money they think is worth more than the member.) I consider us defacto at war with them already, just no slot and our CB solid. So spying on them fine. You successfully gathered intelligence about Katzenzungen. Your spies discovered that Katzenzungen has 60 spies, $203,522,070.04, 26,433.05 coal, 6.00 oil, 281.60 uranium, 5,174.04 lead, 31.00 iron, 31.00 bauxite, 4,128.42 gasoline, 5,754.39 munitions, 2,934.50 steel, 3,916.50 aluminum, and 0.00 food. Your agents were caught and identified by Katzenzungen's counter-intelligence forces. The operation cost you $145,492.27 and 1 of your spies were captured and executed.

Looks like SAIL may FAIL. Already those who wanted preserve their infra were hurting, throw in 10 more alliances rolling them. Wars like this come down to will power, morale & willingness to take whatever damage to win. Singularity and Cypher cast aside any illusions of preserving their infra early on, so have no reason to back down now with more on their side. Morale is mostly not favoring the SAIL side atm. Can't really beat those who have aside everything already to win. (I think WELP made a mistake jumping into what's probably the losing side, have a hard time imagining them winning. Will probably drag out to a draw at best for them after their infra is wrecked.) Also I decided Syndicate and Aurora don't own Green. So we're green & consider it free color now. (You can thank Locutus for showing me income sucks on Brown compare to Green. Also someone told me I can't, which made me want to more.) Also I think SAIL's side won't win, since they try motivating their members to constantly stay active by stealing their bank deposits & labeling them war dodgers if they can't always be active 24/7. So those who aren't prepared to constantly be active for what could a drawn out war, they might as well withdraw their bank deposits now. Rather than get booted and labeled a war dodger, after being robbed. Lack of loyalty to members makes members less loyal. (When I finally got some explanation on the bank thing, their leader called the member they booted a war dodger since they weren't active at the time. I see plenty of nations in there borderline, where they could lose their deposits if Carthogo thinks their war deposits are worth more than what they're contributing to the war effort. He also claimed the member left, but I already knew they were booted. That's when he clarified his view that being inactive is war dodging. Rather than tell me anything regarding it in thier channel when asking, they first muted me for a week; then also banned me from the channel when I mentioned it again in one of their allies channels. So they did not want their members to hear the reason I guess, since maybe it would cause them to leave?)

Oh yeah they declared on TK, was talking with someone who wanted me to raid a Rose nation (70m or even more than that isn't worth sabotaging side which I think will and should win), so saw that as reason not to. Not to relavent to this DoW. Guess WELP is Weebinsim, Eclipse & Legion of the Dawn. So answering the call from themselves, they declare on TK? I have anything personal against WELP or TK; but don't think that side will win personally. Carthago's leader thought my ego big to think I could make any difference in the war. Well, maybe in this game I do. Ego to win. One person can make a huge difference if they know they will win. Despite declaring the most wars and winning in last war WELP did shortly before peacing it they kicked me. So I don't think WELP will make a huge difference in this.

Guess I can't raid you guys more, since our interests align. Should be a more interesting global now. Yesterday I felt a good chance this war would turn around, now I'm sure it will.

Clearly Rose is doing something right, so even if I just recently finished the wars of most recent counters rose did on me from raiding, even for high profit targets; will leave them alone. (Someone was just advising me to raid high loot Rose targets found, but guess I can't hit them now.) https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=1921531

*retracted* What we'll do is still under consideration if ODOO does not want us to hit Carthago. Most likely nothing has changed.

I'm not sure what WELP is, but if it's Carthago as well they lost the moral high ground in this war or not worth fighting for; when they decided members who become inactive during it; rather than move to applicant they kick and steal all their bank funds. Give faulty excuse they're war dodgers. Even if I've raided Rose while they weren't at war, guess what this is trying to tell me is Rose is fighting against Carthago's side in the war. So I should not raid Rose. (KT I have no issues with actually & don't plan to hit them; unless they hit us.) Having one faulty enough alliance on a side, can be a piece which makes the whole side end up losing. GOONS was such an alliance in the past maybe. (I see nothing wrong if nations do leave Carthago to war dodge after hearing from their leader they robbed a member they kicked for being a war dodger, just for being inactive a bit. So the stress they want to put thier members under, where they get kicked, their stuff stolen & slandered as war dodgers if not constantly active makes them a bad alliance imo.)

*retracted* We'll hit who we want. if ODOO doesn't want us hitting the other side. Doesn't mean we won't, but will see.

Carthago stole 175m deposit from one of our members and was thinking of declaring on them today over it; when they kicked us from server rather than want to discuss the issue & maybe give their former member they kicked for inactivity their money back. So since yesterday, I've had a feeling this war will turn around since the allaince on the side winning are not smart. Seems it's happening. Don't think we'll bother with a DoW, unless effected member wants to post one explaining it. Probably will just raid them until get it back. Sometimes a side deserves to lose in a war because of reasons, this might be such a case with side which was winning. (We indirectly have ties with BK, but probably will focus on Carthago unless we're asked to hit more maybe.) $200m stolen, with their leader claiming the member a war dodger after they kicked for just being inactive for a short time. That's not war dodging, not being able to be active 24/7 in a war they're dragging out. So when I have slots, lol. (That's just called being greedy theives, eager to rob their own members when they use them being inactive a bit in a drawn out war as an excuse to steal their bank funds. Reason to weary of using alliance banks, but most alliances probably aren't like that.) Also it being a betrayal of trust makes it much worse than raiding, which is different. Betrayal I don't like. (Not about the money, as much as the betrayal and very petty of them to do it over such a sum. Not even that big for people playing a bit. Helping retreive it I wasn't even going to ask for any of it, all would go to the member it belongs.) If helping a member betrayed in such a way, fighting for noble purpose is more fun that just raiding.