Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Roquentin last won the day on August 19

Roquentin had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1227 Upvote King

About Roquentin

  • Rank
    Exalted Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Alliance Pip
    New Pacific Order
  • Leader Name
  • Nation Name
    Dreamcatcher(formerly T-ara)
  • Nation ID
  • Alliance Name
    New Pacific Order

Recent Profile Visitors

2820 profile views
  1. well they could also have it overthrown by a CIA-backed coup.
  2. I did nazi this coming. Kosmo out of nowhere bam.
  3. Oh, well, then I'm going to have to shut up. I don't want more secret surrender terms.
  4. BK are awful people especially since they associate with people like TheNG and Malal who also relish in player deletions and I can't accept this. Shame on GOONS.
  5. Not all of these are Soviet. Communist/Socialist parties existed before the Soviet Union. With USN they say anyone left of center would be okay so they aren't particularly ideologically rigid. If you just dislike socialism in general, that's another thing altogether. This one has Soviet symbology but for the most part the motifs are just the easiest ones to use. The reason the Communist stuff doesn't have the same stigma as Nazism is because Communism/Socialism doesn't say you should be treated worse for your ascribed characteristics. No one is being said to be innately inferior to a master race and condemned for their genetic lineage. You can hate the violent means taken by regimes like the USSR and the killings they did, but it's a major difference. We specifically avoid actual identification with Communism as the motivations behind it and what we do are entirely different as the economic factors in the game aren't the same as RL and we don't try to spread our stuff beyond our alliance besides just telling people why it's not as bad as they make it out. The reason NPO does what it does is because a united alliance is better to us than a spread out one in terms of how we want to play the game. It's a fixed set up in-game and all the production factors are accessible so the local knowledge problem doesn't exist. The average person who just has it as a casual game where they blow stuff up isn't going to look at things from a wider perspective so having a centralized set up avoids a lot of the pitfalls of a do as you please set up. It allows for alliance goals to be set. Communism is ultimately about direct democracy applied to economics, so the two are very different as we have no desire or expectation of deciding everything we do by vote. We don't expect every single person to have the same level of investment in the game as the leadership, so it is better for things to be decided autocratically. It is merely an absolute monarchy that extends to economics as well, which is the main difference between it and the other autocratic/dictatorial set ups that are predominant in the game.
  6. So glad we can keep fighting you. By the way, there's nothing really conspiratorial in the above, and fyi the pollyannish picture I was being sold is you could just be rolled all by yourself after you rebuilt as long as it didn't help BK and avoided hurting Chaos so keep huffing and puffing about me all you want. Not by choice on both occasions. They hit you and then you used them to discharge boredom because you didn't want to hit BK on your own. I'd say we'd be about equal by now. We can drag the war out enough so we surpass you, though. Um you're saying they planned it both before and after Surf's Up. The 3-1 advantage is usually based on nationcount and the nationcounts of actual involved alliances in this war were shown earlier to not be reflective of that level of advantage. The plans you already had to cooperate earlier in the year which have been previously acknowledgedI. The main premise is that BK would be out of the way and it is easier to win against one than against both. I'm using tone for some conversations and outright plans/concepts for other ones. It doesn't matter if it's this war or right after. It's simply easier to divide and conquer by having one down first. There were also the original leaks of you maintaining ties with TCW from your own forums which were seen as suspect. They were handwaved away super fast. In the Sphinx leaks, the motivations instead of minispheres appear to be that your main dispute at the time was with IQ alliances rather than CoS which SRD had. TCW not accepting the covert alignment wasn't planned yeah, but that was based on them not wanting to be a secret partner. Well the way the people that interacted with you at the time took it was you expected to win with Chaos and that it was a winning move. The screenshots that showed up later also seemed to indicate that in terms of seeing it as your best opportunity to turn things around rather than it being a huge gamble. If you saw it differently at the time, then it wasn't evident. The idea wasn't exclusive to this war. It could have been peace out and then turn around similar to Surf's Up since you'd have the momentum. it could be either. I don't know of the exact details you gave to anyone you interacted with as I wasn't involved in the talks anyone had with you but if you just said this war, it's easy to skate around.
  7. Actually, per the secret surrender terms we've had to accept from the Covenant, I was reprogrammed to shitpost to fit in more with Memesphere.(shhh)
  8. You didn't go to war with just your sphere. The screen released was from May, so if your justification is based on them plotting to hit you before Surf's Up, then that's something else to say they'd hit you right after as well. You haven't revealed any insider knowledge of BK and co planning to hit you that wasn't tied to Rainbow. When I'm talking about less potent militarily, I'm referring to it vs your coalition KETOG/Chaos/Rose together. A large inexperienced group that hasn't coordinated together won't really do well if it's on the defensive, and that has always played out. As far as I saw in the original plan leaked, they didn't see it in the terms you describe as a 3 on 1 gangbang, so obviously they're self-aware and know the limitations of their capacities. It was not really much of an assurance to me given it'd be the 2nd time you've worked with them in the same year. It was an easy of a win as you could get. Your infra was low and you could use that to fight on a much better terms against full infra lower city opponents. I don't know your timetable for escalation but more than one person that interacted with you directly detected a palpable hostility and they had no reason to mislead me about you or rile me up because they had no ill will towards you. The idea has always been if you could get BK locked down and out of the way, there'd be nothing stopping you and whoever your co-conspirators would be from doing it. There is no reason to trust you. You've been super confident since you formed Chaos and the suspicious circumstances surrounding it and the FA in the lead up has made it clear you had certain objectives in mind. It's your right to do whatever you feel is in your interest, but I don't have any reason to enable you to win outright. There is simply nothing else out there realistically that could have happened short of the two spheres breaking up into smaller parts themselves or a different curbstomp on one of them which would have been the same thing they hoped to avoid. There is a limited field for potential action and the biggest target out there would be us in the event of a BKsphere loss. Anything else would be hopelessly naive to assume. You can take it personally, but we have no reason to trust anyone in KETOG either, you just gave the most reason in terms of outward expressions of hostility and there were more common contacts between us while they were relatively quiet so it comes down to a choice in target selection. We had no common goals with either of you, so conflict was always more likely.
  9. Yeah Smith, you sick freak. Get your mind out of the gutter.
  10. Six months pfft. It also applies retroactively.
  11. It doesn't. Having less on paper allies while being able to build a large coalition if needed historically has been a way to justify ganging up on people who have more paper but are less potent militarily.
  12. The reason it's not really that believable is because unifying "minispheres" to hit another sphere isn't exactly conducive to maintaining minispheres. It would make more sense if one truly believed in them to just take the losses on their own. The intuitive answer is you wanted to beat down an alliance or alliances at all costs and get a win.
  13. It was just to fit in the song lyric reference but either way good chunks of your bloc were willing to give up a lot they held dear in terms of principles to go for a win. Not sure what else it'd be.
  14. I'm not talking about sentimentally. The actions we take are more important than anything we say. It would be ideal if it changed but we have all tacitly approved regardless of our individual gripes. It's just the difference is unlike Chaos we don't poise ourselves for long-term alignment with a group some of them call "slursphere" and don't claim to uphold the high ground in this regard. They traded their passion for glory.
  15. Are we Coalition B or Memesphere? This pigeon however knows the Art of the Deal inside and out and we are seeing the results right here. This is the type of dynamic politics Orbis has been craving.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.