Sketchy

Given the cost to build a single nuke vs the cost of spies, and that nukes aren't really useful unless in a losing position, at which point you'll likely have no spies to protect them if your opponent is even 25% competent, reverting this change seems kind of counter-intuitive. At that point you might as well remove nukes. They will never be a worthwhile investment.

@Curufinwe @The Mad Titan You were saying lmfao. Please spin me a web on how you aren't consolidating now.

And just like that more ties into BK's group. But hey we aren't supposed to talk about that.

No actually the mechanics lend themselves to drawn out wars of attrition. They used to lend themselves to quick wars, but now you can basically keep fighting until either you run out of stockpiles (which is hard in an attrition war when you are losing since resource burn is tiny), or you decide to peace. Long wars will remain the meta unless the leaders of the game decide to disincentive it or the mechanics are changed. The former is unlikely to happen as most leaders have adjusted to the long nature of war and don't care as much as the people complaining about it do.

Thanks for clarifying, I wasn't sure since the treaty had not been updated on the web when it was first posted.

Downgrade to ODP?

What you need to understand is James is an idiot.

How are you gonna feed the homeless food if the radiation stops all your production smh. Clearly didn't think this through.

I take it all back praise our new overlords in BK. Lmfao.

Nice try lmfao. If that is what you meant you'd have stipulated it in your first post. You are retroactively changing your perspective now that I've reminded you in the hopes of deflecting and pretending you were operating under my frame of reference. I never saw the logs you are referring too, so it is still as far as I'm concerned, either IQ fabricated their CB, in which case sure, you were the aggressor, I have no problem ceding that, or the log was legitimate, in which case people were backchanneling it. The only evidence supporting the latter is your word which isn't much to me. Only you can really provide clarity on that, so pick a lane lmfao. Its been 2 years like you said, I don't see any reason not to drop the log now. If its legitimate I have no issue retracting any statements made about it. Considering the argument is about whether people are willing to go to into an offensive conflict (Well actually it was about power moves but I don't mind the distraction for now), pretty sure intent is relevant. Plus you disputed my original point as it was and are now falling back on the technical definition, since you can't refute my point. Its weird how intent to act matters only when its convenient. I will respond to the rest of your points tomorrow since its getting late and I need to sleep. Try not to go off on anymore tangents like last time or our responses our going to get exponentially bigger lmfao.

You guys claimed Tiers was a preempt. Do you forget the entire log controversy? (I still haven't seen it btw pop it in my dms fam). So that would be 2 preempts and a dogpile. Therefore my point still stands, based on your own logic. The rest of your paragraph continues on this false premise so I'm going to skip most of it. TGH didn't enter on your "preempt" in AC, we were part of the initial plan and were always intended to be on Vanguard. False. Had we not committed, the war likely wouldn't have happened at all, depending on whether it got to the point of being leaked and the preempt went ahead anyway. The rest of your paragraph seems to be some weird attempt to compare a sphere that has for its entire existence been by design more than 1/4 of your size and has still managed to achieve more offensive wars than you have. I wasn't criticising your tiering. The meatshield comment was in reference to your decision to bring in a bunch of upper tier alliances into the war against TKR to eat all the damage while you sat planes only in the bottom minimizing the risk. Which you did. So.... You literally just argued against yourself, good job. I was not even playing the game during 168, and I wasn't in government until after Silent War finished. You really got me bro. I WAS the leader of Rose when we kicked your ass tho lmfao. Funny you didn't mention that in your little 1000 word essay. Must have slipped your mind. Yes, I can see that you are intentionally ignoring one half of that table and focusing on the part that advances your narrative. The upper tier consolidation jab was me making fun of the fact that literally 2 weeks ago Leo was claiming chaos was an upper tier consolidation, and now hes signing the alliance he was concerned about (TCW). I will try to be more direct in the future to ensure you can understand and don't get all confused. Wow bro calm down there @Seeker might not appreciate you calling him out like that. VE tried their hardest. But fair enough. Polaris and UPN are pretty scary. Yer, because you had the most treaties of anyone, no fricking shit. You do realize that still leaves you with 9 treaties right? Brilliant framing tho, you should post on Leos behalf from now on he needs all the help he can get. You aren't broken up yet. Both sides are tied into vanguard. I've been told the transition period isn't complete, hence why I'm not !@#$ing about that in every single thread despite it being glaringly obvious when I could be and I'm just focusing on the treaties that exist outside of it. Point to my criticism of NPO or GOG anywhere on the forum. I haven't criticised GOG because I have no idea what they are doing as of yet, and have waited to see. I haven't criticised NPO because I know they were the actual drivers of the split. I did criticise t$ because Kayser as you would agree with me has a somewhat murky history on this point, but he claimed more was to come and for the most part I have waited to see. I never claimed it wasn't a good thing or that it shouldn't be commended. But replacing one IQ with a sphere only slightly smaller while other groups are making an active effort to trim down their numbers in more significant ways doesn't make you a hero. It makes this a transparent power move. This is further solidified by the fairly obvious attempts to redirect onto chaos. I've been a fairly outspoken critic of TKR for awhile now, and if they try to pull similar moves, I'll be saying the same shit to them. You seem to think my criticism of BK is tied to personal issues but its not. You make moves, I respond to them. Its within your power to change my or anyone elses perception of you. This is just pure spin. My criticism was of Leos attempts to redirect onto Chaos. I don't have an issue with burying the hatchet, I have an issue with overt power grabs and attempts to obfuscate data in order to justify it. As for the whole paragraph about the stats, I already asked if you guys wanted me to post a graph or not, I assume no. That is an entire separate conversation to get into. I could be pushing that line a lot harder than I am. Frankly I'd say I've been waaayyy more generous with all of you during this period than I could have been, precisely because of the nature of the events. TLDR: Curu is a fan of writing long paragraphs sneakily built on false premises, and forming strawman arguments in order to avoid having to deal with the real ones. Truly a master of word salad and bullshit sandwiches. Thanks for playing.

Ah yes, from your intimate involvement in the planning of the war against you. You have no idea what you are talking about lmfao. Keep spinning. BK hasn't engaged in an offensive war literally since you left t$-oo unless it was a dogpile. Just pre empts. You needed half the game to take down big bad TKR because you too shook to come out of the lower tier and would rather have a bunch of upper tier alliances meatshield for you. You were the worst alliance in t$-oo, got your ass kicked by NPO, realized it would be easier to join NPO to avoid getting your ass kicked again by them, and now your too !@#$ to run your own group without stacking meatshields to the ceiling to protect you from the "upper tier consolidation". You keep trying to change the subject because you know your narrative is retarded and falls apart under very basic scrutiny. The real irony is noone would be talking about you at all if you weren't stacking treaties to the roof. Hell, everyone was up t$'s ass last week and not even looking at you, and the week before they were up TKR's ass (you included). Funny how you can switch from whining about TKR protecting TCW to signing TCW and act like nothing happened and everyone suddenly is "out to get you" with "narratives". You only have to look at the numbers to see why everyone is talking about it now.

I haven't posted any graphs yet but if you like I can. Of course we both know you'll just come up with some excuse why objective numbers don't count lmfao.

Bigger economies also have bigger upkeep costs so the idea that a larger economy matters is a bit ridiculous. Even if you try to argue that, larger alliances have larger economies. If you have more people you are going to have a larger tax base as well, so your entire point is moot. Tiering and nation count is what matters when determining military power. Your attempts to obfuscate and deflect are more transparent than you seem to think.

Lmfao I knew minispheres wouldn't last until the next war. Did anyone really expect BK to take a risk? Lmfao