Daniel Storm
-
Posts
322 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Daniel Storm
-
-
In answer to the OP I'll fight for as long as it takes for Coalition A to be defeated. I'm always thirsty for blood, and the Guinea Pigs are always hungry. I don't particularly care how Coalition A is defeated, it can be by their own admission or by the rolling going on for so long that they cease to be relevant. I also don't care if it takes 2 months or 2 years. War is the only time this game is remotely interesting anyway.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Gudea said:
Of course I want this war to end. P&W isn't exactly an exciting war game, and I don't want to run a micro nation forever. If the war doesn't end, then a rebuild isn't going to happen.
Maybe not end the war tomorrow, but I'd be cool with the war being over around the end of October. I still have some personal objectives I want to finish.
Given I'm not in government, and my Alliance is ruled by a King, my expressed opinions are only those of this lowly Serf-Noob, and no one else.
Someday I might get lucky enough to get a promotion to Clown or Varlet!
2 weeks? That's pretty optimistic chief. I think 2 months is more likely.
-
23 minutes ago, Syrachime said:
To those of us that are loyal to our alliances, it's not harmful. The harm comes in the attraction of new players that gives this game life. New people that come into this game are going to be swept up into the war and the politics behind it that we've seen are going to make them want to stop playing. Our alliances on both sides need these new players to keep this game going and perpetual war isn't doing anyone any good. The politics least of all don't help with how toxic they've been. And they have been VERY toxic on both sides of the aisle. Both Coalitions bear responsibility for the current state of affairs in the war, not just one side or the other.
You say that as if the impact on recruitment is equally spread across both coalitions, it might be if this were an even war, but it isn't. Naturally the Coalition that is getting absolutely slapped below 4.5k (you guys) will feel a greater impact on low tiers and new recruits. Once again, that can be ended at any time by DMing Sphinx or TheNG and admitting defeat. From what I've observed on this side of the pond our recruits have been absolutely thriving on the plunder your coalition provides. Take the current #1 for Soldier kills in the entire war, a green NPO recruit 4 months ago who has amassed a fortune of pixels and experience tearing through all the yummy targets y'all provide. imho War is the crucible that forges the best recruits an alliance can get, provided you haven't lost tier control and can give them breathing room.
If your argument is that we should make concessions to Coalition A because Coalition A is feeling the weight of defeat and can't recruit I don't think you're going to get far unfortunately. Ultimately its a free market and recruits will go somewhere they can have a reasonable expectation of prosperity.
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, Syrachime said:
I choose to stay a member of Coalition A because I happen to like TKR. I enjoy talking to the people here and being apart of that community. They reached out to me when I first started, taught me a lot about the game, and helped me grow as a player. Even now, I enjoy being with them and talking to all their members and They are like family to me. Just because I choose to stay with them doesn't mean I am seeking eternal war. It just means I like my family and I stick with them regardless of what's happening inside of the game. Keeping in mind that this IS just a game. If players choice is as important as you say it is, I choose to stay with my alliance because this alliance is important to me. Doesn't mean I support every decision they make, but if I am going to be apart of that team, I do play with my teammates same as you. Would you jump ship and dessert your alliance if you were in our position? If so, isn't that a bit shallow...?
If the war isn't enough of a burden to overwhelm other aspects of the game like your loyalty to your alliance then how can it be damaging to the health of the game like you were spouting earlier?
I wouldn't leave my alliance over a little rolling which is my point. The war is a completely natural part of the game that has continued for so long with the consent of all parties involved. All these moral appeals to Game Health from your Coalition are baseless and hold no value.
-
2
-
-
I don't see how the game suffers from Coalition A voluntarily being rolled for 6+ months. Player choice is an important part of every game and your leadership has clearly chosen that they want the war to continue for the foreseeable future, and you've clearly chosen to endorse that decision by remaining a member of a Coalition A alliance. If war was truly untenable for your leadership they would surrender, and if it was untenable for you you'd leave the alliance. Neither outcome has occurred, which means that both your leadership and you as an individual want more war.
There is absolutely 0 onus on Coalition B to make concessions or capitulations to Coalition A when we've won the war and gain economic ground against you every day. It's on your leadership to admit that they've been defeated and that this set of circumstances is no longer acceptable to them.
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, ShadyAssassin said:
Thank you. I'm also right about the perma-war.You dont win a war till all participants peace out.
It's interesting how many Coalition leaders, mostly from Chaos are in here talking about how peace is possible if only the terms were revealed. Meanwhile KETOG leaders like you and the guy that mass spied GOONS and told them to get bent have taken actions to drag outside alliances into the war against you, and in your case outright stated that you want a permawar. I'm not sure what kind of crazy-ass good cop/bad cop foreign affairs strategy Coalition A is running, but maybe take a step back and reevaluate lmao.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, ShadyAssassin said:
White peace isnt an option here.
Well you're right about one thing at least.
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I get that your posts are basically memes but post more real memes and argue less thx. We have dozens of other threads for the exact same conversation we've been having for 4 months, this one must remain pure.
-
10
-
28 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:
Chaos literally teamed up with KETOGG to hit BKSphere. So unless you're attempting to reinvent the English dictionary, I'm quite certain I'm right
Did you forget Rose or did we finally stop pretending that Rose isn't a part of KETOG?
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
War is peace.
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, japan77 said:
Bwahahaha. Nearly every sentence in that paragraph is wrong. Impressive.
Let's talk about history and unconditional surrenders. There has never been and never will be a unconditional surrender in which the loser did not wind up agreeing to all terms imposed by the victors. That's how that works.
Let's note that coalition B has refused to talk about any potential terms until after coalition A's surrender. That is by definition a unconditional surrender. You seriously expect people to be willing to surrender unconditionally when the opposing coalition contains actors known to have imposed ridiculous terms. And don't give me any of the NPO isn't the same as NPO nonsense. Either own your name or change it. Similarly, given that BK has put rather ridiculous terms on the table in the past, an unconditional surrender to any coalition containing either alliance is a bad idea.
Let's next talk about precedent. This particular game has never had unconditional surrenders, and establishing that precedent will lead to longer wars as the best possible victory condition has changed dramatically. There's also the fact that coalition B winning would encourage longer wars, as we have opened up a path to victory of literally just waiting out an opponent instead of smashing through their infra, although given how long the last few globals have been, this isn't truly a new idea, but it would be the first time it worked. Up until now, dragging out a war has at most resulted in white peace, but the precedent of improving conditions by dragging out a war has resulted in longer wars. Thirdly, it would establish that having net negative damage, rolling coalition allies, having secret arbitrary treaties that one can twist into a CB, and bullshit CBs are valid things along a path to victory. If you truly believe these are not bad precedents for the game as a whole, give me what you're smoking because I need to escape reality.
That's a lot of words from someone who hasn't fought an offensive war in over a month. If you truly believe Coalition B is a game killing hegemony that shouldn't be allowed to win then you're being a pretty bad citizen of the game by not fighting us at all. Mil up or shut up.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
6
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
It's been 4 months, how long did you think you set that VM timer to chief?
-
9
-
2
-
How about having the 50% resource production bonus only apply if you have enough Infra for your improvements. It would be a significant cut to the productivity of improvs without even destroying them.
-
10/10/2019 12:06 AM
Imperator Daniel Storm of Altmoras declared a Attrition war upon President Filmore of Solstheim. Daniel Storm's justification for the war was, "Say hello to my little friend!".
10/10/2019 12:06 am
Imperator Daniel Storm of Altmoras ordered a dogfight airstrike upon the nation of Solstheim and eliminated 12 Resistance. The attack was an immense triumph. Imperator Daniel Storm's forces lost 114 aircraft, while President Filmore's defenders lost 288 aircraft. The attack destroyed 68.42 infrastructure in the city of Karstaag.
10/10/2019 12:07 am
President Filmore of Solstheim ordered a dogfight airstrike upon the nation of Altmoras and eliminated 0 Resistance. The attack was an utter failure. President Filmore's forces lost 191 aircraft, while Imperator Daniel Storm's defenders lost 176 aircraft. The attack destroyed 0.00 infrastructure in the city of Galten.
10/10/2019 12:08 am
President Filmore of Solstheim ordered a ground attack upon the nation of Altmoras led by Imperator Daniel Storm and eliminated 7 Resistance. The attack was a moderate success. President Filmore's forces lost 15,706 soldiers and 0 tanks, while Imperator Daniel Storm's defenders lost 14,016 soldiers and 72 tanks. The attack destroyed 59.19 infrastructure in the city of Galten and 0 improvements. President Filmore stole $273,600.00 in the attack.
10/10/2019 12:08 am
President Filmore of Solstheim ordered a ground attack upon the nation of Altmoras led by Imperator Daniel Storm and eliminated 4 Resistance. The attack was a Pyrrhic victory. President Filmore's forces lost 13,979 soldiers and 0 tanks, while Imperator Daniel Storm's defenders lost 9,236 soldiers and 48 tanks. The attack destroyed 26.00 infrastructure in the city of Celmos and 0 improvements. President Filmore stole $127,914.65 in the attack.
This guy was able to conduct 10 MAPs worth of attacks on me with only 6 MAPs. Your 3s timer doesn't seem to have fixed things.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
-
6
-
7
-
5
-
The irony of these changes is that all the power players @Alex is trying to nerf have already made their money. All you've done is make sure nobody else can catch up.
Personally I only baseball to get out of bill lock so this doesn't affect me. But the fact that your solution to baseball power players getting rich is to give them an unassailable head-start is hilarious.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I'm proud of you for not posting this in Alliance Affairs, baby steps.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
this is why we need a micro affairs subforum.
-
1
-
7
-
31 minutes ago, Micchan said:
The problem here is the NAP, at least for me, because you can trust Chaos on the NAP, you can trust KETOGG, you can trust the brave and beautiful coalition, but you can't trust NPO anymore, and if you can't trust the biggest alliance controlling more than half of the game on the non-written rules you basically killed the politic part
Disband (even if this means no more stats site) and I accept that offer from the others, including the infra cap
If I take the annoying BK gov over you it is really the time to ask you what you are doing with your game life
-
1
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
-
3
-
8
-
1
-
1
-
Respect.
-
Godspeed GOONS.
-
The Infinity War continues.
Surrender
in Alliance Affairs
Posted
Micro Affairs subforum when.