Starting 2018 the Right Way

[Prefontaine]

6 minutes ago, Kastor said:

The thing is, EMC has pushed away a big majority and clumped all the losers together. Now they finally have power and don’t want to lose.

I wasn’t directing that at either side. They’ve both done from what I’ve seen. They’re both afraid to lose, who is more at fault doesn’t really matter. Was it the previous groups fault? Is it the new groups fault? Is it my fault? Doesn’t matter. Gotta take chances. Gotta make plays that might cause you to lose. 

 

I dont blame the historical losing side in this game in being less inclined to want to take that risk. But doesn’t mean I don’t think they should. What’s the point of climbing to the top of the hill without having a fun ride down it. It’s like going sledding: The fun part isn’t walking up the hill.  

Edited January 5, 2018 by Judge Dredd

[Kastor]

Just now, Judge Dredd said:

I wasn’t directing that at either side. They’ve both done from what I’ve seen. They’re both afraid to lose, who is more at fault doesn’t really matter. Was it the previous groups fault? Is it the new groups fault? Is it my fault? Doesn’t matter. Gotta take chances. Gotta make plays that might cause you to lose. 

 

I dont blame the historical losing side in this game in being less inclined to want to take that risk. But doesn’t mean I don’t think should. What’s the point of climbing to the top of the hill without having a fun ride down it. It’s like going sledding. The fun park isn’t walking up the hill.  

But they still haven’t won yet, everyone is forgetting that. Until this day, NPO has never won a war, until NPO/IQ does, this argument is invalid. You can’t be the Dominant sphere if you haven’t won a war, because you have never doninated.

[Prefontaine]

19 minutes ago, Kastor said:

But they still haven’t won yet, everyone is forgetting that. Until this day, NPO has never won a war, until NPO/IQ does, this argument is invalid. You can’t be the Dominant sphere if you haven’t won a war, because you have never doninated.

Did I call them the dominant sphere?

[Buorhann]

17 minutes ago, Judge Dredd said:

Only under Pfeifer. Mensa after him rode on the legacy he established without adding much to it. 

I feel that I should clarify.  Vanek, Avruch, and dmj were pretty docile towards others - so I can see why you'd see that, as Vanek and Avruch were the Chairman after Pfeiffer.  The rest of our government were rather dick-ish to others if we were contacted (And especially so behind the scenes).  Pfeiffer was pretty vocal for us initially and did a lot what the community requested of him, but both him and TUGT had caused headaches behind the scenes with some others as well.  I was also pretty direct and blunt with promises of conflict if things didn't go our way (That is, to those that caused us issues).  We certainly weren't the friendly ones of our sphere.  Syndicate had to cover for us a lot.

 

24 minutes ago, Kastor said:

If you take Pfeiffer’s leadership away, Mensa was your average Syndisphere alliance. Very tame and did what Partisan said. Never hit another alliance aligned towards them, and only rolled people they could dominate until the next big war.

While our dynamic wasn't TEst-like, we could very well have done more if it we weren't trying to restrain ourselves for the sake of our allies.  Not quite sure what your point is here, because there's been a few times where we did act (Or would've acted) on our own.  I mean, we hit SI, SK, GPA, Vanguard, Lordaeron, Arrgh (when they had military and had ex-Mensa members in it)...  I think I'm missing one or two more.  And you can ask our allies that I've pestered the hell out of them for a 1v1 for the sake of bloodying each other's noses for fun, but that obviously didn't happen.

The next big thing I was trying to see we could accomplish was a 1v1 with TEst, but at the time they were rather larger than us - so it would've been a rather awkward conflict until we grew more to be in line with them.   By then, our coalition was already high up on seeing paperless rolled for various reasons and shortly after that conflict, TEst disbanded.

Not very many alliances can really claim what you're trying to point out either.  In any case, we've always been one of the top performers in the wars, so you trying to question our capability is rather silly.

[Prefontaine]

Pfeifer Mensa: willing to burn ever Mensa pixel to the ground in he/Mensa were slighted. Willing to pick on paper losing fights fairly easily. 

 

Post-Pfeifer Mensa: Cared more about sphere and alliance politics. Did less what you wanted how/when you wanted and worked with your allies. 

 

That’s my take on it. Not saying it was bad, just Mensa was way less dickish as an alliance without Pfeifer acting as the political viagara. 

[Buorhann]

I'd disagree very heavily on that assessment.  You were involved more with us during Pfeiffer-era, but we certainly kept up with atagonizing others well after.

The affairs did shift dramatically though after our first year.

I'll have to keep that tag line for Pfeiffer though, political viagra, lol

Edited January 5, 2018 by Buorhann

[Shadowthrone]

9 hours ago, Buorhann said:

That also goes for IQ aligned alliances too, @Shadowthrone.  Goes both ways.

We also didn't exactly trust Rose initially, but we did clearly mention that we're putting a lot on the line for the treaty.  They were aware of what could happen if things went differently.  (Plus there was more behind the scenes that they can talk about if they wish to do so) I'd say a lot of trust buildup occurred AFTER the treaty signing, which is strange to hear but they showed they were willing to work with us.

It goes both ways I agree. But the first step I don't believe has to come from us, since we're not trying to sell the narrative of an EMC breakup or any dynamique™ FA moves. If EMC is truly interested in changing the current scenario and wish to see folks move sides, switch around and create different things in the game, its up to them to reach out and sell that and pick up alliances accordingly. Their open hostility towards NPO for example makes it harder for us to reach out because at this point it seems entirely pointless. I don't see the point in any of reaching out if the only response is going to be "IQ must break up then lets talk" or along those lines. If this break up is indeed true and they want to change their focus, I don't think I'd shut down any chance for an open/honest frank discussion to at least get things out in the open. If they aren't interested, In this specific scenario its up to them to sell their narratives for change and not on us imho. 

 

9 hours ago, Big Brother said:

Woah man, I'm paperless and bloc neutral. Don't group me in with everyone in EMC or with the EMC splinters. I'm not telling you that you need to split up IQ, I'm just saying that you shouldn't be surprised that people see you as a threat nor that people are willing to combine their forces to counter the threat they perceive

The reason I used your quote was more because it was essentially the issue I was bringing up about the lack of trust. Not to paint you or by extension CoS as a part of EMC or any such thing. Apologies if it came off as that. My answer to the rest of your post should be in the above paragraph. I do believe in the current scenario/circumstances of supposed change within the EMC alliances, requires them to cross the rubicon, not us or myself. If they aren't particularly interested and always hostile towards anything NPO or Pacifican, I don't see the point in believing or buying this change. Like I said, it\s not us thats changing our FA, its them and they need to get out there and sell it imho. 

 

5 hours ago, Kastor said:

Wait....EMC and company is mad at IQ for not reaching out when IQ has no reason to reach out and EMC are the ones trying to make mini-spheres? 

ˆˆˆˆˆˆ

[Roquentin]

18 hours ago, durmij said:

"When did I say your motives weren't genuine. I really said you were too stupid to know your own motives." Your constant attempts to gaslight me about my own actions are pathetic and insulting. We've been at this for a year, you can stop now.

You're acting as if people only ever have one motivator. Are you blind to nuance? I said my FA was relationship led, not pure happy friend fun times. If Mensa was as good as they were, but I didn't like them, I wouldn't have signed them. If I liked them but they we're like, Cornerstone tier, I wouldn't have signed them. The 2 benchmarks for signing, at least at the start of my term when I gave a shit, were that I liked them and they were functionally competent. This is the answer to the great unsolved mystery of why Rose and Mensa signed.

How am I gaslighting you? You said it was just relationship-based and that you were doing relationship-based treaties when I said it had pragmatic motivations. It doesn't conflict if you like them if I'm saying a major contributing factor is wanting to be protected and on the winning team. Your motivations were just as realpolitik/sphere-oriented as relationship-based. You've gotten a free pass on it in general because you won.

14 hours ago, Judge Dredd said:

I stopped reading this somewhere around page 3 apologies if this has been said already  

 

Someone has to lose. Everyone seems to be too afraid to do something that might risk them to lose. It’s a game, take a chance, losing or winning doesn’t matter. Having fun does. 

The issue here is mostly people aren't playing it for fun but rather  a lot of people are looking to establish some form of superiority be it material, influence, or some other motivation and most people don't like losing on a consistent basis even if they can handle it. If everyone was playing it as a war game, there wouldn't be the huge disparities like we see here. Right now in the "welcome to your tape" topic there's one nation with a huge personal stash of money/resources. Others have used the victories/lack of intensity of conflict in the upper tier for the past year to propel themselves to even greater heights and we've seen plenty of people over the past year and a half see that and say "why can't we do that? why can't we be on the gud side or get out of the steamroller" and then they do. It's hard to ask people that are willing to lose to go out of their way set themselves back on a frequent basis so the same people can keep beating down on them. I've had plenty of fun in all the wars we did even though we haven't won a single one and most people who bought into what we were saying about needing to resist the dominant sphere did. However, people aren't going to volunteer for it all the time especially when it results in gloating, ridicule, expectations of begging for forgiveness and so on. Many have gotten tired of losing since they know who keeps winning  and then it results in an even bigger powerful side since they seek accommodations, give up their old identities/values, and so on to just to be better off materially.

Edited January 5, 2018 by Roquentin

[Sir Scarfalot]

10 hours ago, Judge Dredd said:

I stopped reading this somewhere around page 3 apologies if this has been said already  

 

Someone has to lose. Everyone seems to be too afraid to do something that might risk them to lose. It’s a game, take a chance, losing or winning doesn’t matter. Having fun does. 

It has been said, but it bears repeating anyway, so +1 for you~

[Insert Name Here]

@Kastor, the EMC splinters I took into consideration were the ones who fought last war (t$, Rose and tC).

To me it doesn't make much of a difference what the major alliances in this game do, since I still find a way to have war on a regular basis. However, if IQsphere can't see the opportunity they have right now they're blind as a bat. Worst you'll have is lose like you did last war but get good PR. But by all means keep being paranoid, if you don't wanna help yourselves then no one will.

No you don't have to be the instigators and start shit yourselves. But if you wanna find out if EMC splitting up was a sham then it's your best option. I mean otherwise what's the point of all this consolidation? Are you gonna do anything with all this paper or do you just hate trees?  

[Kastor]

13 minutes ago, Insert Name Here said:

@Kastor, the EMC splinters I took into consideration were the ones who fought last war (t$, Rose and tC).

To me it doesn't make much of a difference what the major alliances in this game do, since I still find a way to have war on a regular basis. However, if IQsphere can't see the opportunity they have right now they're blind as a bat. Worst you'll have is lose like you did last war but get good PR. But by all means keep being paranoid, if you don't wanna help yourselves then no one will.

No you don't have to be the instigators and start shit yourselves. But if you wanna find out if EMC splitting up was a sham then it's your best option. I mean otherwise what's the point of all this consolidation? Are you gonna do anything with all this paper or do you just hate trees?  

IQ doesn’t want to lose again. They refuse to lose. Therefore there’s not gonna be any “good PR”.

Also, isn’t that what you all said about Syndisphere splintering off, then dragged BK and friends when they did it? 

 

EMC has to be rolled in entirely, plain and simple.

[Insert Name Here]

20 minutes ago, Kastor said:

IQ doesn’t want to lose again. They refuse to lose. Therefore there’s not gonna be any “good PR”.

Also, isn’t that what you all said about Syndisphere splintering off, then dragged BK and friends when they did it? 

 

EMC has to be rolled in entirely, plain and simple.

 

The good PR would come if EMC's splinters joined forces to defend their former allies

Also by EMC I mean mostly TKR, Guardian, Panth and TCW, since there's 0 proof the likes of Rose, t$ and tC are still working together with EMC. If you're so obsessed with rolling all of them then you might as well just preempt EMC. Since you say they need to get rolled they would have to be dealt with eventually, in which case you'd better preempt than wait for it.

Preempting EMC would actually be the best course of action if you did wanna roll all of your former enemies. If you DoW EMC you either get a similar war to the last one or, what would likely happen, you'd get good odds against just TKR, Panth, TCW, Gaurdian and TFP. Then you could just deal with the likes of Rose and co, which imo would be stupid since I'm pretty sure they're tired of the old dynamic and just wanna do their own thing.

Seriously if you wanna do something with all this paper, you need to go about it by preempting those 4 alliances. Then you'll clear your doubts regarding your conspiracy theory that EMC splitting up was a sham.

EDIT: inb4 someone notices my edit and says "Freudian slip".

 

 

Edited January 5, 2018 by Insert Name Here

[James II]

I don't htink Acadia has enough treaties.

[Prefonteen]

On 3-1-2018 at 2:51 PM, Roquentin said:

Basically, things that signal a genuinely new meta where alliances like TCW pursue other things besides just beat downs on traditionally weaker opponents. We haven't really seen a new vision expressed except less paper = good and IQ = bad. At this point, we haven't really seen anything except just attempts to shame IQ into breaking up because it didn't fall apart completely like Paracov did.  I just don't see TCW really having issues or competition with anyone who isn't in IQ or tied to it currently when they have had a laser focus. We could say the HW scenario was an exception to that, but people didn't bite it when it turned into a more complicated situation with another top-heavy group.

In TCW's case, the record is basically they joined a dominant sphere at the apex of its power, embarked on wars on Valyria and then Paperless which were lop-sided, joined with no obligation in the last war and since focused fire on denouncing IQ alliances. In the Valyria and paperless cases, they justified them by citing grievances with GPA, but oddly enough those grievance were absent with a TKRsphere alliance which instead they held in the highest respect. Wouldn't it have been interesting if that had been a source of tension?  With IQ, there isn't really even a reason for them to be so upset since no one in IQ would have ever even given TCW much thought aside from the antagonism.  This is by no means unique to TCW aside from the particulars and there are several other alliances that have acted similarly. We all know there are other alliances that have been de facto enforcers of the traditionally victorious side. Are we expecting that to change when many of those alliances have often joined and gone beyond paper simply because there is less?  Right now, I can't fathom real change in some of brave new world since people are too friendly in that arena and whatever tensions may arise aren't significant enough to engender real rivalries, which is why splits without a defining dividing aspect are bad and just obscure and create an invisible treaty web.

Roq, i can't believe how !@#$ing thickheaded you're being with your that abomination of a narrative of yours. Yes, you're right about TCW in particular. No, that does not in the slightest apply to the entire other side of the world, the legitimacy of EMC's breakup, or your consolidation. You've tunnel-visioned yourself into a "OMG EMC IS TRYING TO BEAT US DOWN" mentality, and are either being obscenely obtuse, or you're being deliberately disingenious to buy more time for consolidation.

In either case: For the love of god, even if you score a "victory" at this point, it will be one I would not be proud of. Please !@#$ off and do something interesting for once. You have every necessary tool at your disposal to make things *fun*.

 

.. Or you could just continue sitting around all limp-wristed.

On 3-1-2018 at 3:32 PM, Justin076 said:

Joining beat downs and traditionally weaker opponents. Every single war we joined was at the request of an ally. In the case of Valyria, Obelisk whom we had an MDP with requested our assistance. Obviously we agreed to help them because they were our ally and because of what Valyria did to us in the dying days of the GPA. Paperless war, we offered help to our protector TKR, they accpted our offer and requested our assistance. Obviously because of the defacto perpetual war the Paperless held us at in the GPA motivated us to get some sort of action against them. As for Git Gud Friday, we joined immediately to help defend our sphere allies, but anyways my guess is that you aren’t referring to our involvement in that war. 

Grevience absent for a TKR sphere alliance? I’m guessing your referring to Mensa HQ. As for them, I’ve already explained this several times but I will again. Mensa rolled us yes, but it was a short war and they didn’t keep holding us down. They came in, fought and respectfully left and let us do our thing. The Paperless came into the war, were reluctant to leave and following the war, when we were much weaker, they kept raiding us and hitting our whales to keep them from the top 10 leaderboards. As for our grevience with Valyria, they targeted ya when we were down, following a September war with the Paperless, that’s why we held a grevience with them. 

And as for us joining the dominant sphere, TKR was one of the only alliances that GPA spoke to regularly, Dalinar was always on the GPA fourms and often spoke out against the rollings of us. This of course led us to go to them for protection. 

Also I’m not upset with IQ, I’m just disappointed that even when nothing has happened in the game for about 9 months and it continues to be stagnant, IQ continues to do the same things that led to this point of stagnation. People are cutting treaties and you guys keep adding them. Your developing into a hegemoney and have no real opposition but yet still go on as if you do. Please, tell me who your opposition is? There is no more EMC if that’s what your going to say, I know you guys think it’s all fake and shit and we’re just playing you guys but speaking in real terms, who is IQ’s opposition? Furthermore with the game in such a poor state, other parties including EMC leftovers have been trying to make moves and develop ideas to help move the game forward while IQ has been counter-productive and continues to destroy our progress of changing the game for the better. But by all means, keep consolidating and being stagnant, you just keep proving your real intentions and the fact your past narratives were complete BS. 

 

 

PS: I’m done with walls of text, this was too much writing, especially on an iPhone.

Justin. The diarrhea spouting from all your orifices is starting to make me question the quality of these brand new noseplugs I bought for this exact reason.

Speaking strictly on your in-game character: The stark contrast between your complete and utter devotion to being a loud-mouthed lapdog whos only use for whomever's snake you try to slobber off is to soak up some damage in wars which have already been won, and the constant moral outrage you display over the supposed lack of dynamism among third parties not affiliated with your master is astounding.

Over the course of its existence, TCW has accomplished nothing. Nada. Zero. Squat. At least when you ran under the GPA moniker, you offered a unique value proposition as an established and dedicated neutral alliance which at time showed tendencies toward a flip. When you eventually made that flip towards being willing to war, it was an utter letdown: You did so out of cowardice- a fear to be rolled. As roq already alluded, you did suck up to the powers that be, and in that process got rid of any character or uniqueness that your alliance had displayed to date.

You joined a few lopsided wars and performed above your mediocre expectations. Now you waddle around the forums, waggling your finger at the world. 

The problem with your atttiude is that its not limited to just aforementioned contrast. In your faux selfrighteousness you become contradictory. As can be expected from a political entity lacking any aspiration or creativity on its own. You call faul at any and all consolidation, rallying around the banner of "dynamism" and "change", but the moment any third party makes or attempts to make a move which conflicts with your interest in self-preservation, you revert to hiding behind your master's back as you call for the total destruction of said party.

 

There is no desire for dynamism among you- and many with you. It's a hollow phrase you throw around as a component of your virtue-signalling ritual. Kindly go !@#$ yourself.

[Sketchy]

13 minutes ago, Partisan said:

Kindly go !@#$ yourself.

OMG OOC ATTACK

[Mayor]

Don't worry, I reported him. We can't have that kind of attitude in this thread Partisan. This is a safe space.

[Prefonteen]

Just now, Mayor said:

Don't worry, I reported him. We can't have that kind of attitude in this thread Partisan. This is a safe space.

!@#$ your safe space. 

3 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

OMG OOC ATTACK

!@#$ your OOC attack.

[Sketchy]

2 minutes ago, Partisan said:

!@#$ your safe space. 

!@#$ your OOC attack.

Look at what you did Roq, you broke Partisan.

[Buorhann]

1 hour ago, James II said:

I don't htink Acadia has enough treaties.

That's next month when we need to revisit the circular arguments again.

[TheNG]

2 hours ago, Buorhann said:

That's next month when we need to revisit the circular arguments again.

That topic does not include any potential for vigorous debate over the minutiae of an action Mensa took two years ago, and therefore is an entirely invalid topic of debate. Instead, its timeslot will be filled with additional discussion about how more treaties could be added to the web to make it more aesthetically pleasing, and whether or not the word 'dynamic' has become too "politically correct" in the current year. 

I'll expect to see you all there, mental breakdowns are of course encouraged, and a friendly reminder that under no circumstances can a war result from anything said. That's just not proper.

[Micchan]

5 hours ago, Partisan said:

!@#$ your safe space. 

!@#$ your OOC attack.

!@#&#038

"@#&#039

#@#&#040

$@#&#041

%@#&#042

!@#$ this game

[Starbuck]

On 1/3/2018 at 11:26 PM, Big Brother said:

We did gloat, we celebrated our victories. I accept that you hold a personal belief that no one has the right to gloat but I hold the personal belief that it's perfectly acceptable to celebrate your wins and lash out at the opposition. It's very human to do so, it happens all the time. This isn't meant as an excuse but the fact that it does happen frequently means that it is accepted in human society, to a point. You can call it arrogant and unnecessary if you'd like but this just strikes me as defeatist bitterness resulting from feeling uncomfortable about winning and what that entails. I don't understand why you want to make winning less fun for the victors.

I just saw this. I wouldn't call celebrating a victory gloating. They are two very different things. I believe in being humble when I can. I give TKR gov credit for example for instilling a sense of humbleness in their members, at least when I was there. There is nothing defeatist about being humble and gracious about your victories. By gloating I mean bragging about how you're the best.

[Senry]

Another month, another 6-page thread with the exact same walls of text being thrown back and forth.

 

Glad I clicked on this and pressed the *mark as read* button. I feel absolutely and completely fulfilled by these threads.

 

P.S. Hurry up and !@#$ing kill each other already.

Edited January 10, 2018 by Senry

[Insert Name Here]

2 hours ago, Senry said:

Another month, another 6-page thread with the exact same walls of text being thrown back and forth.

 

Glad I clicked on this and pressed the *mark as read* button. I feel absolutely and completely fulfilled by these threads.

 

P.S. Hurry up and !@#$ing kill each other already.

 

They're all bark and no bite m8.

[Prefonteen]

On 5-1-2018 at 7:29 AM, Kastor said:

The thing is, EMC has pushed away a big majority and clumped all the losers together. Now they finally have power and don’t want to lose.

This^^^^ @Buorhann

If you take Pfeiffer’s leadership away, Mensa was your average Syndisphere alliance. Very tame and did what Partisan said. Never hit another alliance aligned towards them, and only rolled people they could dominate until the next big war.

 

lol. If Mensa always did what I said, they wouldn't have raided Vanguard and half our wars with rose wouldn't have occurred the way they did :v.

 

But... Vanguard was like a !@#$ing honeycomb for mensa. Whenever their name popped up Mensa went DIODIODIODIODIODIODIODIODIODIODIODIO and flocked to the banners. It was intriguing to watch.