Jump to content

Welcome back Felkey! (A video tribute)


Prefontaine
 Share

Recommended Posts

I nearly spat out my coffee when I read "Don't delete your nation! Go into VM!" from TKR.

You're cementing your alliances' crappiness. If you don't change the oil in your car ever all that will be left is sludge. Cars need oil. Sludge hurts them. Getting rid of the sludge is good. These people are your sludge.

If someone in GoG was contemplating quitting the game over being attacked, I would click the f***ing button for them if I could. Good riddance. Honestly the most devastating impact of this war will not be to your infra, it will be you rewarding members who bailed and giving the ones who stayed a slap in the face by doing so.

Edited by Ashland1
L'sprit de l'escalier
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ashland1 said:

I nearly spat out my coffee when I read "Don't delete your nation! Go into VM!" from TKR.

You're cementing your alliances' crappiness. If you don't change the oil in your car ever all that will be left is sludge. Cars need oil. Sludge hurts them. Getting rid of the sludge is good. These people are your sludge.

If someone in GoG was contemplating quitting the game over being attacked, I would click the f***ing button for them if I could. Good riddance. Honestly the most devastating impact of this war will not be to your infra, it will be you rewarding members who bailed and giving the ones who stayed a slap in the face by doing so.

Here is some reading comprehension problem, let me explain once again, NONE of our long VM started because of this war, some of them started in spring

When a player is busy irl and thinks to quit the game we suggest to put one year of VM to not lose the nation if in the future he finds time to play, if not the nation will be removed from the alliance once the VM ends

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Micchan said:

Here is some reading comprehension problem, let me explain once again, NONE of our long VM started because of this war, some of them started in spring

When a player is busy irl and thinks to quit the game we suggest to put one year of VM to not lose the nation if in the future he finds time to play, if not the nation will be removed from the alliance once the VM ends

None of your long term VM nations started due to the war? So you're saying that there are no logs of any of your VM mode players openly admitting that that is the case?

Do I understand you correctly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ashland1 said:

None of your long term VM nations started due to the war? So you're saying that there are no logs of any of your VM mode players openly admitting that that is the case?

Do I understand you correctly?

None that I'm aware of

You can find a detailed post in this thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Micchan said:

None that I'm aware of

You can find a detailed post in this thread

None that you are aware of... Have you accounted for all your nations in VM or not? Because if you had accounted for them all, obviously you'd be able to say "No, those logs do not exist." So I guess let's start there. Have you accounted for them (in which case you can give a definitive answer to my question) or have you not (in which case you have no basis to claim that they didn't VM because of the war)?

Edited by Ashland1
1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ashland1 said:

None that you are aware of... Have you accounted for all your nations in VM or not? Because if you had accounted for them all, obviously you'd be able to say "No, those logs do not exist." So I guess let's start there. Have you accounted for them (in which case you can give a definitive answer to my question) or have you not (in which case you have no basis to claim that they didn't VM because of the war)?

Wow, whine much?

Have you accounted for every one of your alliance mates?

Has the coalition accounted for every beige they've handed out and tremendously messing up their war effort?

 

Either put up the logs of get out of here with that stuff.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PDunny said:

Wow, whine much?

Have you accounted for every one of your alliance mates?

Has the coalition accounted for every beige they've handed out and tremendously messing up their war effort?

 

Either put up the logs of get out of here with that stuff.

If people VM'd in my alliance during a war that would definitely be accounted for. Their blood pixels would be poured out like water.

 

I never said I had logs. But if TKR is actually telling the truth those logs couldn't possibly exist, right? That's all I'm asking. Pretty simple yes or no question. Why do you guys dislike yes or no questions so much?

Edited by Ashland1
1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ashland1 said:

If people VM'd in my alliance during a war that would definitely be accounted for. Their blood pixels would be poured out like water.

 

I never said I had logs. But if TKR is actually telling the truth those logs couldn't possibly exist, right? That's all I'm asking. Pretty simple yes or no question. Why do you guys dislike yes or no questions so much?

Have you accounted for everyone in your alliance?

And yes or no questions are difficult when you're asking if we know for sure that 150+ people didn't say something. There is no one that we are aware of currently that went into VM mode due to the war. Thanks for your concern for TKR but it's really not necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PDunny said:

Have you accounted for everyone in your alliance?

And yes or no questions are difficult when you're asking if we know for sure that 150+ people didn't say something. There is no one that we are aware of currently that went into VM mode due to the war. Thanks for your concern for TKR but it's really not necessary.

I actually think that's reasonable. Okay, so you're saying it's entirely possible that of the people who went into VM around when the war started plenty of them did it to avoid the war.

The thing about uncertainty is that you don't get to claim it only when it would benefit you. If you can't answer my question about accounting for your members in VM with certainty you can't say with certainty that those who went into VM around when the war started didn't do it to avoid the war.

On its face, that's precisely what they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ashland1 said:

I actually think that's reasonable. Okay, so you're saying it's entirely possible that of the people who went into VM around when the war started plenty of them did it to avoid the war.

The thing about uncertainty is that you don't get to claim it only when it would benefit you. If you can't answer my question about accounting for your members in VM with certainty you can't say with certainty that those who went into VM around when the war started didn't do it to avoid the war.

On its face, that's precisely what they did.

And you don't get to use uncertainty to benefit you and claim that that is their reason. And even if it was their reason, that is our problem to address not yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PDunny said:

And you don't get to use uncertainty to benefit you and claim that that is their reason. And even if it was their reason, that is our problem to address not yours.

But the thing is, we're certain they went into vacation mode. We're certain as to when they did it (in many cases, conveniently right before the war!). As I said, on its face it's an exceedingly fair assumption that they did it to avoid the war due to what they did and the highly unlikely timing of all of them doing it around the same time at just the right time.

Two people showing up at a party wearing identical outfits is a coincidence. What if it's three people? Four people? The more people who do the exact same thing at the exact same time, the more unlikely it is that it was just coincidence, right? So the fact that you had a litany of nations all do the same thing at the same time, which was coincidentally also the time they needed to do it to avoid a war, is a bit convenient. A reasonable person (in this case any reasonable person not in TKR or TCW) would obviously assume what we're all assuming.

You've been dispelling that by saying "Well they had reasons." to which the obvious response is "Really? So you're saying we won't be able to find any evidence that that's not the case for any of the members in question?"

And you've been uncomfortable answering that question. And I think it's pretty obvious why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ashland1 said:

But the thing is, we're certain they went into vacation mode. We're certain as to when they did it (in many cases, conveniently right before the war!). As I said, on its face it's an exceedingly fair assumption that they did it to avoid the war due to what they did and the highly unlikely timing of all of them doing it around the same time at just the right time.

Two people showing up at a party wearing identical outfits is a coincidence. What if it's three people? Four people? The more people who do the exact same thing at the exact same time, the more unlikely it is that it was just coincidence, right? So the fact that you had a litany of nations all do the same thing at the same time, which was coincidentally also the time they needed to do it to avoid a war, is a bit convenient. A reasonable person (in this case any reasonable person not in TKR or TCW) would obviously assume what we're all assuming.

You've been dispelling that by saying "Well they had reasons." to which the obvious response is "Really? So you're saying we won't be able to find any evidence that that's not the case for any of the members in question?"

And you've been uncomfortable answering that question. And I think it's pretty obvious why.

 

 

I don't disagree with the optics of it but the facts are simple....

 

  • I am not aware of any who went into Vacation Mode to avoid war
  • There was some who went into VM near the start of the war that had valid reasons for it
  • It shouldn't be any of your concern and if anything helps your coalition

 

The last bullet point being the most important, and as I have said with every post directed to you ..... It's not any of your business so why are you so concerned about it? Go worry about your own people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Ashland1 said:

None that you are aware of... Have you accounted for all your nations in VM or not? Because if you had accounted for them all, obviously you'd be able to say "No, those logs do not exist." So I guess let's start there. Have you accounted for them (in which case you can give a definitive answer to my question) or have you not (in which case you have no basis to claim that they didn't VM because of the war)?

Ok let me change that

I'm too lazy to check 150 players to see if someone just went into VM for a year in the last two days

Now if you have some example feel free to share with me what you know, if not it's time to learn how to celebrate for winning wars in the conventional way, I can give you free lessons

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Micchan said:

Ok let me change that

I'm too lazy to check 150 players to see if someone just went into VM for a year in the last two days

Now if you have some example feel free to share with me what you know, if not it's time to learn how to celebrate for winning wars in the conventional way, I can give you free lessons

Alright, well, are you willing to at least check @Sargun? He's been the posterboy for your opponents' beach-themed propaganda efforts, so if you can definitively prove his VM wasn't to dodge the war then you'd put a big dent in their argument. I'm not saying he's war dodging (any more than it has already been said anyway), I'm just saying you can really make back some ground on that point if his case is defensible.

10 hours ago, Auctor said:

if this was true then they're highly underperforming compared to the aggression they could be outputting. Their offensive war decs should far and a way outstrip BK's given BK's limited targets and their relative bounty.

True, they're definitely not declaring as many wars as *theoretically* possible, however they're at least declaring some attrition wars against fairly decent missile/nuke bait targets. TKRsphere might just be more cautious than I tend to be, which isn't that surprising really.

16 hours ago, Anneal said:

I’m just saying one can continue fighting even without most of your military through other unconventional tactics.  

You know, I do believe you might be right ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

Alright, well, are you willing to at least check @Sargun? He's been the posterboy for your opponents' beach-themed propaganda efforts, so if you can definitively prove his VM wasn't to dodge the war then you'd put a big dent in their argument. I'm not saying he's war dodging (any more than it has already been said anyway), I'm just saying you can really make back some ground on that point if his case is defensible.

C'mon, do you see Sargun faking a VM to avoid war?

9 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

You know, I do believe you might be right ;)

I launched a missile every day, pat my head pls

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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