Endgame?

[Buorhann]

50 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

@Buorhann @Hodor

You reap what you sow

Huh, I sent F-You’s to Partisan?  That’s new to me.

2 hours ago, Filmore said:

I find it amusing how the Chaos and Ketog members in this thread keep leaving out the fact that they recruited Rose for this war. 

I find it funny that you finally succumbed to your BK overlords.

At least Rose knows how to fight.

 

(Also you guys are giving Inst way too much attention)

Edited June 20, 2019 by Buorhann

[Tiberius]

3 hours ago, PDunny said:

 

1. BK is not hostile currently, unless there is a secret treaty that is bound to change. Without multiple spheres coming together to take down either you or BK, you two are the only spheres at the top that could realistically fight each other. It's just a matter of time until it happens unless there is treaties in place. And even with treaties, it is likely to happen eventually as you push more and more people out of the game there will be virtually no one left to war other than each other.
2.  I will give you that, we were making them not a threat. By supporting them you are allowing them to continue to be a threat though. As I said, I am not discussing whether or not you should be involved in the war but whether or not it is in your best interest to support only one side of the war. The fact is, your best interest is to let us fight it out and then come through and destroy everything that remains. The fact that you are supporting a single side currently would be indicative of a secret treaty.
3. Yeah, whale tier consolidation is a pain and I understand your sentiment regarding that. I do think that Knightfall has proven that whale tier can be overcome by mass amount of mid tier. BK has also strengthened their whale tier since KnightFall by signing TCW. This should make them more a threat than the 2 smaller spheres, who have clear animosity towards each other. Again, not saying that N$O shouldn't get involved, just stating that their best interests is for the fall of BK's sphere and the demolition of the coalition between Chaos & KETOG.

1. Yes things can always change and I'm sure we will react to that when it becomes a reality. It is funny that people point the finger at us as being the hegemony that drives people out of the game. Yet we've only been the "hegemony" for less than a year. NPO had to go through countless beatdowns to get where we are now and we continue to play. I'd suggest those who would leave are simply made of soggy cardboard if they can't take a few L's.

2. Not much I can contribute to this since it's a back and forth argument that's been done plenty in this thread.

3. TCW on its own does not make up for the rest of the whale tier. Allowing BK sphere to fall doesn't destroy Chaos & KETOGs Whale tier either. 

[ArcKnox]

>I'd suggest those who would leave are simply made of soggy cardboard if they can't take a few L's

We've seen what happens when alliances try to go off the reservation. Very recently in fact.

[TheNG]

Man I like this thread already. It's been too long since we've had a good forum meltdown.

[Micchan]

I think KETOGG war on Chaos was to show that on this side there's a real intention to change things and go from a bipolar world to a multisphere world

At the same time was a message to the "ex" IQ, and invite to do the same and fight each other without the risk of being hit by the other two spheres

After the leaks was pretty clear that the Brave and Beautiful bloc wanted to repeat the old script, but there was still a moderate belief that N$O was at least on their way to accomplish a complete separation, now these hopes have collapsed and we're back again to the previous situation

[Hodor]

1 hour ago, TheNG said:

Man I like this thread already. It's been too long since we've had a good forum meltdown.

Not gonna lie, this made me laugh, but it's not true unless you've got t$' allies slobbering in the background:
 

22 hours ago, Sisyphus said:

The Syndicate and its affiliates* declare war on the alliances of Guardian and Grumpy Old Bastards.

The Rules

1.) This is not a result of hard feelings. This is strictly business.

2.) The Syndicate and its affiliates have no intent to expand their war on the coalition currently fighting the Black Knights and their allies beyond Guardian and Grumpy Old Bastards. 

3.) Any counters upon The Syndicate and its affiliates by any alliance outside of Guardian and Grumpy Old Bastards will be met with extreme prejudice. 

*The term "affiliates" refers to any party committed to this effort, announced and unannounced.

 

18 hours ago, Micchan said:

Can you clarify something important to me?

Until t$ and GG are at war no alliance of the N$O bloc will attack an alliance of the Chaos/KETOGG bloc unless attacked? Is this right?

 

17 hours ago, Frawley said:

No, the various members of the N$O group will do as they please when they please.

 

[Edward I]

6 hours ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

Our experiences are completely different then; I've literally never seen a game that didn't end with one group desperately holding onto power and forcing out all competition, even unto the point of complete boredom and detriment to their own side. I've led alliances where our one major player literally owned something like 50% of the game's economy and definitely owned about 50% of the game's military, I've led rebellions against a cabal of 3 players that literally forced our nations to delete every week after we rerolled (the game mechanics permitted that), I've allied with hegemonies that projected power into all corners of the game map, I've fought exploiters and allied with exploiters (our enemies were exploiting too at that point, the admin just stopped giving a damn). I've made meme strategies that made me literally invincible, I've seen toxicity that I sincerely hope you wouldn't believe. But for all that, I've never once seen any game escape the pattern of people wanting to be protected, at any cost, and therefore consolidate around players with the same motivations and paranoia. And when they do, and I refuse to play along, they feel threatened by me... and the war becomes us versus them, with no room for quarter. No negotiation possible, no peace, only betrayal, war, and ultimately stagnation and massive player exodus. As I've said, I'm apocalyptically bad at FA.

I don't dispute that consolidation can exacerbate existing problems, and perhaps lead to the death of games in its own right (I've never personally seen this happen, so I can't say for sure).  But, in your own telling, it's not the only reason for the decline of political simulators, arguably not the primary reason, and in some cases it's not even the first thing to go wrong.  Bad mechanics (one player owning 50% of the game, three players with the power to force out vastly larger numbers of players out of the game, meme strategies and the invincibility that accompanies them), rampant cheating, moderation unwilling or unable to address rampant cheating, and plain toxicity all have prominent roles to play.

However, none of those has happened here yet.  Despite N$O's complaints about the limited vulnerability of upper tier nations to military strikes, no one player controls half the game's resources, and no handful of players are capable of dominance by purely mechanical means.  For all the complaints about the war system being unbalanced, there aren't any "meme" strategies that I can think of, and certainly none that make players practically invincible.  There have been several prominent incidences of massive cheating, but little evidence that Alex is incapable or entirely unwilling to counteract exploits (even if he does sometimes need to be prodded into action).  And, despite the breakdown of trust that you opened the this thread by discussing, we're still having a fairly level-headed, non-toxic conversation about the state of the game here.

Even if you believe political consolidation predated all of those things in these other games you've mentioned, it still doesn't erase the fact that there is little evidence any of that happening here or, to a degree, even being possible at this point.  So I don't think the game is in imminent danger of being over.  I think what's mostly at stake here is the narrative of the metagame we all have.  Plenty of people were and are attached to the idea of "minispheres" and believe this war spells the end of that possibility; plenty of other people were either never sold on the idea of minispheres in the first place, or disagree with some of the conceptions the first group has of them (e.g. the extent to which treaties matter; see my response to Thrax below for a more detailed reply).

Quote

Also it's never even taken 5 years for the whole process to happen.

Now, sure, EMC definitely broke up. That was unprecedented in my experience, and it shows that sphere breakups are indeed more than a theoretical possibility in this game and this environment at least... but when we get shit like N$O declaring war in support of BK when they have no defensive reason to and have supposedly split from them, that causes irreparable damage to the possiblity of trusting that such a split as the EMC split can again happen. Now, sure, there was the same speculation that EMC hadn't really split... but here, we've got actual actions speaking far louder than words ever could. My concern is that once theres a substantial breakdown in trust it would take a complete sucker to believe that any split could ever be legitimate. Fool us once, and all that. And once the trust no longer exists, any split, even a legitimate one, has to be assumed not to have happened, and thus it de-facto hasn't. No breakup can happen, which means no difference in the war fronts can happen, and thus we're back to fighting the same war 3 or 4 times before we get bored of it, only this time without any way out of our doom.

Endgame.

I empathize with you here because you sound like The Inquisition did in 2017 and 2018.  EMC had purportedly split up, first by the departure of the IQ alliances, then by the departures of The Syndicate and Mensa, and finally when TKR supposedly killed it for good.  But there was a constant fear that it would re-materialize whenever someone fought a war against us.  The departure of BK, Zodiac and Cornerstone only seemed to harden the animosity Syndisphere had towards the corpse of Paracovenant, which became IQ-sphere.  Although t$ departed after ToT, there was still a very real threat of a similar war coalition being marshaled against us.  We hit KT because it tried to do just that, and we weren't entirely sure that more of the former members of Syndisphere/EMC wouldn't jump in (SALT began a few days after we hit KT).  We later got confirmation that we were right to be suspicious and distrustful: one of the most important steps in building the Knightfall coalition was getting t$ to drop its secret ties with TKR.

The interesting thing, though, is that based purely on the war record - which at this point is all we have to go on in our present, analogous timeline - EMC definitively broke up following ToT.  That particular grouping never fought a concerted war against IQ again.  So, for what it's worth, the historical record is mixed here.  If you've made up your mind to distrust everything that comes out of BK-sphere and N$O, that's your (not entirely unreasonable) prerogative.  Expect to feel a little paranoid and somewhat cornered, even if there's limited public evidence that your suspicions are correct.  But don't be surprised if luck or circumstance are on your side, either.  It's entirely possible that KETOG will avoid wars with the people you see as permanent enemies.

 

56 minutes ago, Spaceman Thrax said:

My two cents. Take it for the incredibly tired, mostly retired rambling it is before I get smart and leave you all to deal with your own mess.

Hopefully this won't be too much of a siren call and you can safely finish your exit from the mess.

56 minutes ago, Spaceman Thrax said:

Rose, KETOG, and Chaos came at the idea of a multipolar world with more honesty than others did (Citadel, t$, Covenant). There were also groups that very simply don't care about this goal (BK), and those that think it is impossible and as such don't bother to try (NPO). As a result, when it became clearly evident we were going to be actively targeted by a consolidated mess of alliances no matter what we did, we had no choice but to declare this war. It's a defensive war, since every reasonable political opportunity was created for the rest of the treaty to break, including virtually all of those alliances fighting each other while the treaty web did nothing.

I disagree with the characterization of the first three's actions as "dishonest" and NPO's attitude as "not trying". I think this is mainly because we disagree about what does and doesn't qualify as a multipolarity.

First, there's a general disagreement between N$O and Chaos/KETOG about what treaties signify and how they influence the actions of their signatories. Perhaps ironically, N$O is probably closer to the traditional paperless stance on treaties than not. We think treaties broadcast existing relationships but don't create them; paperless doctrine agrees, but also holds that relationships can decay faster than treaties. We're saying that if we had actual, binding treaty links to BK-sphere, they'd be on the treaty web for everyone to see.  So for us, the notion that because you can draw a long, squiggly line from NPO or t$ to BK through the treaty web we're one, monolithic political actor is silly.  t$ entered because it wanted to, not because of a treaty.

Second, wartime cooperation does not make a sphere.  There's a bit of inconsistency here (by your coalition mates, not you in this post) stating that Chaos/KETOG/Rose aren't a single pole by dint of being in the same war coalition (at least not yet), but that BK/N$O, by dint of being in the same war coalition, are.  Maybe you're right and this is all one slow transition back into a more formal, explicit bipolarity, but we can't self-consistently claim that one war coalition is automatically a sphere while the other isn't automatically a sphere.

56 minutes ago, Spaceman Thrax said:

Now, were it up to me, I wouldn't have fought KETOG in the first place, because the signs that that consolidation wasn't going to break were always there, and as such, rewarding the alliances who were just looking to redo previous IQ wars only with t$ and TCW in iq was very simply dumb. But obviously that wasn't my bloc's war to declare, and it does amuse me a bit to see the KETOG players crying foul, as if they didn't implicitly reward the politicking they are supposedly so averse to. But good job getting stats, I guess?

I've said as much elsewhere.  If there really were so many obvious warning signs in plain sight before the TCW logs found a new home on the forums, it wouldn't have made much  sense for KETOG to hit Chaos. They either don't believe their own arguments about IQ reaching out from the grave or they're attributing far too much significance to the "indirect ties", etc. that they claim made the present situation inevitable.  I suppose they could have a death wish for their infrastructure, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Additionally, much of what I said in reply to Scarfalot above also applies to the points you brought up.

[Buorhann]

You folks are trying too hard to deflect away from the fact that this is indeed IQ 2.0 vs. Chaos/KETOG.

>we don’t like BK

>but we’ll force the game into two spheres again

Oh well.  It’s a buffett of targets out there now.

[Sir Scarfalot]

8 hours ago, Reuben Cheuk said:

I don't know much about the situation, so correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like realpolitik, or at least attempting to use it, results in zero-sum situations like this. What's the enemy of realpolitik? Idealism. I don't know how idealism could be injected into this game in a desirable manner, but it could be a good place to find solutions.

This guy gets it. This guy, thank god, he gets it.

I don't have enough upvotes for this

39 minutes ago, Edward I said:

well-crafted wall of text

Imma be honest with ya, you make some very solid points there. And I do admit that my fears are based on speculation, and while my prior experiences do tell me that the situation is deeply bad, I may well be wrong. I sincerely hope that I am, at least.

I still do have to dispute you on one point though, and that is this bit:

39 minutes ago, Edward I said:

Second, wartime cooperation does not make a sphere.  There's a bit of inconsistency here (by your coalition mates, not you in this post) stating that Chaos/KETOG/Rose aren't a single pole by dint of being in the same war coalition (at least not yet), but that BK/N$O, by dint of being in the same war coalition, are.  Maybe you're right and this is all one slow transition back into a more formal, explicit bipolarity, but we can't self-consistently claim that one war coalition is automatically a sphere while the other isn't automatically a sphere.

The issue here is that unlike what Tiberius said, there are always at least 3 sides to any conflict: The winners, the losers, and the uninvolved bystanders. If BK/N$O were indeed strangers to each other, as both claim, then the current conflict could have ended up as BKsphere vs KETOGG/Chaos, winner to be determined, with N$O on the sidelines, reaping the benefits of both proving their political point AND preserving economic growth and resources for free. But you didn't, so why? What's your advantage to be gained by forming a coalition with BKsphere? I cannot see a single rational reason for it other than to maintain longer-term alliance with BKsphere. N$O and BKsphere weren't literally fighting each other just prior to allying. N$O has published no hard evidence that KETOGG/Chaos were ever planning on teaming up against them, only the mere specter of its possibility. So, yes, we indeed cannot say that one time of cooperation proves a permanent sphere, but that in no way makes the circumstances of our respective coalitions remotely similar.

Edited June 20, 2019 by Sir Scarfalot

[Spaceman Thrax]

6 minutes ago, Edward I said:

-lots of things-

Hello! You are better at multiquoting than I am so prepare to endure my thoughts in no particular order.

No foul on quoting me. My issue is more with completely substanceless parroting than an actually political argument with some semblance of a crack at objectivity to it. So I'm grateful rather than annoyed, at least in your particular case.

We're not going to agree about t$/Citadel/Covenant. All made chirps about breaking off but wouldn't; citadel and covenant agreed to a plan that involved reforming IQ to roll everyone who isn't IQ in an environment where the other spheres were actually literally fighting. Syndicate I know had gov turnover issues that caused their apparent schizophrenia, but as an institution, they have demonstrated that they do not care enough to force their vision onto the people who were supposedly a part of it. Hence dishonest, and it's about that simple. Putting them on the same page as Rose/Chaos/Ketog in terms of attempting to break off is just nonsense, considering the leaks. I'd actually give Rose more credit than my own bloc here, because their smaller sphere, despite hanging off the treaty web, was smallest, and I know they elected to walk away from NPO/t$ after the details of your "break" ended up being so muddled.

So those of you who are older, take a breath and appreciate: I am Thrax, and I just paid Rose a massive compliment. Maybe there's some hope for dynamism after all. Hahaha.

In your alliance's case, I don't draw as much of a conclusion from your squiggly line as I do from my assumption that you were told about the IQ reform plan: t$ and HS have claimed to be ignorant of it, so I assume you were hedging your bets, against t$'s supposed wishes of multipolarity. Perhaps I'm wrong. But if you can tell me with a straight face NPO was not aware BK wanted to declare the war in the leak, or that NPO told BK they were not at all interested, I will eat my shoe. And I've had this shoe a while, so it'll be a good show. Those who want trust need to show they are trustworthy, and NPO's most consistent party line in the time they have played has been "Well, you guys first". And then people went first, and still nothing. 

It is not sharing a coalition that makes me assume the BK-NPO break false. There's a lot more going into that decision. History, comments by your alliance mates, knowing BK to be cowardly and assuming they continue to fear ever fighting your alliance, the total lack of gov turnover in either alliance since the time you were allied (amusingly, I think Roq has cited a lack of gov turnover as a reason politics may turn stagnant, in other contexts, but feel free to assume I'm lying here because I don't care enough to find it) my assumption your alliance hedged their bets and committed an error of omission with your current allies as part of that, the difficulty IQ has had in the past considering other people's splits as genuine. It's a false equivalence, sorry to say. I may be wrong about one or two of these, but taken together, I'm nowhere near optimistic and I'm sure you can understand that.

In terms of this war: the timing is everything. The idea that t$ suddenly decided upper tier consolidation was a problem at a point where it would impact this overall war effort and aid BK is just silly. They could have done something about it at any other time, and decided not to.

As to your point about ketog: sensible accounts may differ, but my opinion is that they were afraid to stare down the treaty web, actually. They had asked for our support at times in a war on parts of the treaty web; we declined, not wanting to fall into a large bipolar conflict. The leaks showed we had no choice, and that the greater BK sphere had no intention of ever allowing us to actually maneuver or even do our own thing, and as such we acted. The signs were there; ketog elected to disregard them.

[Shadowthrone]

48 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

The issue here is that unlike what Tiberius said, there are always at least 3 sides to any conflict: The winners, the losers, and the uninvolved bystanders. If BK/N$O were indeed strangers to each other, as both claim, then the current conflict could have ended up as BKsphere vs KETOGG/Chaos, winner to be determined, with N$O on the sidelines, reaping the benefits of both proving their political point AND preserving economic growth and resources for free. But you didn't, so why? What's your advantage to be gained by forming a coalition with BKsphere? I cannot see a single rational reason for it other than to maintain longer-term alliance with BKsphere. N$O and BKsphere weren't literally fighting each other just prior to allying. N$O has published no hard evidence that KETOGG/Chaos were ever planning on teaming up against them, only the mere specter of its possibility. So, yes, we indeed cannot say that one time of cooperation proves a permanent sphere, but that in no way makes the circumstances of our respective coalitions remotely similar.

I have answered this multiple times through the thread. We could have had all that you suggest yes, but that is insignificant to upper tier inflation. That does not mean we are here fighting with BKSphere or their coalition at large, but doing what we said we would as laid out in tS' DoW thread. At the end of the day, it is your prerogative to take that at face value, or ignore it, but our reasoning doesn't change because you don't' believe it. 

Under any strategy, if we were in here to defend BK, we would have come out of the blocks the moment they were hit. We had the information, we did not, because it is not our war. If you believe our reasons to deal with GoB/Guardian, then fair and well, if you do not, we can keep coming around this. As you stated, you should not do FA, therefore assuming our intentions/motivations to defend BK, when we've made it clear we have not, and have not done anything to indicate we are on their side of this war, are actions that have been undertaken. Easier to spin collusion, than see the reasoning and deal with the reasoning as explained throughout the last 24 hours. 

[Sir Scarfalot]

1 minute ago, Shadowthrone said:

I have answered this multiple times through the thread. We could have had all that you suggest yes, but that is insignificant to upper tier inflation. That does not mean we are here fighting with BKSphere or their coalition at large, but doing what we said we would as laid out in tS' DoW thread. At the end of the day, it is your prerogative to take that at face value, or ignore it, but our reasoning doesn't change because you don't' believe it. 

Under any strategy, if we were in here to defend BK, we would have come out of the blocks the moment they were hit. We had the information, we did not, because it is not our war. If you believe our reasons to deal with GoB/Guardian, then fair and well, if you do not, we can keep coming around this. As you stated, you should not do FA, therefore assuming our intentions/motivations to defend BK, when we've made it clear we have not, and have not done anything to indicate we are on their side of this war, are actions that have been undertaken. Easier to spin collusion, than see the reasoning and deal with the reasoning as explained throughout the last 24 hours. 

And yet here you are, declaring in support of BK, timing be damned. The fact that you could unquestionably have gone through with the effort infinitely more effectively doesn't change the fact that you've gone and done the thing.

Upper tier inflation my left asscheek, by the way; city cost increases nonlinearly while the benefit increases linearly, and the sheer bulk of your numbers could have simply taken this opportunity to grow another five cities and therefore been the upper tier. You're already capable of going head to head with Grumpy, or at least your 3-man blitz clearly proves you think so.

So where's the protection of NPO in sending them to die against such untouchable, impossible, overwhelming, inflated upper tier man bad as Grumpy?

[Shadowthrone]

7 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

And yet here you are, declaring in support of BK, timing be damned. The fact that you could unquestionably have gone through with the effort infinitely more effectively doesn't change the fact that you've gone and done the thing.

Upper tier inflation my left asscheek, by the way; city cost increases nonlinearly while the benefit increases linearly, and the sheer bulk of your numbers could have simply taken this opportunity to grow another five cities and therefore been the upper tier. You're already capable of going head to head with Grumpy, or at least your 3-man blitz clearly proves you think so.

So where's the protection of NPO in sending them to die against such untouchable, impossible, overwhelming, inflated upper tier man bad as Grumpy?

No where in our DoW did we state it in support of BK. Once again we aren't expanding the conflict at the moment, and if you do not believe, again always open to counter us. The rest of your post is problematic as is, and really don't have to deal with it. If NPO magically moves 153 members to city 30, in the space of the next two months or three, we'd need Pooball's billions. Its ultimately an argument that falls within itself, but go on. 

Like I said, we cover where we can, but go on continue harping about protection of my community. If anything, you've done nothing other than reinforce the prevailing view of folks trying to disband us. If thats what it takes to please you, feel free to come and fight us  

[ArcKnox]

>No where in our DoW did we state it in support of BK.

It just happens to be attacking a flank of KETOGG/Chaos that would otherwise be helping swat away the stream of fresh micros coming in to help bail out BK.

Edited June 20, 2019 by ArcKnox

[Thalmor]

I'm not pleased with the political climate of the game, but no matter what happens this war, I don't think the game will die. I'm not convinced it's even dying.

People were saying the game was dead after Silent War, but that was far from the truth. Not matter how stagnant politics got, something always broke. I wish there were more in the community that were willing to sacrifice safety and their positioning so that the community has a whole could have more wars (even if they were smaller), but oh well.

P&W is also a growing game. I think that's a factor that shouldn't be overlooked.

[Sir Scarfalot]

11 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

No where in our DoW did we state it in support of BK. Once again we aren't expanding the conflict at the moment, and if you do not believe, again always open to counter us. The rest of your post is problematic as is, and really don't have to deal with it. If NPO magically moves 153 members to city 30, in the space of the next two months or three, we'd need Pooball's billions. Its ultimately an argument that falls within itself, but go on. 

Like I said, we cover where we can, but go on continue harping about protection of my community. If anything, you've done nothing other than reinforce the prevailing view of folks trying to disband us. If thats what it takes to please you, feel free to come and fight us  

You might not "state" your support of BK but that doesn't change its existence. And you can go ahead and continue to believe that making enemies of everyone not enslaved to you makes you enemies, since guess what: It's true. Wanting total domination makes enemies! Go figure!

And sure, NPO can't magically hit city 30 within a few months. But here's what you can do: Hit city 30 in 10 months. Which by some definitions is indeed a 'few'. And here's some more numbers: Grumpy and the other ultra-high tier whales used to have about triple your city count, correct? Now, they've got 33% more cities than you do. And with the way the mechanics increase the cost of cities as the number of cities gets higher, that gap, which you are so desperately afraid of, can only ever close. There is no "high tier inflation", there is only the deflation as the supply of cities gets higher and higher.

As for protecting your community, I've said this ten thousand times and I'll say it ten thousand more: Your short-sighted and desperate attempts to win a game that should not be won can only ever result in your community being destroyed. Not by any hostile force somehow mind-controlling you into pushing the deletion button, but by yourselves precluding any reason for you to exist. You are biologically speaking a virus, which so desperately propagates throughout its host that it ultimately annihilates its own existence. If you'd just calm the hell down about how desperately important it is that no threat, be it real, potential or imagined can ever come to your precious precious community, then you'd be able to secure that community permanently as opposed to depleting its hosts and dooming it to starvation.

[Mikey]

Remember when IQ banded together with other unrelated alliances in the face of what they considered a larger threat, just last war? Apparently NPO is allowed to do that and it's a legitimate temporary necessity. But when we do it in the face of an even more apparent threat, it's all a secret plot and a threat to the game. Nevermind that many of our alliances have not, in fact, been historical friends at all in recent history and the fact prominant individuals in both spheres (chaos/KETOG) share disdain for one another...

By this logic everyone should have rallied to tkrs side in knightfall, because that coalition posed the biggest threat ever assembled.

 

 

Edited June 20, 2019 by Mikey

[Sketchy]

4 hours ago, Spaceman Thrax said:

it does amuse me a bit to see the KETOG players crying foul, as if they didn't implicitly reward the politicking they are supposedly so averse to. But good job getting stats, I guess?

Yes we should all sit on our ass and do nothing like you Thrax great advice. Funny how TKR hitting us first isn't an issue but us stomping on you is lmfao.

All you do is cry foul. Its the only card in your deck.

[Spaceman Thrax]

1 minute ago, Sketchy said:

All you do is cry foul. Its the only card in your deck.

but is Sketchy

[Tiberius]

6 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

You might not "state" your support of BK but that doesn't change its existence. And you can go ahead and continue to believe that making enemies of everyone not enslaved to you makes you enemies, since guess what: It's true. Wanting total domination makes enemies! Go figure!

If we wanted to support BK we'd already be stomping on you. If you want us to support BK so badly then hit us and force your opinion to become fact. 

[Sketchy]

1 minute ago, Spaceman Thrax said:

but is Sketchy

No I have two cards, the other one is rolling your alliance.

You should try it sometime.

[Shadowthrone]

6 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

You might not "state" your support of BK but that doesn't change its existence. And you can go ahead and continue to believe that making enemies of everyone not enslaved to you makes you enemies, since guess what: It's true. Wanting total domination makes enemies! Go figure!

And sure, NPO can't magically hit city 30 within a few months. But here's what you can do: Hit city 30 in 10 months. Which by some definitions is indeed a 'few'. And here's some more numbers: Grumpy and the other ultra-high tier whales used to have about triple your city count, correct? Now, they've got 33% more cities than you do. And with the way the mechanics increase the cost of cities as the number of cities gets higher, that gap, which you are so desperately afraid of, can only ever close. There is no "high tier inflation", there is only the deflation as the supply of cities gets higher and higher.

As for protecting your community, I've said this ten thousand times and I'll say it ten thousand more: Your short-sighted and desperate attempts to win a game that should not be won can only ever result in your community being destroyed. Not by any hostile force somehow mind-controlling you into pushing the deletion button, but by yourselves precluding any reason for you to exist. You are biologically speaking a virus, which so desperately propagates throughout its host that it ultimately annihilates its own existence. If you'd just calm the hell down about how desperately important it is that no threat, be it real, potential or imagined can ever come to your precious precious community, then you'd be able to secure that community permanently as opposed to depleting its hosts and dooming it to starvation.

Yes because I wish to enslave anybody lol. I mean I wish I was even half as dastardly as you make me seem. It'd be a nice change of pace/character. 

Once again, I have no intention of winning a game. I wish I had even an ounce of such a wide over-arching vision of winning games, rather than being satiated with being a member and where I am. What I do have as a vision is one where the NPO can exist and play this game as much as everyone else. That will always be an internal goal of mine, to keep us active, vibrant and secure to function within this game, without the threat of disbandment. That does not mean that I intend to see other communities dead, or annihilated. Since you seem to assume my intentions, I've always stated it publicly and privately, I will always want more alliances in this game, and space given to them to grow and develop. Its why I've followed an open door protectorate policy in the hope of giving communities that space. But go on, keep telling me how I'm out to get you. At first I thought it was pure hyperbole, but if you really want to keep coming after me personally, feel free, I'm always ready. Really wish you'd calm down and have a sane conversation without calling me a cancer but I guess I can only hope for the best. Enjoy your flaming~`  

[Mikey]

13 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

Yes we should all sit on our ass and do nothing like you Thrax great advice. Funny how TKR hitting us first isn't an issue but us stomping on you is lmfao.

All you do is cry foul. Its the only card in your deck.

 

10 minutes ago, Spaceman Thrax said:

but is Sketchy

 

9 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

No I have two cards, the other one is rolling your alliance.

You should try it sometime.

 

Gee, just look at all that mutual respect and friendship. Between Grumpy calling for the destruction of CoS and open disdain for ripper, or Thrax and many of his alliance mates distaste for 'slursphere', or the fact that TKR has only ever been on the opposite end of the barrel from KT/TGH, its no wonder NPO thinks we've been working together this whole time! It's not like claims of historical friendship and cooperation apply far more to their side, where everyone has been directly allied and partnered for years. Or that one pair of spheres have actually fought while the other has openly stated they remain close and won't oppose each other...

The only real historical ties within our coalition was us with KT, that one time, when we fought in the Ayyslamic crusade. But then, we've fought alongside NPO more than against it, and we haven't exactly been on speaking terms with Guardian since we bombed out of syndisphere. Sure, there are many members of the old Syndisphere/EMC on both sides. But so are there on yours. One just needs to look at the deep animosity between BK/TKR, or apparently now between former t$ members and each other, to see that having been allies once, years ago, is hardly a sign of future cooperation to come...

Edited June 20, 2019 by Mikey

[Sketchy]

Just now, Mikey said:

 

 

 

Gee, just look at all that mutual respect and friendship. Between Grumpy calling for the destruction of CoS and open disdain for ripper, or Thrax and many of his alliance mates distaste for 'slursphere', or the fact that TKR has only ever been on the opposite end of the barrel from KT/TGH, its no wonder NPO thinks we've been working together as one sphere this whole time! It's not like claims of historical friendship and cooperation apply far more to their side, where everyone has been directly allied and partnered for years. Or that one pair of spheres have actually fought or the other has openly stated they remain close and won't oppose each other...

The only real historical alliance was us with KT, that one time, when we fought in the Ayyslamic crusade. But then, we've fought alongside NPO more than against it, and we haven't exactly been on speaking terms with Guardian since we bombed out of syndisphere. Sure, there are many members of the old Syndisphere/EMC on both sides. But one just needs to look at the deep animosity between BK/TKR, or apparently now between former t$ members and each other, to see that having been allies once, years ago, is hardly a sign of future cooperation to come...

Shit you are right my tension is showing, my bad lmfao.

[Kevanovia]

42 minutes ago, Mikey said:

-snip-

You know that TGH stop Charlie and I did before the Hobo Express? We were collaborating with Beerhoe and Sketchy on delivering this war. It all started ages ago. Sphinx? Also a part of Soup’s humble beginnings. He was in on it the whole time. Nice work with the “leak” there Sphinx, they never expected a thing.

This coalition is held together by one nice hot cup of Soup.

Three cheers for the ladle and spoon!

 

throws a bone to Inst

Edited June 20, 2019 by Kevanovia