Jump to content

This is a brave new world we're living in


alyster
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Akuryo said:

BK/TC/Citadel was not a microsphere. Citadel had an MDAP with BK and so there was never any question. Including their protectorates that came in, is over 1000 nations. The microspheres that unified against them were 300 nations individually at most, and smaller than 200 in the case of Rose.

Now considering that 1000 nation 'microsphere' had the intent to attack one of the MUCH smaller, ACTUAL microspheres 1 on 1, outnumbering them at WORST 3:1, that the spheres numbering 250 and sub 200, might not be feeling very safe about that? Of course they banded together to attack a common threat to them. Even banded together it was still 2:1 against them.

That's the risk of micro/mini spheres. You aren't all going to be the same size. Also from my understanding, minispheres was about moving away from a bipolar landscape rather than every sphere being tiny. Everyone has the opportunity to recruit alliances into their spheres.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Toph said:

This whole "I'm above this game, I'm not actually a part of it because I just am on here for the lulz and don't really care" mentality is literally denial at it's finest. The fact that you play this game to begin with means you're a part of it. Can you completely change/switch sides/implode/rebuild and still be "a part" of the game? Uh yeah. But pretending you're somehow above it all, aloof in your tower of giggles and friendship with your buddies is delusional. If you're here and not playing the game, then why be here at all?

Most of the people in this game have changed into different people/characters. The irony is that the ones who haven't are the very same ones who pretend like they're above it all.

And to get back on topic, the whole Commerce Union thing absolutely needs to be addressed. The shady tactics going on as of late are the reason for this thread. Nobody in coalition B has denied any of these accusation and frankly, it will look very bad for you later on when you'll inevitably not be the largest Bloc anymore. Bare that in mind.

I’m not sure how their buddies could have forced them to disband. Where they offered peace and disbanded instead? Maybe they just wanted out and thought it the easiest way. OP pretty vague on that, sounds like they just disbanded. 

Actually remembering him coming to me with just 3 members asking for his first treaty after forming Commerce Union when I was Death Watch FA. They were small & their name didn't imply a military focus; although said he knew me from BC; so I signed a low level treaty with them. Although after Death Watch was gone they ended up getting a treaty with Camelot. Although was surprised how much they grew since then; when I mostly just signed the PIAT he was asking for as a favor. They went out fighting on the battlefield at least. o7 Commerce Union; they last longer than many on their side. 

Edited by Noctis Anarch Caelum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Curufinwe said:

Last I checked, BK didn't have a tie to them, so okay?

"To Coalition B Leaders: You threatened us one too many times. Attack any one of my members and I will leak classified OPSEC to your enemies.""

>they're literally in your coalition but keep dancing around the point. Don't need to be directly treatied to BK to be part of your coalition and clearly imply you guys as the reason they disbanded, so yes, there's a big difference between an alliance on your side who is treatied to an ally of yours disbanding and blaming you guys and some random alliance disbanding and blaming you guys.

sO, oKAy

 

Edited by Deos
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Tiberius said:

When microspheres combine to hit another microsphere it kind of shits on the idea of microspheres. I'm not discounting that you teamed up due to common threats, but you can't sing and dance about microspheres and then carry on with the same kind of coalition building that has always existed.

Wait...  BK + Cov + Citadel is a microsphere?

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/20/2019 at 11:20 PM, Toph said:

This whole "I'm above this game, I'm not actually a part of it because I just am on here for the lulz and don't really care" mentality is literally denial at it's finest. The fact that you play this game to begin with means you're a part of it. Can you completely change/switch sides/implode/rebuild and still be "a part" of the game? Uh yeah. But pretending you're somehow above it all, aloof in your tower of giggles and friendship with your buddies is delusional. If you're here and not playing the game, then why be here at all?

Most of the people in this game have changed into different people/characters. The irony is that the ones who haven't are the very same ones who pretend like they're above it all.

And to get back on topic, the whole Commerce Union thing absolutely needs to be addressed. The shady tactics going on as of late are the reason for this thread. Nobody in coalition B has denied any of these accusation and frankly, it will look very bad for you later on when you'll inevitably not be the largest Bloc anymore. Bare that in mind.

no, if you can't separate a game and personalities in a way that allows you to enjoy the game, the people around you, and what you've done it it, you should prob not be playing games like this.

There are plenty of people who share the mindset that - yes - they are here to frick around, like me.  Not only could I give 2 shits about my nation, but I could also give 2 shits about pretty much everything else in this game.

I'm above it. If more people were, this place probably would be a little less toxic.

:) 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Curufinwe
6 hours ago, Deos said:

"To Coalition B Leaders: You threatened us one too many times. Attack any one of my members and I will leak classified OPSEC to your enemies.""

>they're literally in your coalition but keep dancing around the point. Don't need to be directly treatied to BK to be part of your coalition and clearly imply you guys as the reason they disbanded, so yes, there's a big difference between an alliance on your side who is treatied to an ally of yours disbanding and blaming you guys and some random alliance disbanding and blaming you guys.

sO, oKAy

 

 

On 7/19/2019 at 8:48 PM, Curufinwe said:

Well you have us there.  If someone in a micro said something about politics, it must be true.  You win the argument, I guess.

Still seems applicable.  Or, you know, you could check out Epi's explanation.  But I like my response more, personally.

Edited by Curufinwe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Curufinwe said:

 

Still seems applicable.  Or, you know, you could check out Epi's explanation.  But I like my response more, personally.

nice job ignoring literally everything that was written there, explaining how it wasn't just 'someone in a micro' and someone more directly tied to you guys.

though i stand corrected by Epi's explanation of what actually happened w/ them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Curufinwe
12 minutes ago, Deos said:

nice job ignoring literally everything that was written there, explaining how it wasn't just 'someone in a micro' and someone more directly tied to you guys.

though i stand corrected by Epi's explanation of what actually happened w/ them.

Thanks.  I feel I did a nice job as well :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, CandyShi said:

It’s hard to read when you’re busy trying to remove your eyes due to inst posting.

That seems to be my contribution to the BKNPO war effort, isn't it? If you're blind, you can't interact with the game. So, please be Oedipal in other ways.

 

Generally, see this particular text (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_the_Eastern_Front )for its coverage of the Anglophone historiography regarding the Eastern Front. It's too welcome to lambast the capability of the Red Army when the US was actually scared of escalating Korea as a result of Soviet deployments in the Russian Far East (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/redacted-testimony-fully-explains-why-general-macarthur-was-fired-180960622/).

 

Another point of comparison is Khalkin Gol, wherein the Soviet forces in Mongolia routed the Imperial Japanese Army using combined arms tactics the Japanese couldn't match. The Japanese were debating whether to attack north into Russia or attack south into Western colonies. Khalkin Gol convinced them that going after the Russian bear was a terrible idea.

 

NATO during the end days of the Cold War respected Soviet operational art as superior to their own. For instance, the Chinese believed that terrain features in Afghanistan meant that the Afghans would be able to defeat a Soviet incursion. The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, on the other hand, saw the Soviet engineering corps rapidly produce roads and logistics chains to support the invasion and rapidly overrun the Afghanis.

 

Against the Soviets, basically, you can definitely win battles against them. But the battles you win aren't the battles that matter, as we are seeing this war.

Edited by Inst

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2019 at 2:44 AM, Epi said:

@Toph

Completely addressed Smug.png

We completely disavow the shady tactics of those involved and hope they hold themselves to a higher standard in the future.

The bane of Camelot is that we attempt the right thing, lesson learned: Be more immoral. Because either way, our side will look bad for it. That's how war works.

1260426661-preview-neo-walking.gif | Ice Queen - Epimetheus

Just to be clear, you hit a declared neutral in AD, then question the decision making of our coalition? We don’t simply broker protectorates, we sign them to help build community - which does not constitute an act of hostility or aggression.

There was limited strategic interest in letting CU out of the conflict and we stand by that decision. Would a protectorate peace trade even be upheld by your side or would you find another reason to hit them again?

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Buorhann said:

Wait...  BK + Cov + Citadel is a microsphere?

In short, yes. You can choose to pick things out in isolation, however the whole point of splitting spheres up was to move away from a landscape that had predominantly two sides. Micro/mini spheres was sold as more than two sides, not the actual size of those spheres. There will always be one sphere larger than the others and it is up to those spheres to bring other alliances in to their spheres to enlarge it, not join two spheres together. You'll find most will agree it made sense for your spheres to come together to take down BK, because that has always been the way things have been done here, you get enough of a coalition to take down another sphere. The whole song and dance about changing things up hasnt created a different environment at all and your coalition was the main instigators from what I could see. You backed that up with Surfs Up and then decided against carrying on with the course you had set out to do. All I see is claims about wanting change yet all I see is action to the contrary of that.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah...  you're stupid.

Somehow BK + UPN + Acadia + TCW + Carthago + AK + Yakuza + Camelot +...  you get the point, is somehow a fricking microsphere.  You're dumb in the head.

"Claims about wanting change"

Yeah, we backed up those claims.  KETOG and Chaos fought each other.  Which many of your own leaders were either surprised with that or refused to believe it based on their own paranoia.

Again, like we said multiple fricking times, had those logs from TCW's low gov not dropped out in public like that - we wouldn't have even engaged this war.  With those logs on top of BK/TCWs odd militarization/sign ups/etc and on top of other rumors, well, we had to act together to deal with it.  Now you see why we had to.

You had the numbers far in your advantage on the onset, and you still have them.

Your reply just made my head hurt.  I'll just move you to the Inst/Noctis level of idiocy.

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Curufinwe
8 hours ago, Benfro said:

Just to be clear, you hit a declared neutral in AD, then question the decision making of our coalition? We don’t simply broker protectorates, we sign them to help build community - which does not constitute an act of hostility or aggression.

There was limited strategic interest in letting CU out of the conflict and we stand by that decision. Would a protectorate peace trade even be upheld by your side or would you find another reason to hit them again?

AD got hit because they're a part of your sphere and we're at war with your sphere - same deal with Clan Cailan and Silenzio.  In AD's case, if they had wanted to remain neutral they should probably have avoided signing one of the belligerents during a war.  It was particularly unwise to sign a belligerent that is not in a position to protect them, as has proven to be the case with TKR.  We gave you guys an option to get your protectorates out of the war and you opted to reject it, so they're free to direct any and all complaints on the matter to TKR's gov.  Glad to hear you stand by the decision though.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

In short, yes. You can choose to pick things out in isolation, however the whole point of splitting spheres up was to move away from a landscape that had predominantly two sides. Micro/mini spheres was sold as more than two sides, not the actual size of those spheres. There will always be one sphere larger than the others and it is up to those spheres to bring other alliances in to their spheres to enlarge it, not join two spheres together. You'll find most will agree it made sense for your spheres to come together to take down BK, because that has always been the way things have been done here, you get enough of a coalition to take down another sphere. The whole song and dance about changing things up hasnt created a different environment at all and your coalition was the main instigators from what I could see. You backed that up with Surfs Up and then decided against carrying on with the course you had set out to do. All I see is claims about wanting change yet all I see is action to the contrary of that.

Wroooooong.

Is that what NPO told you microspheres were? Maybe that's how NPO thinks of them, but the original concept of microspheres was numerous sides created through a variety of small spheres, in number of Alliances and total number of member nations. 

I suppose you could also judge it by equal strength too. But then, you're still wrong. It's took 3 actual minispheres to fight them. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Akuryo said:

Wroooooong.

Is that what NPO told you microspheres were? Maybe that's how NPO thinks of them, but the original concept of microspheres was numerous sides created through a variety of small spheres, in number of Alliances and total number of member nations. 

I suppose you could also judge it by equal strength too. But then, you're still wrong. It's took 3 actual minispheres to fight them. 

I mean that's not what the NPO or its actions indicated. But we also conceded that minispheres as an idea would eventually fail, and the likelihood of a different but new bi-polar dynamic might mostly be the outcome. Given that concession, we took the actions to see if an alternative was at play. I mean I'm skeptical of the idea, but tried it nevertheless, full aware of the pitfalls of said idea. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Buorhann said:

Yeah...  you're stupid.

Somehow BK + UPN + Acadia + TCW + Carthago + AK + Yakuza + Camelot +...  you get the point, is somehow a fricking microsphere.  You're dumb in the head.

"Claims about wanting change"

Yeah, we backed up those claims.  KETOG and Chaos fought each other.  Which many of your own leaders were either surprised with that or refused to believe it based on their own paranoia.

Again, like we said multiple fricking times, had those logs from TCW's low gov not dropped out in public like that - we wouldn't have even engaged this war.  With those logs on top of BK/TCWs odd militarization/sign ups/etc and on top of other rumors, well, we had to act together to deal with it.  Now you see why we had to.

You had the numbers far in your advantage on the onset, and you still have them.

Your reply just made my head hurt.  I'll just move you to the Inst/Noctis level of idiocy.

You should have let Chaos take the beating. KETOG weren't the target for BK sphere, Chaos was. If you wanted to hit them afterwards then do that. Sure not a good use of resources, but that's the change you have been shouting about. Minispheres or whatever you want to call them only work if they work in isolation, otherwise it's the same as it always has been, but call me stupid all you like, facts are facts. Just like this war you can't face a losing war, and now you and your friends aren't the hegemony on top of this game the meta suddenly is bad. Keep doing what you are good at, soliciting people to downvote for you like good lapdogs.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mad Max said:

akdownvote.png

NP.JPG

IF.JPG

Whatever my tactics might be Max, i'd suggest ya spend less time whining about how better and special you are compared to everyone, like some pathetic low-self esteem teenager, and more time sitting quietly and watching. Maybe you'll learn something!

Can't accuse me of no fake wars that burned all our infra! Nor of higher tiering, being massively larger, nor of fighting in a tier our allies controlled until very recently. No, i'm afraid you simply just suck that much, whatever tactics you got. Having 2200 infra in every city, burning my entire warchest, entering late and going down early, have done absolutely nothing to stop me from singlehandedly doing half as much damage as your entire alliance. I'm not even a whale! Your largest guy is a mere 2 cities behind.

Now sit back, shut up, and keep watchin. My encore's about to begin, and it's very rude to speak during a performance, you understand. <3

36 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

I mean that's not what the NPO or its actions indicated. But we also conceded that minispheres as an idea would eventually fail, and the likelihood of a different but new bi-polar dynamic might mostly be the outcome. Given that concession, we took the actions to see if an alternative was at play. I mean I'm skeptical of the idea, but tried it nevertheless, full aware of the pitfalls of said idea. 

I should have put less weight on it as an NPO thing, and more as a personal thing. Multi-polar world is an interesting, but very fragile concept. It requires everyone involved to be playing with it in mind, and i suspect it's death is not far off. No sense in giving up trying while the heart's still beating though. :P

  • Haha 3
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Akuryo said:

NP.JPG

IF.JPG

Whatever my tactics might be Max, i'd suggest ya spend less time whining about how better and special you are compared to everyone, like some pathetic low-self esteem teenager, and more time sitting quietly and watching. Maybe you'll learn something!

Can't accuse me of no fake wars that burned all our infra! Nor of higher tiering, being massively larger, nor of fighting in a tier our allies controlled until very recently. No, i'm afraid you simply just suck that much, whatever tactics you got. Having 2200 infra in every city, burning my entire warchest, entering late and going down early, have done absolutely nothing to stop me from singlehandedly doing half as much damage as your entire alliance. I'm not even a whale! Your largest guy is a mere 2 cities behind.

Now sit back, shut up, and keep watchin. My encore's about to begin, and it's very rude to speak during a performance, you understand. ❤️

No, you sit down.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
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.