Jump to content

[DoW] I Mean It


Agent W
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Sval said:

Your argument would hold more water, if the cue for mass militarisation hadn't been the actions of the very megasphere you created.

Noone made you militarise. If BW/Clock had just left it be for two weeks, the MDP would have expired and we would have been back to how we were before.

Besides, if you're allowed to have an offensive coalition, why aren't we allowed to have a defensive coalition? The only difference between the two is who fires the first shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

The difference is actually that offensive coalitions enable attacks against the largest spheres, thus ensuring that no-one can overwhelm the entire game and thus stagnate it, while defensive coalitions are built in order to ensure that the defenders cannot be hit at all, which stagnates the game. That's the difference

No one is placing any restrictions on what offensive coalitions can be used for though. The people in the current "offensive coalition" were in the same "offensive coalition" that was dogpiling a few months ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LukeTP said:

If you're not qualified to talk about something that does affect your alliance, how can you be qualified to talk about something that affects someone else's alliance?

Cause everyone is qualified to talk about this, the case against you is just so clear and obvious that I’m mind boggled by how you didn’t see this coming. I don’t really have numbers for our c30 tiering compared to everyone else’s, I’m sure we have a lot of those, not really my problem though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

The difference is actually that offensive coalitions enable attacks against the largest spheres, thus ensuring that no-one can overwhelm the entire game and thus stagnate it, while defensive coalitions are built in order to ensure that the defenders cannot be hit at all, which stagnates the game. That's the difference

The only coalition I'd like to see at all is one made up of raiders who just blanket the game in piracy and leave nothing in their wake.

 

 

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Zach LaVine said:

Cause everyone is qualified to talk about this, the case against you is just so clear and obvious that I’m mind boggled by how you didn’t see this coming. I don’t really have numbers for our c30 tiering compared to everyone else’s, I’m sure we have a lot of those, not really my problem though.

The tiering has been widely shared, mainly by people trying to justify their offensive against Oasis and MInc so if you haven't seen that then I would suggest you do a bit of reading.

If you don't see how it is hypocritical to say tier consolidation is fine if you are doing it but not if someone else is doing it then there's no hope for you and we're all just wasting our time here.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, LukeTP said:

Noone made you militarise. If BW/Clock had just left it be for two weeks, the MDP would have expired and we would have been back to how we were before.

Besides, if you're allowed to have an offensive coalition, why aren't we allowed to have a defensive coalition? The only difference between the two is who fires the first shot.

If you hadn't signed the MDP, I'm sure most of Orbis wouldn't have militarised.

I'm not saying you're not allowed a defensive coalition. I'm saying you're being a hypocrite.
You're whining about being forced to use the coalition you created, in the circumstance you specifically created it for, after your actions caused pretty much all of Orbis into rapid militarisation.

Simple fact is, if you hadn't forged the megasphere, you wouldn't be in a war right now.

  • Upvote 4

<~Sval[OWR]> I am your father.
<+Curufinwe> Can confirm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Charles Bolivar said:

The only coalition I'd like to see at all is one made up of raiders who just blanket the game in piracy and leave nothing in their wake.

 

 

That would literally be Oasis and Mystery's worst nightmare.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LukeTP said:

Friendly/fun/etc. wars are not without precedence (indeed i've been in a couple myself in the past), but when they were friendly/fun/etc. wars, they were discussed by both sides, rather than being forced by one on the other without any kind of context.

I’ll leave this here for you, since you are clearly mistaken:

https://politicsandwar.fandom.com/wiki/Community_Outreach_Program

Edited by Kevanovia
  • Upvote 1

image.gif.d80770bf646703bba00c14ad52088af9.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Sval said:

If you hadn't signed the MDP, I'm sure most of Orbis wouldn't have militarised.

I'm not saying you're not allowed a defensive coalition. I'm saying you're being a hypocrite.
You're whining about being forced to use the coalition you created, in the circumstance you specifically created it for, after your actions caused pretty much all of Orbis into rapid militarisation.

There are treaties all the time that do not get used.

 

21 minutes ago, Sval said:

Simple fact is, if you hadn't forged the megasphere, you wouldn't be in a war right now.

Except we would... which was the point I made...

The scale of the war may not have been to the level we expected, but we would have been at war nonetheless. Cataclysm have already admitted that they were going to hit us. Clock is 30-40% larger than our bloc, should we have just let them hit us? They claimed, after this war started, that it was only going to be two alliances attacking. We have no way to verify this other than their unsubstantiated claims.

 

4 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

I’ll leave this here for you, since you are clearly mistaken:

https://politicsandwar.fandom.com/wiki/Community_Outreach_Program

Thanks for the one example that does not really prove or disprove my point. It does not suggest that the war was forced by one on the other or if it was mutual so was kind of a pointless contribution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LukeTP said:

Thanks for the one example that does not really prove or disprove my point. It does not suggest that the war was forced by one on the other or if it was mutual so was kind of a pointless contribution.

It had links to the original forum threads/posts that can be researched. It is a war that has been referenced and it is a war that some of the leaders of your bloc were in/orchestrated. It was a fun/non toxic war that was not “mutually agreed upon in advance”. (Since such a thing does not happen outside of micros). So again, arguments from your corner have no merit or meat.

 

Also, the hit was going to be Cata/HoF versus MINC. You guys would have had the upper hand, so to reference that Clock is ‘30%’ bigger is irrelevant.

Edited by Kevanovia

image.gif.d80770bf646703bba00c14ad52088af9.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

It had links to the original forum threads/posts that can be researched.

I read them, the point i made was that it didn't show whether they were forced on anyone or not.

5 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

It was a fun/non toxic war that was not “mutually agreed upon in advance”. (Since such a thing does not happen outside of micros). So again, arguments from your corner have no merit or meat.

Yes it does happen outside micros. I've been in top 10 alliances my entire time on PnW and I have been involved in said wars in the past.

The point I have made is that we did not who the actual target was, all we knew was that you were building up. We did not know who the target originally was until after the MDP had already been signed and it was too late. How can we know that it's going to be a friendly/fun war if we do not even know who the target is, let alone if the aggressors are a couple of alliances or a whole bloc? We're not mind readers.

The fact that two sizable blocs were able to prepare a coordinated and fully militarised blitz within 3 days of the temporary MDP being signed suggests that our fears were not entirely unfounded as there was clearly already a level of preparedness from the two blocs.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LukeTP said:

I read them, the point i made was that it didn't show whether they were forced on anyone or not.

Yes it does happen outside micros. I've been in top 10 alliances my entire time on PnW and I have been involved in said wars in the past.

The point I have made is that we did not who the actual target was, all we knew was that you were building up. We did not know who the target originally was until after the MDP had already been signed and it was too late. How can we know that it's going to be a friendly/fun war if we do not even know who the target is, let alone if the aggressors are a couple of alliances or a whole bloc? We're not mind readers.

The fact that two sizable blocs were able to prepare a coordinated and fully militarised blitz within 3 days of the temporary MDP being signed suggests that our fears were not entirely unfounded as there was clearly already a level of preparedness from the two blocs.

What is it with people in Mystery Inc thinking that aggressors in war tell the defenders that they’re about to be hit? It’s not a thing. It doesn’t happen unless it’s via leak. It’s hilarious that you guys think otherwise 😂 

Keegoz went shopping as soon as you guys signed a bloc-level treaty. He even said what he was about to do in RON. It’s not a secret. 3 days is plenty of time to coordinate an attack among people who have coordinate attacks before. It’s much longer than the 3 hours it took Oasis/MINC to coordinate targets in defense of Rose during GNR.

image.gif.d80770bf646703bba00c14ad52088af9.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

What is it with people in Mystery Inc thinking that aggressors in war tell the defenders that they’re about to be hit? It’s not a thing. It doesn’t happen unless it’s via leak. It’s hilarious that you guys think otherwise 😂

I'm not saying that you would tell us who you're going to hit. What I am saying is that until we know who is going to be hit, it's only natural for us to prepare to defend ourselves, just like everyone else would if they think that they, or one of their allies, might be the target.

 

22 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

It’s much longer than the 3 hours it took Oasis/MINC to coordinate targets in defense of Rose during GNR.

All of the MInc alliances that were involved in GNR are no longer in MInc. I do not know if those alliances and Oasis had planned for "3 hours", and quite frankly I don't care, as I was not involved in it.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

3 days is plenty of time to coordinate an attack among people who have coordinate attacks before. It’s much longer than the 3 hours it took Oasis/MINC to coordinate targets in defense of Rose during GNR.

You know you're in Swamp when: this is a foreign concept

(Also Oasis/MInc coordinated targets!? This is a shock to me 😉)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Leopold von Habsburg said:

That would literally be Oasis and Mystery's worst nightmare.

It would be everyone's worst nightmare I think.

500 plus nations c25 downwards engaging in mass raiding and looting in an organised and coordinated manner would cripple the long term economic policies and capabilities of every single alliance without question.

Some AAs would fare better than others naturally, but I think every alliance would eventually reach a breaking point where the damage and lost tax revenue would simply be too much to sustain.

It actually sounds quite fun, for both the raider and the raided. A good challenge I think 😀

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LukeTP said:

Friendly/fun/etc. wars are not without precedence (indeed i've been in a couple myself in the past)

I’ve also been in many fun and friendly wars before and I don’t think any of the ones I’ve been a part of were agreed upon. Whether or not you think a war is friendly or not is almost entirely based on who you fight with and those who you interact with on the other side. I would also argue that all wars are fun~~

Humans cannot create anything out of nothingness. Humans cannot accomplish anything without holding onto something. After all, humans are not gods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kyubnyan said:

I’ve also been in many fun and friendly wars before and I don’t think any of the ones I’ve been a part of were agreed upon. Whether or not you think a war is friendly or not is almost entirely based on who you fight with and those who you interact with on the other side.

I can agree with that to a point, and in all fairness, there are some alliances that you can have a joke around with and it's actually enjoyable to play with/against, unfortunately there are others who are not. You guys for example are an alliance that is nice to engage with.

 

8 minutes ago, Kyubnyan said:

I would also argue that all wars are fun~~

I'd probably think wars were more fun if the server didn't fall apart every time there was a blitz and if dogpiles were not a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LukeTP said:

I'm not saying that you would tell us who you're going to hit. What I am saying is that until we know who is going to be hit, it's only natural for us to prepare to defend ourselves, just like everyone else would if they think that they, or one of their allies, might be the target.

Every other alliance in the game prepares to defend by militarizing and doing FA so as to gain information about whether they’re the threat or not. In my time of playing the game, no one has ever defended themselves by panic signing a treaty with another bloc.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LukeTP said:

There are treaties all the time that do not get used.

Can you name an instance when a megasphere formed via an MDP, and nothing came of it?

  • Like 1

<~Sval[OWR]> I am your father.
<+Curufinwe> Can confirm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, LukeTP said:

Noone made you militarise. If BW/Clock had just left it be for two weeks, the MDP would have expired and we would have been back to how we were before.

Besides, if you're allowed to have an offensive coalition, why aren't we allowed to have a defensive coalition? The only difference between the two is who fires the first shot.

Of course you're allowed to have a defensive coalition! Ya got one right now! See?

Things can be done but, for practical reasons, it sometimes might not be the best idea to actually do some things.

  • Upvote 2

P&W SK Flag Small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, LukeTP said:

Noone made you militarise. If BW/Clock had just left it be for two weeks, the MDP would have expired and we would have been back to how we were before.

Besides, if you're allowed to have an offensive coalition, why aren't we allowed to have a defensive coalition? The only difference between the two is who fires the first shot.

bcoz those who have defensive coalitions are cowards. Nobody likes cowards

3 hours ago, Darth Ataxia said:

your alliance and bloc are good :)

one of the best jokes in this war.

  • Thanks 1

image.png.4824d77377c05ab0639aa7b3275e3aea.png

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.