It is currently June 18th, 2019, 10:15 pm

All times are UTC-03:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: January 7th, 2015, 11:42 am 
User avatar
Online
Kaiserin
Kaiserin

Joined: February 23rd, 2011, 5:26 pm
Posts: 5938
Beg to differ that permawar is valid in any possible scenario.

_________________
My CN Nation | My Primary NS Nation | Nordreich NS Region | Nordreich Wiki
Image
Je suis Juif | Oro Ibah Aozpi: Damn it Oro - Kaiser Hanssen
Hiki säästää verta - Uberdude | עַם יִשְרָאֵל חַי
Click me!

Image
ImageImage


Top
   
PostPosted: January 7th, 2015, 2:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: December 19th, 2014, 2:17 pm
Posts: 10
Duderonomy wrote:
kingzog wrote:As I said in the thread, if you sit in PM you leave yourself open to criticism. Whether it's just or unjust criticism is a matter of perspective and, let's face it, personal interest.

If you go all out, folks respect that. I've never seen an alliance criticized for throwing everything they had into a fight.

I'm going to disagree with Duderonomy, though. Perma-war is just as damaging as prolonged periods of peace. Possibly even more so. Every long war in CN's history has been followed by some kind of exodus, and we're at the point where we can ill afford to have people, friend or foe, chased away.

If you think of CN as one endless, long-winded argument between alliances that are constantly changing allegiances to one another, then wars should be the punctuation. Quick and to the point.
I think permawar (or at least sustained 6 month-to-a-year wars) are an inevitable outgrowth of the peacemode tactic. We're already seeing the losers of a war trying to dictate terms to the winning coalition while the losing AA's leaders hide in peace mode. Their hope is that by making it a contest of wills, rather than nation strength, the losing AA can simply wait out their enemies until concessions are made.

That's why I've been advocating tech trading on the winning side, so we can get a head start on NS growth. While precautions will need to be made, it is doubtful the losing side will leave PM just to get curbstomped. So keep them stagnant while DBDC, et al continue to grow.

Is it sad that nations are leaving? Yes. But it's not our decision to make. It is up to the losing coalition to determine when enough is enough. If they are happy to sit in peace mode, then we will wait until they can't stand it anymore. But our growth will continue as normal.
You and I think alike.

NG and TOP has been thinking alike (minus the PM usage) lately.


Top
   
PostPosted: January 7th, 2015, 2:44 pm 
User avatar
Online
Kaiserin
Kaiserin

Joined: February 23rd, 2011, 5:26 pm
Posts: 5938
Spartan Glory wrote:
Duderonomy wrote:
kingzog wrote:As I said in the thread, if you sit in PM you leave yourself open to criticism. Whether it's just or unjust criticism is a matter of perspective and, let's face it, personal interest.

If you go all out, folks respect that. I've never seen an alliance criticized for throwing everything they had into a fight.

I'm going to disagree with Duderonomy, though. Perma-war is just as damaging as prolonged periods of peace. Possibly even more so. Every long war in CN's history has been followed by some kind of exodus, and we're at the point where we can ill afford to have people, friend or foe, chased away.

If you think of CN as one endless, long-winded argument between alliances that are constantly changing allegiances to one another, then wars should be the punctuation. Quick and to the point.
I think permawar (or at least sustained 6 month-to-a-year wars) are an inevitable outgrowth of the peacemode tactic. We're already seeing the losers of a war trying to dictate terms to the winning coalition while the losing AA's leaders hide in peace mode. Their hope is that by making it a contest of wills, rather than nation strength, the losing AA can simply wait out their enemies until concessions are made.

That's why I've been advocating tech trading on the winning side, so we can get a head start on NS growth. While precautions will need to be made, it is doubtful the losing side will leave PM just to get curbstomped. So keep them stagnant while DBDC, et al continue to grow.

Is it sad that nations are leaving? Yes. But it's not our decision to make. It is up to the losing coalition to determine when enough is enough. If they are happy to sit in peace mode, then we will wait until they can't stand it anymore. But our growth will continue as normal.
You and I think alike.

NG and TOP has been thinking alike (minus the PM usage) lately.
Much more alike than you can possibly imagine.

_________________
My CN Nation | My Primary NS Nation | Nordreich NS Region | Nordreich Wiki
Image
Je suis Juif | Oro Ibah Aozpi: Damn it Oro - Kaiser Hanssen
Hiki säästää verta - Uberdude | עַם יִשְרָאֵל חַי
Click me!

Image
ImageImage


Top
   
PostPosted: January 7th, 2015, 9:54 pm 
User avatar
Offline

Joined: December 12th, 2013, 12:08 am
Posts: 703
Kaiser Hanssen wrote:
Spartan Glory wrote:
Duderonomy wrote:
kingzog wrote:As I said in the thread, if you sit in PM you leave yourself open to criticism. Whether it's just or unjust criticism is a matter of perspective and, let's face it, personal interest.

If you go all out, folks respect that. I've never seen an alliance criticized for throwing everything they had into a fight.

I'm going to disagree with Duderonomy, though. Perma-war is just as damaging as prolonged periods of peace. Possibly even more so. Every long war in CN's history has been followed by some kind of exodus, and we're at the point where we can ill afford to have people, friend or foe, chased away.

If you think of CN as one endless, long-winded argument between alliances that are constantly changing allegiances to one another, then wars should be the punctuation. Quick and to the point.
I think permawar (or at least sustained 6 month-to-a-year wars) are an inevitable outgrowth of the peacemode tactic. We're already seeing the losers of a war trying to dictate terms to the winning coalition while the losing AA's leaders hide in peace mode. Their hope is that by making it a contest of wills, rather than nation strength, the losing AA can simply wait out their enemies until concessions are made.

That's why I've been advocating tech trading on the winning side, so we can get a head start on NS growth. While precautions will need to be made, it is doubtful the losing side will leave PM just to get curbstomped. So keep them stagnant while DBDC, et al continue to grow.

Is it sad that nations are leaving? Yes. But it's not our decision to make. It is up to the losing coalition to determine when enough is enough. If they are happy to sit in peace mode, then we will wait until they can't stand it anymore. But our growth will continue as normal.
You and I think alike.

NG and TOP has been thinking alike (minus the PM usage) lately.
Much more alike than you can possibly imagine.
:hang3:

_________________
Don't worry about tomorrow,
because tonight Dynamite will make everything all right.
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: January 8th, 2015, 12:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: December 19th, 2014, 2:17 pm
Posts: 10
Kaiser Hanssen wrote:
Spartan Glory wrote:
Duderonomy wrote:
kingzog wrote:As I said in the thread, if you sit in PM you leave yourself open to criticism. Whether it's just or unjust criticism is a matter of perspective and, let's face it, personal interest.

If you go all out, folks respect that. I've never seen an alliance criticized for throwing everything they had into a fight.

I'm going to disagree with Duderonomy, though. Perma-war is just as damaging as prolonged periods of peace. Possibly even more so. Every long war in CN's history has been followed by some kind of exodus, and we're at the point where we can ill afford to have people, friend or foe, chased away.

If you think of CN as one endless, long-winded argument between alliances that are constantly changing allegiances to one another, then wars should be the punctuation. Quick and to the point.
I think permawar (or at least sustained 6 month-to-a-year wars) are an inevitable outgrowth of the peacemode tactic. We're already seeing the losers of a war trying to dictate terms to the winning coalition while the losing AA's leaders hide in peace mode. Their hope is that by making it a contest of wills, rather than nation strength, the losing AA can simply wait out their enemies until concessions are made.

That's why I've been advocating tech trading on the winning side, so we can get a head start on NS growth. While precautions will need to be made, it is doubtful the losing side will leave PM just to get curbstomped. So keep them stagnant while DBDC, et al continue to grow.

Is it sad that nations are leaving? Yes. But it's not our decision to make. It is up to the losing coalition to determine when enough is enough. If they are happy to sit in peace mode, then we will wait until they can't stand it anymore. But our growth will continue as normal.
You and I think alike.

NG and TOP has been thinking alike (minus the PM usage) lately.
Much more alike than you can possibly imagine.
I like where this is going. Where I come from those are sexual words.


Top
   
PostPosted: January 8th, 2015, 12:41 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Herzog
Herzog

Joined: May 7th, 2009, 7:21 pm
Posts: 2193
Don't get sucked in by Hanssens smooth talking UKIP recruitment.

_________________
Wolfgang Von Sterreich: Bacon and booze 4lyf


Top
   
PostPosted: January 16th, 2015, 10:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: December 19th, 2014, 2:17 pm
Posts: 10
TurnipCruncher wrote:Don't get sucked in by Hanssens smooth talking UKIP recruitment.
How are your wars with MHA and Fark?


Top
   
PostPosted: January 16th, 2015, 10:57 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Markgraf
Markgraf

Joined: May 18th, 2009, 8:42 am
Posts: 2323
TurnipCruncher wrote:Don't get sucked in by Hanssens smooth talking UKIP recruitment.
For Gods sake dso not get sucked by hansen then violated by the buffoons at UKIP :gasmask:

_________________
Proud member of the 1st Nordreich Penal Battalion


Top
   
PostPosted: January 16th, 2015, 11:00 pm 
User avatar
Offline

Joined: December 12th, 2013, 12:08 am
Posts: 703
wilhelm1908 wrote:
TurnipCruncher wrote:Don't get sucked in by Hanssens smooth talking UKIP recruitment.
For Gods sake dso not get sucked by hansen then violated by the buffoons at UKIP :gasmask:
Protip: Hanssen goes straight for the urethra first.

_________________
Don't worry about tomorrow,
because tonight Dynamite will make everything all right.
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: January 17th, 2015, 12:35 am 
Offline
Reichsgraf
Reichsgraf

Joined: April 22nd, 2009, 3:59 pm
Posts: 2720
Spartan Glory wrote:How are your wars with MHA and Fark?
We're dishing out much more damage than we're taking, which is always a good thing.


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next

All times are UTC-03:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited

Copyright © 2009, 2017 Nordreich Community

Theme by Kaiser Hanssen and Vinzent Zeppelin