 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Frankychan
|
 |
In the Kingdom of Hawaii (CPA Member)
Sep 2001 time: 19:36
|
|
Well, I still support Lazerus. Unfortunately, with his seemingly withdrawal from NationStates, I'm at a loss.
I mean, I technically could take over the Hive troops in Azan (Laz said that they are under FCL command). But I don't think I can keep up with all the posters. There is Squeblish, Mr. President, Joncha, Urban Ranger, Rasputin, General Tacticus, Guardian, Ceroo, and Azazel. And then there is me. That's a 9:1 ratio, posting-wise and I don't think I can keep up with that. I mean, if you guys want to keep this up, I'll sure as hell try because I don't want to give up....fudge that! I think it would be a heck of a lot more fun if we hashed things out in Azan....but, whatever works for you guys.
I'll leave this up to you 9, but I'm willing to try this if you guys are willing to be patient with my posts.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
xiaodave
|
|
Im just a newbie and all here, but let me play devils advocate here a bit. Is there some reason that the war is being played out 10 nations to 2? It seems to me that 5-5/6-6 might be a better idea all around.
Most of the big european wars of the last 400 odd years, sides seemed to get chosen less for any political reality and more to ensure the continued balance of power. Countries were less afraid of being on an unpopular moralistic side of things and more afraid of letting any one nation get too powerful.
In the last half-century we've may have seen more of the Falkland Is / Iraq situations. Those kind of actions may make more socio-political sense in the modern world, but from a roleplaying position they really arent going to be as much fun as a more even struggle might be.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
GeneralTacticus
|
 |
of Melbourne, Australia
Dec 2001 time: 15:36
|
|
quote: Is there some reason that the war is being played out 10 nations to 2? It seems to me that 5-5/6-6 might be a better idea all around. |
The reason is that, given the nature of most of the nations here, nobody could ICly justify taking FCL's side.
Besides, until Lazerus decided to have a temper tantrum, he was the most powerful military power in the region, and it would have required all the forces available to us to beat him.
Last edited by GeneralTacticus on 24-05-2004 at 13:22
|
|
|  |
 |
|
xiaodave
|
|
quote: Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
The reason is that, given the nature of most of the nations ehre, nobody could ICly justify taking FCL's side.
Besides, until Lazerus decided to have a temper tantrum, he was the most powerful military power in the region, and it would have required all the forces available to us to beat him. |
Heh, it seems to me that given a few minutes to think of something you could justify action on the side of this FCL.
The second reason sounds like the important one. It was 10-2 because it was going to take the ten of you to give the two a run for thier money. So my question becomes, why have such disparate military strengths? It seems counter productive as wars will almost always have to be 10-2?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36. Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|