NationStates Jolt Archive

Leapfrogging off of some ideas from Guffingford's thread about II, I'm restarting the old, and much fantasized about, idea of a massive, NS world war.

Sign up if you're interested. So far, this is the cause of war that we've come up with:

Northern Sushi, Kroblexskij, N Y C, East Lithuania, and Admiral-Bell have a multi-national space program, deep in the tropical rainforests of Northern Sushi. Black Katanas and the Grey Legions, in their utter hatred for peaceful foreign operations, attack Northern Sushi and attempt to kill the scientists involved in the space program. Due to the unrest in Sushi, it creates a diversion, so Comatica and Velkya invade Topal. Topal is located on land that was previously owned by the Comatic Empire, but was lost during World War II. Comatica uses the military unrest in Northern Sushi as an excuse to take back it's land, and it promises to give Velkya a part of the land in return for their aid if the attack succeeds. Then the war will escalate from there. Allies step in and defend, people counterattack, more allies get drawn in, shit hits the fan. The nation of Vhammpyr joined what is now known as the Black and Grey Imperium, consisting of Black Katanas and the Grey Legions, and launched nuclear ICBMs at West Cedarbrook, Xeraph, Comatica, and I think Hakari, forcing West Cedarbrook and Comatica into the war against the Black and Grey.

If you want to remain neutral for a part of the war, and see which side you like better as it progresses, that's fine. I don't know just how many people are going to sign up, so I won't set a limit just yet to how many nations can enter.

Participants
Fourhearts
NYC
Haraki
Comatica
Topal
Dark Visions
Saint Fedski
The Grey Legions
Black Shadows
The Black Katanas
Nivaria
Euroslavia
Call to Power
Northern Sushi
Saudbany
Oillanders
Tocrowkia
East Lithuania
Antanjyl
Palixia
Admiral-Bell
Velkya
Militia Enforced State
Vhammpyr


Neutrals
Novacom
Kyleslavia
Kroblexskij
Xeraph
Emporer Pudu
Elyria-Lorain
Verstummelung
-Magdha-
Tarlag
The Parthians
Drexel Hillsville
Fantasy World Union
Methral
Vampad
Tyrandis (Arms dealer)
IDF (Arms dealer)
The Canadian Tundra (Arms dealer)
Tree-Hugging Lesbians
West Cedarbrook
Warta Endor
Kirisubo


Interested Audience
Zatarack


Like I said, much of this will be open for suggestion, so feel free to comment, air concerns, or savagely criticize.

Sign Fourhearts up for the good guys. Pop - 500 million by the time this gets started.

I have a bad guy puppet about the same size called Fourspades, but unless the "trigger" was a civil war between the two then I don't see how I could work it.

I would love to be a neutral nation. Sign Northern Sushi up for neutral!

I'm in on good guys/neutral, I have an idea for a contributing factor to the war at least, a certain Rebel Admiral Kukonois of mine, he's been planning something big for a while and once we've found out how nations will be falling in let's just say a lot of havoc will break out, causing a world war to potentially weaken the world powers to later move in and conquer would be right up his street.

I’m thinking about rather I’ll join or not. If the point is to specifically cripple us (Older, more “influential and powerful” nations.) in some way, I’ll probably refrain. Until then, just consider Tocrowkia, and her ultra-sexy player(OOC Me), an interested audience.

I wouldn't care so much about crippling older nations, I just think it would be fun to have a huge world war.

and of course any theoretical crippling is just that, especially since any crippling would be by your choice and more than likely inflicted by another old timer, somehow I do not see Novacom dealing a deadly blow to any old timer.

[Interest Tag]

Since many of us probably won't want to cripple our nations, what if that was the IC goal of the war rather than the OOC goal of the war? What if the cause was a lot of smaller (newer) nations joining forces to try and eliminate the hegemony larger nations have over the world of NS? Because larger nations exist, the smaller nations live in fear of one by one being subjugated by the larger ones, so what if the cause wasn't good vs. evil, but rather a lot of small nations against a smaller number of large nations? It would be a good way to keep it fair as well as not having to divide it into instigators and victims. Both sides would be equally at fault.

That way, whether or not the smaller nations succeed in crippling us and assuring political power for themselves would be based on how the war goes, rather than having us get crippled regardless.

I'd like to be "officially" neutral, but secretly an instigator.

Interested as well. There is a conflict in Torontia that could be used to start such a war. You have a small war with some alliances beginning to play, get another alliance in their...then just keep adding alliances or pledges of support until you have a world war. But either way, I will join in. Once I see who else is interested, I will decide whether to be good or bad, or neutral for a while.

Since many of us probably won't want to cripple our nations, what if that was the IC goal of the war rather than the OOC goal of the war? What if the cause was a lot of smaller (newer) nations joining forces to try and eliminate the hegemony larger nations have over the world of NS? Because larger nations exist, the smaller nations live in fear of one by one being subjugated by the larger ones, so what if the cause wasn't good vs. evil, but rather a lot of small nations against a smaller number of large nations? It would be a good way to keep it fair as well as not having to divide it into instigators and victims. Both sides would be equally at fault.

That way, whether or not the smaller nations succeed in crippling us and assuring political power for themselves would be based on how the war goes, rather than having us get crippled regardless.

There are some parts of this i like, but others I dislike. I have to think about this more, but remember large nations can sometimes offer protection to small nations.

Since many of us probably won't want to cripple our nations, what if that was the IC goal of the war rather than the OOC goal of the war? What if the cause was a lot of smaller (newer) nations joining forces to try and eliminate the hegemony larger nations have over the world of NS? Because larger nations exist, the smaller nations live in fear of one by one being subjugated by the larger ones, so what if the cause wasn't good vs. evil, but rather a lot of small nations against a smaller number of large nations? It would be a good way to keep it fair as well as not having to divide it into instigators and victims. Both sides would be equally at fault.

That way, whether or not the smaller nations succeed in crippling us and assuring political power for themselves would be based on how the war goes, rather than having us get crippled regardless.

That's a good idea, and I'd join if we're doing that.

There are some parts of this i like, but others I dislike. I have to think about this more, but remember large nations can sometimes offer protection to small nations.

Well I'm not saying we should do that for sure. I'm just throwing out ideas for how we could start it off. Of course, as with anything I propose (Usually) any ideas for improvement or alternatives are welcome.

Since many of us probably won't want to cripple our nations, what if that was the IC goal of the war rather than the OOC goal of the war? What if the cause was a lot of smaller (newer) nations joining forces to try and eliminate the hegemony larger nations have over the world of NS? Because larger nations exist, the smaller nations live in fear of one by one being subjugated by the larger ones, so what if the cause wasn't good vs. evil, but rather a lot of small nations against a smaller number of large nations? It would be a good way to keep it fair as well as not having to divide it into instigators and victims. Both sides would be equally at fault.

That way, whether or not the smaller nations succeed in crippling us and assuring political power for themselves would be based on how the war goes, rather than having us get crippled regardless.

That might be a good idea. Actually, I might be willing to have me nation taken over, and used as land for another nation for about 10 years, then have them break away. It would look good in my factbook, anyway.;)

Mark me down as neutral....for now.

tag of interest.

Alright, everyone's on the list that signed up. We're on our way.

The Grey Legions are interested in being one of "the good guys" (whatever that eventually means).

Just a sidenote: since it'll be so huge, it won't be able to fit into one thread. We'll most likely make a bunch of different threads for different parts of the war, with the tag 'WWNS' after the title, like with the Earths.

Put me down as 'neutral' at the beginning. I'll probably go with the 'good nations' later.

Do you think the mods would give this it's own section? Or perhaps sticky the main thread if enough nations get involved?

Also curious about how we would draw out a map for this thing?? A lot of us are in regions that have thier own map. Map out the regions involved perhaps?

Do you think the mods would give this it's own section? Or perhaps sticky the main thread if enough nations get involved?

Also curious about how we would draw out a map for this thing?? A lot of us are in regions that have thier own map. Map out the regions involved perhaps?

I doubt it. (look at E2 and it's 8000+ posts)

Do you think the mods would give this it's own section? Or perhaps sticky the main thread if enough nations get involved?

Also curious about how we would draw out a map for this thing?? A lot of us are in regions that have thier own map. Map out the regions involved perhaps?

Yeah. I like to think of myself as a good mapmaker, of some sorts.:p

Im Interested, although Mac was planning something like this for when A Passion Play is over

Well, if it gets huge, maps will be difficult. Also, not all nations in most regions rp, leaving a lot of tricky land to move across that won't be played by anyone. I think a map is not a good idea.

I also am not to keen on a "big vs. small" war. It sounds a little to contrived for my liking. If this gets big, sizes won't matter if you're in a large alliance. Also, remember that many of us don't play by numbers, and thus care little for pops./economies listed by the game.

I'd like to be a good nation, by the way. Sign me up!:)

I think it best to leave it map-free and let individual conflicts such as invasions work out their own maps. Because we're so scattered across the world, whatever shape it may be taking, a map just wouldn't do it justice.

Also, put me down as a 'good guy'/'victim'.



Also, NYC, it wouldn't have to be by size alone. It could also go by who uses/flaunts their power, who is influential, who isn't, etc. It could just be the people who have little power and influence rising up against those who do.

I think it best to leave it map-free and let individual conflicts such as invasions work out their own maps. Because we're so scattered across the world, whatever shape it may be taking, a map just wouldn't do it justice.
.

Agreed

....I'm still waiting on a "bad guy nation" to post. Perhaps we could devide it up by government type??

I'd like to contribute the Barrow Sea, which is lined with Comatic provinces, to be a major warzone. There's plenty of land to fight and such, and there's already a map of it.

I'd like to sign up as one of the good guys.

Also, instead of maps, why doesn't everyone just state whether they have a shoreline, mountains, etc? Keeps it simpler. Nothing is as frustrating as landing forces on a beach when the nation being attacked winds up being land-locked a few posts later.

....I'm still waiting on a "bad guy nation" to post. Perhaps we could devide it up by government type??

Possibly. There definitely are more good nations than bad. We need Doomingsland or RB in here. ;)

Comatica when I have my basic map finished could you fix it up, I am most definetly not a good map maker, I do better at logo's.

Everyone here is MT/PMT, right?
< < > >
___ ___

What if we had some sort of framed act of war. For example, Fourspades sends a kamakzi airship into DMG's capital painted with Fourhearts' markings. DMG declares war on Fourhearts, Fourhearts denies involvement, everyone takes sides from there.

Just an example of how to pit "good guy" nations against each other.

Comatica when I have my basic map finished could you fix it up, I am most definetly not a good map maker, I do better at logo's.

Lol, alright.

Thank you so much :D

I'm working out a few grand conspiracies to start things off with a bang, Admiral Kukonois has practically been begging for some sort of development, and starting a massive world war would really push him as a truly evil figure.

What if we had some sort of framed act of war. For example, Fourspades sends a kamakzi airship into DMG's capital painted with Fourhearts' markings. DMG declares war on Fourhearts, Fourhearts denies involvement, everyone takes sides from there.

Just an example of how to pit "good guy" nations against each other.

Perhaps. Why did you pick DMG, though? Randomness?

Several problems with this idea.

Back when WW4 and WW5 broke out, there were A LOT of participants. At the time NS and II had pretty much the same players that bounced between the two forums, so the title of 'World War' was generally accepted by the masses. II alone has so many players now that organizing something that can be considered a 'World War' will be nearly impossible.

The appeal that WW4 and WW5 had was that they happened naturally. There was no plotting, planning, or politiking, the whole thing just unfolded naturally. People were hooked because they didn't know what would happen next, there was no scripted feel to it, nor was there any real restrictions.

I believe that though you all have the best of intentions, this effort will be just as futile as all the other attempts over the past 2 years to get a World War going. I certainly can't be a World War without all the big names in II, and I have doubts as to how many would want to take part in a plotted out World War.

Sorry guys, but I've seen this happen too many times to be interested. Because this isn't a naturally occuring World War, I believe that most people will lost interest and the RP will meet the same fate as its predecessors.

what just because we're plotting a beginning and we've had a stab at predicting the end means this is planned?

Just because there's a thread getting things going doesn't mean it's all set in stone far from it.

Yeah, all we're doing is setting off a chain reaction with a simple cause of war. We're just gonna let it fan out, and, possibly, let people jump in in the middle of the war.

While I agree with you on many counts, AMF, and definitely on the fact that not only were the world wars easier back when there were less nations but also that the appeal of the world wars back in the day was that they happened naturally, the problem is they don't happen anymore. We might as well get a few nations together (Even secretly, I'm not sure if this open planning will work) and plan a short series of events on how to start a large-scale war. After that, it's up to the participants. If everybody that's posted in this thread reached out and pulled in allies, we'd have a lot more people, and if they pulled in allies it could spiral out of control like WWI.

I'm not saying it will definitely happen. There's a significant chance this will die before it even gets off the ground, but there's a chance it might not, and that it might become great fun for all involved. I'm willing to take that chance, and give it a try.

what just because we're plotting a beginning and we've had a stab at predicting the end means this is planned?

Just because there's a thread getting things going doesn't mean it's all set in stone far from it.

You missed the point entirely.

Part of it is indeed the planning, but it goes beyond that. Planning alone throws out any hope of a successful World War as noted in my last post. But there are other factors that I mentioned before.

You will not have enough participants, either in size or reputation, to make this thing big enough to be considered a World War. Your prior ideas to get a beginning are interesting, but it looks like nothing more than an everyday war. As I said before, WW4 and WW5 happened because most all of the big names were involved, and a sizable chunk of the RP community at the time was involved in both wars in some manner. Nowadays that will just be too hard to achieve.

Perhaps. Why did you pick DMG, though? Randomness?

Because I am awesome :p

Yeah, all we're doing is setting off a chain reaction with a simple cause of war. We're just gonna let it fan out, and, possibly, let people jump in in the middle of the war.

Then it will be nothing more than a commonly occuring war, sorry to say it. I've seen this idea tried at least a dozen times over the past 2 years, and every attempt has been met with the same criticisms and fate.

Hey, hey, hey! Put me down as one of the bad guys. I'll attack someone without provocation, rape, pillage and burn the villages, etc, and then everybody can choose sides. A good time can be had by all!

To tell you the truth, AMF is right. This will never be considered a real world war by myself because it's not of natural occurance. I don't like or respect role plays that are born through out of character planning instead of in character actions taken by players without knowledge of the instigation of a world war. The best wars are those with an IC story behind it that has seen months of role playing; I think that's part of the success behind my War of Golden Succession [running since August now]. But beyond that, it's really not my word, it's that of the participants, and I really have no right nor the power to really put this down. So, have fun!

I'll have to agree with AMF on this. You don't have the supporting of the so-called "respectable" players to even consider this in the class of a WW. Another point is that you have to have a certain amount of people to have it a WW and it seems that with II having thousands of RPers, it is extremely hard to get even a fraction of these nations into a single RP. Not even Operational Hellfire, which had a lot of people and tons of respectable RPers in it, wasn't a WW. Sorry to dissappoint you guys. :(

Hey Space Union, are you going to join A Passion Play?

Hey Space Union, are you going to join A Passion Play?

Sure, but still waiting for my que to come in. ;)

I'd like to sign up Topal. Ok its pretty small, so I cant be an aggresive bad guy, but maybe some island/country (e.g. Belgium style in WW1) In the way of the spear head of the attack. I could fight vietnam style in the forrests (as opposed to jungles.) Or I could try reactivating my big old bad nation Frozopia. Hm.

At the same time I both respect and acknowledge what you guys are saying about this never being a proper world war and all that. I agree with what you're saying (I was around for some of the later world wars, I know what they were like), but at the same time, hey - No harm in trying, right?

I don't like or respect role plays that are born through out of character planning instead of in character actions taken by players without knowledge of the instigation of a world war.

There have been plenty of good roleplays born from OOC planning. Take my war w/ Tocrowkia for an example.

There have been plenty of good roleplays born from OOC planning. Take my war w/ Tocrowkia for an example.


But nothing that has been recognized to be grand by the international community. And, all wars need some sort of OOC prepping; but I'm talking about wars that are born purely from OOC.

Not to rain on anyone's parade...

However, with all the numbers of alliances today and the nature of war on NS, there can never be a war large enough to be considered a "World War."

First of all, it cannot be done well. There is no way to keep track of enough nations in a war that size.

Second, you can get 200 nations together and say there's a world war, but there will still be thousands uneffected. To them, this life-changing event doesn't matter at all.

Third, "World" doesn't mean big anymore. Myself, I just completed a 8+ World War that was well-written, but only effective because it had a total of two or three main participants. The fact remains, the Earth isn't the end all anymore, its not the biggest battleground. NS is as expansive as the Universe.

...and also...

I don't like or respect role plays that are born through out of character planning instead of in character

That may be the stupidest thing I've seen in II. Do you want examples of some damn good RP's that were "born" through OOC planning?

sounds like a fairly strange statement, how do you know if a war has been planned Private OOCly via TG MS or other methods?

That may be the stupidest thing I've seen in II. Do you want examples of some damn good RP's that were "born" through OOC planning?

Erm...you want me to link you to my last few wars? Prime examples.

That may be the stupidest thing I've seen in II. Do you want examples of some damn good RP's that were "born" through OOC planning?

You do a good job at putting things bluntly, but you miss the point. There never a dispute of how good the prose can be - hell, you can bring an RP out of your ass with very good, or perfect, prose - but you will never get a respected and widely endorsed world war, or well known war, through purely out of character planning, because it is more interesting to have a war sprout out of in character, role played, events without a premonition of the world war. Like AMF put it in the other thread, "World Wars just happen."

Does the use of World in world war matter? Better than "Moderately large, maybe not huge but more than usual war"

Erm...you want me to link you to my last few wars? Prime examples.

Well, tbh, Hellfire also sprung from your extension of oceanic claims, while the Kraven war started with you running supplies to his country and him turning on you.

Well, tbh, Hellfire also sprung from your extension of oceanic claims, while the Kraven war started with you running supplies to his country and him turning on you.

Yes, both sprung from IC actions.

Hellfire wasn't even supposed to be against Praetonia and Hogsweat, it was supposed to be against someone else to be honest. Shows how IC actions can produce unpredictable results.

Does the use of World in world war matter? Better than "Moderately large, maybe not huge but more than usual war"

Well, we really don't have a map of the NS world; I got a thread going, but I can't start on it until I get back on my other computer. The First World War and Second World War, in real life, can only be considered world wars because they were fought on all major continents of the world, with belligerents placed on all major continents of the world [Asia, Europe, Africa, North America and South America]. Obviously, on NS you can't claim that...so I guess a world war can only fit into terminology through common agreement post-bellum and through the fact that you have major powers participating in the war. Operation Hellfire got close, but with its abrupt end it can't really attempt to be classified as such.

sounds like a fairly strange statement, how do you know if a war has been planned Private OOCly via TG MS or other methods?

Must be something about this thread...

Because if I see OOC threads planning them, or if I am, in fact, involved, I know.

You do a good job at putting things bluntly, but you miss the point. There never a dispute of how good the prose can be - hell, you can bring an RP out of your ass with very good, or perfect, prose - but you will never get a respected and widely endorsed world war, or well known war, through purely out of character planning, because it is more interesting to have a war sprout out of in character, role played, events without a premonition of the world war. Like AMF put it in the other thread, "World Wars just happen."

Perhaps the most upsetting thing is the fact that you use the word "war" and "roleplay" as synonyms.

Perhaps the most upsetting thing is the fact that you use the word "war" and "roleplay" as synonyms.

Come now Steel, some of your 'points' are becomming quite silly.

Perhaps the most upsetting thing is the fact that you use the word "war" and "roleplay" as synonyms.


:rolleyes: Look, if you're going to argue don't look for irrelevent points to argue, becuase it really fails to help your case. In the context we're talking about, a WORLD WAR (just in case you failed to notice the thread title), war is synonym to roleplay, since this is speaking about the ROLEPLAYING OF A WORLD WAR.

Come now Steel, some of your 'points' are becomming quite silly.

There's nothing silly about the number of RP's in II that are wars. By all accounts, Earth should have been destroyed long ago due to the constant fighting across its landmasses. But no one roleplays that, even going as far as creating new Earths because "someone else had claimed their country." But now, these people are trying to plan what? Oh...another war. Go figure. The whole thing is a sham.


Look, if you're going to argue don't look for irrelevent points to argue, becuase it really fails to help your case. In the context we're talking about, a WORLD WAR (just in case you failed to notice the thread title), war is synonym to roleplay, since this is speaking about the ROLEPLAYING OF A WORLD WAR.

Don't try to tell me that what we're talking about is on topic here. My presence in this thread is in response to the statement you made:

I don't like or respect role plays that are born through out of character planning instead of in character actions taken by players without knowledge of the instigation of a world war.

Now, either you meant all roleplays, which would be ridiculous, or you meant wars (using roleplays as a synonym) which is rather upsetting given the nature of II.

Hey, Mac do you got a link to your Passion Play OOC thread? I did a search and couldn't find it. Thanks :)

It's irrelevent; the fact of the matter is that the thread is on the topic of a world war, so naturally everything that is said within the topic thread should be considered contextual to the world war. Apologies if I ruined the term roleplaying, but I meant roleplay as a word for war roleplaying. Now, to avoid devolving the thread on to an argument on what the word 'roleplay' should 'technically' refer to, let's get back on topic.

There's nothing silly about the number of RP's in II that are wars. By all accounts, Earth should have been destroyed long ago due to the constant fighting across its landmasses. But no one roleplays that, even going as far as creating new Earths because "someone else had claimed their country." But now, these people are trying to plan what? Oh...another war. Go figure. The whole thing is a sham.


I really don't see you around II enough to be any sort of judge as to what happens here, no offense intended.

I see just as many character/nation development/diplomatic RP as I do war RP in II, and relying on the age old sterotypes as proof is downright silly. This is not the same II of 2 years ago, and it's actually quite annoying that some NSers still think this way. II has evolved into a decent and enjoyable place to RP, regardless of what anyone may think.

And as far as Earth's go, who care? Nobody forces anyone to read the Earth threads, and complaining about them makes as much sense as me complaining about the massived amount of sports threads in NS.

Hey, Mac do you got a link to your Passion Play OOC thread? I did a search and couldn't find it. Thanks :)

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=439156

Add me on to MSN; jonathan.catalan@gmail.com

I can't comment on how good OOC planned wars are, because I've not been part of one, but I can say that wars driven unplanned from IC events are quite exciting.

The Kraven Wars, at least from when I became involved in them, have been pretty much entirely off the cuff and very interesting in my opinion.

Anyway for a world war, what you need is several things. Firstly, you need a complex yet dangerous series of alliances. Secondly, you need a flashpoint, which can be anything. Thirdly, you need multiple theaters. This can be done.

yay someone listened to me! (in your face silent majority)

I think a bad vs. good won't work because even now you can see most people would rather be good

how about joint claims on the same (uninhabited so we don't get people asking the for a vote) island players can pick either side to support the island will have rich supplies of lets say platinum or even military importance to both sides this will make negotiation impossible and lead to a Falkland like conflict

Now to break the military exclusion agreement that will be made a ship will attack outside the zone due to some location confusion the other alliance will overreact and launch a larger attack and so on so forth

sign me up for evil

Finally someone who brought this thread back to its planning.

I really don't see you around II enough to be any sort of judge as to what happens here, no offense intended.

I see just as many character/nation development/diplomatic RP as I do war RP in II, and relying on the age old sterotypes as proof is downright silly. This is not the same II of 2 years ago, and it's actually quite annoying that some NSers still think this way. II has evolved into a decent and enjoyable place to RP, regardless of what anyone may think.

And as far as Earth's go, who care? Nobody forces anyone to read the Earth threads, and complaining about them makes as much sense as me complaining about the massived amount of sports threads in NS.

No offense taken, although I have to point out that you don't have to post to be "around" a forum.

The "age old stereotypes" hold more weight than you may be willing to admit. Just because you, AMF, hold character oriented RPs in II does not make it any more or less likely, on average, to have such events. You're right, it is not the same II as of 2 years ago, but 2 years ago was just around the formation of the split roleplaying forums, and neither had any identity. As for stat wankers, war mongerers, and n00bs...the common stereotypes...they've gotten better, but the difference is still obvious.

And on the Earths..."who cares" is a pretty good description. I was just using it as an example of what's wrong, imo, in II. That's not to say that there aren't things wrong with NS either though.

Not to mention that bad and good are inherently terms that arise from a certain point of view. For example, to the Germans of the Reich, and many Germans today, and even non-Germans, the Third Reich was not bad. In their point of view, global Communism is evil. All the while, the Western Allies (at the time; discounting the developing relationship between NATO and WP) considered the Reich an evil enterprise, and themselves the 'good' side. So, I really don't suggest using good and evil. A good example, although the role play went awry, was RWC and NATO (on NS, mind you). NATO considered the RWC evil, and the RWC likewise to NATO. None were, within themselves, evil.

Finally someone who brought this thread back to its planning.

Yes, I'm getting very sick of the bitter arguments.

The use of good and evil is used, at least I think, just too define two sides. Its better than saying A and B.

Are we actually arguing about the superiority of NationStates over International Incidents?

Not to mention that bad and good are inherently terms that arise from a certain point of view. For example, to the Germans of the Reich, and many Germans today, and even non-Germans, the Third Reich was not bad. In their point of view, global Communism is evil. All the while, the Western Allies (at the time; discounting the developing relationship between NATO and WP) considered the Reich an evil enterprise, and themselves the 'good' side. So, I really don't suggest using good and evil. A good example, although the role play went awry, was RWC and NATO (on NS, mind you). NATO considered the RWC evil, and the RWC likewise to NATO. None were, within themselves, evil.

That's why I'm considering changing them to "Allied 1" and "Allied 2." Or something along those lines.

The use of good and evil is used, at least I think, just too define two sides. Its better than saying A and B.

Better to go with two political points of view. In fact, why not create some back planning for the war? Why it happened, who started it?

I think a bad vs. good won't work

As a bystander, I have to agree with you.

Bad vs. good is too basic, too elementary, too cliche, too golden hero boy vs. mustache-twirling villan, etc. Reality is lived in the "grey" so to say, where the good guys have dark secrets and the bad guys have good points in what they're saying and doing.

It would be far more interesting, for your sake, to simply have different sides. No evil, no good. Let people who aren't involved, like myself, decided who's viewpoint is "better" or whatnot. Just like WWII, I don't like axis worldwide control or genocide, so I think that the Allies had a better viewpoint or side in the war. To me, the Allies were the good guys. To Hitler, they were the bad guys.

Well that is the whole point of this thread.

In fact, why not create some back planning for the war? Why it happened, who started it?

That's the very thing that you said you are opposed to.

Do you try to have arguments?

That's the very thing that you said you are opposed to.

Funny how things work out. Too bad he won't respect this RP after people take measures to make it better.

Sup guys,

Just looked at this and I was wondering if someone could make some links for world maps, theatre maps, and production based on the nseconomy site (look at my "beat this nationstate!" link, yes there's a long load time).

If this works, I'd like a position like Japan in WW1 or Isengard before the Third Age in LOtR

Yes, I'm opposed to it; but it's hard to avoid in a thread that's destined to be the OOC playground for ideas to start a war. I never said I supported the thread; I'm just offering my help since there's really no other way to approach this idea.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=439156

Add me on to MSN; jonathan.catalan@gmail.com

Thanks but what's your MSN email address?

No offense taken, although I have to point out that you don't have to post to be "around" a forum.

The "age old stereotypes" hold more weight than you may be willing to admit. Just because you, AMF, hold character oriented RPs in II does not make it any more or less likely, on average, to have such events. You're right, it is not the same II as of 2 years ago, but 2 years ago was just around the formation of the split roleplaying forums, and neither had any identity. As for stat wankers, war mongerers, and n00bs...the common stereotypes...they've gotten better, but the difference is still obvious.

And on the Earths..."who cares" is a pretty good description. I was just using it as an example of what's wrong, imo, in II. That's not to say that there aren't things wrong with NS either though.

Yes, you do sort of have to be here day in and day out to get a true feeling for what happens here. Dropping in ever so often doesn't do much other than give you an idea of what happened that day.

And no, the age old sterotypes are untrue in today's II, and bringing them up yet again is not only annoying, but disrespectful to the numerous individuals that have worked hard to make II what it is today.

And for the record, there are plenty of character RPers in II. To say that I am the only one is misinformed at best. In fact, I may not even be considered the premier character RPer in II anymore, because over the past 8 months there has been a major shift towards character development and RP. Being here exclusively, I know this.

In my mind there is no difference between the forums, because each have their upsides and downsides. I could write several paragraphs about what I see wrong with NS, but there really is no point. Just as there is no point complaining about what is wrong with II.

That's it.

Yes, you do sort of have to be here day in and day out to get a true feeling for what happens here. Dropping in ever so often doesn't do much other than give you an idea of what happened that day.

And no, the age old sterotypes are untrue in today's II, and bringing them up yet again is not only annoying, but disrespectful to the numerous individuals that have worked hard to make II what it is today.

And for the record, there are plenty of character RPers in II. To say that I am the only one is misinformed at best. In fact, I may not even be considered the premier character RPer in II anymore, because over the past 8 months there has been a major shift towards character development and RP. Being here exclusively, I know this.

In my mind there is no difference between the forums, because each have their upsides and downsides. I could write several paragraphs about what I see wrong with NS, but there really is no point. Just as there is no point complaining about what is wrong with II.

Eh...agree to disagree. Our opinions of II are simply contradictory. Don't want to troll or just bicker mindlessly.

Back when WW4 and WW5 broke out, there were A LOT of participants. At the time NS and II had pretty much the same players that bounced between the two forumsDid International Incidents even exist for WWIV and WWV? :eek:

Damn... must be getting old... NS eras are blurring...

Did International Incidents even exist for WWIV and WWV? :eek:

Damn... must be getting old... NS eras are blurring...

Haha...I would like to know when the split happened...but I think they were split for those two events...although I swear that there were more than one event that carried those titles. (more than one WWIVs and whatnot.)

Did International Incidents even exist for WWIV and WWV? :eek:

Damn... must be getting old... NS eras are blurring...

I believe II was just starting out, though it will be impossible to tell because all the WW threads have been purged.

perhaps we could divide the whole of I.I by getting storefronts involved and pushing neutral nations into it by siding with rival groups

- if we could get storefronts involved we could fight with very different weapons and very different tactics which would cause an arms race seen in pretty much every war in history

- if we have neutral nations we can try to make them join either side making the war much bitterer and longer (also causing the original nations to keep fighting past the point were economic collapse looms)

Also at the end of the war we could kick in a depression so even the winners end up totally losing the bubbling pot of hate would lead us into another war when it becomes necessary

That's it.

It doesn't seem to register your name when I try to add you to my contacts.:confused:

It doesn't seem to register your name when I try to add you to my contacts.:confused:

Bah, stupid me. I gave you my email; I used to have an old email that now I use simply for MSN. puto_poeta@hotmail.com

perhaps we could divide the whole of I.I by getting storefronts involved and pushing neutral nations into it by siding with rival groups

- if we could get storefronts involved we could fight with very different weapons and very different tactics which would cause an arms race seen in pretty much every war in history

- if we have neutral nations we can try to make them join either side making the war much bitterer and longer (also causing the original nations to keep fighting past the point were economic collapse looms)

Also at the end of the war we could kick in a depression so even the winners end up totally losing the bubbling pot of hate would lead us into another war when it becomes necessary

Yes, back into the brainstorming. :p

I'm not sure if getting storefronts in could be feasible; I never would have thought of that, though. It's worth a try. Maybe get DMG's in.

Funny how things work out. Too bad he won't respect this RP after people take measures to make it better.

was that aimed at me?

was that aimed at me?

nope

perhaps we should split it all the way down to East and West cold war technology that way even are supply trucks will be different (and railroads)

Elyria-Lorain would like to be involved as a neutral-becoming-good nation.

Elyria-Lorain would like to be involved as a neutral-becoming-good nation.

that would depend on what your nation thinks is the good side any ideas that would split the world ideologically will be welcomed

that would depend on what your nation thinks is the good side any ideas that would split the world ideologically will be welcomed

I would think that the touchiest split would be capitalism vs. communism/marxism/any far-left notions.

that would depend on what your nation thinks is the good side any ideas that would split the world ideologically will be welcomed


Since Elyria-Lorain is a constitutional tetrarchy valuing individual citizen's rights, and is a non-imperialistic, agri-capitalist country, we would consider "good" those nations which stand for similar values.

perhaps we should split it all the way down to East and West cold war technology that way even are supply trucks will be different (and railroads)See, I think this is why people are against the idea of a pre-fab war (for lack of a better phrase): you're scrambling for a reason where none exists. In all honesty, you'd be better off not even bothering with a reason and just having "instigators" and "resisters" or something like that.

Good/Evil is cliche, and East/West sounds more like a historical sim than anything.

That's not to say that wars conceived of out of character can't work. I've been involved in a war that started in April of 04 that was plotted and planned out of character. Granted, it's more limited in scope than a supposed World War, but it can be done.

perhaps we could divide the whole of I.I by getting storefronts involved and pushing neutral nations into it by siding with rival groups

- if we could get storefronts involved we could fight with very different weapons and very different tactics which would cause an arms race seen in pretty much every war in history

- if we have neutral nations we can try to make them join either side making the war much bitterer and longer (also causing the original nations to keep fighting past the point were economic collapse looms)

Also at the end of the war we could kick in a depression so even the winners end up totally losing the bubbling pot of hate would lead us into another war when it becomes necessary


Well then, I'm defiantly not joining. Instead, I shall wait until everyone has burned them selves out, and then, invade all the participants.

*Evil Military Drum/Rock Guitar Music plays*

Dammit! I wanna join badly, but am already in a war.

Well then, I'm defiantly not joining. Instead, I shall wait until everyone has burned them selves out, and then, invade all the participants.

*Evil Military Drum/Rock Guitar Music plays*

Hmmm...you seem very deadset on not having your nation destroyed. What's the matter with you? ;)

Hey, c'mon, I'm willing to have my economy destroyed. I know the feeling; you get addicted to NS, and you keep imagining your nation as real, and you people as real, too. Then you get crazed with wild, foaming-at-the-mouth overprotective mother-type instincts, and refuse to have a nation do anything to your citizens and cities. Well, it's RPing, so you could have your nation rebuild itself in a week, if you want. Your economy could suddenly be filled with life again, all in another week. Sometimes, we have to destroy your nations to remind ourselves that we're not all-powerful.

Dammit! I wanna join badly, but am already in a war.

Hell, I'm in a war too; we've proved from all of our arguments that this isn't gonna happen overnight.;)

Leapfrogging off of some ideas from Guffingford's thread about II, I'm restarting the old, and much fantasized about, idea of a massive, NS world war.

Alright then: The sides could be devided as such; Good, Evil, and Neutral. Naturally, the war would be instigated by an evil nation, but I'm going to leave the actual cause of the war open, so the brilliant minds of II can take over and offer suggestions. But, however, it should be good enough so that a LOT of nations can join. An attempt at world conquest usually does it, only a little more...complex than that. Like I said, you guys are better at this than me.

Now sign up will be as follows: Sign up in whatever side you would like. We will most likely bse the sides on political views, and such and such. Or, if you want to remain neutral for a part of the war, and see which side you like better as it progresses, that's fine too. I don't know just how many people are going to sign up, so I won't set a limit just yet to how many nations can enter.

Allied 1


Allied 2


Neutrals
Northern Sushi
Novacom
Kyleslavia
Xeraph
Elyria-Lorain


Interested Audience
Tocrowkia

I'm wiping the slate clean, as the idea needed reforms, and the sides were changed. So, you can resign-up, once we hash out the sides, and what is going on in their governments.

Like I said, much of this will be open for suggestion, so feel free to comment, air concerns, or savagely criticize. I'm not well trained in the world of politics, so clue me in in which side you think should hold what political view.


What are the qualifications for Allied 1 and Allied 2? Good guys are 1 and Bad Guys are 2?

What are the qualifications for Allied 1 and Allied 2? Good guys are 1 and Bad Guys are 2?

That's the thing; we don't know yet. It'll probably be based on government style, or just a world domination conquest.

I'm interested..Throw me in on whatever side you feel like.

That's the thing; we don't know yet. It'll probably be based on government style, or just a world domination conquest.


Gotcha....the Black Katanas are quasi-barbaric techno blood-thirsty cannibal aggressors with high-tech capabilities. Sort of a animal- skin clad Klingon bunch of imperialists. Government type is constantly shifting due to regular assassination of it's head honcho, but is basically a trouble-maker.

I'm interested..Throw me in on whatever side you feel like.

The sides are gonna be established sometime. I'll put you in Neutral for now.

Hmmm...been thinking about sides. Put me down with the bad guys. These Katana dudes sound like theyr'e fun to play with.

Put me down for Alliance 2.

Interesting how many of the larger nations aren’t getting involved *clucks like a chicken*

Perhaps we should wait for more nations to get involved before we set any scenario/teams

Interesting how many of the larger nations aren’t getting involved *clucks like a chicken*

Perhaps we should wait for more nations to get involved before we set any scenario/teams

This sort of RP has always drawn more newbies looking to make a name for themselves as opposed to older, more experienced RPers.

Put me down for Alliance 2.
I don't understand how people can want to be part of an alliance that they do not even know what they are fighting for.

I would like to be a neutral nation

Also, instead of maps, why doesn't everyone just state whether they have a shoreline, mountains, etc? Keeps it simpler. Nothing is as frustrating as landing forces on a beach when the nation being attacked winds up being land-locked a few posts later.

I like this idea.

I think for the time being we should do away with alliances altogether. Just have a list of participants, then two (or more) of them have a dispute and get in a war over it, and the rest of us take sides depending on what happens in the war. Who commits atrocities, who doesn't, who stands for what, who does what, etc. That way we'll get a cleaner split along personal and ideological differences rather than "I chose this side so I'm on this side".

I think for the time being we should do away with alliances altogether. Just have a list of participants, then two (or more) of them have a dispute and get in a war over it, and the rest of us take sides depending on what happens in the war. Who commits atrocities, who doesn't, who stands for what, who does what, etc. That way we'll get a cleaner split along personal and ideological differences rather than "I chose this side so I'm on this side".
But you should also be allowed to choose neutral ahead of time. Northern Sushi wishes to be designated as neutral and make decisions later without risk of some random attack.

Well I imagine being neutral would come more from roleplaying staying neutral than from anything else. Stating you're neutral so people can't attack you because that's what you claimed as your role in the game just seems stupid to me. In such a version as I outlined above, nations that wanted to be neutral would remain neutral by not joining either side, and possibly adding in IC posts of their nation staying neutral.

Well I imagine being neutral would come more from roleplaying staying neutral than from anything else. Stating you're neutral so people can't attack you because that's what you claimed as your role in the game just seems stupid to me. In such a version as I outlined above, nations that wanted to be neutral would remain neutral by not joining either side, and possibly adding in IC posts of their nation staying neutral.
But in the intrest of smaller nations and newbs, I think neutrality should be a prior option to prevent say a newb attacking another newb for no reason.

IMHO, allow nations to declare their neutrality. But, this is not some magic wall. Countries can attack nutrals, but keep in mind the terrible consequences of such an act. It would, in fact, be a very good way to spin a world war out of an initial conflict.

By all means, allow people an IC declaration of neutrality, but bear in mind that neutral nations have been attacked many times before in real life and in NS. The fact that you declared your neutrality doesn't protect you from a ballistic missile strike, if someone should decide to launch one against you.

The bottom line is, by all means declare neutrality. But if you get attacked, you've been attacked, and then must deal with it accordingly and In Character above all else.

How about born again SATO versus the Reich or any Nazis?

IMHO, allow nations to declare their neutrality. But, this is not some magic wall. Countries can attack nutrals, but keep in mind the terrible consequences of such an act. It would, in fact, be a very good way to spin a world war out of an initial conflict.
I agree with N Y C. It provides security, yet an exciting RP.

I agree with N Y C. It provides security, yet an exciting RP.
Yes it would make things exciting and interesting.

May our protectorates participate?

How about born again SATO versus the Reich or any Nazis?

Which Reich?

Which Reich?
I think he means Nazis. I think Findan's idea will take this RP down the wrong path.

I am willing to join the evil/neutral side, depending on what the evil side represents. Err or should I call it the bad side? Ah well... It depends on whats what.

Seeing two of my allies are listed as neutral in this upcoming war please put me down for neutral. From what I have been following on this thread if someone were to attack one of the neutral countries because of preexisting alliances you would have a pretty good sized war.
You may not be able to get a world war out of this, but you may get a large war with respectable RPing. you may just wish to change what you are calling the war.

I think for the time being we should do away with alliances altogether. Just have a list of participants, then two (or more) of them have a dispute and get in a war over it, and the rest of us take sides depending on what happens in the war. Who commits atrocities, who doesn't, who stands for what, who does what, etc. That way we'll get a cleaner split along personal and ideological differences rather than "I chose this side so I'm on this side".

Agreed

I'll be nuetral unless some of my allies join as another group then I'll stick with them.
My allies are Xharn and Mirkana.

Well then, put me on the participants' list please.

I think he means Nazis. I think Findan's idea will take this RP down the wrong path.
By the Reich Northern Sushi, Findan means the Nazi super alliance that used to dominate the NS world in days long past. It did merge, according to the NSwiki's info, with the infamous Global Dominion of Dictators Against Democracy (GDODAD) and Arda, to create Metus (this was under Rayne's coup'du'tat), one of the biggest super-alliances in NS history.

To get people brainstorming, here's a small list of why wars start (feel free to add on):
Terrorism
Alliances
Border incursions
Precieved weakness of the victim
Resources/territory
Ideological differences
Imperialism
Genocide/other government induced action seen as necessary to stop by invader
...

we should just vote on idea's, and with each vote we give an explanation. Most votes wins.

I would like to be on the Conservative Side, if not a Conservative Side, then a Democratic/Capitalist Side... If you dont have any of those sides yet, you people are SAD!

and 1 more reason why wars start
Terrorism
Alliances
Border incursions
Precieved weakness of the victim
Resources/territory
Ideological differences
Imperialism
Genocide/other government induced action seen as necessary to stop by invader
Pressure from ally to attack.

I'm interested in the world war. Sign me up as an neutural.

An alliance and pressure from an ally to attack are the same.

I would be willing to let my King get killed in order to start a War. Fourhearts doesn't really have any formal allies though.

By the Reich Northern Sushi, Findan means the Nazi super alliance that used to dominate the NS world in days long past. It did merge, according to the NSwiki's info, with the infamous Global Dominion of Dictators Against Democracy (GDODAD) and Arda, to create Metus (this was under Rayne's coup'du'tat), one of the biggest super-alliances in NS history.
Does this alliance still exist?

It [I assume you're refering to The Reich] does. But it is no longer the political, military and economic pact of titanic proportions. GDODAD had several incarnations, the most powerful were only its first and second attempts. Arda, founded by Melkor Unchained, still does, but as MU decided that he was finished with rping, it no longer is the hyperpower that it was. For more info, go read the Archives or go to the NSWiki.

To get people brainstorming, here's a small list of why wars start (feel free to add on):
Terrorism
Alliances
Border incursions
Precieved weakness of the victim
Resources/territory
Ideological differences
Imperialism
Genocide/other government induced action seen as necessary to stop by invader
...


Border incursions due to a perceived weakness. Small amount of mercenaries cross a river, sack and burn small villages, then a town, then a county seat, etc. Attacked nation calls for limited help. A couple of smaller nations respond. Another, somewhat larger, bad guy joins in the plunder. Escalation ensues....voila, a regional war growing into a hemispheric war, etc...

You forget a madman launching a nuclear attack. It doesn tahve to succeed, just be launched.

I would be willing to let my King get killed in order to start a War. Fourhearts doesn't really have any formal allies though.

We could set up an alliance between each other for the purposes of this RP.[/SUGGESTION]

Hell, I can already come up with personalized reasons for some participants to fight each other. This is good we're brainstorming. Anybody willing to have something bad happen to them in order to start the war (a la Fourhearts) please post so, so we can get this ball rolling.

Hell, I can already come up with personalized reasons for some participants to fight each other. This is good we're brainstorming. Anybody willing to have something bad happen to them in order to start the war (a la Fourhearts) please post so, so we can get this ball rolling.

Hey, I'm Imperialistic, and I have alot of, rather lossely held provinces all over the world. Perhaps a couple of nations band together and lead a conquest to take over my land. Seriously, I have about 35 million sq. miles in land altogether in my empire, who wouldn't want that? ;)

I dont care what the wars about (lol i know this post is not the slightest bit useful). I just want to fight some invaders in my forrests.

I don't think Imperialism should be the reason. I'm thinking a nation should just randomly invade a smaller nation to get things started. (kinda like WWII)

Well I volunteer my nation to be invaded.......

Hey, I'm Imperialistic, and I have alot of, rather lossely held provinces all over the world. Perhaps a couple of nations band together and lead a conquest to take over my land. Seriously, I have about 35 million sq. miles in land altogether in my empire, who wouldn't want that? ;)


35 million sq. miles? North America, in total, has just 9.5 million sq. miles. Just wondering.....:eek:

Maybe Comatica, acting as an imperialist, expansionist nation, tries to invade a smaller nation such as Topal in order to expand their territory, the way the imperialist nations used to do all the time in the 16-1800s. Of course, such a return to tradition wouldn't work in a modern world such as this one, public support turns against them, wars of retaliation, that sort of thing. Throw in some allies, and you have a fairly decent start.

Well I volunteer my nation to be invaded.......

Same here.

One more thing. I'm assuming that this is MT.

Comatica, would you be willing to invade somebody to get it started?

I'm a goody two shoes ultraliberal slightly socialist democracy that has a historey of standing up for nations in a run of bad luck. We're not that into wars, but a seemingly unprevoked assault would definitely make us want to help the victim.

Remember, however, that blatant imperialism is IMHO somewhat frowned upon. You'll need a slightly more developed backstory than that.

35 million sq. miles? North America, in total, has just 9.5 million sq. miles. Just wondering.....:eek:

Yup. I'm pretty damn expansive.

Maybe Comatica, acting as an imperialist, expansionist nation, tries to invade a smaller nation such as Topal in order to expand their territory, the way the imperialist nations used to do all the time in the 16-1800s. Of course, such a return to tradition wouldn't work in a modern world such as this one, public support turns against them, wars of retaliation, that sort of thing. Throw in some allies, and you have a fairly decent start.

Actually, that makes more sense than myself getting invaded by another nation. Although, my suggestion triggered a war between me and Tocrowkia, maybe it could work here. Dunno.

I think both sides shall be at blamed for something, not a good and evil side

NYC, because imperialism is frowned upon so much, wouldn't that make it more likely to start a war than something more developed and complicated?

Also, Topal, would you be willing to be invaded by Comatica to start this off? Just as an idea.

Remember, however, that blatant imperialism is IMHO somewhat frowned upon. You'll need a slightly more developed backstory than that.

Perhaps that the nation's land that I'm invading was once mine, but taken from me in WWII, and I never got it back. Then, throughout the course of 60 years, a small new nation formed on it, and I seize the opportunity to take it back, and it sets off a chain reaction.

1. NYC, because imperialism is frowned upon so much, wouldn't that make it more likely to start a war than something more developed and complicated?

2. Also, Topal, would you be willing to be invaded by Comatica to start this off? Just as an idea.
Your 1st point I disagree with.
Your 2nd point I agree with.

One more thing. I'm assuming that this is MT.

I hope so. :eek:

Although, I'd probably allow PMT nations in, too.

Excuse me, but who gives a shit why a war starts? Just so long as it does. How's about I have one of my "diplomats" piss on a revered statue of the Her Highness Isabella of Tocrowkia? That'll undoubtedly get the ball rolling!

Excuse me, but who gives a shit why a war starts? Just so long as it does. How's about I have one of my "diplomats" piss on a revered statue of the Her Highness Isabella of Tocrowkia? That'll undoubtedly get the ball rolling!



LMAO...that'd certainly be different.

Yew, but consider what a rediculous proposition that is. Besides, peeing on a statue is an insult, not a reason to start a war.

Excuse me, but who gives a shit why a war starts?
I do

Excuse me, but who gives a shit why a war starts? Just so long as it does. How's about I have one of my "diplomats" piss on a revered statue of the Her Highness Isabella of Tocrowkia? That'll undoubtedly get the ball rolling!

I'm not sure Tocrowkia is officially in this. S/He doesn't want the Tocrowkian Reich to be obliterated beyond recognition, which I don't fully understand. :p

Yew, but consider what a rediculous proposition that is. Besides, peeing on a statue is an insult, not a reason to start a war.


Very true. An insult that leads to an attempted arrest, which leads to a few people getting wounded on each side, diplomatic denunciations, a squad sent in to rescue someone somewhere, then a slowly escalating situation. Let's make it a little different than the usual excuses for beating the hell outta each other.

I'm not sure Tocrowkia is officially in this. S/He doesn't want the Tocrowkian Reich to be obliterated beyond recognition, which I don't fully understand. :p

OK, so I'll piss on any revered thing of any nation....doesn't matter. How about I piss on the grave of the leader of Topal's mother?

OK, so I'll piss on any revered thing of any nation....doesn't matter. How about I piss on the grave of the leader of Topal's mother?
If this is something you really want to do, you may go on the masoleum of King Harr the Great in Sushi.

Perhaps that the nation's land that I'm invading was once mine, but taken from me in WWII, and I never got it back. Then, throughout the course of 60 years, a small new nation formed on it, and I seize the opportunity to take it back, and it sets off a chain reaction.

*emphasized*

If this is something you really want to do, you may go on the masoleum of King Harr the Great in Sushi.


Sure, mausoleams are OK, too. Hell, if it's big enough, I could take a dump on it. Let's just get this war going!

ooc: why would I be in Northern Sushi?

*emphasized*


Actually, I like this a lot better than evacuating waste from my body. Sort of like in pre- WWII with Prussia, etc...

snip

I'd be fine with that, although we have to clear it with the invaded nation first (Topal for now, I believe, unless we get somebody else).

Sure, mausoleams are OK, too. Hell, if it's big enough, I could take a dump on it. Let's just get this war going!

ooc: why would I be in Northern Sushi?
Interested in applying for an embassy??? Come up with something else and i'll tell you if it's ok

Interested in applying for an embassy??? Come up with something else and i'll tell you if it's ok


It looks like some are leaning towards a re-taking of a former bit of territory, which is OK with me.

But perhaps a side post or two would work, too. I'm a 'bad guy', and your'e a 'good guy', and when the war break out, I'm in your nation talking about establishing an embassy. We take opposite sides, etc...

Remember fellas; ther can be more than one cause to this war. More causes means more fighting theaters.

Remember fellas; ther can be more than one cause to this war. More causes means more fighting theaters.
If the entire war is about imperialism I will not be happy. It needs complexity, and I'm willing to let sushi be a major player in another theatre of this war.

It would be helpful if both sides are clear cut. Democracy versus Dictatorships/Fascism kinda thing.

It would be helpful if both sides are clear cut. Democracy versus Dictatorships/Fascism kinda thing.
I disagree. If it is clear cut, it makes the story very simple. I think we need multiple sides, multiple reasons, and multiple theatres.

Well, as a thought, somebody could end up at war with Northern Sushi for the 'subjugation' of any nations that are their protectorates. I know some people (Including me) were posting IC posts condemning the Northern Sushi Commonwealth. We could probably set up another cause for war where somebody declares war on Northern Sushi for that.

put me on the intrest list.

i need to reform my military first and then have a look at some of the military theatres then i will most probably join. - I feel like taking war to the kosmos.

Sounds like a nice revival of II or death of some nations.

Is it too late to sign up for this?

I'm interested in being neutral!

Edit: And joining in at a later date maybe?

If the entire war is about imperialism I will not be happy. It needs complexity, and I'm willing to let sushi be a major player in another theatre of this war.

Precisely, my dear Watson!

Another thing: I said this earlier in the thread, in the midst of the bitter arguments, that there will definitely be more than one war thread. We could do a whole complex of them, each with a 'WWNS' in the thread title, like the Earths do.

Is it too late to sign up for this?

I'm interested in being neutral!

You got it.

Precisely, my dear Watson!

Another thing: I said this earlier in the thread, in the midst of the bitter arguments, that there will definitely be more than one war thread. We could do a whole complex of them, each with a 'WWNS' in the thread title, like the Earths do.

Why not just call it WWIII - and of course there should be more than one thread. It's madness to post it in one.

multiple threads for multiple conflicts - quite obvious

Well, as a thought, somebody could end up at war with Northern Sushi for the 'subjugation' of any nations that are their protectorates. I know some people (Including me) were posting IC posts condemning the Northern Sushi Commonwealth. We could probably set up another cause for war where somebody declares war on Northern Sushi for that.
That is imperialism, and that is not the direct reason Sushi wants to go to war. It could be an indirect reason though.

You got it.

Good good! I'll probably be dusting off my old factbook soon!

That is imperialism, and that is not the direct reason Sushi wants to go to war. It could be an indirect reason though.

I didn't say it was you going to war. I said it was someone else going to war with you.

I didn't say it was you going to war. I said it was someone else going to war with you.
I realize that, but I ask that Northern Sushi is regarded as a seperate theater with another problem. Any ideas?

Many nations have not as big a problem with Northern Sushi's commonwealth. But, if a nation alliied with the commonwealth was commiting REALLY LARGE SCALE genocide, that would give many nations, such as myself, an excuse to go to war, and opens up a whole new front.

Many nations have not as big a problem with Northern Sushi's commonwealth.

True, in IC only 2 nations complained, and OOC 1 other nation complained. Also in IC one additional nation told us they were not interested.

Many nations have not as big a problem with Northern Sushi's commonwealth. But, if a nation alliied with the commonwealth was commiting REALLY LARGE SCALE genocide, that would give many nations, such as myself, an excuse to go to war, and opens up a whole new front.
I have another idea. What about another nation conducting terror in Sushi.

Sign me up as a neutral, because I'll mostly be exporting arms and aircraft to participants.

Oh yeah, and I'll be attacking shipping from both sides with my submarines to keep the war going, and my profits high >_>

Sign me up as a neutral, because I'll mostly be exporting arms and aircraft to participants.

Oh yeah, and I'll be attacking shipping from both sides with my submarines to keep the war going, and my profits high >_>

Lol, consider it done.

I would like to participate

Intresting plot line i have set up for me.

At some point one side of the war draws up an operation to capture Krob engineers and scientists - similar to the events of 1946 with the Penemunde scientists. To turn the tide with a space based weapon system.

Intresting plot line i have set up for me.

At some point one side of the war draws up an operation to capture Krob engineers and scientists - similar to the events of 1946 with the Penemunde scientists.
This could be the theater Sushi may want to be in. But we won't be the ones catching the Krob scientists, but major maybe in some other way. Could Krob scientists be doing research in Sushi?

This could be the theater Sushi may want to be in. But we won't be the ones catching the Krob scientists, but major maybe in some other way. Could Krob scientists be doing research in Sushi?

Totally. some kind of multi nation space program. that leads on.

Totally. some kind of multi nation space program. that leads on.
ok, and they were maybe researching launch sites in our nations tropical forests?

Okay. So we have Sushi and Topal wanting to be attacked to get this thing going. Genocide on Sushi, cool. What do we perpetrate on Topal?

Oh, and correct me if I'm wrong, but myself and the Gray Legionaires are the only one's signed up to be "bad guys", right? If so, then we need to talk and come up w/a plan of attack.

What do we perpetrate on Topal?

I'm taking back my land that was lost in World War Two.

If scientists from multiple nations were in Northern Sushi for a space program, we could have it where something happens and they either die or aren't allowed to leave the nation, which provokes another theatre of warfare to retrieve multiple nations' top scientists.

yes a better line.

Krob scientists launching spacecraft into orbit. currently in winter so all avaliable launch sites are gone. Goes to northern sushi for tropical site. while there political situation rises and they try to leave. only to be blocked by an attacking coalition.

To be clear, I suggested one of Sushi's allies could commit genocide. That's what you were reiterating, right?

I'm taking back my land that was lost in World War Two.

Okay...so genocide on one country and reclamation on another. How about myself and the Grays launch a two-pronged attack on Sushi, and then Comatica uses the attack as an excuse to reclaim it's land?

Okay...so genocide on one country and reclamation on another. How about myself and the Grays launch a two-pronged attack on Sushi, and then Comatica uses the attack as an excuse to reclaim it's land?

I rather like this idea.

Okay...so genocide on one country and reclamation on another. How about myself and the Grays launch a two-pronged attack on Sushi, and then Comatica uses the attack as an excuse to reclaim it's land?

Sounds good. Comatica using the international confusion over the relatively unprovoked invasion of Sushi to reclaim lost land is another nice touch. Then genocide by either invading or defending forces in Sushi or Topal pulls in more and more people, alliances bring more and more stuff ... Sounds like a good catalyst.

To be clear, I suggested one of Sushi's allies could commit genocide. That's what you were reiterating, right?

Because of Sushi's multi-national scientific community, myself and the Grays launch a genocidal attack due to our extreme hate of multi-diversity, thereby giving Comatica an excuse for regaining it's lost territory (using my attack as a diversionary thing)

Because of Sushi's multi-national scientific community, myself and the Grays launch a genocidal attack due to our extreme hate of multi-diversity, thereby giving Comatica an excuse for regaining it's lost territory (using my attack as a diversionary thing)

Hell of a lot better than your pissing idea.

Is Topal alligned with Sushi then, making them weak if Sushi's in trouble? Sorry, must have missed something.

Okay. So we have Sushi and Topal wanting to be attacked to get this thing going. Genocide on Sushi, cool. What do we perpetrate on Topal?

Oh, and correct me if I'm wrong, but myself and the Gray Legionaires are the only one's signed up to be "bad guys", right? If so, then we need to talk and come up w/a plan of attack.
Incorrect. I meant that a major battle may occur in Sushi. I never gave direct approval for an attack. Plus, I like the multi-national space program idea better for my theatre.

Okay...so genocide on one country and reclamation on another. How about myself and the Grays launch a two-pronged attack on Sushi, and then Comatica uses the attack as an excuse to reclaim it's land?


Looks like I got here just in time....and BTW, it's the Grey Legions (just so there's no confusion..;) )

and the plot sounds really good.

Ok I tried to catch up on what i missed, but it was 3 pages so excuse me if I make a mistake.

I like the idea of (was is comatica?) someone launching an invasion on my (Island/mainland) due to WW2. However just so its clear, Topal was once part of Frozopia, so they took the land. But thats it. I look forward to fighting in the forrests a force probably 100 times my own size. Look forward to brainwashing children to turn them into killing machines if the war gets truly bitter. Hey it will destroy me in the long term, but who cares?

Is Topal alligned with Sushi then.
Nope, and it never will be.

Hell of a lot better than your pissing idea.


Yeah, but don't worry. I'll work the pissing thing in there somewhere.....

I still don't get: Why is an invasion of Sushi Comatica's excuse to attack Topal?

Could enviro terror be envolved, because a space program in the forests would be breaking a lot of enviro protection laws, but the our government and other nations involved continue with the program.

Really I would have to be allied with sushi. Right?

Because of Sushi's multi-national scientific community, myself and the Grays launch a genocidal attack due to our extreme hate of multi-diversity, thereby giving Comatica an excuse for regaining it's lost territory (using my attack as a diversionary thing)

This also gives an excuse to bring the multi-national science countries into the war because the whole reason for this theatre is the multi-national science program.

I still don't get: Why is an invasion of Sushi Comatica's excuse to attack Topal?


Because Comatica has been fuming for years over the unjust partitioning of it's former territory, and with all of the legalities now exhausted, the only way to reclaim it's lands is thru military means, but Comatica doesn't want to appear a unilateral aggressor, this is the excuse it's been waiting for for a long time.

See, I think this is why people are against the idea of a pre-fab war (for lack of a better phrase): you're scrambling for a reason where none exists. In all honesty, you'd be better off not even bothering with a reason and just having "instigators" and "resisters" or something like that.

Good/Evil is cliche, and East/West sounds more like a historical sim than anything.


I agree totally.

Oh please dont start this again.

Really I would have to be allied with sushi. Right?

No, because you're both being attacked by different people. It's like in WWII, one of you is China and one of you is France. At war with different people, but not allied even though basically on the same side

Really I would have to be allied with sushi. Right?
Exzcty from my understanding, that is why we need an alternative idea with Topal and Sushi and the space project. I was thinking another nation sponsors terror against the space program.

Really I would have to be allied with sushi. Right?


Not at the beginning....it's not necessary. Perhaps you could have a secret envoy/meeting thing forming an underground alliance....

Not at the beginning....it's not necessary. Perhaps you could have a secret envoy/meeting thing forming an underground alliance....
It still wouldn't work... Topals against the commonwealth union.

Who cares about that when war breaks out?

OK people. Listen up. We don't want to micromanage the reason we're going to war. Over planning this thing will suck the life right out of it. Let's keep the excuse for invading Sushi simple. Terrorists are cool, but let's wait a while before terrorists enter the fray. We have enough nations here right now to get the ball rolling.

Me and the Katanas will attack Sushi because we hate the diverse community of scientists. We don't give a rat's ass about the space program. We just don't like a whole lot of people from different lands coming together for peaceful means. Call us racists. Then Comatica goes after it's old territory. Let the escalation proceed....

OK people. Listen up. We don't want to micromanage the reason we're going to war. Over planning this thing will suck the life right out of it. Let's keep the excuse for invading Sushi simple. Terrorists are cool, but let's wait a while before terrorists enter the fray. We have enough nations here right now to get the ball rolling.

Me and the Katanas will attack Sushi because we hate the diverse community of scientists. We don't give a rat's ass about the space program. We just don't like a whole lot of people from different lands coming together for peaceful means. Call us racists. Then Comatica goes after it's old territory. Let the escalation proceed....
We like the part about you attacking us over the scientists, but we don't like the Comatica land calim part, and we still will not side with Topal, unless absolutly needed.

We like the part about you attacking us over the scientists, but we don't like the Comatica land calim part, and we still will not side with Topal, unless absolutly needed.

OK, so you don't side w/Topal. And perhaps we need only one thing to get this going. I just happen to like the Comatica claim thing because it will give me and the Katanas the chance to form an "Evil Axis" type thing. Maybe we can get a few more 'bad guys' on our side and expand the war. Shit, maybe we'll attack Comatica for their attack on Topal while we're attacking Sushi. Let's have fun w/this without overplanning.

OK, so you don't side w/Topal. And perhaps we need only one thing to get this going. I just happen to like the Comatica claim thing because it will give me and the Katanas the chance to form an "Evil Axis" type thing. Maybe we can get a few more 'bad guys' on our side and expand the war. Shit, maybe we'll attack Comatica for their attack on Topal while we're attacking Sushi. Let's have fun w/this without overplanning.
I like this better, but what if Comatica had its own space program, and saw our multi-national space program as competition. Any ideas on this?

My space program could be called "Hyley Ysegalu" meaning national friendship in Sushiian Symbol.

I like this better, but what if Comatica had its own space program, and saw our multi-national space program as competition. Any ideas on this?

My space program could be called "Hyley Ysegalu" meaning national friendship in Sushiian Symbol.


Space programs are ok. But we're attacking Sushi because we don't like diversity. And Comatica doesn't care about anybody's space program, just their former lands. Hell I have a space program. But this is MT with a bit of PT, not FT. Space is FT, so it shouldn't have anything to do with the situation.

Space programs are ok. But we're attacking Sushi because we don't like diversity. And Comatica doesn't care about anybody's space program, just their former lands. Hell I have a space program. But this is MT with a bit of PT, not FT. Space is FT, so it shouldn't have anything to do with the situation.
I am talking about MT space tech. And i'm talking only about Comatica's reason to enter this theatre, not yours. I am fine with your reason.

Perhaps, to escalate things, when I attack Topal, a liberal nation like N Y C steps in to defend him, then I attack N Y C. Then his allies step in, and, voila, shit hits the fan.

Perhaps, to escalate things, when I attack Topal, a liberal nation like N Y C steps in to defend him, then I attack N Y C. Then his allies step in, and, voila, shit hits the fan.
Will this be a seperate theater than the Sushi Space War theatre, or are they inter-linked more.

Will this be a seperate theater than the Sushi Space War theatre, or are they inter-linked more.

We could try to link them. Perhaps you are an ally of N Y C, and when I attack him too, you step in and help him retaliate. Everything could connect in a circle that way.

We could try to link them. Perhaps you are an ally of N Y C, and when I attack him too, you step in and help him retaliate. Everything could connect in a circle that way.
N Y C could help on the space program, that can link stuff up.

OK...sounds like a plan. Can we get everyone to agree that something along the lines of me and the Katanas will attack Sushi and Comatica will re-occupy their former lands now occupied by Topal, and that someone will object to it, and someone else will object to the attack on Sushi and then attack me and Katanas, and we'll strike back, and...and...etc?

I guess I could participate - only a minor part though. I have a tendency to post...late.

Katanas are ready to go. If Comatica will do the honors of creating a new thread, we'll be on our way. Oh, and let's use this thread for the OOC stuff. I hate clogging up the IC with OOC...

Oh, and let's use this thread for the OOC stuff. I hate clogging up the IC with OOC...
Good idea, and I agree

Right then, Questers, you're in. The thread title will have the 'WWNS' tag at the end, just to remind everyone for the third time.

Right then, Questers, you're in. The thread title will have the 'WWNS' tag at the end, just to remind everyone for the third time.
I think i'm no longer neutral.