War Plans

[Arminius]

We are woefully underprepared for any upcoming hostilities. Regardless of who we are fighting for/against, we should be clear about our aims, so that we can decide when we have achieved them. This will avoid the slow fade-out when the opposition have given up and we don't know how to react.

For example: expel Digg out of o2, o12. Make sure Digg splits into groups of no more than 50 members. Make sure Pantheon splits up back to its original alliances. Take n islands off Digg/Pantheon. Destroy Orcs. Whatever.

What do we want?

[AeroS]

Pantheon: All members fall back to original alliances.
DIGG: I don't care how many alliances they split into as long as half their membership is not

• Pantheon:

  All members fall back to original alliances.

  
  
• DIGG:

  I don't care how many alliances they split into as long as half their membership is not 'treatied/pacted' with the other half.

  
  
• Orc:

  Should be pushed into other alliances.. they have out lived their novelty

  
  
• KoM:

  If they preform well, we should consider greater access to the forums.

  
  

[Shendemiar]

Very important thread. Without objective its all just Merda!. (more later)

[Clausewitz]

While this is definitely a solid idea, I find it hard to put clear "Objectives" in advance of an operation. In my judgment, an objective should be fluid, and adapt with what is possible. Strict adherence to an objective that flies in the face of reality does no good (for example, Bush's objective of a strong, stable, unified Iraqi gov't in spite of all the evidence that this simply cannot happen - as the realm of possibility becomes clear, objectives need to adapt accordingly).

However, with that significant conditional in mind, I'll throw out the following:

DIGG - Reduced to a scope that they do not exceed the score of the #10 alliance by more than triple.
Pantheon - Reduced to a scope that they do not exceed the score of the #10 alliance by more than triple.
Orcs - Short of the emergence of strong leadership to keep their true to their once-noble values, disbandment.

[Shendemiar]

I would like to see us unallied in ww2.

[Ruku]

Really?! Why is that?

I was hoping we would merge again

[Clausewitz]

I think he just means being "free agents" rather than embedding ourselves to one side or the other.

[Ruku]

Ohhhhhh, silly me

[Clausewitz]

If it's a Pantheon v. DIGG straight fight, to be honest, I don't really see a place for us getting involved. However, if one side or the other starts calling in Pacts, then we may indeed find a place as a "balancing force".

[Ruku]

Lol at "Shits and Giggles"

[domhnall]

I say we attack which ever side is winning. If the whole server gets smashed up enough it could rejuvenate the whole thing.

[domhnall]

ruku said:

Lol at "Shits and Giggles"

I accidentally deleted what this was a reply too.

Proposed New Morkin Policy:

"Shits and giggles" is valid pretext for war.