WesWorld

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
When I joined one of the bits I was told was WWI wasn't as bad as historical, that it ended a bit earlier, the US wasn't involved, but others were, and they really hadn't worked out the details.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
.....and the discussion goes and will not lead to any result.

I´ve yet failled to see at least one other player moving, stating he is willing to accept a conflict without triggering all alliances, to probably loose men, material and land - just to get things rolling. And nobody stated he accepts to cancel any alliance for funs sake, to give us some leeway to work on a storyarc that will lead to some interesting bashing.

You can go one with this blabla alliance versus coughcough treaty partners all day but it will remain fruitless.

You guys have to move. Find a new mindset. Why spend all the time on fiddling with designs when there is no ultimate "test", no situation vessel x was not build for, no improvision and no results to get experience and lessons learned from? What purpose does it all serve when everybody is leaning back in his chair, feeling save because of all his powerful buddies?

The whole roleplaying thing is dead if there is no change. In that case, we will be back where we originally came from - pure design and discussion of technical details. But I´m not sure WW can live from that alone as it will be quite recurrent and probably even boring.

Think about it....

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
We need to come up with an alliance acronym for AWAY. Then it can be FAR vs. AWAY.

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
Overall, FAR is strongest in the pacific, doesn't need to be in the Atlantic as much. Russia fighting in Siberia would be a problem for Atlantis and France, while Atlantis in the Carrib sees the others out of place.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
True enough. At this point, I can't see anywhere in the world (except perhaps North America or Australia) where FAR won't want to pull out this doctrine. South America? Nope, Chile's there, might affect them, we're in. Africa? Nope, might affect French colonies, we're in. Europe? Nope, we're there already, we're in. Asia, nope, might affect French colonies, we're in. Australia proper and continental North America are really the only places they don't have a leg to stand on..... wait, continental North America has Quebec. Oh, might affect French speakers, we're in. Sheesh.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin

Try one fore NEAR, that works better, NEAR vs FAR, comeone Kirk! Your slipping!!

Quoted

Originally posted by The Rock Doctor
North Dakota versus South Dakota.

Two Dakotas enter, one Dakota leaves.

Quoted

I'm just saying we've all gotten worked up about Satsuma for 20 years but they haven't really done anything but bluff and bluster. The threat just isn't there and they would need a reason to start trouble now.