"cgb/csj Repatriation Compromise"
#41
Posted 03 February 2015 - 07:05 PM
#42
Posted 03 February 2015 - 07:13 PM
It shouldn't come down to trading planets... GB simply needs a PGI wormhole summoning in Kurita space.
SJ takes the options that are provided.... it is not the intent to screw GB of its path to Terra. The algorithm must hate GB.
#43
Posted 03 February 2015 - 07:31 PM
Deathlike, on 03 February 2015 - 07:13 PM, said:
It shouldn't come down to trading planets... GB simply needs a PGI wormhole summoning in Kurita space.
SJ takes the options that are provided.... it is not the intent to screw GB of its path to Terra. The algorithm must hate GB.
Wolf's need one for Steiner now too... they finally get an attack lane back, and CGB {LT-MOB-25} blocks it with a Steiner attack lane of their own in the same ceasefire...
The Algorithm needs an overhaul because it is ****** up right now...
#44
Posted 03 February 2015 - 11:42 PM
#45
Posted 04 February 2015 - 08:13 AM
As for the whole thing back up north with the unsanctioned attacks, personally I feel like you guys did us a favor, sure we lost a few planets but in the end you were able to close up a major hole in the territory that the FRR can no longer use to attack us from. For now we should probably just continue as we are since there is no way to effectively plan for anything. If in the future we find ourselves cut off by our Jaguar trothkin we could arrange for some fun skirmishes that would not go beyond reopening our corridor to Terra.
#46
Posted 04 February 2015 - 09:02 AM
#47
Posted 04 February 2015 - 12:10 PM
#48
Posted 04 February 2015 - 12:50 PM
Apostal Sinclair, on 03 February 2015 - 07:31 PM, said:
Wolf's need one for Steiner now too... they finally get an attack lane back, and CGB {LT-MOB-25} blocks it with a Steiner attack lane of their own in the same ceasefire...
The Algorithm needs an overhaul because it is ****** up right now...
Mordin Ashe, on 03 February 2015 - 11:42 PM, said:
At some level, we all realize there is both an algorithm AND a #ManInTheLoop.
And I am fine with that.
Whereas a Faction communal-consensus would have Clan Smoke Jaguar cut a dagger-sharp salient straight to Terra, the current algorithm-originated/#ManInTheLoop - approved, Attack options more closely replicate the Clans of Lore, where CSJ could be expected to be parochial and near-sighted enough to spend uncounted "gamer-hours" trying to wastefully cut off CGB's only viable Kurita Axis of Approach to Terra.
It is only the Spice of Lore being added into our game...
...and I have no problem with that.
We are free to rise above the petty, betrayals and parochialism of Lore and as I have advocated for, ensure (perhaps with a modicum of 228-inspired 12v12 CW-threshold combat first) that enough CSJ worlds are repatriated to CGB to ensure that ON CLAN ALONE is not driving on Terrra.
Ideally ALL four Clans would have viable Axis of Approach to Terra, thus compelling the Inner Sphere to parse-four-ways a FINITE pool of Marik, Liao and Davion Inner Sphere Common Defenders to HOLD Steiner, FRR and Kurita WORLDS while Steiner, FRR and Kurita Forces REMAIN ON THE ATTACK AGAINST CLANS 24/7.
Yes, there are MANY advanced tactical and even Operational Art facets of MWO CW yet to be fully realized, even though the hints of those possibilities are already tantalizingly present in nascent form/function.
#49
Posted 04 February 2015 - 01:55 PM
Angel Devereaux, on 04 February 2015 - 08:13 AM, said:
As for the whole thing back up north with the unsanctioned attacks, personally I feel like you guys did us a favor, sure we lost a few planets but in the end you were able to close up a major hole in the territory that the FRR can no longer use to attack us from. For now we should probably just continue as we are since there is no way to effectively plan for anything. If in the future we find ourselves cut off by our Jaguar trothkin we could arrange for some fun skirmishes that would not go beyond reopening our corridor to Terra.
100% Aff.
NAZGUULL, on 04 February 2015 - 09:02 AM, said:
I had hoped this would be communicated to the bulk of CGB's Loyalist gamer population.
100% (Salmon and Honey) Aff.
CyclonerM, on 04 February 2015 - 12:10 PM, said:
I agree... though in a sadomasochistic way, having the logarithm/#ManInTheLoop go so very "rogue" (like it currently is!!!) would make for some GREAT BattleTech-like PGI "Command Guidance" from our Non-Player-Character (NPC) of a Clan Smoke Jaguar KHAN.
Please consider...
IF these errant missions to basically rob CGB of its Invasion Corridor were some PGI NPC Smoke Jaguar KHAN Machiavellian-plot to position RUSS' (who better to play a power-mad IlKhan wannabe?) NPC to seize center stage and power of position in the race to Terra.
Now it would NOT reflect the CSJ PLAYER BASE desires, intentions and plans, but what can we do to counter RUSS' evil master plan for NPC Khan TRYHARD?
I am here tell you we could do what we are already doing, working out a mutually acceptable means of realigning Invasion Sectors to best afford a STRONG and MULTI-CLAN advance to Terra.
Please remember...
WHAT ONE CLAN ALONE WILL FAIL TO ACCOMPLISH, TWO OR MORE CLANS WORKING IN HARMONIOUS PURPOSE CAN (AND WILL) ACHIEVE WITH EASE.
Edited by Prussian Havoc, 04 February 2015 - 01:56 PM.
#50
Posted 04 February 2015 - 05:46 PM
Prussian Havoc, on 04 February 2015 - 01:55 PM, said:
Please consider...
IF these errant missions to basically rob CGB of its Invasion Corridor were some PGI NPC Smoke Jaguar KHAN Machiavellian-plot to position RUSS' (who better to play a power-mad IlKhan wannabe?) NPC to seize center stage and power of position in the race to Terra.
Now it would NOT reflect the CSJ PLAYER BASE desires, intentions and plans, but what can we do to counter RUSS' evil master plan for NPC Khan TRYHARD?
But if this was the case and the Khan of CSJ had these intentions then it would then leave no room for negociations with mutual aligned objectives and also any scope for Clan unity?
So as much as it might explain the non-sensical interpretation by PGI strategists with the algorythm it would not help to give credance to the allied relationship found between CGB and CSJ and the same time?
So you can't really use it as an apparent character based excuse for the seen strategical behaviour without making other initiatives by CSJ unrealistic can you?
Edited by Noesis, 04 February 2015 - 05:50 PM.
#51
Posted 04 February 2015 - 06:01 PM
Noesis, on 04 February 2015 - 05:46 PM, said:
But if this was the case and the Khan of CSJ had these intentions then it would then leave no room for negociations with mutual aligned objectives and also any scope for Clan unity?
So as much as it might explain the non-sensical interpretation by PGI strategists with the algorythm it would not help to give credance to the allied relationship found between CGB and CSJ and the same time?
So you can't really use it as an apparent character based excuse for the seen strategical behaviour without making other initiatives by CSJ unrealistic can you?
I failed to make myself clear, I apologize.
I have ALWAYS championed CGB /CSJ Peace.
My attempt at humor above went astray for some, it would now seem.
In no way am I trying to EXCUSE the wayward algorithm. By "HUMANIZING IT" I only attempt to work in one possible explanation as to why in Heaven CSJ's path to Terra would take such a deviant path.
It is quite unexplainable.
#52
Posted 04 February 2015 - 06:13 PM
Prussian Havoc, on 04 February 2015 - 06:01 PM, said:
Or there could be an element of truth in it as per the association with humour as a defense mechanism, even if intentions are to uphold the best of relations with CGB.
It is of course easy to see that the CSJ corridor shutting off CGB helping CSJ with the race to Terra and those objectives at the same time which is fortuitous to CSJ.
But do you then want to rub CGB's nose in it as per your apparent attempt to humanise things? Since this is then what you are actually doing even if you then think it can be trivialised for convenience?
#53
Posted 04 February 2015 - 06:26 PM
'Next Stop Tharkad!'
#55
Posted 05 February 2015 - 12:48 AM
Noesis, on 04 February 2015 - 06:13 PM, said:
Brother Noesis, trivializing a game is the furthest thing from my mind... trying to rationalize the intent of the PGI employee who is the Logarithm's "Man in the Loop" is very important in my opinion.
Please consider...
If we, by observation of the planets selected for CSJ Offensives AND Defenses, can discern what our supposed CSJ-PGI-NPC-Khan is attempting to realize, we as either work to further realize it OR (as is more likely) actively work to counter it.
Just being able to discern that the CSJ-portion of the algorithm WILL ALWAYS look to interfere with CGB is HIGHLY VALUABLE as we will then know that we need to set up a STANDING accord with CGB to repatriate CONTINUAL worlds to each other if the wildly irresponsible behavior of the CSJ-PGI-NPC-Khan has rightly and properly incurred the rather of the CGB-PGI-NPC-Khan.
IF this is very un-Khan-like behavior becomes mutual, the algorithm will soon tie itself in knots.
So you see, it is not an attempt a trivialization but an attempt to parse meaning from this #RoadToSteinerAndTharkad that we find ourselves on.
#56
Posted 05 February 2015 - 01:00 AM
Noesis, on 03 February 2015 - 12:59 AM, said:
As I understand it, it is the use of mutual defense aggreements to strengthen the push to terra against the IS.
Not sure how that fits into your colorfull metaphor, and I'm pretty sure that is the intention as laid out by Prussian.
Agreed. We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.
#57
Posted 05 February 2015 - 01:02 AM
Can I suggest "DevKhan", quiaff?
I suggest despite the terminology however that the Bears will cut through CSJ to earn their Sushi rights to complement the Salmon, which in turn seemingly would suggest as you say that CSJ could push to Steiner in the search of good Bratwurst?
I think then with CSJ and CGB sharing many IS fronts much satiation can then occur despite the dietry suggestions imposed by the DevKhans.
Edited by Noesis, 05 February 2015 - 01:05 AM.
#58
Posted 05 February 2015 - 01:23 AM
#59
Posted 05 February 2015 - 06:25 AM
Noesis, on 05 February 2015 - 01:02 AM, said:
It did not occur to me until I saw you explain it "just so" but a #StriatedApproach to interleaving Clan Space will serve to establish natural and mutually defensible territorial "Firebreaks." For example IF Clan Ghost Bear Mercenaries do indeed separate out a small portion of Clan Smoke Jaguar Space by cutting through at Tanh Linh (which is now in CGB possession) the portion of CSJ that eventually comes into contact with House Steiner will be quite akin to the Marik pocket which developed in Kurita Space - capable of Attack but limiting Clan vulnerability because an enemy could never follow that small strip of CSJ Space BACK to the main are of CSJ Space WITHOUT risking #TotalWar with CGB.
Now THAT presents some interesting possibilities...
Thank you my Dark Born brother.
#60
Posted 05 February 2015 - 06:36 AM
Mordin Ashe, on 05 February 2015 - 01:23 AM, said:
http://m.imgur.com/a/wd56k
Let us FIRST review the record of those who WITHOUT COORDINATION, UNILATERALLY decided to preempt all efforts at a negotiated repatriation of Clan Ghost Bear planets.
While I completely understand the current... impasse between 228 and MercStar, what concerns me are the 12-man ACES drops on Tanh Linh...
http://m.imgur.com/a/wd56k
...the 12-man CI drops on Tanh Linh...
http://m.imgur.com/a/wd56k
...and most DAMNING of all...
http://m.imgur.com/a/wd56k
...the eight-man CGBI drops on Yanh Linh yesterday.
Good Mordin Ashe... I can understand that a Faction finds it difficult to direct the actions of its Mercenary Allies, but when one can not even account for the actions of a good portion of one's OWN Unit...
...well THAT beggars ANY CREDIBILITY for a CGBI spokesman now doesn't it?
I sincerely hope there is an explanation for this... but I begin to glimpse good Sir, that there is NOT.
What say you, Good Mordin Ashe? Perhaps you were in the dark as to your Unit's official stance?
Edited by Prussian Havoc, 05 February 2015 - 06:37 AM.
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users