Mogar Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 (edited) Those who were fortunate enough to be elected to the Maroon senate to represent our color sphere for the month of May are as follows: 1) Benfica-Land [Ruler: Ninja] [Alliance: Nordreich] 2/1/2007 [Team: Maroon (Since 3/1/2014)] 110 votes 2) Northern Empire [Ruler: Northern Empire] [Alliance: The Templar Knights] 10/23/2008 [Team: Maroon (Since 10/23/2008)] 99 votes 3) Creepville [Ruler: Steve Buscemi] [Alliance: Non Grata] 2/7/2007 [Team: Maroon (Since 9/25/2011)] 68 votes 4) Frontier [Ruler: hackerhog] [Alliance: Random Insanity Alliance] 1/9/2008 [Team: Maroon (Since 1/9/2008)] 63 votes 5) Kickastan [Ruler: Chuck Normis] [Alliance: Coalition of Royal Allied Powers] 3/4/2007 [Team: Maroon (Since 3/4/2007)] 62 votes In 6th place was TLR's senator, BaronVonPumpernickle, with 51 votes. Edited May 1, 2017 by Mogar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 How dare you defy M3D! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 How this hasn't turned into a sanction war I will never know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackatron Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 2 hours ago, berbers said: How this hasn't turned into a sanction war I will never know... We at TTK, RIA and CRAP believes that sanctions should be reserved for rogues Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted May 1, 2017 Author Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 8 hours ago, berbers said: How this hasn't turned into a sanction war I will never know... How would either side continue to claim moral high ground by resorting to sanctions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helbrecht Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 So the Senate is unaffected by maroon incest I see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted May 3, 2017 Report Share Posted May 3, 2017 On 5/1/2017 at 5:49 PM, berbers said: How this hasn't turned into a sanction war I will never know... I was wondering the same thing but am somewhat relieved we decided to resort to nukes and emp attacks instead. Rebuilding trade circles is a pain in the ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holy Ruler Posted May 9, 2017 Report Share Posted May 9, 2017 Are we still in war? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Lucis Caelum Posted May 9, 2017 Report Share Posted May 9, 2017 (edited) On 5/1/2017 at 5:49 AM, berbers said: How this hasn't turned into a sanction war I will never know... A sanction war I think would just be bad for all sides involved. Both sides have a similar number of Senators, so it would just force both sides to change their trades to secret and have sanctioned nations wait to receive or send aid until their sanction can be removed. So in the grand scheme of things, it wouldn't be able to cripple either side long term. Instead it would just add an extra level of inconvenience for both sides, without benefiting one side over the other. If one side lost all their Senators, there would be a higher chance of sanctions being used. Edited May 9, 2017 by Noctis Lucis Caelum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galerion Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 1 hour ago, Noctis Lucis Caelum said: So in the grand scheme of things, it wouldn't be able to cripple either side long term. Instead it would just add an extra level of inconvenience for both sides, without benefiting one side over the other. If one side lost all their Senators, there would be a higher chance of sanctions being used. Depends on how your target them, which side has the greater numbers, who has the bigger warchests, how long it is expected to go on etc, there can be benefits depending on who you are but they are unlikely to be seen as decently sized by the majority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Lucis Caelum Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 16 minutes ago, Galerion said: Depends on how your target them, which side has the greater numbers, who has the bigger warchests, how long it is expected to go on etc, there can be benefits depending on who you are but they are unlikely to be seen as decently sized by the majority. If they are active, they can resend all their trades (as well as any outgoing aid or receive aid) in whatever time gap there is between their Senator removing the sanction and the other side placing new ones. For a Senator to keep a nation sanctioned in a way which prevents them from having any trades or receiving/sending aid would require them to be very fast with the clicking and always on at update, as well as the other side being to slow. Although generally speaking, eventually both sides would have all their trades set to secret. So the main the effect would be the other side needing to coordinate aid to be sent between sanctions for a drawn out war like this. The element of surprise with the sanctions could give one side an initial advantage if they've already made their own trades immune to sanctions.. Although in a long and drawn out war like this, I think both sides would just adjust. Aid offers and secret trades requests don't get cancelled from Sanctions, so all it takes is less than a second for a nation to reestablish all their trades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galerion Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 8 minutes ago, Noctis Lucis Caelum said: If they are active, they can resend all their trades (as well as any outgoing aid or receive aid) in whatever time gap there is between their Senator removing the sanction and the other side placing new ones. For a Senator to keep a nation sanctioned in a way which prevents them from having any trades or receiving/sending aid would require them to be very fast with the clicking and always on at update, as well as the other side being to slow. Although generally speaking, eventually both sides would have all their trades set to secret. So the main the effect would be the other side needing to coordinate aid to be sent between sanctions for a drawn out war like this. The element of surprise with the sanctions could give one side an initial advantage if they've already made their own trades immune to sanctions.. Although in a long and drawn out war like this, I think both sides would just adjust. Aid offers and secret trades requests don't get cancelled from Sanctions, so all it takes is less than a second for a nation to reestablish all their trades. Well there is the happiness hit for those managing to collect outside of war, re-establishing trade circles can be a pain and if a less active persons trades are taken out that can adverse affect on effective soldiers for some time. Aid offers may not be cancelled but if there is a obvious bank funding others then it can be effective to block that or if a nation is really low on funds help push them into a bill lock situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opportunity Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 On 5/1/2017 at 11:48 AM, Mogar said: How would either side continue to claim moral high ground by resorting to sanctions? Not sanctioning terrorists makes it more difficult to claim the moral high ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.