Jump to content

i would like to offer peace talks for woto


Mister black

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 514
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If your side would actually deign to, y'know, offer terms, we might be able to counter offer. That's generally how these things work. It's hard to counter something that hasn't been first offered.
 
 

# of nations in PM * amount of aid not able to be sent = around 20 billion. It gets even worse when you figure in the lost income of those nations.

 

Wait, your 20B cost figure is the aid upper tier nations cannot send away from themselves? As in money they would not have if this horrific policy would not force them to keep? Sure, if it all goes to lower NPO it would be more money for them in that amount, but conversely it would be the exact same amount of money forgone from the upper tier.  It would make much more sense if the figure was based upon lost revenue for being in PM (which shouldn't be that hard to calculate), cause as is, it is not that compelling of a case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Wait, your 20B cost figure is the aid upper tier nations cannot send away from themselves? As in money they would not have if this horrific policy would not force them to keep? Sure, if it all goes to lower NPO it would be more money for them in that amount, but conversely it would be the exact same amount of money forgone from the upper tier.  It would make much more sense if the figure was based upon lost revenue for being in PM (which shouldn't be that hard to calculate), cause as is, it is not that compelling of a case.

Those nations pretty much exist for no other reason than to send out aid to the lower tier. They are not "fighting" upper tier as in many alliances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those nations pretty much exist for no other reason than to send out aid to the lower tier. They are not "fighting" upper tier as in many alliances.

 

Well then its weird that they keep screwing up their aid slots by taking tech in.  But what do I know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those nations pretty much exist for no other reason than to send out aid to the lower tier. They are not "fighting" upper tier as in many alliances.

 

Doesn't address his point though. Counting "aid not sent" as a cost means most alliances in CN above 50 members is losing billions every aid cycle just through sheer inefficiency - it's not really a harsh term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those nations pretty much exist for no other reason than to send out aid to the lower tier. They are not "fighting" upper tier as in many alliances.

 

Sorry, I shouldn't double post but this really was so bad it deserves it:

 

http://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid?nation1=29470&nation2=

Oh no.  Look at all that money he is not sending.  Looks like he sent out a grand total of:  $0.  And brought in a 1,700 tech in October alone.  So how much of Farrin's math is NPO losing if he cannot keep that up?  Lets see, we just take 6 slots, 3 aid cycles, gonna go ahead and assume he has a FAC...  what absolute !@#$ propoganda.

 

Next up: http://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid?nation1=233123&nation2=

Looks like he sent out  $36m in October.  And brought in a 1,000 tech in October.  So how much of Farrin's math is NPO losing if he cannot keep that up?

 

Next up by tech: http://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid?nation1=329212&nation2=

Looks like he sent out 30m in October.  And brought in 1,200 tech in October. So how much of Farrin's math is NPO losing if he cannot keep that up?

 

Next up by tech: http://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid?nation1=132439&nation2=

Looks like he sent out 6m in October.  And brought in 1,600 tech in October. So how much of Farrin's math is NPO losing if he cannot keep that up?

 

Next up by tech: http://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid?nation1=84844&nation2=

Looks like he sent out 51m in October.  And brought in 850 tech in October (lol the 50 and yes, this guy is comparitively getting hosed). But either way how much of Farrin's math is NPO losing if he cannot keep that up?

 

 

I could keep going but I think the point is pretty clear.  Now mind updating your profile to show your alliance as NPO so everyone knows what alliance owns your !@#$ posting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well then its weird that they keep screwing up their aid slots by taking tech in.  But what do I know?

Not much obviously.

 

 

Doesn't address his point though. Counting "aid not sent" as a cost means most alliances in CN above 50 members is losing billions every aid cycle just through sheer inefficiency - it's not really a harsh term.

It answers it perfectly.

 

Those nations are active and with a specialized purpose of sending out resources. We are not talking about some random collection of nations, utilization of aid slots of those nations is at its maximum. Therefore, blocking them from their purpose that they are certain to achieve amounts to a tangible monetary loss for the alliance that adds to a very lot with purpose to achieve a serious stunning of our growth. Considering the losses we sustained that monetary loss to post war rebuilding would be serious.

 

Hence, its a punitive measure aimed at an alliance that was pulled to the conflict via treaties from alliances that used peace mode unmeasurable more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not much obviously.

 

It answers it perfectly.

 

Those nations are active and with a specialized purpose of sending out resources. We are not talking about some random collection of nations, utilization of aid slots of those nations is at its maximum. Therefore, blocking them from their purpose that they are certain to achieve amounts to a tangible monetary loss for the alliance that adds to a very lot with purpose to achieve a serious stunning of our growth. Considering the losses we sustained that monetary loss to post war rebuilding would be serious.

 

Hence, its a punitive measure aimed at an alliance that was pulled to the conflict via treaties from alliances that used peace mode unmeasurable more.

 

It doesn't looks like you are right.  So you might want to rethink saying other people don't know much.

 

 

 

Sorry, I shouldn't double post but this really was so bad it deserves it:

 

http://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid?nation1=29470&nation2=

Oh no.  Look at all that money he is not sending.  Looks like he sent out a grand total of:  $0.  And brought in a 1,700 tech in October alone.  So how much of Farrin's math is NPO losing if he cannot keep that up?  Lets see, we just take 6 slots, 3 aid cycles, gonna go ahead and assume he has a FAC...  what absolute !@#$ propoganda.

 

Next up: http://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid?nation1=233123&nation2=

Looks like he sent out  $36m in October.  And brought in a 1,000 tech in October.  So how much of Farrin's math is NPO losing if he cannot keep that up?

 

Next up by tech: http://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid?nation1=329212&nation2=

Looks like he sent out 30m in October.  And brought in 1,200 tech in October. So how much of Farrin's math is NPO losing if he cannot keep that up?

 

Next up by tech: http://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid?nation1=132439&nation2=

Looks like he sent out 6m in October.  And brought in 1,600 tech in October. So how much of Farrin's math is NPO losing if he cannot keep that up?

 

Next up by tech: http://cybernations.lyricalz.com/aid?nation1=84844&nation2=

Looks like he sent out 51m in October.  And brought in 850 tech in October (lol the 50 and yes, this guy is comparitively getting hosed). But either way how much of Farrin's math is NPO losing if he cannot keep that up?

 

 

I could keep going but I think the point is pretty clear.  Now mind updating your profile to show your alliance as NPO so everyone knows what alliance owns your !@#$ posting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't looks like you are right.  So you might want to rethink saying other people don't know much.


hahahyahahahahahqahahjkasdghadjk;sgharh;assgdk; ... Sorry, missed the keys laughing .... You really know that much more about NPO than Bran to tell him he is wrong?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not much obviously.

 

It answers it perfectly.

 

Those nations are active and with a specialized purpose of sending out resources. We are not talking about some random collection of nations, utilization of aid slots of those nations is at its maximum. Therefore, blocking them from their purpose that they are certain to achieve amounts to a tangible monetary loss for the alliance that adds to a very lot with purpose to achieve a serious stunning of our growth. Considering the losses we sustained that monetary loss to post war rebuilding would be serious.

 

Hence, its a punitive measure aimed at an alliance that was pulled to the conflict via treaties from alliances that used peace mode unmeasurable more.

Then they really should start sending out money rather than hoarding tech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't even matter if they are banks or not, NPO had a large amount of nations over 100k, now they don't.  They've lost some 100's of 1000's of tech and almost 9M NS.

 

What part of the above screams "let's beat them more, they obviously didn't take enough damage."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hahahyahahahahahqahahjkasdghadjk;sgharh;assgdk; ... Sorry, missed the keys laughing .... You really know that much more about NPO than Bran to tell him he is wrong?

 

Yeah, looks like I did.  Unless you think he was right that those 5 first nations bringing in 6,350 tech in 1 month only exist for sending money out.   Course, he could be lying and/or not dumb.  Either way, he really shouldn't say I'm wrong when the facts are already presented showing otherwise

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's almost as if maybe having 13k infra banks with no tech would be a really bad idea if you were blindsided.

Maybe the NPO, masterminds you make them, have some contingency plans for their banks as well? Did you monitor their slots after every war to see if they sent out money or not post-war? Maybe they buy tech after handing their free fat wads of cash.

Edited by Neo Uruk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can not change what transpired between Sengoku and Brehon during EQ war. Nor could I be possibly bothered too. That is the the bottom line here.

 

Other then that, if we were not counting on monetary assistance coming from the targeted nations on the talked about possible terms, then perhaps we wouldn't be so vehemently opposed. Those nations have a purpose to meet already explained. Those in the monetary departments of the Order can share their numbers. To disable that possibility would be a harsh punitive measure for us,...and over what? That a small fraction of our nations stayed in peace mode during war? Practice more wide spread among those calling for this term from the opposite side? A practice that is common place. Are we the supposed cause for this war so to be thusly subjected to special cosideration?

 

This is just more blood lust, and all those with a hard on for us will cheer this idea. I am just here, to take note.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can not change what transpired between Sengoku and Brehon during EQ war. Nor could I be possibly bothered too. That is the the bottom line here.

 

You're trying too hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I invite you to back through, read the posts hartfw or myself have made in this thread, and show me where we reference Brehon then. Us Sengoku types are not a subtle people, we'd be pretty danged explicit about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Id be using caps lock if so.

Could be you trying to deflect from the valid points others have made about NPO.  This has nothing to do with Seng-NPO during EQ.  We're just people pointing out the obvious in regards to your bank nations, putting some numbers along with all the talk of people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Once again, periphery vs central. We could destroy TLR down to 0NS and still not reach the top of damage statistics. As someone above said, stop cherry picking.

 

Who's cherry-picking what? Your argument doesn't have a leg to stand on. Give it up.

 

Because TOP wasn't involved in the selection of the negotiator, and have no influence at all in negotiations. Given the coalition has a central negotiator the absence of TOP specifically in the talks asking anything doesn't mean you guys are completely out of the loop and innocent. But nice attempt at spinning your way out of implication.

 

Oh, so now you've amended your story to read that TOP is just one of the alliances that is in on deciding the supposed surrender terms in question, rather than the alliance demanding those terms. Sadly for you, this very fundamental change to your tune is visible to everyone else who has been reading this thread.

 



If your side would actually deign to, y'know, offer terms, we might be able to counter offer. That's generally how these things work. It's hard to counter something that hasn't been first offered.

 

Shockingly, after all of the implications by NPO allies and IRON members that harsh terms are being pressed, we find that NPO apparently hasn't actually been offered terms at all. Next up on Farrin TV: it's all TOP's fault. Because that's the tripe you've been spreading around lately, isn't it?

 

# of nations in PM * amount of aid not able to be sent = around 20 billion. It gets even worse when you figure in the lost income of those nations.

 

Ah, so it comes to light that $20b isn't being demanded at all---thus making several people in this thread look rather foolish---but rather that NPO stands to lose $20b as the result of these terms, in the main because it still uses a years-outdated system of banking. Okie dokie. 

Edited by Crymson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How cruel to force those nations who fled to peace mode to remain in it rather than handing over reparations.

 

False dichotomy; exactly why should NPO be paying reps or be punished at all when they entered via MDP for NSO? If anything, it should be us whose feet you're holding to the fire, as the given CB for Polar, TOP, and Fark; especially since we've got a higher percentage of nations in peace mode right now than Pacifica.

 

e:clarification

Edited by Hereno
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those nations pretty much exist for no other reason than to send out aid to the lower tier. They are not "fighting" upper tier as in many alliances.

 

I question why you bother making this claim when the data necessary to incontrovertibly disprove it is easily accessible to everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I question why you bother making this claim when the data necessary to incontrovertibly disprove it is easily accessible to everyone.


Get your facts straight. Introversion is not a disease, and that attitude is just outdated and wrong.
http://giftedkids.about.com/od/glossary/g/introvert.htm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...