Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
  • entries
    38
  • comments
    428
  • views
    42,836

Why War means Peace: How NPO is preventing peace talks

The Zigur

2,933 views

484828_677974805576455_1135853998_n.jpg

Over the last couple weeks, NSO coalition has raised objections over the fact that Polar coalition desires to achieve total victory. Indeed, NSO coalition was defeated before the war ever began. While the coalition was lead to an overwhelming military victory, several political developments have occured. Pacifica has established themselves as the true power and intelligence behind NSO, and has assumed a leadership role amongst their "coalition." This has extended to hiding behind their meatshields:

NSO has suffered a 60% score reduction, 66% NS reduction, and average tech per member sits at 1500 tech

NG has suffered a 60% score reduction, 69% NS reduction, and average tech per member sits at 2500 tech*

TLR has suffered a 50% score reduction, 66% NS reduction, and average tech per member sits at 1866 tech

NPO has only suffered a 40% score reduction, 50% NS reduction, and average tech per member sits at 2100 tech

*NG began the war with a much higher ave NS and tech, and also lost 40 members such as Franz Ferdinand

NPO has suffered the least of the core NSO aligned alliances. For NPO to be reduced tech-wise to NSO's comparable level, for example, it would need to lose roughly 180,000 more tech; to suffer a comparable score loss as either NSO or NG, it would have to lose ten more points. As one NPO member also noted, much of NPO's actual NS loss was really infra being rebuilt for nuclear warfare, which renders NS loss alone a useless figure.

This has led to an interesting dilemma. Most alliances (besides the obvious ODN) have bled more than their friends in NPO. This is, as Dajobo noted, NPO's usual tactic, employed in the Equilibrium war. With NPO's meatshields taking the damage, it is clear NPO desires a political victory by trying to force Polar coalition to allow a simultaneous surrender before reductions have been completed. This is achieved by leveraging all their direct and indirect allies into continuing the war despite lenient terms being offered and the precedent set by TPF.

So we enter into something of a paradox. Polar coalition cannot allow NPO to go unreduced, and NPO will place pressure on their allies. This leaves the ball in NPO's court. They could chose to:

1. Allow their allies to surrender, and submit to terms when the time is appropriate.

2. Engage their peacemode nations into the war and lose some of that hidden tech.

3. Drag on the war in the hopes Polar tires first.

Obviously, only the first two actually help their allies, while the third benefits NPO and their political machinations. Fortunately, all three options, including the third still works for Polar coalition.

If NSO coalition continues in their obstinacy, this conflict will stretch into the long war. This would have several unique benefits. Aside from AZTEC, there exists three primary power spheres: Polarsphere, Platysphere and Pacifica. The longer this war is waged, the more the coalition will be viewed as a single political entity. The spirit of war will again become engrained into the mentality of the average player, and new players joining the game will be introduced to the energy and vigor of war culture. Especially in the eyes of the new player, war will become the normal state of affairs.

As warfare becomes continuous, it also becomes less dangerous. With both Polarsphere and Platysphere united by war, there is little reason for people to fear: there are already global victors and losers. Indeed, it may be in the interests of the major world powers for war to continue, as the war would indefinitely preserve the new power structure. The war, being continuous, would turn into a peace mode siege in which members of the coalition would come under occasional attack from terrorists, but a new normalcy would set in.

The sooner NPO and their cohorts realize that they cannot win politically, the sooner we can have peace. But should they not, well war really isnt so bad is it?



73 Comments


Recommended Comments



Would you submit, in their position?

I would not have allowed myself to be placed in their position in the first place. This is what happens when one plots a war, doesn't successfully make it happen, and doesn't attempt to repair the damage afterwards.

Share this comment


Link to comment

The only clear thing this war is shown is that HB needs to suffer the same fate it did in the books for trusting a Lannister.

Putting you in Gov and your role as their mouthpiece here has led HB to be #1 on my most disliked alliances list.

Share this comment


Link to comment

The only clear thing this war is shown is that HB needs to suffer the same fate it did in the books for trusting a Lannister.

Putting you in Gov and your role as their mouthpiece here has led HB to be #1 on my most disliked alliances list.

Someone needs to fetch a crossbow and do some housekeeping it seems.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I would not have allowed myself to be placed in their position in the first place. This is what happens when one plots a war, doesn't successfully make it happen, and doesn't attempt to repair the damage afterwards.

That's not answering my question.

Would you submit in their current position?

The only clear thing this war is shown is that HB needs to suffer the same fate it did in the books for trusting a Lannister.

Putting you in Gov and your role as their mouthpiece here has led HB to be #1 on my most disliked alliances list.

Good thing he isn't in HB anymore.

Share this comment


Link to comment

That's not answering my question.

Would you submit in their current position?

Well, it would depend on what alliance I was in and what I knew. Bending the knee is not always a bad thing. It's not like any of these alliances will be forcibly disbanded and their leadership EZI'd like I was.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Well, it would depend on what alliance I was in and what I knew. Bending the knee is not always a bad thing. It's not like any of these alliances will be forcibly disbanded and their leadership EZI'd like I was.

Yes, or no?

Share this comment


Link to comment

Stop lying, you wouldn't. And no respectable alliance in this game would either.

Actually, TPF already set the precedent with their surrender. This is about NPO holding up peace. What I would do is irrelevant.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Actually, TPF already set the precedent with their surrender. This is about NPO holding up peace. What I would do is irrelevant.

TPF's "precedent" isn't with regard to terms. It's with regard to whether or not they are comfortable pulling out. (For the record, I don't entirely fault them for it even if I wouldn't do so)

Share this comment


Link to comment

I guess NPO doesn't believe they should have to pay for Brehon's mistakes on their own. Or at all.

Some of us only need the knife twisted in our backs once before we learn better. We will see how long it takes Pacifica's allies.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Clearly, you haven't been UNDERSTANDING Jesse's responses to you.

Different alliances have different NS decay rates while at war. If you used your brains at all to analyze stats, you would realize that there's a reason aside from peace mode that has resulted in differing NS decay rates of NPO and her allies.

But meh, most people don't like using their brains, so they pick one reason and stick with it, even if the response variable one is trying to measure consists of multiple explanatory variables interacting with each other.

Oh, yeah, you forgot option 4. It's called giving NPO and friends white peace. *Shrugs* We're already down 9 million NS, so it's not like we haven't been reduced, you know...

Share this comment


Link to comment

"1. Allow their allies to surrender, and submit to terms when the time is appropriate."

Actually, TPF already set the precedent with their surrender. This is about NPO holding up peace. What I would do is irrelevant.

You just made my point for me we've already told our allies if it's in their best interests to bow out to do so, TPF did, the absolute bumbling your coalition has done to engage our coalition, and really pressure us and our allies to even consider any terms at all has strengthened the resolve of the coalition and pulled in more periphery alliances like R&R

Share this comment


Link to comment

Actually, TPF already set the precedent with their surrender. This is about NPO holding up peace. What I would do is irrelevant.

How can you write about them doing something, and not be able to do it yourself?

You should eat vegetables, it's better for you in the long run, but I wont eat vegetables, because eeww.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I see alot of NPO in here. I was once a Pacifican myself, but over the years NPO lost their philosophical foundation. I encourage you to read Vladimir's works, although I dont know if that is encouraged by todays leadership.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...