Re: Valhalla

[Stumpy Jung Il]

Maybe you can answer this then Stumpy

Really what do you think it would change. Why do you care that we aren't getting tech? really.

Bring back my home and ask me if I feel like the people who took it deserve a harsher punishment. You ask me if it would have changed anything? No. But maybe then I could feel the slightest sense of justice in it all. I lost everything I cared about in this game cause of a war they started and they pushed to carry out. Remember that when you try to tell me that punishing them wouldnt amount to anything.

@Nizzle: Yeah Im terrible at FA. Anyone in CnG could tell you that. Sorry if I dont live up to what you've heard about me. Also, sorry if my in a moment of being upset offends you. What Im saying does not reflect where Vanguard stands, just myself.

[rabonnobar]

Are you implying we did nothing? We criticized them for every one of their moves that were out of place. We could not offer them white peace as we were their allies and we had no ability to help them.

Absolutely not what I'm implying. I'm saying that I was for white peace then and spoke out against tyranny then, and I have these same beliefs today. Whether I was part of the group in power or not doesn't matter. I'm not trying to toot my own horn, I know I'm not alone (sup Gremlins, many others) but it's just the best and most direct example I had.

You guys want white peace for yourselves but reps for others? Or, criticize them giving harsh terms then go !@#$% insane when an alliance is beaten down but doesn't have to pay reps? It's all just ridiculous. I realize that you guys want less harsh reps, but it's just that some of you are really going wowzers-crazy when an alliance fought alongside its allies, lost tons of infra, and got peace terms that don't ask for these battered nations to spill reps to their enemies. Not just that, but you guys are saying that 'Valhalla will rise up and strike you(/us!!!)' when a major talking point of Karma is that the hegemony being put down will allow more plentiful conflicts.

[Lucas Perry]

We wanted to save Valhalla's Chancellor from certain bill lock. Thats why they got off so easily.

Keshav, I you. I'm glad you were looking out for me.

[Nizzle]

We will be fair in victory. If we were unfair, you would look at the terms Valhalla levelled at alliances or the equivalent of what was done o TDSM8 at either of it's surrenders. The terms posted by Fallen Fool, a FAR cry from those, would have been more appropriate. Just terms do not mean white peace, the mean fair and reasonable terms. Reperations of reasonable levels fall into this category.

Unless, of course, you think you have leveled their nations enough.

Unless, of course, you believe limiting them to internal aid for three months is enough.

Unfortunately, you didn't fight them. Then again, even if you had, I would imagine you would attempt to extract reps from the alliance even if they had no infrastructure to speak of.

[TehChron]

There is no arrogance about it. I do wish things were different and someone hit Valhalla that would have given them the terms that everyone wants. I hate seeing us, that are fighting in the same side, getting so heated about this.

But it is what it is. We were assigned to Valhalla and we stuck by our beliefs in how peace terms should be handled. Different alliances, different views. I don't see what is so wrong with that. Like I said, it was our war and thus it was up to us to determine the peace terms.

You could have consulted your allies about it. Asked what they thought.

Based on AirMe's reaction, I think it's fair to say that the thought never crossed your mind.

[Kryievla]

1. At least 10,000 tech via tech deals at the ratio of 100 tech per 3 million.

2. Cancellation of all their treaties, with a stipulation that no new treaties will be signed for six months.

3. Decommission soldier levels to 30% for six months

4. Decommission all tanks, aircraft, nuclear weapons, cruise missiles for six months

5. Destroy all missile defense, satellites, barracks, intelligence agencies and guerrilla camps that are necessary for wonders, and a moratorium on rebuilding them for 6 months.

6. No Karma POW is allowed to join Valhalla for at least 3 months.

7. Valhalla is not allowed to receive any foreign aid from outside sources, except for the aid related to aforementioned tech deals, for six months.

8. A forfeiture of the membership of any nation who has not followed the terms within a week of their announcement, or who violates them during their duration, with members of the victorious forces on standby to punish said individuals.

With terms like that, we would have said, "Go spin" and sat about nuking til we ran out of cash. Which is what many of us were figuring would be the result of this war. Instead, we have been granted what some consider leniency.

I voted to continue fighting rather than accept these terms, but the offer was good enough that it seduced most of our people, leaving folks like me outvoted. For those of you worried about karma being satisfied, I think you would be glad to see this sort of ending. We do like our wars, and hope to get in many more in the future. I think it likely that when we next win a fight, we will take a page from how our surrender was handled.

Anyways, it's been a pleasure fighting with you all. I learned a couple few things, and I had a great time! Look forward to working with you over the next few months.

Kry

[rabonnobar]

No I don't believe karma ever stated that.

They may not have had an official announcement but it has been implied many, many, many times over. And I don't criticize that, that is a good thing IMO.

[Orkules]

But even if they do regrow into a threat, what is wrong with that? Isn't one goal of Karma to break the monotony of the game and exponentially increase the potential for large, exhilarating conflicts?

Sure I would. Of course, making it so easy to get revenge upon us that we're practically pulling the trigger is different.

I would love to see them come back as a player. But I would prefer to see them punished first and that their return to strength takes some time. However, I do not wish to do to them what they did to us. Middle ground, I like it.

[Orkules]

Unless, of course, you think you have leveled their nations enough.

Unless, of course, you believe limiting them to internal aid for three months is enough.

Unfortunately, you didn't fight them. Then again, even if you had, I would imagine you would attempt to extract reps from the alliance even if they had no infrastructure to speak of.

If they were all at ZI you mean? No of course not. Of course they're not close to that. Also, internal aid is plenty when an alliance has massive warchests everywhere.

[Tygaland]

I plainly answered your question. Maybe you want to rephrase it?

You didn't answer it at all, please, by all means explain how a small reps payment is the same as the things I listed.

[Nizzle]

You didn't answer it at all, please, by all means explain how a small reps payment is the same as the things I listed.

If you believe any reps at all are excessive.

I really don't see how you aren't understanding that to be an answer.

[King Srqt]

I lost everything I cared about in this game cause of a war they started and they pushed to carry out. Remember that when you try to tell me that punishing them wouldnt amount to anything.

When the alliance that destroyed my home came under attack I had a chance to pile on them and fight for my revenge I instead dropped my AA and fought on their side because the reasons they were attacked were crap.

Valhalla fought this war because of treaty obligations and their terms reflect what they fought for and how they fought in this war extracting vengeance for the past would be becoming what I hate.

Edited May 11, 2009 by KingSrqt

[Orkules]

Absolutely not what I'm implying. I'm saying that I was for white peace then and spoke out against tyranny then, and I have these same beliefs today. Whether I was part of the group in power or not doesn't matter. I'm not trying to toot my own horn, I know I'm not alone (sup Gremlins, many others) but it's just the best and most direct example I had.

You guys want white peace for yourselves but reps for others? Or, criticize them giving harsh terms then go !@#$% insane when an alliance is beaten down but doesn't have to pay reps? It's all just ridiculous. I realize that you guys want less harsh reps, but it's just that some of you are really going wowzers-crazy when an alliance fought alongside its allies, lost tons of infra, and got peace terms that don't ask for these battered nations to spill reps to their enemies. Not just that, but you guys are saying that 'Valhalla will rise up and strike you(/us!!!)' when a major talking point of Karma is that the hegemony being put down will allow more plentiful conflicts.

/me sighs

I really need to calm down and think clearly. I apologize for the misunderstanding. I also should have stuck with my earlier plan and withdrawn from this thread. I will now. I'm just too volatile right now to post coherently and I am going to get out of here before I say anything stupid or more things in ways I don't intend.

[Nizzle]

If they were all at ZI you mean? No of course not. Of course they're not close to that. Also, internal aid is plenty when an alliance has massive warchests everywhere.

Again, we fought them. We are well aware what warchest levels they currently possess after such a protracted war. However, it's apparent you have no clue of the financial strain.

It's also apparent that you don't understand the limitations of internal aid programs. Valhalla has an average NS of 18,000. Their NS is well over halved. Their second largest nations has an infra of 6k. Do you really want to continue this discussion?

[Lysdexia]

I love how alliance's that didn't fight or barely had any action at most, have input on stuff.. go back to your little hole my friend. we aren't in english class.

as for everyone devoting 3 pages thus far of attention to me. Thanks. I am glad I can gain that much attention.. Now, carry on with your little cries of how unfair it is you had to pay reps, and someone else didn't. cause honestly i am getting tired of typing now.

( OOC ) Please do us and yourself a favor and stay tired of typing for tonight (OOC)

To my former enemies at war: I enjoyed the fight and many of you earned my respect.

I look forward to working with you all in the future.

Good luck with your rebuilding.

[maxnmike]

Bring back my home and ask me if I feel like the people who took it deserve a harsher punishment. You ask me if it would have changed anything? No. But maybe then I could feel the slightest sense of justice in it all. I lost everything I cared about in this game cause of a war they started and they pushed to carry out. Remember that when you try to tell me that punishing them wouldnt amount to anything.

I know this feeling well

[The Corrupt Teacher]

I think people are refusing to see:

1) Hegemony alliances are being decimated.

2) Hegemony alliances won't form the next prominent power structure.

3) The Karma alliances complaining in here about "lenient" terms will accept the reigns from the defeated, and take their place as the rightful Hegemony.

Your sadly mistaken if you think the Hegemony is gone. Look at us now Karma sucks we have so little unity as it is just look at this f***ing thread. They will be back in 6 months and stomping down on us.

Reps would merely delay their eventual regrowth by mere weeks. As for their warchests, I do believe we understand what they have and are capable of. I also think you overestimate the ability to regrow into a potent threat.

It comes back, again, to the original statement that you drew concern with: You should have done something. You selected a group of alliances that think differently about war reparations to attack an alliance you wanted to see pay dearly for past crimes. Oh well?

There will be another war, folks. I don't know what to tell you, I really don't. We think they suffered enough, and we didn't have use for reps. Seriously, the only thing I can say is that if you wanted it done a certain way you should have done it yourself. I'm sorry.

Once again your show how f***ing stupid you are. Most of Karma has paid significant reps in the past such as the last war and look how easy it was for us to come back with alittle political pull and become a threat to the Hegemony which contained the two largest alliances in the game and the 2 largest blocks.

Oh, hey thanks Umbrella/Kronos/PC/etc! That was totally awesome of you to stomp Valhalla like that! Gosh, you guys got pretty banged up too? Oh well, at least we taught them a lesson. Thanks so much, they totally deserved it after all they did to this game!

edit: I don't need to label it so plainly, I think it's obvious.

Yeah thats what working as a team entails. MK, Athens, and other have done that on other fronts for you so don't come here saying oh !@#$ Kronos and co did all the fighting while you guys sat and drank fizzy drinks with the little pink $@tail umbrellas because we've been in the trenches just as long if not longer than you doing the same dirty work.

on a side note god I hate Karma so much right now. I almost want to go join NPO because at least they have what it takes to finish off a war properly.

[TehChron]

( OOC ) Please do us and yourself a favor and stay tired of typing for tonight (OOC)

To my former enemies at war: I enjoyed the fight and many of you earned my respect.

I look forward to working with you all in the future.

Good luck with your rebuilding.

Based on everything ive seen, you folks deserved more than that. At least to mollify your victims.

Because there's no way in hell Pacifica is going to get off as easily.

[Stumpy Jung Il]

When the alliance that destroyed my home came under attack I had a chance to pile on them and fight for my revenge I instead dropped my AA and fought on their side because the reasons they were attacked were crap.

Valhalla fought this war because of treaty obligations and their terms reflect what they fought for and how they fought in this war extracting vengeance for the past would be becoming what I hate.

Becoming what you hate. That phrase is easily my least favorite line of all time when it comes to CN. There is a difference between white peace and becoming the monster. Im sick and tired of hearing this self righteous bull !@#$ acting like anything else is evil. This isnt what happened to Polar, this is a just war that they wanted. NPO didnt go BONKERS and attack OV. They had the go ahead from their allies. This war is also a culmination of past crimes being brought to justice. Polaris tried to avoid war by fixing its problems and righting its wrongs. What has Valhalla done to do that? Nothing. Im not becoming what I hate. Im asking for the wrongs of the past to be at least met with some sort of justice. But the fact remains that Karma lacks the backbone to face such a move. You are all too afraid because you fell prey to your own propaganda to an excessive level.

[Orkules]

Again, we fought them. We are well aware what warchest levels they currently possess after such a protracted war. However, it's apparent you have no clue of the financial strain.

It's also apparent that you don't understand the limitations of internal aid programs. Valhalla has an average NS of 18,000. Their NS is well over halved. Their second largest nations has an infra of 6k. Do you really want to continue this discussion?

As I said in my earlier post, my anger is getting the best of me. I do not agree with white peace for them. However, I have stated my reasons and standings poorly because of how upset I was about this. Much of this is likely personal, a grudge against what they did to me and Stumpy and the rest of TDSM8. The greatest alliance we have ever been in dead due in no small part to them. I'm sure you can understand how this might make me feel, even if my feelings make me want to betray some of what I stood for. I'm stepping out of here.

Though I stand by many of my statements, I apologize for a few of them that were particularly combative and ill-informed (Quoted text was a good one).

[Tygaland]

If you believe any reps at all are excessive.

I really don't see how you aren't understanding that to be an answer.

Because I didn't ask your opinion on reps, I asked how small reps was the same as the things I listed. Something you are avoiding answering. Try again.

[Dankbud]

You could have consulted your allies about it. Asked what they thought.

Based on AirMe's reaction, I think it's fair to say that the thought never crossed your mind.

Are you really hypothesizing that any alliance involved in a war where they are getting into peace term talks are to ask all of their allies if the terms presented are okay with them even thought they didn't fight in that war/battle? I think that is going a bit in far in trying to appease your friends.

Should alliances now let their allies dictate certain terms? That corrupts their sovreingty.

I am not one to break ones morals because a friend asks me to. That friend should know my views and how I deal with situations. And at the same time our alliance won't sign a treaty with someone that doesn't already know how we operate in war and is against such methods.

[Fallen Fool]

You know, the funny part is, your former alliance was the cause of the death of mine, and I still was upset my alliance received reps from the NpO in the War of the Coalition. And you know what, I took that anger, and I decided if I was going to talk the talk, I sure as hell better walk the walk. If 6 months time from now, 1 year from now, 2 years from now, Valhalla decides its time for revenge and we get rolled, or destroyed, or receive impossibly high reps, or even get disbanded, its nothing new to many (probably most) of us in Umbrella, and it doesn't change anything.

Obviously we were just one part of the effort against Valhalla, but I don't think Umbrella is exactly quaking in their boots right now.

Good for you.

In the meantime, I'll probably get to watch Valhalla bully or extort cash and tech from alliances a third their size while you're busy looking for a nice hole in the sand to stick your head in.

Why not ask?

Because they could turn you down and limit the strategic and tactical benefit you would gain from the tech?

Alas, the end to this war was not your call either. Funny thing is I don't remember reading your complaints of the white peace your alliance gave TPF. In fact, the agreement there was far more lenient. It's hard for anyone to take you serious here when you didn't not voice your concern there. You might want to check those soapbox braces a little more closely.

I find it to be bad form to disagree or question my leadership in public, so I'm hypocrite? Edited May 11, 2009 by Fallen_Fool

[King Srqt]

Becoming what you hate. That phrase is easily my least favorite line of all time when it comes to CN. There is a difference between white peace and becoming the monster. Im sick and tired of hearing this self righteous bull !@#$ acting like anything else is evil. This isnt what happened to Polar, this is a just war that they wanted. NPO didnt go BONKERS and attack OV. They had the go ahead from their allies. This war is also a culmination of past crimes being brought to justice. Polaris tried to avoid war by fixing its problems and righting its wrongs. What has Valhalla done to do that? Nothing. Im not becoming what I hate. Im asking for the wrongs of the past to be at least met with some sort of justice. But the fact remains that Karma lacks the backbone to face such a move. You are all too afraid because you fell prey to your own propaganda to an excessive level.

see stumpy that is the difference. I have never said this !@#$ for propaganda I said it because it is what I believed and $%&@ you if you think I am going to do something I do not believe in so you can get your vengeance. I lost the majority of my infra tech and land fighting the lower tier of valhalla because my alliance got asked to cover it when no one else could touch it and now you are going to give me !@#$ because I didn't make them give me reps? I don't want their reps, so why should I take them.

[TehChron]

Are you really hypothesizing that any alliance involved in a war where they are getting into peace term talks are to ask all of their allies if the terms presented are okay with them even thought they didn't fight in that war/battle? I think that is going a bit in far in trying to appease your friends.

Should alliances now let their allies dictate certain terms? That corrupts their sovreingty.

I am not one to break ones morals because a friend asks me to. That friend should know my views and how I deal with situations. And at the same time our alliance won't sign a treaty with someone that doesn't already know how we operate in war and is against such methods.

You misinterpret how "diplomacy" works. And a large part of that is Empathy. Because of a stroke of ill-chance, your allies are denied justice to right wrongs done unto them, and then you refuse to even tell them beforehand of this travesty of justice?

Of course, your soveriegnty is far more important than empathy to their plight. I hope that when your mistakes come back to haunt you folks, they bite you in the rear. You slapped your allies in the face with these terms. And I have no small suspicoun the reason you didn't inform the Valhalla victims beforehand was specifically because they would have protested against your self-righteous pissing.

Keep the feel-good train going and whatnot.