Seerow

That sounds an aweful lot like a threat buddy )):

Try pressing ctrl+a while looking at your nation.

I'm curious, does this come from the voice of Karma, the King of Mushroom Kingdom, or Archon the person?

Have I mentioned how ridiculous the treaty web is? CN as a whole should be ashamed.

The number of yes votes in this topic disturbs me.

I can't explain how or why, but this comment made me smile.

This is has been thrown around a few times I'm going to address it. Yes, it covers all of the reparations you have received. If there's any wars not listed there I don't remember them. However NPO has a history of being creative with harsh terms that aren't necessarily reparations, that you can't really put a monetary value on. It is important to note that at this time the -only- harsh term we've heard about is the war followed up by reparations. Here's some alternative terms I know offhand the NPO has handed out in the past that Karma won't touch because they go against their beliefs (and are in fact the Draconian terms that Archon initially said Karma would not incorporate. Any argument that large reps are draconian is a silly PR ploy) -Viceroys -Destruction of Wonders -Destruction of factories for the duration of terms (under the argument that they're a military improvement of course) -No first strike nuking in a war indefinitely -Reduction to 13 nukes spread among the entire alliance indefinitely. I'm sure there's more that I haven't thought of. I seem to remember moving another alliance to a different color sphere, but I'm not sure offhand if that was the NPO so I won't list it there. I'm sure others can add to this list. I'm pretty sure also that there was removal and/or perma-ZI of leadership/vocal members of losing alliances, but I can't remember for sure which war so I'm leaving that off the list until citing a source as well. So basically you don't like the reps and restrictions, consider them compensation for not having the above occuring to your alliance. I am fairly sure Karma would be willing to negotiate to include those terms and lower your reps in turn if you -really- think that the terms you've handed out in the past are better. (In fact I'm pretty sure at least one Karma leader has said he'd support letting you off with the exact terms you gave GPA). I've also made my set of suggestions for alternative punishments, but I've had people tell me they're way worse and seem to think that forced voluntary bill lock is a bad thing.

But when he leaves the alliance immediately after hitting his $800,000, and goes on to the next alliance, then we get to threaten that alliance for harboring someone in debt to us. Lack of immediate response gets us a completely legit CB and we get moar war! Try to keep up with the whole evil overlord thing, you're falling behind.

Frankly I don't like most of the options given. I wish I were an evil overlord

This is quite possible the best announcement I have ever seen. I'll be in touch.

I propose a new rule: No nominating your own alliance's flag. That said, I like the flag that was shown here for Hydra. I've also always thought Gremlins had a really cool flag, and am suprised it has not been mentioned:

I would have thought you of all people would shoot for gramatical correctness. It would at least need to be changed to The Hypocritical War if we went that route. That said, on topic, I don't support any rebranding at this point in time and won't until Karma retroactively declares all alliances who got white peace were under secret terms that were broken, and are redeclared on then put under viceroyship and turned into neverending tech banks to avoid any future breaking of terms. For now Karma still seems suitable.

It doesn't matter, we know for a fact from spy reports that many of them have 500mil-1bil warchests. I don't know exact numbers as I personally am not privvy to these reports and am not in a range where I can spy on them myself, but I recall numbers like 20-30 provided, and if those numbers are accurate then that's all you really need. I can't help it, it's like morbid curioisity just keeps drawing me back in

I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's far more likely they said they weren't going to drop or reduce the length of the wars. I really doubt they'd absolutely refuse to clarify it so it means exactly what they want without worrying about eternal war. I wouldn't mind confirmation one way or the other from someone on Karma's side. If your only goal is survival for 14 days of war, you aren't declaring on anybody. So that's down to 3 opponents rather than 6. It is only 2 weeks so saying 2-4 is disingenious. If you're seriously outmatched you can turtle to avoid a large part of the monetary damage, as for the most part money is lost through ground attacks. I lived for 2 months on a 120mil warchest, for the first two weeks my money actually stayed about even, as I managed to hold my own in ground attacks enough to pay for my bills. It wasn't until well past a month, almost 2 months that I got bill locked. But by all means keep telling me how you poor people with 1billion warchests are and how two weeks of war is going to destroy you and stop you from having any warchest left or rebuilding.

I agree. I'm sure one day Letum will end up out of the NPO and we'll all like him much more for it. While I disagree with his view points on most things, he has proven himself as a solid debater and an intelligent individual. If only he would realize most of the people he is defending in his arguments did not live up to his own standards.

That I didn't even make this list shows how innactive I am, how bad at being an evil overlord I am, or both.

If we're down to questioning Bob Janova's knowledge of game mechanics, then you really have run out of arguments. You can alternatively take it from me, or Azaghul, or any of the countless others who have organized reparations in the past who agree with him.

Because giving away infra is a great tactic to win a war. Memo to self please do not take war advice from TPF in the future

To be fair it's 9 months, not over a year.

Interesting. So long as your personality fits with those in Pacifica, I wish you good luck. You are right to view your nation only as a collection of statistics and not worry about it overly much in the long term. However be careful of having too much fun in the NPO. Long term grudges ending in banishment have been known to happen in response to that.

Cortath's might, but Letum's assume 14. The number he provides (1120) is 14*80. Which means he is assuming 14 nukes doing an average of 80 damage across the board.

Well you're not anymore, that counts for something right?

But by that logic then he IS scum. And by me calling him scum makes me scum, but only scum to me because if anyone else calls me scum they become scum and...

It's either that or just fade out of the thread and let everyone get back to how terrible/great the reps are. Either way the sooner you stop the line of conversation the sooner everyone forgets it ever happened.

No I have been telling you that you are wrong in insulting my own and others' intelligence and reading comprehension by defending somebody who said something to make your own alliance look bad, then trying to spin it to make it look like something else, all the while fooling nobody. What your actual policies are don't matter here. We don't care. Invicta and their policies are about as important to me as whether there's a wart on your aunt's nose. The point is that you are trying to deface me in the defense of a poorly thought out post rather than just saying the post is wrong and then clarifying. Rather than trying to make a post say what it didn't, all you had to do was just say what your policy actually is and be done with it.