Henkie

[quote name='Ryuzaki' timestamp='1300693030' post='2672043'] If you refuse to believe that there is anything more to it, then you are an idiot. There is no point in replying to you.[/quote] Yet you go on... Point is, this war was completely unprovoked and for the simple reason that the last attempt to dismantle the NPO failed miserably, because the game doesn't allow for it if you're not willing to commit to a long term tactic of perma-ZI-ing every single nation. So the reality is that somewhere along the line, whether it's this war or the next, some group of people is going to decide that they're willing to go that far. And if they're willing to go that far, this is what it'll look like: a suggestion of peace to draw nations out of peace mode and than breaking their word. And as my PM inbox this morning proved, this strategy is not only not beyond Doomhouse, they're actually applying it as we speak. I, and all other nations this morning, received a PM from Doomhouse where they declared peace had been achieved. Yet Doomhouse is still fighting. What basis do you have to expect us to trust you on your word when you've already shown how little it's worth? [quote]OOC: If the people in NPO wanted to play without war, they should have gone and joined a neutral alliance. I have had every nation I have ever had destroyed in war, and winning or losing it was entertaining.[/quote] If neutrality is in commiting no offence great enough to warrant a war, NPO is neutral. If neutrality is in actually not getting entangled in a war, it's not our choice, but yours. [quote]Also if 30 days of war makes them unable to do anything for two years, then they are bad at the simple game mechanics that make up CN. My nation was less than a year old and I got to 40k ns with a decent stockpile of tech, as well as being nuke capable. GOONS is almost entirely small, young nations and they have had a large effect on CN.[/quote] I don't know to what degree you're willing to commit to the lie, but what makes you think the war will be over after 30 days? Do you honestly expect us to believe that?

[quote name='Golan 1st' date='02 April 2010 - 12:00 PM' timestamp='1270205983' post='2245255'] The hotspot should be (3.0, -9.0) [/quote] That gives me 99%, which is close enough for me. Thanks!

So... -34.03445, -44.00024 yields 74% Can anyone do the math again, please?

It amazes me that people that are openly supporting repeatedly attacking people for no good reason can complain about being attacked for what they feel is a bad reason.

Two relatively random attempts: Mars Mine: Location: 29.84064, 102.30469 94% Mars Base: Location: 30.14513, 113.55469 94%

He's trying to be clever about the fact that you said TOP, which is ranked first, rather than TOOL, which is ranked just above us.

As the leaders of Karma have all experienced at one time or another, once your friends are slowly moving away and your enemies are moving together, getting curbstomped is pretty unavoidable. We thought we could avoid this by being bigger and better than everybody else, but it turned out we weren't entirely matched up to everybody else together. The trick of good leadership is not in avoiding the unavoidable, but in surviving a curbstomp and bouncing back. And I know we will.

The Manhattan Project had a huge impact, but other than that, I'm not too sure.

The fact that they are in no way willing to renegotiate anything in the terms, and set terms that are extremely close to, if not over the limit of what's reachable, doesn't exactly suggest that they're lenient about the whole matter. Furthermore, you can't honestly expect us to bet our entire alliance on this leniency, with no guarantees what-so-ever.

An sich an entirely logical assumption, but not entirely applicable to the current situation. I'd like to point out that we've offered to pay a billion more than Karma's asking, if we could get rid of some of the limitations of how it is to be payed. Most importantly is the tech. 300k, to be payed by the larger nations now in peace mode, after they've gone through a serious war, at a minimum of 25k per month. In peace mode right now, are two groups of nations: a small group of bankers and a large group of nations that has allready ignored multiple orders to get out of peace mode and fight, probably because they're inactive for various reasons. The nations that will have to pay the tech are the nations that are known to be inactive and will be ZI-ed before they have to pay. The idea that these nations will achieve an efficiency anywhere close to what our bank on average can get, is absurd, tbh, even if we don't account for nations that may reroll, delete, or disappear, this is a tall order. If at any time we fall below the required amount, we've got another war on our hands, but now with ZI-ed banks with no warchests, no nations with nukes and enemies that have had time to restock. What you seem to think we've gotten is doable and reasonable, what we've actually been offered, however, is not.

We didn't start this war. We started a small war against a small alliance that had been spying. The current war has nothing to do with that war, except that it was used as an excuse to get revenge for any number of supposed slights.

Because paying the reps won't end the war. That's the central argument. There is no rational reason to accept the payment of reps if the only outcome is yet another war, for which, undoubtedly, new reps will be demanded. When we demanded reps, at the very least we offered the outlook of peace, it's why people pay reps, by not offering the chance of peace, there's no point in accepting. Calling it "reps" is trying to dress it up. The money has no relation to damage sustained and is purely punitive. The fact that you want to continue war before payment of reps in itself proves this point.

Taking several years would be against the peace terms, as they set minimum amounts to be payed each month, especially the tech bit, where 180 nations got exactly one year to pay off the 300k tech (25k per month). Breaking those terms will undoubtably lead to yet another way, except that we'd have let our nations be ZI-ed and we'd have been funding our opponents. Don't make the mistake of considering these peace-terms: they're an offer to speed up our destruction. Untill there are actual peaceterms, we have no choice but to continue the current path.

I doubt anybody from the NPO will be picking up Ivan's debt, Doitzel's debt, or Electron Spunge's debt. I mean, ES himself has admitted on past occasions to be the mastermind behind FAN's fall, but nobody's taking this out on him. Doitzel himself was a loyal member of the NPO untill somebody talked about maybe needing to punish ES for this. Overall, it's astounding to see the selective memories at work, when deciding that nobody but the NPO was to blaim for every alliance that blew itself up in one war or another.

They can't get any worse. I mean, reps that can't be payed, won't be payed. Whether we're not paying 7 billion, 8 billion, or 800 billion is of no real consequence.

Only if you see a connection between the war we started and the one your side escalated. But since Karma clearly pointed out that the war never was about protecting that one alliance, which ever it was, but about all kinds of selfrightious things, and apparently setting a bad example to you all, it was merely an excuse and it's quite absurd to consider the NPO the aggressors.

What we're talking about is the punishment of an alliance, it is irrelevant how much alliances are on the Karma side, when only the one alliance is on the paying side. In other words, it's not about what others'd be receiving, it's about what we'd be paying, and we'd be paying 300k tech. which is over 5 times more than what MK'd be paying. At any rate, am I the only one who thinks of Orwellian Newspeak when what is clearly punitive payments are labelled "reperations" and when a demand for a minimum of two weeks war is part of the "peace terms"?

The trick'd be to keep your nation growing, or atleast staying at an even NS, while fighting three defensive wars. If we keep nukes out of the equation (because they are the automatic "everybody loses" option), I do see possibilities to do something like that. It'd be hard, and require a very well balanced nation, but seeing as how in 1 on 1 combat the defensive nation has the advantage, it'd be possible if you're a better fighter, more active and have the discipline to stay focussed on the defense, rather than thinking offensively, because the trick, again, is not to destroy your opponent, but to survive a theoretically unending combat.

You do get a notification if a trade is cancelled on you. Though not when a nation is deleted. In general, I think the current system works. What could be nice is an addition of a cooling period, like three days, between the one partner cancelling a trade, and the other actually losing it.

I think some clarification is in order: sending a PM, talking on IRC or hanging after school is all ok, by Admin. That kind of interaction is allowed. Sending aid, trading and possibly (although I'm not sure on this) having a war and/or spying is not ok by Admin. That kind of interaction is not allowed.

This is first and foremostly a game of politics. Although I have to say, I do appreciate the moments of (for my standards) complicated maths to find out which wonder I should buy next and how much money I need to save up for the next jump and that sort of thing.

The SSS gives you 2% extra taxes, that is an extra 2/28 of your total income, which is just over 7%. Technically, if you spent all your money on infra and bills for infra could give you a 8% cut on all your expenses. But I think (just a guess) that with bills for wonders and improvements, that's already somewhat of a lesser effiecency and if you inted to ever again buy something like tech or a wonder, the SSS is just the better purchase. So just go for the SSS already.

Lead really sucks, it is arguably the worst resource in the game. Gems isn't actually bad per se, but it isn't that good either. I have neither.

Wasn't that only if you'd have less than the 20% of working pop. left? If so, I never went under that.

Ok, here's the deal. Yesterday, I was told to get fully mobilized, today, I was ordered into peacemode. So I get into peacemode, I move my defcon and threat-level down to green and I start decomming my military. Firstly, I decom most of my soldier back to what I had yesterday, which is 8000 (11405) on a working population of 54059, my nation was still okay. Then I decommed all my tanks, and my nation was okay. But when I finished decomming my CM's, I suddenly get this message: Your nation's defenses were considerably depleted on 2/13/2008. As a result of your recent lack of defending security forces riots have sparked up within your nation and have thrown your government into Anarchy. The riots are expected to last until 2/16/2008 regardless of any action that you attempt to take. You will not be able to change your government until these riots end. While it also tells me this: Your military of 8,000 (11,405) soldiers is considered adequate strength for the size of Polycratia. Do note, my number of soldiers has not been below 8000. Is this a bug and should I report it, or did I miss some rule about decomming and is this my own fault?