WcaesarD

What's this? Leniency from the sith? Surely not. In any event, very... simple terms.

I've been having a good time fighting my Valhalla opponents this war. White Majik in specific stands out, though I think he just joined to fight. My IRON guys aren't so fun, they keep sending me individual surrender terms.

Have fun FOK, welcome back to the fray. Edit: FOK and Fark, in the same thread?

What about after GW1, when no harsh reps were imposed, and then that later came to bight the victors in the $@!? If the opponent is still viewed as a threat, are reps not just another form of warfare, or a way to manage your alliance over theirs?

I think you also bring up a good point here on the purpose of reps. Is it to prevent rapid rebuilding, allow the victor aid in rebuilding, or is it a punishment for crimes of the past? And in many cases, an alliance in a position to demand overly oppressive reps isn't going to be opposed by many, most likely, so the burden of preventing those harsh reps falls to their allies and fellow victors.

All of the valhalla guys I'm fighting have been awesome. Fun opponents, good fighters... And my SDI blocked it's second nuke ever last night, bringing it to a whopping 2 blocks out of 19 nukes sent in its lifetime. Oh yeah, Special shoutout to WhiteMajik, for the nukes.

[quote name='ChairmanHal' date='05 February 2010 - 10:39 AM' timestamp='1265384383' post='2161525'] Now there is a siggable moment. Here at Valhalla when we have a clearance sale on nuke, you can bet that you won't drive away without a nice shiny Viking nuke landing in your car. [/quote] I got a convertable for easier nuking access. Send moar.

Post war reparations (reps) have long been a staple on planet Bob. Once a war was over, the winning side would tally up some numbers, and present em to the losing side. Sure, there was usually some sort of haggling, but for the most part, the victorious dictated the terms. In the Karma war, we saw both ends of the spectrum; white peace, and the heaviest reps of all time. Now, I'm not here to discuss what was or wasn't warranted, the time for that is long passed. What I do want to discuss, is if, in the modern, warchest filled world of CN, reparations still have a place. During this war we're having, there was a brief period where we saw masses of white peace. Many alliances signing to peace out with all of their opponents at once. Is this an indication of a move away from reps, or more a sign of there being friends on both sides of the war, or something completely unrelated? I would say that it is the first. Of the alliances recent losing wars, almost all have had fairly tame reps for their sizes, or none at all. The reasons for the could be many, war is significantly more devastating now than it was in years past, they go on longer, the advent of mass warchest savings make either overly harsh, or underly effective terms the only real options, or simply the fact that there is a stigma on them from the times of the Hegemony. With the widespread use of warchests for not only warfare, but for post-war rebuilding, why would victors want to take money out of a stockpile? Before the massive warchest was a common practice, it would take most of the money a nation was making to gather up the cash to send out payments. With the way nation building and banking are understood, it's significantly easier to get a nation back up to banking size in a short span of time, allowing more of an alliances nations to send out reps. With all of this taken into account, the small amount that you can move at once, the large warchests, the public disapproval, and the PR hit you take, it would seem that soon enough, harsh reps will most likely be a thing of the past in most cases. Sure, when a group unnecessarily prolongs a war, or causes undue devastation, they still have a rightful place, but only, as I see it, in defensive victory, or when the war was grossly prolonged through malice. I'd love to hear thoughts on the place of reps, and the time for white peace, if anyone feels like discussing.

That's it, I surrender.

Excelent analysis Bob, but I think you're overestimating SF, I don't think they desire becoming a global hegemony. Not beyond a vocal minority anyways.

Welcome to the fight boys.

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='02 February 2010 - 03:44 PM' timestamp='1265143460' post='2153781'] I await your withdrawal from SF with interest. (Or more likely, someone saying that you didn't actually mean what you posted here.) [/quote] I think we can all agree thath that was a silly thing to say.

[quote name='Quadrius' date='02 February 2010 - 03:10 PM' timestamp='1265141437' post='2153719'] Good luck with that, hope FAN wins, etc. EDIT: I'M A MORON AND CAN'T READ DOWS RIGHT edited for proper allegiance [/quote] Nice edit, I was a little insulted for a bit there.

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='02 February 2010 - 02:41 PM' timestamp='1265139691' post='2153680'] (quoting one of several posts making this point) If this is the case, then someone didn't look at the big picture. Superfriends chose to enter this war on the non-Polar side. GOD has declared war on NpO's MDP ally (NSO). It wasn't Polar that chose to put GOD in direct opposition to them, and cancelling on Polar because they're retaliating against an alliance which has declared war on their MDP ally would be rather odd . I give RoK more credit than that which is why I went for the bigger political picture theory. [/quote] I think that overall, yes, that makes sense, but it was more of a "straw that broke the camels back" thing. And the SF/CnG side wasn't even 100% clear until TOP/IRON/TORN went ahead with thier blitz, from what I can see.

I'm sure this was a difficult thing to do, RoK, and I admire the patience you've shown, not to mention the restraint. As for Bob Janova, I think it was more the Polar directly attacking a SF member, rather than RoK picking between NpO and CnG.

[quote name='danizduhman' date='02 February 2010 - 12:29 PM' timestamp='1265131774' post='2153394'] Just a guess, but the whole "secret treaties" thing might be what he's talking about. "- All of the folks in FAN are zombies. - FAN cancels all treaties [b]- FAN is signing secret treaties so that when you find out who we're allied now with you pee all over yourselves.[/b]" [/quote] You might find that [url="http://http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=73277&st=0"]this[/url] either clears things up, or confuses you more. Either way, it's friendship that counts, especially with the amount of e-paper we've seen wasted over the years.

I've only been in the war for a day and I'm already having more fun than in the last month. Best of luck, Valhalla, it's a good thing you got Stumpy to sign off on this one, I woulda been disappointed if the king said no.

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='01 February 2010 - 12:29 PM' timestamp='1265045369' post='2150677'] I wonder if those who are claiming conflicts of interests based on treaty lawyering on the TOP/IRON-C&G front are getting ready to bring the same lawyers and the force of the web to FAN ... There's some interesting MDPs that IRON have here, particularly R&R and MCXA. It's good to see FAN back in active politics, but this seems like a pretty opportunistic attack. Declaring on a secret treaty? That's about the only justification I could find in the OP. [/quote] Actually, we claim no treaty, public or private, we simply claim friendship, and a wish to help, and hopefully have a bit of fun. And yes, as you pointed out, Valhalla was quick to defend thier allies in IRON, and we are now engaged with both alliances. I'm excited for some quality war, and really excited to use some of my new toys.

It occurs to me that the past few weeks/months of NSO membership calling out, or trying to call out multiple SF alliances might be coming to bite them in the backside. That being said, I hope that a reasonable end to this conflict can be worked out, despite the fun it's been watching allies at each others throats. Remember, you're all forgetting the real enemy: fluoridation.

[quote name='Lennox' date='31 January 2010 - 08:45 PM' timestamp='1264988748' post='2148947'] Congrats on the elections FARK. I will step back and watch the rest of these idiots now [/quote] They're actually "erections" Thanks for the fun, everyone. And as for all you conspiracy theorists out there... I was telling the truth, nothing was shopped. Y'all just wanted it to look that way, so it did.

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='31 January 2010 - 09:22 PM' timestamp='1264990976' post='2149124'] I'll tell you all what, I've got a Vox-era account at FAN. Mask me, I'll take a look around, and I'll let you know what I find. [/quote] Good luck, they responded right quick, good thing I got most of my screenshots before I posted this. They're already trying to cover it up. Don't be fooled.

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' date='31 January 2010 - 08:56 PM' timestamp='1264989383' post='2149029'] OP, you said "Screen Shots" plural, right now you posted one with the rather obviously photoshoped name of RandomlyJim included and another of the general forum, any more before this gets completely dismissed? [/quote] I can promise you that nothing was shopped, and I provided further evidence a couple pages back. working on getting a clean version of the first pic back up.

For those requesting timestamped and more info, for now: [img]http://www.grandbastard.reloadpress.com/upload/11281-ss1.png[/img]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='31 January 2010 - 08:31 PM' timestamp='1264987862' post='2148853'] You mentioned screenshots, why did you post only one? [/quote] Still sorting everything out. I can edit the OP, if it'll make you feel better.

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' date='31 January 2010 - 08:20 PM' timestamp='1264987205' post='2148802'] Your link, it doesn't work. [/quote] Pesky copy paste, musta hit v twice. Should be good.