TOOL Announcement

[Sandwich Controversy]

[quote name='the rebel' timestamp='1302539397' post='2688602']
There are reasons why some people keep 50 CMs, look around the other parts of these forums and you will find out why...
[/quote]
Please list them here, thanks

[potato]

[quote name='the rebel' timestamp='1302539397' post='2688602']
There are reasons why some people keep 50 CMs, look around the other parts of these forums and you will find out why... Also it might be the case 3mill/100tech is the norm but when you have to go outside of your alliance and allies in search of deals because you cant find or dont want to wait ages, then that is where the competition is as a neutral party will look at MK offering 3mill for 100 tech and someone else offering 3mill for 50 tech, who they going to choose?

Regardless your point doesnt take the fact this world is shrinking and many sellers become buyers with none to replace them.
[/quote]

I've never had any sort of problem finding 3 mil/100 tech deals, whether it was through my alliance or not. I'm not sure what you're doing wrong but, as I said, whatever floats your boat.

As for the shrinking population, I don't give a flying $%&@. It's not my job to keep this planet afloat: if the creator doesn't care, why should I? Not to mention, it is a silly point: GOONS, for example, have no problem getting new recruits and there's always war to shrink the bigger yet not so fit nations. If they can't take the heat, then so be it...

But all this is way off topic. Congrats TOOL on getting peace. And good luck in your future endeavours.

[the rebel]

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1302540501' post='2688610']
Please list them here, thanks
[/quote]

Its a nice publication on here called "Open National RP" I was confused myself why some had 50 CMs during my time in alliance military leadership, when asking them the reason i was directed there.

[potato]

[quote name='the rebel' timestamp='1302541015' post='2688616']
Its a nice publication on here called "Open National RP" I was confused myself why some had 50 CMs during my time in alliance military leadership, when asking them the reason i was directed there.
[/quote]

A solid and valid point. You never said they were good reasons.

[the rebel]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1302541218' post='2688619']
A solid and valid point. You never said they were good reasons.
[/quote]

Its all opinions, what you see as good to you may be boring to others hence that section of the publications... anyway drifting now so lets agree to disagree

[Deimos27]

Very good to see this.

[Bob Janova]

It's quite a large headline number, but since TOOL is naturally a selling alliance with its current build, it takes some strong spin to make these terms look bad. You can disagree in principle with taking any form of reps from an overall aggressive war, but there aren't really many who agree with that, and if you're still in the same side as the old hegemony then you are shacked up with a load of alliances who are worse about that than just requiring forced tech deals.

Comparing it to Grämlins in BLEU war isn't entirely fair as we only demanded the tech deals from the primary alliance, not those dragged in to defend them. In addition, we were doing them more of a favour than you are, as the terms pushed by other coalition members meant that the cash we sent over was the only aid they had for rebuilding.

Edit: Forgot to say, congratulations on peace! I hope to see many more soon!

Edited April 11, 2011 by Bob Janova

[Drai]

[quote name='the rebel' timestamp='1302539397' post='2688602']
There are reasons why some people keep 50 CMs, look around the other parts of these forums and you will find out why... Also it might be the case 3mill/100tech is the norm but when you have to go outside of your alliance and allies in search of deals because you cant find or dont want to wait ages, then that is where the competition is as a neutral party will look at MK offering 3mill for 100 tech and someone else offering 3mill for 50 tech, who they going to choose?

Regardless your point doesnt take the fact this world is shrinking and many sellers become buyers with none to replace them.
[/quote]
Because I don't know where to begin looking, could you give me a couple reasons why they would keep 50 CMs?

$3 mil/100 is a 'term' as I've admitted this and I'm sure many MKers will. There are indeed a shortage of sellers. However it is not crippling by any means, there are sellers out there if you look on IRC or message inactives withing your own alliance (and they will have a surplus if they message some of their inactive sellers for internal deals). The uncertainty or waiting period is where this will be considered a 'term'.

Don't forget that every alliance (except NPO I believe) on this side was given the chance to exit the war earlier with no, or minimal reps.

Edited April 11, 2011 by Drai

[Zoomzoomzoom]

Best of luck rebuilding TOOL

[Alterego]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302545672' post='2688645']
It's quite a large headline number, but since TOOL is naturally a selling alliance with its current build, it takes some strong spin to make these terms look bad. You can disagree in principle with taking any form of reps from an overall aggressive war, but there aren't really many who agree with that, and if you're still in the same side as the [b]old hegemony[/b] then [u]you are shacked up with a load of alliances who are worse about that than just requiring forced tech deals.[/u]

[/quote]
This from a guy who wont hear the word hegemony used if its his about his side, the actual hegemony but happily throws it around as if its still relevent to that small oppressed group. Hal was right, whats next dust of hegemony?

What has this group done in the last 2 years? I only ask because your group has copied their every move since karma minus one or two things. Who are you shacked up with? I hope you dont jump ship when it comes around again. I would love to see you squashed instead of slithering off the hook again mister old hegemony [b]and [/b]new hegemony member.

Edited April 11, 2011 by Alterego

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Drai' timestamp='1302547193' post='2688654']
Don't forget that every alliance (except NPO I believe) on this side was given the chance to exit the war earlier with no, or minimal reps.[/quote]

Making that offer to alliances before they get even remotely bloody and then pulling it back away when they finally decide enough is enough makes it appear like the original peace offer wasn't particularly serious...most likely because it wasn't.

[Bob Janova]

Do something about it

It's a fact that the Orders, TPF, Valhalla etc were the core of the old hegemony. Yes, it's a long time ago. So what? Most of your side's propaganda merchants were allied to them back then, so it can't be a matter of principle. That has nothing to do with whether PB is a hegemony. Kindly don't derail another thread with that.

[the rebel]

[quote name='Drai' timestamp='1302547193' post='2688654']
Because I don't know where to begin looking, could you give me a couple reasons why they would keep 50 CMs?

$3 mil/100 is a 'term' as I've admitted this and I'm sure many MKers will. There are indeed a shortage of sellers. However it is not crippling by any means, there are sellers out there if you look on IRC or message inactives withing your own alliance (and they will have a surplus if they message some of their inactive sellers for internal deals). The uncertainty or waiting period is where this will be considered a 'term'.

Don't forget that every alliance (except NPO I believe) on this side was given the chance to exit the war earlier with no, or minimal reps.
[/quote]

Ive already answered the CMs question earlier as a reason why some may and spoken to some in the past who have done that as a reason, if you want examples then go look or talk to those that use the RP publication...

I'm not saying its a crippling term either, its just removing their active tech sellers however many that maybe which means the other nations are forced to look elsewhere due to no active sellers in the alliance...that is unless MK want to buy from the inactive sellers?

Who wants allies that pack up and leave you in war after a round or two?

[Penguin]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302548924' post='2688667']
Do something about it

It's a fact that the Orders, TPF, Valhalla etc were the core of the old hegemony. Yes, it's a long time ago. So what? Most of your side's propaganda merchants were allied to them back then, so it can't be a matter of principle. That has nothing to do with whether PB is a hegemony. Kindly don't derail another thread with that.
[/quote]
This upsets me to hear from you. The foundation of our friendship is that alliances can redeem themselves. That while you can't escape your past, your character is defined by how you act and not by how your predecessors acted. If you no longer think you can impact the world for the better, then what are you fighting for now?

[Bob Janova]

This isn't about people and their predecessors, this is about the [i]people[/i] now taking shots at 'our side' (Haflinger, Alterego, HoT, etc) who tied themselves into what they complain about now. I mean, there's really nothing to complain about in forcing a natural seller alliance to sell some tech.

If those individuals want to come out and say they've changed, and they regret their past actions, then, eh, maybe they can be treated differently moving forward, but they still have no place to complain about others doing the same things they did in the past.

And to be honest, the world is not in a state where it is easy to change at the moment. To change it, you need the support of a large power base, and most of the alliances that are worth including in that power base do not share a moral agenda. You might disagree since we were just at war, but generally VE does its part for that, with fair terms when we do go to war and making sure we have a good reason before doing so. We deposed the old hegemony in Karma, but it turns out that there aren't enough alliances who subscribe to a strong moral code to keep that spirit together.

I fear we're getting off topic, though . TOOL was only ever a fringe member of the old hegemony grouping, and what we're talking about isn't that relevant to them.

[Drai]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1302548850' post='2688664']
Making that offer to alliances before they get even remotely bloody and then pulling it back away when they finally decide enough is enough makes it appear like the original peace offer wasn't particularly serious...most likely because it wasn't.
[/quote]
We pulled it back away a few days after we gave them the warning, it has been weeks since then. It was completely serious and I'm sure you can see it was a tactical move on our part. Obviously we wanted them out before damage was done. That was the whole point of giving them no terms.

[quote name='the rebel' timestamp='1302549339' post='2688670']
Ive already answered the CMs question earlier as a reason why some may and spoken to some in the past who have done that as a reason, if you want examples then go look or talk to those that use the RP publication...

I'm not saying its a crippling term either, its just removing their active tech sellers however many that maybe which means the other nations are forced to look elsewhere due to no active sellers in the alliance...that is unless MK want to buy from the inactive sellers?

Who wants allies that pack up and leave you in war after a round or two?
[/quote]
I'm sure many people still want to know the answer to the CM issue. I don't know where to look for it in the RP section. Quite frankly I don't see any merits and I'm not about to spend 10+ minutes trying to find an answer that likely doesn't exist. I'd like you to answer me here, or at least in pm.

You can still use inactive tech sellers as long as you send them messages throughout the deal to guide them through. I did that for quite a while with 2-3 slots of mine.

[Alterego]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302548924' post='2688667']
Do something about it

It's a fact that the Orders, TPF, Valhalla etc were the core of the old hegemony. Yes, it's a long time ago. So what? [/quote]

You talk about it like its present tense and not the distant past.

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302545672' post='2688645']
there aren't really many who agree with that, and if you're still in the same side as the old hegemony then you are shacked up with a load of alliances who are worse about that than just requiring forced tech deals.
[/quote]

You seem to think being connected to alliances today that long ago demanded reps that while harsh havent a patch of the demands made since then by you and your cronies in todays hegemony. You imply that they are lucky not to get harsh treatment because they have allies you dont approve of.

Edited April 11, 2011 by Alterego

[NowaCorp]

I'm glad to hear that another alliance has come to see that further fighting is pointless and completely unnecessary.

Doomhouse terms are not harsh and severe; they are in fact quite reasonable. Those in the at-war alliances should ask their leadership why they're still fighting. The war is over.

Terms won't get less punitive, rebuilding won't become easier. You'll just continue to lose nations to ZI, bill-lock or boredom.

Accept the defeat, rebuild your nations, and come back to fight another day. Best of luck in your future endeavors TOOL.

[Alterego]

[quote name='NowaCorp' timestamp='1302550925' post='2688678']
I'm glad to hear that another alliance has come to see that [b]further fighting is pointless and completely unnecessary[/b].

[/quote]
Well said. Wait, why the demand of a month of war for every single member of NPO before they get peace.

[Ryan Greenberg]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302550243' post='2688673']
This isn't about people and their predecessors, this is about the [i]people[/i] now taking shots at 'our side' (Haflinger, Alterego, HoT, etc) who tied themselves into what they complain about now. I mean, there's really nothing to complain about in forcing a natural seller alliance to sell some tech.
[/quote]
HoT, Haflinger, and Alterego represent a small faction of those who criticize "your side".

[NowaCorp]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1302551075' post='2688681']
Well said. Wait, why the demand of a month of war for every single member of NPO before they get peace.
[/quote]
While I don't speak for Doomhouse, and I'd prefer peace to this drawn-out war, I believe certain grievances must be addressed before a long standing peace can be achieved.

My message was directed mostly at the satellite alliances more-so than the core belligerents of NPO and Legion. Though the [i]"Terms won't get less punitive, rebuilding won't become easier. You'll just continue to lose nations to ZI, bill-lock or boredom."[/i] line still definitely applies here as well.

[BamaBuc]

[quote name='Drai' timestamp='1302547193' post='2688654']
Don't forget that every alliance (except NPO I believe) on this side was given the chance to exit the war earlier with no, or minimal reps.
[/quote]
You are incorrect.

-Bama

[Hereno]

[quote name='the rebel' timestamp='1302520356' post='2688500']
Many people do buy at 3mill/50tech to secrue sellers over the competition in this smaller world or because they generous, that isnt being ripped off, if you think so then buy 50tech without a seller
[/quote]

Even if 3m/50 was the going rate (which it isn't), these are supposed to be reparations. The fact that they're actually [i]profitable[/i] for TOOL speaks volumes for "the new hegemony". Then again, 3m/150 deals would still have been, what, $500,000 profit from each deal? Give me a break.

[Alterego]

[quote name='NowaCorp' timestamp='1302551820' post='2688686']
While I don't speak for Doomhouse, and I'd prefer peace to this drawn-out war, I believe certain grievances must be addressed before a long standing peace can be achieved.

My message was directed mostly at the satellite alliances more-so than the core belligerents of NPO and Legion. Though the [i]"Terms won't get less punitive, rebuilding won't become easier. You'll just continue to lose nations to ZI, bill-lock or boredom."[/i] line still definitely applies here as well.
[/quote]
This might come as a surprise to you but you and your allies are the core belligerents in this war of oppression. NPO and Legion are innocent victims of your aggressive actions against them. The idea they need to be punished for being the target of your unprovoked attack against them is a moronic suggestion.

Edited April 11, 2011 by Alterego

[Lord Velox]

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1302552496' post='2688692']
This might come as a surprise to you but you and your allies are the core belligerents in this war of oppression. NPO and Legion are innocent victims of your aggressive actions against them. The idea they need to be punished for being the target of your unprovoked attack against them is a moronic suggestion.
[/quote]
There is no innocence only varying degrees of guilt.
"But but it's in the past!!"
who cares?

Edited April 11, 2011 by Lord Velox