Hyperbad Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='ComradeR' timestamp='1319404927' post='2831078'] Haha, how embarrassing it would be to surrender, even more that you would have to pay to surrender. [/quote] It's pretty much been the story for most of the wars which have to date occurred. The only difference here is scale, it's been brought down to individual nations as opposed to alliances as a whole "paying to surrender." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 If you want to opt out of war, you have to pay up. Makes sense to me. The reps are quite affordable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernkastel Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Lord Levistus' timestamp='1319416988' post='2831239'] Who said disband? These terms keep the membership from getting pummeled and put them under NG protection. The gov remains and takes it on the chin until NG get bored and agree to end it. [/quote] They'll continue getting pummeled together until they literally have nothing left. They'll take their pummeling and beating, they know its been coming for [i]months[/i] that they would have to pay for Arrnea's continuous ignorance, slander and lies at some point. You would think the sheer satisfaction of just rolling the crap out of SOS would be enough payment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Lord Levistus' timestamp='1319416988' post='2831239'] Who said disband? These terms keep the membership from getting pummeled and put them under NG protection. The gov remains and takes it on the chin until NG get bored and agree to end it. [/quote] So is this the strategy you're going to encourage your alliance to take the next time you find yourself losing a war? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hormones74 Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 Rep are very cheap, not to mention very fair for their smaller nations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Levistus Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 (edited) double post Edited October 24, 2011 by Lord Levistus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Levistus Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1319418463' post='2831258'] So is this the strategy you're going to encourage your alliance to take the next time you find yourself losing a war? [/quote] If we were alone, and it was a beating I could save my membership from by doing so, and it was a beating I brought apon my membership, then yes. It's a very specific scenario though. They aren't losing, they're impotent. They can't even make NG pay for the damage they do in trade. They can't do enough to make NG notice. Are you saying you would hold your membership to the flames out of pride? Your pride is more important than the alliance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ilyani Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 These reps are totally fair, I don't quite understand all the anger around them. Besides, there's little worse in this game than a wartime deserter... if you're going to surrender in an alliance war, you deserve to pay some sort of consequence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Lord Levistus' timestamp='1319420653' post='2831278'] If we were alone, and it was a beating I could save my membership from by doing so, and it was a beating I brought apon my membership, then yes. It's a very specific scenario though. They aren't losing, they're impotent. They can't even make NG pay for the damage they do in trade. They can't do enough to make NG notice. Are you saying you would hold your membership to the flames out of pride? Your pride is more important than the alliance? [/quote] Most of my members have more pride than I do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1319421296' post='2831284'] Most of my members have more pride than I do. [/quote] thing is, we'd have to agree to surrender, not you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordliam Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Lord Levistus' timestamp='1319416244' post='2831230'] Yep. If i were SOS gov I'd order everyone to drop to these terms unless they're already at the table and looking at better terms. There's no dishonour in knowing when a fight is lost. Getting your membership run over because you can't see that, or even worse out of pride is just another way leadership can be a failure. [/quote] Except you're not SOS gov and Arrnea isn't even close to likely to let every body go and have himself take the damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejarue Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1319411954' post='2831168'] [b]Decom all[/b] military improvements (except those required for the Strategic Defense Initiative), [b]soldiers to at least 25% of population[/b], and all tanks, planes, nukes, and naval ships. It's an awkward wording but it makes sense to me. [/quote] Makes sense to me. Basically means you don't have to decom soldiers. Decom to 35%. That's "at least 25%". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonator21 Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 (edited) [quote name='lordliam' timestamp='1319422960' post='2831303'] Except you're not SOS gov and Arrnea isn't even close to likely to let every body go and have himself take the damage. [/quote] If that's all NG wants (Arrnea), then he should just turn himself over tbh. Let SOS go for him to come out of PM and be ZI'd or whatever. Edit: He's out of PM, so I guess this post is even more irrelevant. Edit 2: Hahaha, NG blew the stagger on him! XD Edited October 24, 2011 by Gibsonator21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoomzoomzoom Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1319413096' post='2831182'] Especially when it is your alliance. [/quote] Yes. No reason deserters from Non Grata should ever be treated differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Xander the Only Posted October 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1319425734' post='2831338'] Yes. No reason deserters from Non Grata should ever be treated differently. [/quote] Indeed. The last deserter was handled quite well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='lordliam' timestamp='1319422960' post='2831303'] Except you're not SOS gov and Arrnea isn't even close to likely to let every body go and have himself take the damage. [/quote] How do you propose he keep people in the alliance? [quote name='Gibsonator21' timestamp='1319423211' post='2831308'] Hahaha, NG blew the stagger on him! XD [/quote] Oh wow. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/8GJJ0.gif[/IMG] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Gibsonator21' timestamp='1319423211' post='2831308'] If that's all NG wants (Arrnea), then he should just turn himself over tbh. Let SOS go for him to come out of PM and be ZI'd or whatever. Edit: He's out of PM, so I guess this post is even more irrelevant. Edit 2: Hahaha, NG blew the stagger on him! XD [/quote] Watch them make some new demand if he goes back into peace mode. Edited October 24, 2011 by James Dahl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 I like this new precedent that NG is setting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 The only reason these terms are being used is because this is a curbstomp. Terms like this wouldn't ever be used in a major war. It's stupid as hell, but NG will get away with it. Back in the day if you forced your tech raid target to pay up to get out of the war, you'd look like scum (unless of course he fought back). Same thing imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Earogema' timestamp='1319429697' post='2831388'] The only reason these terms are being used is because this is a curbstomp. Terms like this wouldn't ever be used in a major war. It's stupid as hell, but NG will get away with it. Back in the day if you forced your tech raid target to pay up to get out of the war, you'd look like scum (unless of course he fought back). Same thing imo. [/quote] You should read up on NG and GOONS' new raid policies :v Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanilla Napalm Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='dejarue' timestamp='1319423094' post='2831304'] Makes sense to me. Basically means you don't have to decom soldiers. Decom to 35%. That's "at least 25%". [/quote] Makes sense to me; hitting turtles gets old, and with a minimum soldier stipulation NG can at least get some swag Forever progressive! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Buscemi Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1319425953' post='2831343'] How do you propose he keep people in the alliance? Oh wow. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/8GJJ0.gif[/IMG] [/quote] And you wouldn't believe the tongue lashing he got. NG loves to fight way too much! Good thing it's faster to declare on a nation vs. that nation hitting peace mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanilla Napalm Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='James Dahl' timestamp='1319429831' post='2831392'] You should read up on NG and GOONS' new raid policies :v [/quote] You don't have to tell me GOONS policies, because i totally already know. ...but for the sake of MegaAros (incidentally, ascend ascend etc), i'd say you should explain them. He probably doesn't know what the !@#$ you're talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 [quote name='Steve Buscemi' timestamp='1319430372' post='2831397'] And you wouldn't believe the tongue lashing he got. NG loves to fight way too much! Good thing it's faster to declare on a nation vs. that nation hitting peace mode. [/quote] Actually, looking at his war screen myself, I'm not seeing a blown stagger. I'm seeing Arrnea declaring on two people on the 21st, followed by 3 NG nations declaring on him on the 22nd, which means unless all the people on either one of those days peaces out, no stagger is blown. Gibsy, why do you lead me astray? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg23 Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 I just wonder what youll ask for to let the entire alliance get peace. We shall see I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.