Jump to content

Rogue Senators and the Sanction War


HeroofTime55

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 175
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

a fair and well-developed argument; i can only hope that one day we will mature enough to write economics papers in college about a children's card game

yea what the actual fuck http://nintenderek.webs.com/economicsofyugioh.htm

 

I believe in the heart of the cards, do you? 

Edited by CheeKy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont think anything is wrong with Sanctions.  It will make the game interesting again since color sanction is part of the gameplay..

 

Saying color sanction is bad is like saying nuking any nation, blockading any nation is bad.

 

But then again, even though HoT was sanctioned by MK, shouldn't the GOD senator be able to repeal any sanctions done by o ya baby?  If so, what is the point of the complaint?

 

Nuking or blockading nations are part of mutual warfare. If you can nuke me I can nuke you back. And the nukes can fly between us merrily.

 

Sanctions are entirely one-sided in that sense, yet they are also indiscriminate in effect. They dont just damage the nation fired at them, but several other nations as well.

 

A second senator on the same sphere, AFTER some time, can remove the sanction, but by that time the damage is done, the nation most likely already moved and established new trades. 

 

These are some of the reasons that the use of sanctions as tools of war are a long-standing taboo here. /b/ tried it and got what they deserved. When was the last time you saw them around here eh?

 

In conclusion, your post was simply ignorant. If you havent the slightest idea what you are talking about, it might not be necessary to post at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow.......I have been called alot of nasty things but this is beyond reprehensible......

 

I am now a sad panda.
 

 

Hey at least your not Florida D:

 

It explains our elections though

Edited by Ogaden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nuking or blockading nations are part of mutual warfare. If you can nuke me I can nuke you back. And the nukes can fly between us merrily.

 

Sanctions are entirely one-sided in that sense, yet they are also indiscriminate in effect. They dont just damage the nation fired at them, but several other nations as well.

 

A second senator on the same sphere, AFTER some time, can remove the sanction, but by that time the damage is done, the nation most likely already moved and established new trades. 

 

These are some of the reasons that the use of sanctions as tools of war are a long-standing taboo here. /b/ tried it and got what they deserved. When was the last time you saw them around here eh?

 

In conclusion, your post was simply ignorant. If you havent the slightest idea what you are talking about, it might not be necessary to post at all.

 

 

Taboo is a matter of culture.  But whats the point of having those game mechanics if you cannot use it.  I am not ignorant, I just do not discriminate game mechanics for the sake of other people saying otherwise.  Forcing another people not using a game mechanic is very discriminating and more of Fascist complex by people who want it not used.

 

Peace mode has been a taboo for some simply because some say so.  But it is purely valid tactic.  The same goes to other game mechanics.

 

The senator power is available to all who can value it and organize to place their man at it it.  If you cannot value or use it, you should not play this game at all.  

 

Not only that, the gameplay will be more colorful if you place back the color game politics.

 

If you Tabooist people do not want the Senator game mechanic, better request almighty Admin to remove it and your problem will be solved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, for one, am shocked that MK have chosen to behave like children. 

 

 

Why are you shocked?  They have been doing this since their inception.  I'd say "leopards can't change their spots" but I don't want anyone to think they are anything so noble as a beast like that.  There are, of course, a few exceptions there but as a whole, this is true.

Edited by Regent of Omerta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you shocked?  They have been doing this since their inception.  I'd say "leopards can't change their spots" but I don't want anyone to think they are anything so noble as a beast like that.  There are, of course, a few exceptions there but as a whole, this is true.

He isn't shocked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, folks, is it any surprise that MK and their ilk have thrown any and all standards of reciprocal decency to the side now that they face a losing war?

 

I would say be thankful, imagine what there going to do if we can get this to become reality,  I invision quality crying and whining allot better than this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you shocked?  They have been doing this since their inception.  I'd say "leopards can't change their spots" but I don't want anyone to think they are anything so noble as a beast like that.  There are, of course, a few exceptions there but as a whole, this is true.

Funny, your pre-AI alliance did quite a bit of shouting in the past few years about how much they've changed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you shocked?  They have been doing this since their inception.  I'd say "leopards can't change their spots" but I don't want anyone to think they are anything so noble as a beast like that.  There are, of course, a few exceptions there but as a whole, this is true.

Considering you're formerly of Valhalla, this is hilarious. Congrats on destroying your own coalition's moralist facade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I've never really understood why sanctions weren't considered valid war tactics.

 

If it is determined that a war action jeopardizes the safety of the sphere I would think sanctions are justified. If you disagree, senators are subject to a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never really understood why sanctions weren't considered valid war tactics.

 

If it is determined that a war action jeopardizes the safety of the sphere I would think sanctions are justified. If you disagree, senators are subject to a vote.

My guess is because, "way back when," people felt like it was an attack on nonparticipant nations, and depending on trade partners' activity, it could be terribly inconvenient. Nowadays, it hardly matters, what with resource-swapping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They damage nonparticipating nations, plus using them in an alliance war invites escalation, and sanction wars can do enormous damage to both sides without accomplishing anything for either one.

 

In what ways does that differ from a nuclear war on the sphere?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In what ways does that differ from a nuclear war on the sphere?

 

GRL exists but it hits everyone equally and even at it's worst it's less of a problem, I really dont see the situations as comparable on that level though I can see how a technicality argument can be made. And for the rest, perhaps again a technical similarity if you focus only on non-nuclear nations getting nuked in war, but the rest get a chance to nuke back, there are ground attacks to be made, tech and land to be taken, casualties to be gained. Even a non-nuclear nation getting pummelled with nukes has some chance to fight back and get a lick in there somewhere, and even if every try comes up snake eyes there will still be some casualties to show for it at least.

 

Sanctions offer none of those redeeming characteristics.

Edited by Sigrun Vapneir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never really understood why sanctions weren't considered valid war tactics.

 

If it is determined that a war action jeopardizes the safety of the sphere I would think sanctions are justified. If you disagree, senators are subject to a vote.

If senators of a color sphere started weaponizing their sanctions to much, ultimately the effect would be those negatively sanctioned would try getting a senator of their own to sanction back, causing a sanction civil war on that color making it very unstable concerning trades. Or any nation which might be negatively effected just moves to a different color and form new trade circles there, then start sanctioning from their new color the alliance who was hitting them sanctions. The result would be a lot of uninvolved nations are forced to switch color depending on who they want to continue trading with and who they want to do tech deals. So mainly it would just destabilizes the color sphere, as replacing trades on another color is pretty easy now that nations can switch resources.

 

While an alliance could try minimizing the negative effect it would have on them by internalizing all their trade circles and trying to gain control of all the senate seats, I don't think many would consider it worth all the hassle to minimize the blow back from it just to see their enemies and anyone who wants to trade with them move to a different one. For sanctions to really hurt, someone would need to be sanctioned on every color. Otherwise its just an annoying inconvenience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...