i would like to offer peace talks for woto

[BrJLa]

You keep believing that.

 

See, now you're being cute.

[General Gabriel]

TOP - 4,359,086.66 damage inflicted - 563 wars (5,5 wars per nation)
IRON - 2,620,276.80 damage inflicted - 634 wars (1.82 wars per nation)
 
Perhaps you can stop your petty attempts after you look at the numbers?

Looks like someone got a calculator for Christmas!

[Rayvon]

this dude's a flirt.
 
Real question here is: what is "woto"? Does anybody know?

'War Of The Orders'

[Commander shepard]

Keeping that in mind, it seems entirely reasonable that TOP could declare on NPO's upper tier while all of TOP's upper tier was staggered.

But with the nations you posted all of them were not staggered, some were in pm and according to your data that is a fact.
There was plenty of nations in TOP that could have declared on NPO when they entered from page 1. 
 

Edited January 6, 2014 by Commander shepard

[Master Hakai]

'War Of The Orders'

o ok.

 

these peace talks are going well so far

[Auctor]

But with the nations you posted all of them were not staggered, some were in pm and according to your data that is a fact.
There was plenty of nations in TOP that could have declared on NPO when they entered from page 1. 
 

 

 

Yeah TOP, you had four nations in peace mode that weren't hitting NPO. Shame on you and everything you do from hereon out is therefore invalid.

[hartfw]

But with the nations you posted all of them were not staggered, some were in pm and according to your data that is a fact.
There was plenty of nations in TOP that could have declared on NPO when they entered. 
 

 

Yes, Loli Loli and his non existent wc could have for 1 round in theory before being staggered, while all the rest of the top 20 did come out. Now go on and tell me again the rate at which the nations above 7.5k tech or 10k tech in NPO  entered this war.  Cause they were so close right?

 

But honestly, I expect nothing from you except to tell people fighting twice as hard as IRON to fight harder, and ignoring the people in the past that did fight for IRON.  Whats clear is you should keep posting more often then you are.

[Commander shepard]

 

Yes, Loli Loli and his non existent wc could have for 1 round in theory before being staggered, while all the rest of the top 20 did come out. Now go on and tell me again the rate at which the nations above 7.5k tech or 10k tech in NPO  entered this war.  Cause they were so close right?

I don't care and I thought you were counting the top 40 as upper tier, they look too high to call them middle tier. 

 

 

 

But honestly, I expect nothing from you except to tell people fighting twice as hard as IRON to fight harder, and ignoring the people in the past that did fight for IRON.  Whats clear is you should keep posting more often then you are.

 

I'd feel way more inclined to follow your line of thinking if I really saw IRON straining to fill the war slots it has available to them and staggering the people it's fighting effectively, honest I would. That hasn't happened in any kind of consistent way though - even with the numerical advantages IRON has had on its fronts. Truth be told, that's the really disappointing thing going on here. TOP is literally outperforming IRON and instead of working harder, IRON's developed this angsty teenager attitude outlook on everything and whining about things TOP did wars ago.

 

Good luck trying to find folks to support you after proving you don't have what it takes to even press your advantages in a winning war - I sure as heck don't feel very inclined to stick by yall to see what an IRON-led coalition would look like next war.

Edited January 6, 2014 by Commander shepard

[Crymson]

I was looking at the time and quite a lot of nations on page 1 were not out.

If they seriously had a problem with NPO then you think they would have took the nations out of PM and caused issues.

 

You were looking at the time. What fine evidence, especially from such an enormously impartial individual such as yourself.

 

In case anyone was wondering: yes, the above is covered in sarcasm.

 

 

You do realize that the page nations are on in the alliance display isn't really a viable metric for whether they're upper tier or not? Or that they change positions in relation to one another as they get beat down or other nations delete? Or that nations in the upper tier on that side were particular hard to keep staggered during Equilibrium at times and some were able to rotate in and out of peace mode? Or that what was left of NPO's upper tier(banks, whatever) was hippied down long term in Equilibrium by the time NPO declared on TOP?

 

Commander Shepard is known on the TOP boards as by far the biggest fool IRON has to offer. You're wasting your time on him.

 

 

See, this is what I'm getting at.  Whether and why NPO needs to have terms extracted on us is the real question.  TOP always intended to demand terms on NPO, and diminishing NPO's ability to challenge TOP has become the only continuing purpose of the war.  If the OWF wants to debate something, that's a more interesting topic than whether banks are obsolete.

 

If you actually believe that, then I'd say you're thinking a bit much of your alliance. Believe it or not, our foreign policy does not revolve around NPO. Nor does it center on maintaining whatever malevolent dominance you think we wish to hold; democracies don't exactly work this way. Indeed, that sort of methodology centers far more on dictatorships; for example, your alliance, the single one best-known in this community for its singular focus on maintaining unchallenged ascendancy. Perhaps you're simply unaware of history.

 

Whatever the case, I can tell you unreservedly that your assertion is incorrect.

Edited January 6, 2014 by Crymson

[Saladjoe]

Nice numbers hart. Also why does every thread boil down to someone parsing our AA?  :psyduck:

[Auctor]

tbf, it's just hart in every thread.

[Hereno]

 

See, this is what I'm getting at.  Whether and why NPO needs to have terms extracted on us is the real question.  TOP always intended to demand terms on NPO, and diminishing NPO's ability to challenge TOP has become the only continuing purpose of the war.  If the OWF wants to debate something, that's a more interesting topic than whether banks are obsolete.

 

We're not going to get an honest response but it's fun to watch them squirm while they pretend that anybody who posts here is going to be shocked by stating that 2+2=4.

[BrJLa]

 

If you actually believe that, then I'd say you're thinking a bit much of your alliance. Believe it or not, our foreign policy does not revolve around NPO. Nor does it center on maintaining whatever malevolent dominance you think we wish to hold; democracies don't exactly work this way. Indeed, that sort of methodology centers far more on dictatorships; for example, your alliance, the single one best-known in this community for its singular focus on maintaining unchallenged ascendancy. Perhaps you're simply unaware of history.

 

Whatever the case, I can tell you unreservedly that your assertion is incorrect.

 

Yeah, it doesn’t take much thinking about my alliance.  The message for weeks has been that NPO is prolonging the war by not allowing itself to be isolated.  The word was terms were coming, but the TOP side couldn’t decide/agree what to ask for.  Y’all came up with the current “unofficial” terms, which are kind of cute/novel in the way they’re topical to the circumstances, but are completely incidental to the already existing intention to demand terms on NPO.  And now the message seems to be that Polar has met its goals, but needs to keep the war going to respect the objectives of its coalition mates, and can’t dictate to its coalition when it’s time to call it quits.

 

All I’m saying is that this all seems more pertinent to the status of peace talks than the purpose of banks.

[alyster]

 

Yeah, it doesn’t take much thinking about my alliance.  The message for weeks has been that NPO is prolonging the war by not allowing itself to be isolated.  The word was terms were coming, but the TOP side couldn’t decide/agree what to ask for.  Y’all came up with the current “unofficial” terms, which are kind of cute/novel in the way they’re topical to the circumstances, but are completely incidental to the already existing intention to demand terms on NPO.  And now the message seems to be that Polar has met its goals, but needs to keep the war going to respect the objectives of its coalition mates, and can’t dictate to its coalition when it’s time to call it quits.

 

All I’m saying is that this all seems more pertinent to the status of peace talks than the purpose of banks.

 

 

Is that's what the Wall of Text with the Farrin's imperial seal in the Body Republic's subforum said? The one that got 4 pages of hailing and no real discussion?

Edited January 6, 2014 by alyster

[Stewie]

Does that mean you have a spy in NPO?

Edited January 6, 2014 by Stewie

[alyster]

Does that mean you have a spy in NPO?

 

If we'd have I wouldn't have to ask :p

[Mister black]

Oh I tried to help. This was an 11 pages disaster

[d3mon]

 

But honestly, I expect nothing from you except to tell people fighting twice as hard as IRON to fight harder, and ignoring the people in the past that did fight for IRON.  Whats clear is you should keep posting more often then you are.

 

In CS's defense, I don't think he was trying to belittle your contributions in EQ or Sengoku in anyway.

 

Anyhow, its good to see the unity of the NpO-TOP coalition, I can't help but wonder how long it will last until it self implodes.

Edited January 7, 2014 by d3mon

[Neo Uruk]

Oh I tried to help. This was an 11 pages disaster

Never try to help here. Also, to address the OP: you don't have the (OOC: game) experience to help in this field. I'd suggest learning how the politics around here work just a bit better. Study under a veteran alliance leader in a less-connected alliance, if available.

e: By veteran, I mean for a couple of years they've had gov experience. Preferably pick an alliance with about ~1m NS and four or five treaties. Make friends with gov members of that alliance as a diplomat, they'll be glad to answer questions about politics. Connections make you in this game. Edited January 7, 2014 by Neo Uruk

[Mogar]

Commander Shepard is known on the TOP boards as by far the biggest fool IRON has to offer. You're wasting your time on him.

What am I known as on TOP's forums?

 

Does that mean you have a spy in NPO?

only a few!

 

Never try to help here. Also, to address the OP: you don't have the (OOC: game) experience to help in this field. I'd suggest learning how the politics around here work just a bit better. Study under a veteran alliance leader in a less-connected alliance, if available.

e: By veteran, I mean for a couple of years they've had gov experience. Preferably pick an alliance with about ~1m NS and four or five treaties. Make friends with gov members of that alliance as a diplomat, they'll be glad to answer questions about politics. Connections make you in this game.

this is actually pretty sound advice, learning this world can be a difficult task, there are plenty who are able and willing to teach you though.

[Auctor]

 

In CS's defense, I don't think he was trying to belittle your contributions in EQ or Sengoku in anyway.

 

I ran GLoF's milcom in Equilibrium, bcortell and hartfw ran all of TOP front. It's a whole lot more authoritative coming from us than dude that glanced at TOP's first page every now and then and kinda remembers.

[Dajobo]

What an amusing read of propaganda and misinformation...

Before I start I'd like to help some people with this,
Reparation - the action of making amends for a wrong one has done, by providing payment or other assistance to those who have been wronged.
Let's be clear here. No one has asked for any reps despite Pacifica telling many people they were being asked for 20 billion in reps.
 
Now I have addressed the "reps" part of their claim lets look at the 20 billion number.
NPO has 35 nations who have spent the entire war in peacemode with and average of 12,046 Infra each. While they stay in PM they lose about 9% on their collections until they exit. They still keep 91% and the 9% adds to much less than half of the number they are sprouting.
 
Where this gets amusing is in the fact they are already in PM by choice! They have no objection to PM and they have no issue of denying the use of their aid slots for comrades and allies at war. They have stated many times they may as well stay at war and in PM. So here is where we get to the nub of it all. NPO do not object to PM, nor do they object to using it for months at a time, as long as their allies and enemies are burning while it happens.
 
It's this simple if you like PM so much, stay there! If you really object to PM then leave.
 
 
In Eq NPO screwed over most of the people who were helping them with this tactic. People were told NPO were going to war and and asked our help. They told us once the war was well under way while everyone else was burning that they were NOT going to be using their bankers. This was wonderful... We were all collectively in there using all of our nations while they made sure at the end they'd be in a strong position at the end. Then when their allies on the other side started taking too much damage, who were already sprouting while that war was still going that Polar was next, they ordered a mass peace out.
 
I say those to you NPO, nice and clear so you don't get it confused any longer. NSO was our target during this war. That same NSO gave it all, and while we still don't have a friendship with NSO, they have earnt some respect. You however are users and are losing more and more of our respect daily. Stop the lies and the bullshit. Stop telling people you are so hard done by and face up to the fact that many of the people you used are pissed at you. There is no difference if we are at war or the war ends tomorrow for your bankers, not one red cent let alone 20 billion dollars. They will remain in PM either way. The only people affected are the rest of Planet Bob, as usual.

[Neo Uruk]

despite Pacifica telling many people they were being asked for 20 billion in reps.

I don't have time to address the rest of your post, but I have not heard this nor have I heard of anyone that was told this. I have only ever heard Pacifica tell people they were being asked the equivalent of paying 20 billion in reps.

[Dajobo]

I don't have time to address the rest of your post, but I have not heard this nor have I heard of anyone that was told this. I have only ever heard Pacifica tell people they were being asked the equivalent of paying 20 billion in reps.

 

Good point.

If NPO paid XYZ 20b in reps that would mean NPO down 20 and XYZ up 20. This would be a difference of $40b. So it highlights even more how false the claim is.

[Mogar]

 

Good point.

If NPO paid XYZ 20b in reps that would mean NPO down 20 and XYZ up 20. This would be a difference of $40b. So it highlights even more how false the claim is.

lets make them pay 10b to nations of my choosing in tech/cash, and we'll call it even?