A Message from the Emperor of the New Pacific Order

[JoshuaR]

If it's outdated and unnecessary, it shouldn't bother you that we continue to impede our economics by keeping them.

The real point is that your statement is a lie. Banking nations don't have so much tech.

 

I've seen your nations' warchests. These PM nations could have fought, sent aid with 100% slots, and continued to send aid even now, and the war would have been over long before Christmas. Every other alliance on your side has taken more damage than I'd wish upon anybody, all because you Pretend to have aid banks and Pretend you have willfully chosen an outdated system of economics.

[Lusitan]

If you bother doing the math, the damage done to pacifica is quite small compared to forcing them out of peace mode.

 

I am not in the loop of anything these days and I have no idea why my government wants it but, for me, letting go people who just sit in peace mode throughout the war is just stupid and the CN recognition that escaping into peace mode is an effective way to dodge a war with no material consequence. That makes a whole lot less sense than terms.

 

Time to grow up and stop crying. These are not the times of noCB war, no one is putting in cripling terms. The only limitation alliances have these days are their competence and their activity.

[Letum]

Clearly you have either been misled, or you now feign ignorance- the coalition dropped the PM term after the first Pacifican counter offer. In its place we accepted Farrin's proposal of aid restrictions (on those nations who have not fought), we exempted their senators as they requested, we then considerably cut the multiplier on the duration of the war from 2 to 1.5 to 1.3. Farrin countered this with .5 - and then proceeded to rage quit over a .8 difference (which remained negotiable). Negotiations at this point are a technical discussion over what the multiplier should be, no one is forcing anything onerous on NPO, certainly nothing NPO hasn't itself proposed.

Your coalition has made two changes to its terms:

1) Moving from "forced peacemode" to "forced banning of receiving aid or sending aid". This might look like a large compromise, but in practice it doesn't affect anything other than the collections of the nations in question. What really matters however is the aid that we are denied from sending to our fighting lower-tier, and which for some reason you insist on preventing us from doing. So what you have done on this front isn't really more than a marginal change.

2) Lowering the "multiplier" as time goes on. Moving from 2.0 to 1.3 might sound "large", but again, in context, it isn't. At the time of the first peace offer, we were at around 2 months of war - with a 2.0 multiplier, that goes to 4 months of terms. Right now, we are almost at 3 months of war; with a 1.3 multiplier, that is also about 4 months of terms. So where exactly is the practical change here?

I will grant that your coalition has been remarkably effective in trying to repackage the same terms again and again so as to pretend it is actually "compromising" when it isn't, but please don't treat us like idiots. You are using the threat of war to force onerous terms on the NPO (aid restrictions that damage economic activity), and let's not pretend that just because NPO might be willing to negotiate on that basis we aren't being forced into it.

[Jesse End]

Why do bank nations need 10k+ tech?

Cause admin hasn't made a rule barring them from having tech.
 

Clearly you have either been misled, or you now feign ignorance- the coalition dropped the PM term after the first Pacifican counter offer. In its place we accepted Farrin's proposal of aid restrictions (on those nations who have not fought), we exempted their senators as they requested, we then considerably cut the multiplier on the duration of the war from 2 to 1.5 to 1.3. Farrin countered this with .5 - and then proceeded to rage quit over a .8 difference (which remained negotiable). Negotiations at this point are a technical discussion over what the multiplier should be, no one is forcing anything onerous on NPO, certainly nothing NPO hasn't itself proposed.

If farrin wants to make a public appeal to the twenty !@#$ posters of the OWF then by all means he's free to do that- all the same we'll be waiting when he wants to talk to us again. The only group extending the war at this point is NPO.

The duration of the peace terms hasn't changed much. It started out as about 4 months, and it's still about 4 months. And let me state yet again that your side refused to counter offer.

Additionally, nothing to do with senators has been accepted.

[22:18:19] <&Dajobo|NpO|> on the issue of Senators let's worry about the big picture first
[22:18:23] <&Dajobo|NpO|> they are details
 

The real point is that your statement is a lie. Banking nations don't have so much tech.
 
I've seen your nations' warchests. These PM nations could have fought, sent aid with 100% slots, and continued to send aid even now, and the war would have been over long before Christmas. Every other alliance on your side has taken more damage than I'd wish upon anybody, all because you Pretend to have aid banks and Pretend you have willfully chosen an outdated system of economics.

How many times are you guys going to spew lies about us not fighting without providing any numbers?

Our pre-war strength was 12,575,310 NS
Our current strength is 5,756,099 NS

We had 107 nations above 50k, now we have 37, so 34% remaining of our 50k+ NS nations.
Our starting 50k+ nations have lost 48% of the total alliance losses, while being 30% of the alliance by number.
Our 50k+ NS nations alone have lost more NS than NSO has lost as a whole, and our alliance has lost more than NSO's total size on Nov 1. Edited January 26, 2014 by Jesse End

[iamthey]

The real point is that your statement is a lie. Banking nations don't have so much tech.
 
I've seen your nations' warchests. These PM nations could have fought, sent aid with 100% slots, and continued to send aid even now, and the war would have been over long before Christmas. Every other alliance on your side has taken more damage than I'd wish upon anybody, all because you Pretend to have aid banks and Pretend you have willfully chosen an outdated system of economics.

 
 
Banking nations also don't import tech, so we could expect most of the banks to be running zero tech imports in the lead up to the war.
 

 

Tech Importation from 9/15-10/15 for those PM'd NPO nations above 90k:

 
magus rules http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=132439 1700
lithium http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=488644 1600
walt schmidt http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=233123 1500
kingdom of dark http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=29470 1500
mr breeze http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=49773 1300
arcades057 http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=90642 1200
chilerelleno http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=113984 1200
desfuhrer http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=53947 1200
yohon http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=38931 1080
acidnine http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=329212 900
guido http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=97698 900
emperor svb http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=256346 800
lord strider http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=84844 600
alexit http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=132119 600
woodrow http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=169033 0
albertspeer http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=195263 0
sable http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=18453 0
sludgemonkey http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=22897 0
eclipse363 http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=152802 0
lenadius http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=134146 0

Edited January 26, 2014 by iamthey

[Hob Dobson]

I didn't want to post but screw it. These infra heavy nations that you use as banks only sure have a lot of tech for just being banks. It's pretty obvious that the terms are meant to limit tech importation for these banks rather then rebuilding aid to the lower tier. If it was aimed at rebuilding aid it would be a blanket aid ban. But nice spin.

 

It would be difficult to characterize war-averse nations like Cirith Ungol or Soviet Domain as anything other than bankers. It may be even more difficult to characterize Kingdom of Dark and Delray Beach (ranked #10 and #22, respectively, for total casualties among all CN nations,) as bankers.

 

Knowing how much VE's own Arcland prefers to function as a banker, yet Warlocke has still managed to accumulate 2.4M casualties, I'd consider it reasonable to estimate that 30-40% of NPO's top 37 nations in peace mode are reserves, and that a select number of nations among those are in peace mode for reasons outside the domain of CN. Make of that what you will, but the numbers suggest that neither side is being entirely truthful in characterizing said nations as "all bankers" or "all reserves"

 

As to the crippling extent of rebuilding aid potentially lost by holding 33 nations in PM ... that also requires a bit of perspective, as JoshuaR notes.  I'd need to spend roughly 1.7B to rebuild my one nation; doing so on aid alone (6 slots, 9M each) would easily take 310 days.  At that rate, 14B-21B doesn't cover much rebuilding compared to what is likely to be needed, maybe translating to 33 nations similar to mine requiring 40% more time to fully recover to pre-war conditions. Considering the organization that would be needed to translate into completely efficient use of that many nations at the end of a 3 or 4 month waiting period, it seems to me that the terms being discussed in the OP are only crippling to the extent that NPO is already crippled and consequently of less use than many seem to be assuming.

 

All that said, everyone's free to draw different conclusions from the information available to them. Sometimes that even results in interesting propaganda.

[The Zigur]

How many times are you guys going to spew lies about us not fighting without providing any numbers?

Our pre-war strength was 12,575,310 NS
Our current strength is 5,756,099 NS

We had 107 nations above 50k, now we have 37, so 34% remaining of our 50k+ NS nations.
Our starting 50k+ nations have lost 48% of the total alliance losses, while being 30% of the alliance by number.
Our 50k+ NS nations alone have lost more NS than NSO has lost as a whole, and our alliance has lost more than NSO's total size on Nov 1.

 

Every time you copy and paste irrelevant statistics about total NS I will post relevant numbers reflecting comparable reduction and threat capability:

 

NSO has suffered a 60% score reduction, 66% NS reduction, and average tech per member sits at 1500 tech
NG has suffered a 60% score reduction, 69% NS reduction, and average tech per member sits at 2500 tech*
TLR has suffered a 50% score reduction, 66% NS reduction, and average tech per member sits at 1866 tech
NPO has only suffered a 40% score reduction, 50% NS reduction, and average tech per member sits at 2100 tech
 
*NG began the war with a much higher ave NS and tech, and also lost 40 members such as Franz Ferdinand

Edited January 26, 2014 by Tywin Lannister

[Nikolay]

 

Why do bank nations need 10k+ tech?

I can think of a wide variety of reasons. Perhaps some acquired most of that tech before they became banks. Perhaps some are buying tech to inflate their NS and the NS of the alliance. Perhaps some got that tech in order to be able to defend themselves if they were caught off guard and attacked in a war before they were able to enter PM or if they got attacked by a rogue during peace time. Perhaps they acquired all that tech for a situation where their alliance is being threatened with perma-war and they are called to fight. Et cetera, et cetera. 

 

Anyways, how are bank nations outdated, as many of the fine gentlemen in this thread are suggesting? They are just not practical for high AVG NS alliances, that's it. For massive recruiting alliances like NPO, they are quite useful.

 

 

And, BTW, the concept of "Banking Nations" who must remain in PM during a war to give reconstruction aid post-war, has been outdated for a while ago. With the amount of warchest the high-tier nations have, any self-respecting high-tier naton can get involved, rebuild and give aid, all at the same time.

Sure, these high-tier nations can rebuild and give aid at the same time, but only by sacrificing aid slots that could be used for buying tech, and these war-fighting nations really do need their tech. Moreover, an extraordinarily long war could exhaust the warchests of these high-tier nations and eliminate any possibilities of them aiding the rebuilding effort.

 

So please, stop parroting this ridiculous party line according to which bank nations aren't a thing. That's demonstrably false and intuitively stupid. Because Umbrella or TOP don't need banks doesn't mean NPO doesn't benefit from having a few dozen.

[Joe Kremlin]

Cause admin hasn't made a rule barring them from having tech.

 

Fair enough, but there's no rule that says we have to believe you when you call them bank nations either.

[Jesse End]

Banking nations also don't import tech, so we could expect most of the banks to be running zero tech imports in the lead up to the war.

Our banking nations sure do need tech, since in practically every war we fight, our enemies try to force us to make our banks fight under the threat of draconian terms.

[Lord Levistus]

That would be a credible argument if Valhalla was at war with somebody else in our coalition, in which case, Pacifica would be guilty of saving their own pixels but making life more difficult for her allies and coalition mates. However, Valhalla declared war on NPO exclusively. By agreeing to turn the Valhalla front into a negligible one, NPO made a deal which allowed them to concentrate their attention on the primary fronts, where it could, for example, put more pressure on NpO or TOP, thus helping relieve pressure from allies and coalition mates like NSO. Or am I wrong here? 

 

You are. However if you want to jump on TOP's bandwagon and parrot their propaganda, feel free.

[Letum]

As to the crippling extent of rebuilding aid potentially lost by holding 33 nations in PM ... that also requires a bit of perspective, as JoshuaR notes.  I'd need to spend roughly 1.7B to rebuild my one nation; doing so on aid alone (6 slots, 9M each) would easily take 310 days.  At that rate, 14B-21B doesn't cover much rebuilding compared to what is likely to be needed, maybe translating to 33 nations similar to mine requiring 40% more time to fully recover to pre-war conditions. Considering the organization that would be needed to translate into completely efficient use of that many nations at the end of a 3 or 4 month waiting period, it seems to me that the terms being discussed in the OP are only crippling to the extent that NPO is already crippled and consequently of less use than many seem to be assuming.

The point isn't in the recovery of those 33 nations, but all the small sub 10k nations that they could be aiding post-war. 14-21bn goes a long way in the lower tier.

[Geerland]

A few of you picked up on kingdom of dark; he is not a banker, he is a senator.

Now, as for the tech imports. Maybe the econ people at NPO realised that the banks tech levels were so awful (they were) that they could benefit from a little bit more tech, and directed some their way?

[Franz Ferdinand]

The point isn't in the recovery of those 33 nations, but all the small sub 10k nations that they could be aiding post-war. 14-21bn goes a long way in the lower tier.

Shouldn't these small nations have been built up pre-war to be ready to fight and to be able to rebuild themselves to a sufficient size again once the fallout subsided?

[The Zigur]

The point isn't in the recovery of those 33 nations, but all the small sub 10k nations that they could be aiding post-war. 14-21bn goes a long way in the lower tier.

 

I agree completely! Such rapid recovery would place NPO in a position to launch a new war within a very short timespan and seek revenge. I don't see how thats good for long term worldwide stability.

[Karl Peters]

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/120332-a-message-from-the-emperor-of-the-new-pacific-order/?p=3221125

 

He goes against the propoganda of this thread, but then comes and spews his own propoganda? Hmmmm...hypocritical much?

[IYIyTh]

A few of you picked up on kingdom of dark; he is not a banker, he is a senator.

Now, as for the tech imports. Maybe the econ people at NPO realised that the banks tech levels were so awful (they were) that they could benefit from a little bit more tech, and directed some their way?

 

Or maybe you're full of shit. :)

[Joe Kremlin]

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/120332-a-message-from-the-emperor-of-the-new-pacific-order/?p=3221125

 

He goes against the propoganda of this thread, but then comes and spews his own propoganda? Hmmmm...hypocritical much?

Tywin is fair and balanced in his reporting.

[Unknown Smurf]

 

If what is listed in the OP is true, then Kaskus fully supports NPOs efforts to ensure that they are not forced into cruel and unusual forms of reparations. 

 

It was not too long ago that we fought for the end of unusual reparations; from viceroys to E/PZIs of leaders of enemy combatants. How quickly the tables have turned. 

 

From our core we have always opposed reparations and unfair wars. We truly believe that wars should be more frequent and more localized rather than the global wars we see today. It is clear that the Polardox coalition does not see the world this way and is planning for a future war against Pacifica; otherwise why would they ensure that a potential ally (or at least coalition partner) would bare such unnecessary crippling of their ability to defend themselves and their allies?

 

But at the same time, we have paid reparations. We paid GOONS 157 million when they raided our ODP partner. We were not wrong there to just defend our allies, the same way NPO defends her ally now,  but we had to do what we had to do after a prolonged conflict in order to ensure that we could stand for what is right in the future. Therefore I urge Farrin and the rest of NPO to bare what must be borne, satyagraha. Pay these reparations now, let the bloodshed end. Just do not forget what was forced upon you. It is only a matter of time until the tides turn. 

 

 

Ooooooh, the Webster's Dictionary argument. So effective!

 

You're obviously new here, or inexperienced at most. The terms offered to NPO are in response to their tactical decisions made over the course of the war. Any potential benefit to us is purely coincidental and unintended. ;)

 

Ooooooh, the ignore-what-he-said argument. So effective!

 

"You're obviously new here, or inexperienced at most." || If he is inexperienced "at most" then that does not necessitate that he is new here. The phrase you are looking for is "at least."

 

Maybe you should borrow his copy of the dictionary. 

 

 

Are you implying that Pacifica intends to come after us post-war?

 

Well, hey, don't go justifying what you're arguing against, young buck.

 

His definition of punitive reps is correct. And considering history it would be unwise for Pacifica to put themselves in a beneficial position should any war be in their future, not just one against you. Though it is clear with the reps your side is attempting to force on pacifica that you are planning to come after them post-war. 

 

Go on, NPO. Continue letting your allies burn for the well-being of your tops tiers who remain safely in Peace Mode.

And, BTW, the concept of "Banking Nations" who must remain in PM during a war to give reconstruction aid post-war, has been outdated for a while ago. With the amount of warchest the high-tier nations have, any self-respecting high-tier naton can get involved, rebuild and give aid, all at the same time.

 

If they wish to have banking nations, let them have banking nations. Not every alliance needs to conform to your standards of how an alliance should work. 

 

Why do bank nations need 10k+ tech?

 

Why not? Are you planning a war of aggression against them later, in which, you do not want them to have an upper tier? 

Edited January 26, 2014 by Unknown Smurf

[Franz Ferdinand]

Why not? Are you planning a war of aggression against them later, in which, you do not want them to have an upper tier? 

 

If that was the case, would it not be more beneficial to the aggressors if the banking nations are left alone as it would mean they are isolated from help in the next war?

[The Zigur]

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/120332-a-message-from-the-emperor-of-the-new-pacific-order/?p=3221125

 

He goes against the propoganda of this thread, but then comes and spews his own propoganda? Hmmmm...hypocritical much?

 

Propaganda implies I have something to gain from this. The war has stalled my personal goal of achieving a Manhattan Project (which I could have achieved if the war didn't happen) and I currently sit at Zero Infrastructure when I could easily join a number of alliances as govt. Considering that my news service is actually against my personal interests it can't be called propaganda, unlike the vitriol Farrin posted.

[Letum]

I agree completely! Such rapid recovery would place NPO in a position to launch a new war within a very short timespan and seek revenge. I don't see how thats good for long term worldwide stability.

"Revenge" is a political act based off emotion, not logic. Revenge does not further the Pacific's political ascendance in the world; whoever is today's enemy may well not be tomorrow's enemy. Having a policy of keeping enemies as enemies between conflicts is foolish as it would only lead to an infinite accumulation of enemies.

[Franz Ferdinand]

 

Propaganda implies I have something to gain from this. The war has stalled my personal goal of achieving a Manhattan Project (which I could have achieved if the war didn't happen) and I currently sit at Zero Infrastructure when I could easily join a number of alliances as govt. Considering that my news service is actually against my personal interests it can't be called propaganda, unlike the vitriol Farrin posted.

I'm sure that if you wanted to have some of the components of the Manhattan Project, you'd build up a little to be able to receive them.

[Azaghul]

The point isn't in the recovery of those 33 nations, but all the small sub 10k nations that they could be aiding post-war. 14-21bn goes a long way in the lower tier.

Nations that could also be aided by quickly (and many instantly) rebuilt middle tier nations.

 

Can we please dispense with the silly and blatantly false notion that NPO critically needs those 33 nations to rebuild?

[The Zigur]

I'm sure that if you wanted to have some of the components of the Manhattan Project, you'd build up a little to be able to receive them.

 

My warchest is severely depleted :p

 

$400,000 or so to be exact.