Public Notice from Karma

[LiquidMercury]

I don't get how people say "I hope the innocents take these fair terms" while looking at them and seeing that they have to put Karma POW in their AA for a whole month and decom their military improvements.

Individual surrender terms have become nothing more than procedural and ignored by 99% of people fighting. If any side actually wanted to thin out the ranks and improve their odds of winning they would set terms that would be fair enough to intice people not willing to fight and would thus weaken the enemy.

Yet no one does this, not even close...

those terms are a joke and far from "fair"

Please tell me how wearing another AA/decomming military improvements is so unfair, so heinous that no one will take the terms? You're looking at not having to pay reps, not having to take continuous dmg for the remainder of the war, not having to worry about staying up for update blitz, among many other things. I believe these terms to be very fair and easy going for anyone looking to get out without much dmg to their nation or for someone who doesn't believe in what the hegemony stands for.

[Asriel Belacqua]

I don't get how people say "I hope the innocents take these fair terms" while looking at them and seeing that they have to put Karma POW in their AA for a whole month and decom their military improvements.

Individual surrender terms have become nothing more than procedural and ignored by 99% of people fighting. If any side actually wanted to thin out the ranks and improve their odds of winning they would set terms that would be fair enough to intice people not willing to fight and would thus weaken the enemy.

Yet no one does this, not even close...

those terms are a joke and far from "fair"

Such unfair terms. Let's see, basically white-peace, allowing people to build improvements that help their economy, decomming military (also helps economy), and wearing an AA tag so they can be protected if they need to be, and not confused as an enemy by wearing another AA.

Also, that's why the Karma POW alliance has already broken 500K NS, and why NPO has only offered terms as lenient as these about... 1 time, IF THAT?

Really horrible terms karma. I hate you all for this. You should all die. /sarcasm.

[SpiderJerusalem]

We have met before, logs edited to remove profanity only. (If I missed any please PM).

NPO can't lose with grunts like this one.

Oh God. I don't think I have laughed this much in quite some time

Way to go Pacifica. I am sure you'll win the war any day now

[hizzy]

I don't get how people say "I hope the innocents take these fair terms" while looking at them and seeing that they have to put Karma POW in their AA for a whole month and decom their military improvements.

Individual surrender terms have become nothing more than procedural and ignored by 99% of people fighting. If any side actually wanted to thin out the ranks and improve their odds of winning they would set terms that would be fair enough to intice people not willing to fight and would thus weaken the enemy.

Yet no one does this, not even close...

those terms are a joke and far from "fair"

Wearing another AA for a month?

For starters, it's AT MOST a month... meaning if the conflict draws out longer, you get let go by default. If it ends before that, then you get let go earlier.

And this only makes sense as someone who surrenders should be anywhere BUT the alliance they were in which was attacked. Unless they love getting raided by noobs who can't follow orders (shut up, everyone has them). Throw on the Karma PoW AA and you're left alone, and if anyone stil $%&@s with you then what goes around, comes around, and karma $%&@s with them.

It's a standard practice, and it works. The one thing Karma has improved on is to give a definite MAXIMUM of time one may spend under the PoW AA.

[Leq]

I surrender. My decision to leave GDA had nothing to do with the ongoing battle, but the result is the same. I'll comply to all terms.

[Gn0xious Jr]

Very fair terms from Karma.

I must say, to those that are going to continue fighting, bravo on defending your alliance and your nation to the end. very commendable. good luck to you all as this conflict continues.

[Zoomzoomzoom]

Very fair terms, but the Hegemony allows me to keep my nukes.

1. Decommission all military (tanks, aircraft, CM's, navy) Allowed to carry a maximum of 5 nukes.

2. No more than 30% soldiers.

3. Remain out of peacemode.

4. Publicly resign in the OWF surrender thread and change AA to 'Hegemony PoW'

5. You are not to support any of karma either militarily or financially through the remainder of the war or to work against the hegemony in any way.

OWF surrender thread : http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=213

Tis too tempting

[Bralor]

Karma PoW AA has broken the 500k NS mark.

yay for them (they are nearly beating my AA now lol)

I laughed when I read this. Good times, good times.

Such unfair terms. Let's see, basically white-peace, allowing people to build improvements that help their economy, decomming military (also helps economy), and wearing an AA tag so they can be protected if they need to be, and not confused as an enemy by wearing another AA.

Also, that's why the Karma POW alliance has already broken 500K NS, and why NPO has only offered terms as lenient as these about... 1 time, IF THAT?

Really horrible terms karma. I hate you all for this. You should all die. /sarcasm.

To be completely honest, as I said earlier, these are fairly harsh terms. I read the surrender terms the NPO laid out for the GATO 1V War. They were similar. I thought KARMA was better than this?

[bzelger]

I hereby surrender to Karma.

Good job guys, my nation is f*ed up!!!!

I surrender. My decision to leave GDA had nothing to do with the ongoing battle, but the result is the same. I'll comply to all terms.

Post it here, guys: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=213

[Gn0xious Jr]

We have met before, logs edited to remove profanity only. (If I missed any please PM).

NPO can't lose with grunts like this one.

I think this was a perfect example of the good ole' "if you can't beat em', beg em'" and "if you can't beg em', curse em'"

good find Unda (i apologize that i am too lazy to type the rest of your name)

[Bob]

To be completely honest, as I said earlier, these are fairly harsh terms. I read the surrender terms the NPO laid out for the GATO 1V War. They were similar. I thought KARMA was better than this?

Eh? I don't think anyone thinks that these terms are harsh in the slightest, fairly standard individual terms.

[Doug Falkner]

I have the utmost respect for Karma, you guys have fought well and this is the first time in about half a dozen wars that anyone's ever managed to anarchy my nation.

However, one of my brothers in arms in the MCXA noted that he would rather gargle a bucket of diarrhea than accept these surrender terms. I must note that I agree with his sentiment.

[Gn0xious Jr]

I was wondering what movie to watch when I came across your post. I've seen it 100 times, and here's to 101!

[bzelger]

However, one of my brothers in arms in the MCXA noted that he would rather gargle a bucket of diarrhea than accept these surrender terms. I must note that I agree with his sentiment.

Fair enough. I'll get a couple of my guys together and we'll start filling that bucket for ya'.

[Lord Brendan]

To be completely honest, as I said earlier, these are fairly harsh terms. I read the surrender terms the NPO laid out for the GATO 1V War. They were similar. I thought KARMA was better than this?

Similar? Are you crazy?

Individual terms in the GATO-1V War required the decommission of SDIs and Hidden Nuclear Silos and weren't offered for two weeks into the conflict. Nations in Peace Mode were threatened with PZI if they didn't leave it immediately. PoWs had no guarantees as to the extent of their imprisonment, and half the time they were attacked even after full compliance.

[Randleman]

Thanks for the terms, but you can keep them.

[uaciaut]

We have met before, logs edited to remove profanity only. (If I missed any please PM).

NPO can't lose with grunts like this one.

I do hope this wasn't gov-sanctioned action. And it did made me laugh pretty hard.

[Bralor]

Eh? I don't think anyone thinks that these terms are harsh in the slightest, fairly standard individual terms.

Standard perhaps. But this doesn't remove the fact that I find them extreme. Ad Populum is not an excuse.

[lcdt94]

arrogance. Sheer arrogance.

http://www.cybernations.net/allNations_dis...nce=Karma%20Pow

It appears that many of your brothers view the opportunity to salvage their nations quite differently.

[Gn0xious Jr]

After reading more and more posts in this thread saying "harsh terms" and the like... seriously? harsh?

less than 1 week of fighting, AND you can keep your military wonders? no military and no military improvements is standard and very fair. improvements are very CHEAP in comparison to the amount spent on wonders and the like. Not to mention that NOT having a military or military improvements will DECREASE your bills for the next month... seriously? harsh?

To be honest, if I were in your shoes, I'd tell us to go F**K ourselves, which I'm glad to see many of you are doing. While I have and always will defend my alliance and her members until the very end, I can't say that these terms are harsh.

Curse at Karma and tell us to F**K OFF because you'd "rather gargle a bucket of diarrhea" before surrendering, I applaud your sentiment. But don't say theses terms are harsh...

Edited April 26, 2009 by Gn0xious Jr

[pd73bassman]

I have the utmost respect for Karma, you guys have fought well and this is the first time in about half a dozen wars that anyone's ever managed to anarchy my nation.

However, one of my brothers in arms in the MCXA noted that he would rather gargle a bucket of diarrhea than accept these surrender terms. I must note that I agree with his sentiment.

Give it time and you will come around

[President Obama]

To be completely honest, as I said earlier, these are fairly harsh terms. I read the surrender terms the NPO laid out for the GATO 1V War. They were similar. I thought KARMA was better than this?

Then post the surrender terms the NPO gave to GATO/allies and let us compare. I am fairly confident that these terms are much more fair.

[neneko]

Standard perhaps. But this doesn't remove the fact that I find them extreme. Ad Populum is not an excuse.

Can you point on something specific that's extreme with these terms?

I for one think it's horrible that the POWs aren't allowed to keep attacking karma alliances or aid their old friends in the hegemony. That's just wrong. Also all POWs should recive reps and a gift basket.

[Ragashingo]

To be completely honest, as I said earlier, these are fairly harsh terms. I read the surrender terms the NPO laid out for the GATO 1V War. They were similar. I thought KARMA was better than this?

The issues of the GATO 1V war were not the individual surrender terms. They were:

1. Going to war over a player who hadn't played in almost a year. (Karma did not start this war and certainly didn't start it over something as horrible as that)

2. Threatening PZI to any nation that dared enter peace mode (NPO currently has 146 peace mode nations yet Karma is making no such threats)

3. Curbstomping an alliance for three months while strongly hinting that the war would be another eternal war (This war while not perfectly evenly matched is not a curbstomp, and no one in Karma is even thinking about this being an eternal war)

4. Putting a viceroy in place. (Karma has said there will be no viceroys)

5. Expelling members and tearing down an alliance's government structures (Karma is not intending to do either of these things)

6. Holding control of an alliance's government for the better part of a year (Yet another thing Karma will not do)

All the things in parentheses are why Karma is better than the NPO. Arguing that these typical, slightly lenient even, individual terms somehow show that Karma is no different than the NPO is both ignorant and dishonest. I certainly expect better from a GATOer.

[Mithgard]

I'm quite convinced these terms are nothing but lenient, but even if you preserve your nation you lose something that can't easily be re-acquired.