Duckz3 Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Woah, he's getting all big-boy on us signing simple comments to alliance announcements. If you haven't noticed Shurukian has said time and time again, that IS and TFO did not treat them like crap but were whether nice to them. I really don't believe IS is not with the Karma Virtues (yeah with the capital V) because of their request of reparations. Although avoiding terrible reps are apart of the Karma ideals, there are many other points in general that we're trying to end, including E/PZI, and ideologies that are present in documents such as the Moldavi Doctrine. So to say that TFO and IS does not stand with Karma's values simply because they choose to accept lenient reps is completely inaccurate. If you have not noticed these so lenient terms you have been speaking of forced TP and IDC to Disband because those so lenient Terms could not be payed by an alliance so bashed by war. TSI has shown true strength and if it was not with the help of many others they would never be able to pay the reps first asked for. TFO and IS originally went in asking for Reps similar to the ones Athens and MK asked for, reps that in no way TSI would have never been able to pay. It was those reps that I am talking about violate the Karma ways, also demanding reps from a small alliance like TSI, who have been honorable opponents supporting there protectorate should not be forced to pay such high reps. Josshill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Most know my personal position on the reps and as a TSI treaty partner I'm not exactly an unbiased source, but a lot of this thread seems to be people whining and posturing because they have nothing better to do and they hate Karma. Compared to straight white peace these terms suck, but as far as terms go, they're very manageable. I'm not using previous ridiculous terms as justification, but 7500 tech in deals is not worthy of this much $&@!#ing. I saw far less people when Athens (among many outrageous terms from the NoCB war) was charged with paying literally 100% of the total tech we had as an alliance. Some of you need to stop being such hypocrites. I think the point is the world is done with harsh reps for stupid reason, if someone asked for that much tech now they'd get even more whining than this thread has gotten, and you can be sure I'd be there to argue for you guys, I remember fighting against your alliance and really enjoyed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The AUT Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Oh word, my fault. If you read my post you'd know I highlighted that portion of it. I'll take Shuru's word for it, I trust her decision and she did what she thought was best for this alliance. o7 Shuru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbysmalPea Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 You did that backwards. Quite right. Here's the corrected reps: - 466.7 tech to IS - 766.7 tech to TFO - 3.75 mil to IS - 11.25 mil to TFO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Indeed. I am quite innerestin'. From the back.OOC: Greenacres, meet Tela. lol rerolls Oh sweet! I .. don't really remember you.. all that much.. but I have been drinking that space drank they got up here, I got back in my spaceship.. man is it delicious and it gets you CRUNK! But yeah, I can see we're both really good at spewing hate. I can respect that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I saw far less people when Athens (among many outrageous terms from the NoCB war) was charged with paying literally 100% of the total tech we had as an alliance. Some of you need to stop being such hypocrites. True. IMO Athens' reps are the worst in the history of CN actually. These are relatively not so bad. HOWEVER. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x Tela x Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 What is more honorable?Going into a war knowing you will lose most of your nations and have to pay massive reps? or Going into a conflict to for seven days knowing you will get white peace? Im just saying all this white peace crap is killing the game for me. I dont care about money i would just like to know who the really honorable alliances are out there. For an alliance of any size and stature, it's nearly impossible to come up with a reparation total that even comes close to the amount they lost in infra alone. There is still a great deal to be lost by going to war, on either side, and that's why it shouldn't be taken lightly - by either side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabonnobar Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 ...but a lot of this thread seems to be people whining and posturing because they have nothing better to do and they hate Karma. Funny that so many in karma would hate themselves, eh? I don't see this as a Karma v. Hegemony issue, as there are many Karmans criticizing TFO. This is a matter of common decency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jipps Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 What is more honorable?Going into a war knowing you will lose most of your nations and have to pay massive reps? or Going into a conflict to for seven days knowing you will get white peace? Im just saying all this white peace crap is killing the game for me. I dont care about money i would just like to know who the really honorable alliances are out there. Honoring your treaties is the same no matter what odds your facing or what peace you face. If you don't like white peace, fine don't give it. Just don't expect it back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebound Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) TFO's conduct in this war has been nothing but self contradiction and shamefull. Those reps are bordering criminal extortion, the namesake Karma is perfect for you blokes. Edited May 5, 2009 by rebound Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabonnobar Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 What is more honorable?Going into a war knowing you will lose most of your nations and have to pay massive reps? or Going into a conflict to for seven days knowing you will get white peace? Im just saying all this white peace crap is killing the game for me. I dont care about money i would just like to know who the really honorable alliances are out there. Are you insinuating that actions be taken by the winning side (you guys) to ensure that the losing alliance "lose most of [its] nations" and has "to pay massive reps"? That sure is what it seems like. I thought Karma (or, well, I don't see you guys as good representatives of karma anymore) was at least trying to do less than hegemonic terms, but this is actually straight-up equal, it seems to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Are you insinuating that actions be taken by the winning side (you guys) to ensure that the losing alliance "lose most of [its] nations" and has "to pay massive reps"? That sure is what it seems like. I thought Karma (or, well, I don't see you guys as good representatives of karma anymore) was at least trying to do less than hegemonic terms, but this is actually straight-up equal, it seems to me. This isn't even close to previously imposed terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revelation Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Honoring your treaties is the same no matter what odds your facing or what peace you face. On what planet? If you don't like white peace, fine don't give it. Just don't expect it back. I dont. If TPF and Valhalla win this war i will have no problem paying the reps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabonnobar Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) This isn't even close to previously imposed terms. Didn't say it was. I meant that what he was proposing ("massive reps", most nations being forced to leave the alliance) is. Edited May 5, 2009 by rabonnobar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carter Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 If you have not noticed these so lenient terms you have been speaking of forced TP and IDC to Disband because those so lenient Terms could not be payed by an alliance so bashed by war. TSI has shown true strength and if it was not with the help of many others they would never be able to pay the reps first asked for. TFO and IS originally went in asking for Reps similar to the ones Athens and MK asked for, reps that in no way TSI would have never been able to pay. It was those reps that I am talking about violate the Karma ways, also demanding reps from a small alliance like TSI, who have been honorable opponents supporting there protectorate should not be forced to pay such high reps.Josshill For starters, I personally believe that with the right management, TP could've paid the reps off, and without any intended offense to anyone, I do believe TSI and TP are different caliber alliances. Asking for the original amount of 12k tech, and retracting your original offer of the 12k tech proves to be a mistake on IS/TFO's end, and nothing that we should all sit here discuss and criticize. Especially since it appears that those terms weren't seriously requested or discussed. You're still missing my main point though, I was stating that whether or not IS requests outrageous terms or not, that does not mean they do not hold any Karma "Virtues". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Didn't say it was. I meant that what he was proposing ("massive reps", most nations being forced to leave the alliance) is. He wasn't proposing it, he wasn't trying to question an alliance's dedication when presented with 2 situations. At least that's what I inferred from it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabonnobar Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) He wasn't proposing it, he wasn't trying to question an alliance's dedication when presented with 2 situations. At least that's what I inferred from it. He is complaining about white peace not being enough, it seemed to me like he was proposing the other as an alternative, even if he was doing so indirectly. I could be wrong though. Edited May 5, 2009 by rabonnobar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 It wasn't a threat. It was a please let's make this decision soon and end the carnage, because I regret us allowing TFO and IS into this fight and being unable to defend them when they were hit back. At first I was kinda suprised to see you, trying to stop carnage Now I think you just wanted your friends not to get too badly killed. But, Twisted and Rev, I think it's time to show your friends how to do white peace. I know Rev would have taken White peace in the NoV war. Sincerely, BEazy Anyway bad reps bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I dont. If TPF and Valhalla win this war i will have no problem paying the reps. No offense, but I have a feeling you're only really saying that because you know they can't possibly win. Staring down the barrel of a bigger gun than your own and still having the balls to stand up is more telling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 At first I was kinda suprised to see you, trying to stop carnage Now I think you just wanted your friends not to get too badly killed. But, Twisted and Rev, I think it's time to show your friends how to do white peace. I know Rev would have taken White peace in the NoV war.Sincerely, BEazy Anyway bad reps bad you're funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 No offense, but I have a feeling you're only really saying that because you know they can't possibly win. Staring down the barrel of a bigger gun than your own and still having the balls to stand up is more telling. I love your faux outrage. It.. pleases me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carter Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 If you read my post you'd know I highlighted that portion of it. I'll take Shuru's word for it, I trust her decision and she did what she thought was best for this alliance.o7 Shuru Actually, I've learned not to read your posts, its always a bunch of ignorant !@#$%^&*, because you're known for speaking upon topics of which you know nothing about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extraduty Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 If you have not noticed these so lenient terms you have been speaking of forced TP and IDC to Disband because those so lenient Terms could not be payed by an alliance so bashed by war. TSI has shown true strength and if it was not with the help of many others they would never be able to pay the reps first asked for. TFO and IS originally went in asking for Reps similar to the ones Athens and MK asked for, reps that in no way TSI would have never been able to pay. It was those reps that I am talking about violate the Karma ways, also demanding reps from a small alliance like TSI, who have been honorable opponents supporting there protectorate should not be forced to pay such high reps.Josshill I didn't know that I destroyed 2 alliances earlier. I guess I'm a horrible person. I was not a party to those reps negotiations and won't speak on how they were conducted. I can only speak of how our negotiations went with TSI. If the reps were to much for TSI to repay then they would be different. TSI advised us that this was withing reason and there was still some time left to negotiate. This was the number that all parties agreed upon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Cash Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 What is more honorable?Going into a war knowing you will lose most of your nations and have to pay massive reps? or Going into a conflict to for seven days knowing you will get white peace? Im just saying all this white peace crap is killing the game for me. I dont care about money i would just like to know who the really honorable alliances are out there. oh so pc was just helping tsi maintain their honor, sure thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revelation Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 No offense, but I have a feeling you're only really saying that because you know they can't possibly win. Staring down the barrel of a bigger gun than your own and still having the balls to stand up is more telling. Read the history of Legio X then come talk to me about your above statement. 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.