Kevin Cash Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 As the precedent you guys set in the noCB, removing the leader of an alliance does not absolve that alliance from it's sins. Double standards run thick in you.i thought karma was about changing the precedents set by the evil hegemony(besides the fact that the sum of sponges crimes far outweighed those of nowedge, nor was sponge the only government member responsible for perpetuating those crimes) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nish81 Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 total tech2300+1400+1700+1100+250+250+250+250 = 7500 total money 3700/150*3M+2800/100*3M+1000/50*3M = 74000000+84000000+60000000 = 218000000 exchange rate 218000000/7500 = 29066.67/1T = 1453333/50T = 2906666/100T Oh the hypocrasy of ~3M for 100T Hang them from the rafters!!! I'm not sure if i understand your post right, but i think you're saying that all the tech is being sent from TSI to TFO/IS and all the money is going the other way. this isnt true: TSI is selling at 100 and 150 for 3m to TFO and IS. and TSI is -buying- at 3m for 50 tech, -from- TFO and IS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Cash Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I cleared this issue up - the comment was not directed at TSI as seen by the edit.it still applies to other allies who simply honored their treaties, or as rabid karma supporters like to say, 'npo lapdogs' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jens of the desert Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Just to say, if TSI weren't happy with these terms, it wouldn't be posted here today. We spent quite a while making this compromise, so I find it mildly suprising that the people here want to kick up a fuss about something that doesn't deserve it. But then I remember what game I'm playing with the community I'm playing with and I'm not so suprised after all. You just had a "great" war, yet you are already pouncing on any scrap of meat you can potentially fight over? Maybe change hasn't come and the NS change of hegemony wasn't enough to root out the true problems. Anyway, wasn't it hegemony who called karma: "different look, same taste" or something along those lines? If you're going to make propaganda like that, I don't expect you to be bashing these reps. At the most you can say "I told you so". That is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Just to say, if TSI weren't happy with these terms, it wouldn't be posted here today Meh. That isn't always true. GATO was very happy with a minimum of five months of viceroyship? Sometimes insane terms are accepted because they are the only way out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jens of the desert Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) Meh. That isn't always true. GATO was very happy with a minimum of five months of viceroyship? Sometimes insane terms are accepted because they are the only way out. And you believe these terms to be "insane"? The example given is also disproportionately larger and very loosely related. There is no viceroyship and these terms shouldn't last 5 months. Edit: Although I can see what you mean, I assure you that TSI weren't forced into this and they were given the opportunity to back out at any time. Edited May 5, 2009 by Jens of the desert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzelger Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 The point is that terms are often better than war. That doesn't make them inherently good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 The point is that terms are often better than war. That doesn't make them inherently good. Right. I just choose my favorite example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jens of the desert Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 The point is that terms are often better than war. That doesn't make them inherently good. I'm not trying to imply terms are good, I'm trying to enforce that the terms aren't as bad as people make them out to be, unless I said something wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Cyvole Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I entered this war fully knowing that I was going to get hurt while honoring my alliance's treaties. I got nuked 6 times by people who didn't even bother to DoW us. I lost 17,000 NS and 2,000 infra. My nation is half of its former strength and I have to wait for a week to get out of nuclear anarchy. I knew what I was doing was right and honorable. And I knew that the people I was fighting (atleast the TFO and IS ones) were simply doing the same. None of this bothered me. What does bother me is the fact that my alliance is now being forced to pay ridiculous reparations for simply doing something honorable. I would have expected this from Poison Clan, but TFO and IS? I had thought you were better than that. Now excuse me while I go lose all of my money after losing so much of my infra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) i thought karma was about changing the precedents set by the evil hegemony(besides the fact that the sum of sponges crimes far outweighed those of nowedge, nor was sponge the only government member responsible for perpetuating those crimes) It is about changing the precedents, but it is not about rewriting history. Also some of the precedents set during the Hegemony era weren't all inherently evil. It all depends on how you look at it. In many ways sponge was just playing the game. For those people who know at least half of what nowedge did, many would argue that he was WAY worse than sponge. Edited May 5, 2009 by AirMe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 For those people who know at least half of what nowedge did, many would argue that he was WAY worse than sponge. I can't imagine anyone ever disagreeing with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOONS Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Ha ha ha ha..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzelger Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I'm not trying to imply terms are good, I'm trying to enforce that the terms aren't as bad as people make them out to be, unless I said something wrong? All I'm saying is that this: Just to say, if TSI weren't happy with these terms, it wouldn't be posted here today. Doesn't necessarily follow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Reverie Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I'm not sure if i understand your post right, but i think you're saying that all the tech is being sent from TSI to TFO/IS and all the money is going the other way. this isnt true: TSI is selling at 100 and 150 for 3m to TFO and IS. and TSI is -buying- at 3m for 50 tech, -from- TFO and IS. fixed. i still really don't care. The people calling these terms out of line are just being silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreddieMercury Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Edit: Although I can see what you mean, I assure you that TSI weren't forced into this and they were given the opportunity to back out at any time. Haha, I heard about TFO's role in these talks. Not just from RV either. Good luck in signing treaties in the future. The argument that ig you don't like peace terms "just don't accept them" is dumb. I suppose an alliance could just reject them and play this game like FAN for 2 years. Fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonewall Jaxon Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 The argument that ig you don't like peace terms "just don't accept them" is dumb. I suppose an alliance could just reject them and play this game like FAN for 2 years. Fun. I'd prefer pride over pixels any day. :jihad: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xavii Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I entered this war fully knowing that I was going to get hurt while honoring my alliance's treaties. I got nuked 6 times by people who didn't even bother to DoW us. I lost 17,000 NS and 2,000 infra. My nation is half of its former strength and I have to wait for a week to get out of nuclear anarchy. I knew what I was doing was right and honorable. And I knew that the people I was fighting (atleast the TFO and IS ones) were simply doing the same. None of this bothered me. What does bother me is the fact that my alliance is now being forced to pay ridiculous reparations for simply doing something honorable. I would have expected this from Poison Clan, but TFO and IS? I had thought you were better than that.Now excuse me while I go lose all of my money after losing so much of my infra. While I would personally have given you white peace, these terms are not ridiculous in any way, and you will only lose money if you $%&@ up the tech deals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Blake Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) While I would personally have given you white peace, these terms are not ridiculous in any way, and you will only lose money if you $%&@ up the tech deals. Well, for what it's worth they would lose some money from the inefficient use of their slots on these tech deals when they could be aiding and doing tech deals with their own nations. But not really enough to be too overly dramatic about. Edited May 5, 2009 by William Blake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I'd prefer pride over pixels any day. :jihad: Perhaps you personally would, but when you have dozens of alliances counting on you to do whats best for them sometimes you need to swallow your pride for the good of those who follow you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Haha, I heard about TFO's role in these talks. Not just from RV either. Good luck in signing treaties in the future.The argument that ig you don't like peace terms "just don't accept them" is dumb. I suppose an alliance could just reject them and play this game like FAN for 2 years. Fun. TFO, like the right dress on the wrong girl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I entered this war fully knowing that I was going to get hurt while honoring my alliance's treaties. I got nuked 6 times by people who didn't even bother to DoW us. I lost 17,000 NS and 2,000 infra. My nation is half of its former strength and I have to wait for a week to get out of nuclear anarchy. I knew what I was doing was right and honorable. And I knew that the people I was fighting (atleast the TFO and IS ones) were simply doing the same. None of this bothered me. What does bother me is the fact that my alliance is now being forced to pay ridiculous reparations for simply doing something honorable. I would have expected this from Poison Clan, but TFO and IS? I had thought you were better than that.Now excuse me while I go lose all of my money after losing so much of my infra. It's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, you can run and tell your friends that I'm on, I'm on, I'm on, i'm on, I'm on, I'm on, best believe I understand it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, you can run and tell my city I'm on, I'm on, I'm on, I'm on, I'm on, I'm on, you can run and tell my city it's on... You'd have expected this from PC? Really? You know nothing of PC then, other than the !@#$ that's been spewed to you by your protectors. What is TSI, anyway, but the new Purge? But, It's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, you can run and tell your friends that I'm on, I'm on, I'm on, i'm on, I'm on, I'm on, best believe I understand it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay, you can run and tell my city I'm on, I'm on, I'm on, I'm on, I'm on, I'm on, you can run and tell my city it's on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaiser Frederick II Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Congrats on getting Peace! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostlin Posted May 6, 2009 Report Share Posted May 6, 2009 (edited) While I would personally have given you white peace, these terms are not ridiculous in any way, and you will only lose money if you $%&@ up the tech deals. I think, with all due respect, Xavii, the argument isn't whether the terms are fair or not in some ways, it's if they should of, well, existed. Yes, I get tech deals are better than payments and I guess I am grateful that TSI didn't have to drop their treaties, a number of which are with the Karma side as well. I get that, I really do. I also get that we're a coalition of 30+ different alliances and the alliances involved can demand what they want. However, I don't see this serving anyone. TSI entered this war with honor and to honor their treaty with their longtime protector, to protect them, similar reasons why Apocalypse and many small alliances on the Karma side attacked those who had in someway affected our traditional allies. Many alliances have, to this point, have received white peace for their service, including alliances with the wherewithal to pay MORE than TSI with more slots. Legion springs immediately to mind. I have to say I'm disappointed. We aren't the coalition of yesteryear as far as NPO terms and all that are concerned, and I guess if you're keeping score at home we're still better with these terms, but are we seriously the coalition or the rabble that just sort of formed because we can't take it anymore? Because if we are the second, let's stop pretending to be the first. TSI is not the reason we're fighting this war, so I, as an alliance leader still find this unnecessary. Congrats on TSI finding peace. Edited May 6, 2009 by Ghostlin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptGodzilla Posted May 6, 2009 Report Share Posted May 6, 2009 You'd have expected this from PC?Really? You know nothing of PC then, other than the !@#$ that's been spewed to you by your protectors. What is TSI, anyway, but the new Purge? Being allied to PC at one point in time, I can say you are totally right. PC would have made the reps much much worse. 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.