The "I Don't Know Anymore" War

[General Specific]

Good discussion here.

A great way to show how Karma reps are appropriate, meaningful and just, would be to have surrendering alliances pay reps to alliances those alliances once forced to pay outrageous reps.

It'd be quite fair (and quite a statement) to have surrendering Continuum/Hegemony alliances pay reps to alliances they extorted like the GPA, the Mushroom Kingdom and Fark (just examples).

Maybe even have some money sent to FAN from NPO and friends for some karmic rebuilding as repayment for their public dishonesty in the first and second FAN wars.

[shahenshah]

Good discussion here.

A great way to show how Karma reps are appropriate, meaningful and just, would be to have surrendering alliances pay reps to alliances those alliances once forced to pay outrageous reps.

It'd be quite fair (and quite a statement) to have surrendering Continuum/Hegemony alliances pay reps to alliances they extorted like the GPA, the Mushroom Kingdom and Fark (just examples).

Maybe even have some money sent to FAN from NPO and friends for some karmic rebuilding as repayment for their public dishonesty in the first and second FAN wars.

People always forget NpO when giving examples.

:/

[Captain Flinders]

Good discussion here.

A great way to show how Karma reps are appropriate, meaningful and just, would be to have surrendering alliances pay reps to alliances those alliances once forced to pay outrageous reps.

It'd be quite fair (and quite a statement) to have surrendering Continuum/Hegemony alliances pay reps to alliances they extorted like the GPA, the Mushroom Kingdom and Fark (just examples).

Maybe even have some money sent to FAN from NPO and friends for some karmic rebuilding as repayment for their public dishonesty in the first and second FAN wars.

I would absolutely love to see this.

People always forget NpO when giving examples.

:/

I don't know what war you're watching but NpO isn't losing this one.

Edited May 12, 2009 by Captain Flinders

[Zhord]

thanks for the entertainment, this threads great i give it a 9/10.

Agreed terms from a group you claim to be in, but never existed. Claiming retribution for alliances you feel where wronged but you can't actually bring yourself associate with. Doitzel complaining about being denied peace and denying FAN peace in the same breath, don't you remember you where right up there in the ORDERS when this was done and where fine with it for over a year until you where denied peace for creating an alliance with the sole purpose of destroying the NPO.

i'm sure the political capital your gain by grandstanding to baying crowd is worth something to you, i sure hope it's worth more than your loosing calling out your erstwhile alliance friends leadership.

[General Specific]

People always forget NpO when giving examples.

:/

You're right. The NpO should have the "insult to injury" reps they paid to some of the Hegemon alliance some months ago returned as well.

[shahenshah]

I would absolutely love to see this.

I don't know what war you're watching but NpO isn't losing this one.

Read General Specific's post above mine. Maybe you will get the point about NoCB reps.

Edited May 12, 2009 by shahenshah

[Captain Flinders]

Read General Specific's post above mine. Maybe you will get the point about NoCB reps.

I thought you were trying to be smart by saying NpO should have to pay reps. My bad. Yes, if anyone should have reps funneled to them as a result of this war, those who suffered in the NoCB war should be some at the top of the list.

[Adrian LaCroix]

So ... the Karma war was never the righteous crusade with the aim of changing the cyberverse for ever afterall. Well i'm shocked.

The early mantra was 'Giving the Continuum / NPO a good talking to'. Well you've done / are doing that. I'm confident the NPO will change after the war. If that was your aim, then what would forcing the sort of terms that karma always claimed to abhor really achieve?

Lol. You're fairly confident that NPO and friends will change the way they've done things for the better part of two years because they lost a war and got to walk away afterwards? Pardon the cynicism, but I'll believe it when I see it.

There is a difference between making this a kinder, gentler world and slaying a monster. You may hand out easy, good as white peaces to the monster and feel nice and good about yourself, but at the end of the day all you've done is let the monster live, and you'll find that nothing will have changed. Slay the monster. Change the world. It only works in that order.

Just my two cents.

[R&R-Viking]

Lol. You're fairly confident that NPO and friends will change the way they've done things for the better part of two years because they lost a war and got to walk away afterwards? Pardon the cynicism, but I'll believe it when I see it.

There is a difference between making this a kinder, gentler world and slaying a monster. You may hand out easy, good as white peaces to the monster and feel nice and good about yourself, but at the end of the day all you've done is let the monster live, and you'll find that nothing will have changed. Slay the monster. Change the world. It only works in that order.

Just my two cents.

If I've learned anything in the past 24 hours, this line of thinking makes you a monster and as bad as the Hegemony.

Join the club! We have free beer!

[Monster]

This is where the past few days have confused me. I see alliances that planned and operated under the Karma banner now claim they were not at war under that banner at all but their only reason to go to war was to honour treaties that existed prior to Karma forming. Fair point, most of the alliances in Karma went to war via existing treaties but the war itself was organised under a larger banner than the individual treaties and blocs that came to form Karma.

Some in Kronos may have said that in a fit of rage because of all the scorn heaped on them and us, but we were a part of Karma from day one. We haven't thrown away the banner and switched to the "We're not Karma" line. Disavow us, if you must, but don't say we've adopted such a mode of thought because of what someone said in a fit of rage.

We have different views on what the goals were apparently and as has been seen throughout this thread and the Valhalla surrender thread, you would have us abandon our principles for what would ultimately be a symbolic gesture, not retribution.

I made a point of my making my stance on reparations known. I even got into fights over it.

Edited May 12, 2009 by Nausea

[The AUT]

Your point?

Well, not a lot have gone through what we've been through. You know the expression never judge someone unless you've walked a mile in their shoes? Fact is most of the "Karma" alliances don't know how the CnG, STA, former BLEU alliances feel. That's just fact. And because of that they believe in being more leniant I suppose.

I don't know

EDIT: AlmightyGrub made my point for me. So I thank him for that.

Edited May 12, 2009 by The AUT

[KingSuck]

I need to get this as an auto-reply.

Pleasing to see alliances who went to war via their treaties getting white peace.

Still haven't got that auto-reply to work yet huh?

[astronaut jones]

OK, this may be a wall of text or I may lose interest after a paragraph or two, but a few things have been bugging me the past few days and I just want to get it out there. I honestly don't care if you agree with me, disagree with me or have no interest in what I say. I'm doing this for me.

I have been reading and posting in a number of threads throughout this war I have to say my level of confusion is rising by the day.

This current war has been unofficially known as the Karma War according to the CN Wiki and when it began to take shape the side of the war I'm on labelled itself Karma. I wasn't involved in the naming of the coalition but considering the reason we had come together it seemed appropriate. The opposition was arbitrarily named Hegemony and that was that.

The war had started and Karma HQ was assigning alliances to certain fronts taking into account treaty requirements and organising aid flow as needed. Over the ensuing days more alliances joined the war on both sides. Karma announced itself as a fair and merciful group seeking to overthrow the Hegemony and bring about a new Cyberverse that was free of the extortion, bullying and over-the-top reparations that had become the norm under the Hegemony.

Fantastic, I thought, finally a dedicated group has come together to change things for the better. My only reservation was whether or not this new coalition will learn from the past and do what needed to be done to achieve the goal that was set out to be achieved.

After a few days a few smaller alliances started seeking peace and an exit from the war. It was pretty much agreed within Karma that these alliances would be given white peace and an exit from the war whenever they sought it. It was around this time that Karma alliances began thinking about how to deal with what would be considered the core members of the Hegemony, alliances in the Continuum and One Vision blocs. Discussion was sporadic and informal and ranged from medium level terms to some requiring terms akin to those the Hegemony handed out to others in the past. The only consensus I got from the discussions I saw was that these alliances were not to be given white peace and that they had to suffer some pain albeit nothing like that that these alliances had forced others to suffer in the past.

Since that time four Continuum alliances have been given peace and only one of them required to pay any reparations at all. This struck me as odd considering the reason the Karma coalition came together and the goals we were supposedly trying to achieve.

This is where the past few days have confused me. I see alliances that planned and operated under the Karma banner now claim they were not at war under that banner at all but their only reason to go to war was to honour treaties that existed prior to Karma forming. Fair point, most of the alliances in Karma went to war via existing treaties but the war itself was organised under a larger banner than the individual treaties and blocs that came to form Karma.

This has resulted in some disagreements between those in Karma but I think this is due to the fact that there seems to be some point in this war where Karma stopped existing and the individual alliances that initially formed Karma began to move away from Karma as a group to hand out their own peace terms.

Now, I have no issue with those fighting on certain fronts having the final say in the terms they hand out. STA did it with a Karma rep present to oversee it. But I have to wonder what the point is if the terms given do not support the basic goals of the Karma coalition.

So, here is the main source of my confusion. We now have alliances who planned and fought a war under the Karma banner whose goal was stated as one of removing the Hegemony form power and creating a Cyberverse without extortion, bullying and over-the-top peace terms. These alliances are now saying they are not fighting to punish alliances for past transgressions and that they are fighting a completely different war to the Karma War and giving terms reflective of that.

If this is the Karma War and the coalition is known as Karma with the stated goals of disabling the Hegemony, how can it be that this is not about past transgressions? Hegemony refers to what? And Karma?

What is this war all about anymore and when did it change? How is the Hegemony to be broken down if the treaties that bind them are left intact?

Was I in a different universe when I looked over what the Karma War was all about and what Karma as a coalition set out to achieve?

Confused

Tygaborough

As I've been saying for awhile now, no one on the karma side of the war has the balls to do what needs to be done. They all want to make friends and grab as much good PR as they possibly can, yet aren't willing to do the dirty work needed to truly end what they're supposedly fighting for.

It all started with white peace. White peace has ensured that every other alliance that not only deserves reparations for the war, but rightfully should be DEMANDING reparations for this war, is afraid to do so.

Karma's nothing but a joke at this point.

[Ilya Murometz]

Well here's my two cents on the reps.:

An attack on Ordo Verde is an attack on the Viridian Entente. Anyone who thinks otherwise, doesn't know Green Team history at all. Also, the BELOW Bloc is rock solid. As solid as the STA-NpO treaty, and that's as solid as it gets in Cyberverse. Also the Superfriends and Ragnabloc are solid. Case in point: by attacking Ordo Verde, NPO knew, or should have known, that it would be at war with VE, RoK and the coaltions helping the two major alliances. For us this is a defensive war.

Don't get me wrong. We're glad to be fighting with Karma. However I fail to see what exactly is wrong with asking for reps from your attacker if you parried his attacks. I fail to see how this makes us bad. I fail to see how the NPO's CB on OV has any merit. While we declared war on NPO in defense of OV, for VE this is a defensive war, because we are defending our allies and they would gladly do the same for us, that's what allies are for!

And in this war we have taken damage. We have lost infra, some of our nations as much as half their infra. I fail to see what is wrong with asking NPO for the reps to compensate our losses. How does this make us unjust? A robber comes in, burns down half of your house, and asking him to repay for the damage makes us evil?

As for the other terms, I'd say that all alliances at PZI and all nations at EZI or PZI get peace. More peace is not evil. Also, in Cyberverse we share our spheres. Again, I don't understand how these terms are harsh, or mean, or bad.

(This post may or may not reflect the views of the Government of the Viridian Entente. However free speech is encouraged in VE, so this post was possible.)

[Monster]

Well here's my two cents on the reps.:

An attack on Ordo Verde is an attack on the Viridian Entente. Anyone who thinks otherwise, doesn't know Green Team history at all. Also, the BELOW Bloc is rock solid. As solid as the STA-NpO treaty, and that's as solid as it gets in Cyberverse. Also the Superfriends and Ragnabloc are solid. Case in point: by attacking Ordo Verde, NPO knew, or should have known, that it would be at war with VE, RoK and the coaltions helping the two major alliances. For us this is a defensive war.

Don't get me wrong. We're glad to be fighting with Karma. However I fail to see what exactly is wrong with asking for reps from your attacker if you parried his attacks. I fail to see how this makes us bad. I fail to see how the NPO's CB on OV has any merit. While we declared war on NPO in defense of OV, for VE this is a defensive war, because we are defending our allies and they would gladly do the same for us, that's what allies are for!

And in this war we have taken damage. We have lost infra, some of our nations as much as half their infra. I fail to see what is wrong with asking NPO for the reps to compensate our losses. How does this make us unjust? A robber comes in, burns down half of your house, and asking him to repay for the damage makes us evil?

As for the other terms, I'd say that all alliances at PZI and all nations at EZI or PZI get peace. More peace is not evil. Also, in Cyberverse we share our spheres. Again, I don't understand how these terms are harsh, or mean, or bad.

(This post may or may not reflect the views of the Government of the Viridian Entente. However free speech is encouraged in VE, so this post was possible.)

You guys have every right to demand reps from NPO. They targeted you specifically and did start the war. It really is a defensive war on your end, so I have no issue with it.

[Phoenix Ascendent]

As I've been saying for awhile now, no one on the karma side of the war has the balls to do what needs to be done. They all want to make friends and grab as much good PR as they possibly can, yet aren't willing to do the dirty work needed to truly end what they're supposedly fighting for.

It all started with white peace. White peace has ensured that every other alliance that not only deserves reparations for the war, but rightfully should be DEMANDING reparations for this war, is afraid to do so.

Karma's nothing but a joke at this point.

Unfortunately this is becoming more and more true. Regardless of what anyone may think about NPO or its allies, or whether one would agree with its tactics, it must be realized one thing is true. NPO and its heirs in Darwinism, have succeeded because they had an ideal of action, and purpose. They have had this purpose and ideal since its inception and they have followed it ardently since in founding. Its a matter of absolute truth that it is worth less to do a thing halfway or half heatedly, to do so is a complete waste of time and effort, and I fear this all to well describes Karma at this point. As such a divided house cannot stand, or well accomplish its mission. An therefore if it continues Karmas gonna lose the philosophical war here, even if it wins the military one, and with this much dissension even thats not guaranteed. So a brief shout out to Karma. GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER, AND REALIZE TO DEFEAT THE ENEMY'S YOUR FACING, YOU MUST FIRST DEFEAT THE ENEMY WITHIN.

Edited May 12, 2009 by Phoenix Ascendent

[OverCaffeinated]

You guys have every right to demand reps from NPO. They targeted you specifically and did start the war. It really is a defensive war on your end, so I have no issue with it.

Everyone has the right to ask for reps. The question is if they accept and what you do about it if they say no.

It's a brave new world we live in.

[Captain Flinders]

Well here's my two cents on the reps.:

An attack on Ordo Verde is an attack on the Viridian Entente. Anyone who thinks otherwise, doesn't know Green Team history at all. Also, the BELOW Bloc is rock solid. As solid as the STA-NpO treaty, and that's as solid as it gets in Cyberverse. Also the Superfriends and Ragnabloc are solid. Case in point: by attacking Ordo Verde, NPO knew, or should have known, that it would be at war with VE, RoK and the coaltions helping the two major alliances. For us this is a defensive war.

Don't get me wrong. We're glad to be fighting with Karma. However I fail to see what exactly is wrong with asking for reps from your attacker if you parried his attacks. I fail to see how this makes us bad. I fail to see how the NPO's CB on OV has any merit. While we declared war on NPO in defense of OV, for VE this is a defensive war, because we are defending our allies and they would gladly do the same for us, that's what allies are for!

And in this war we have taken damage. We have lost infra, some of our nations as much as half their infra. I fail to see what is wrong with asking NPO for the reps to compensate our losses. How does this make us unjust? A robber comes in, burns down half of your house, and asking him to repay for the damage makes us evil?

As for the other terms, I'd say that all alliances at PZI and all nations at EZI or PZI get peace. More peace is not evil. Also, in Cyberverse we share our spheres. Again, I don't understand how these terms are harsh, or mean, or bad.

(This post may or may not reflect the views of the Government of the Viridian Entente. However free speech is encouraged in VE, so this post was possible.)

Please make them pay reps. Your assessment of their bravado and stupidity is spot on. The targeted you specifically and now deserve to pay for that mistake.

Everyone has the right to ask for reps. The question is if they accept and what you do about it if they say no.

It's a brave new world we live in.

How does them possibly declining terms indicate a brave new world? People have been rejecting terms for years.

Edited May 12, 2009 by Captain Flinders

[Monster]

Everyone has the right to ask for reps. The question is if they accept and what you do about it if they say no.

It's a brave new world we live in.

Well, I meant that they have the most legitimate case for asking them in my opinion. Captain Flinders followed up on this point.

[OverCaffeinated]

How does them possibly declining terms indicate a brave new world? People have been rejecting terms for years.

Game mechanics have changed.

People think this is a philisophical argument but it isn't. White peace will be the norm for the most part (at least for alliances with lots of Manhattan Projects). This has nothing to do with people playing nice with each other, it has to do with practicality.

[OverCaffeinated]

Well, I meant that they have the most legitimate case for asking them in my opinion. Captain Flinders followed up on this point.

Agreed. They certainly have the most legitimate case for asking for reps. And I think they should.

Best of luck getting them.

[Ilya Murometz]

You guys have every right to demand reps from NPO. They targeted you specifically and did start the war. It really is a defensive war on your end, so I have no issue with it.

Please make them pay reps. Your assessment of their bravado and stupidity is spot on. The targeted you specifically and now deserve to pay for that mistake.

Thank you guys! It's just that I've been hearing this from alliance members on both sides, Hegemony and Karma, that somehow demanding reps is a bad thing and makes us all look like the ebil Hegemony. I'm more about valid CBs. BTW - I don't think that hegemony is as ebil as a lot of people make them out to be either.

[Ilya Murometz]

Game mechanics have changed.

People think this is a philisophical argument but it isn't. White peace will be the norm for the most part (at least for alliances with lots of Manhattan Projects). This has nothing to do with people playing nice with each other, it has to do with practicality.

*Remembers reparations that MK had to pay NPO*

*Remembers TSO's reps to MCXA* (which TSO offered)

Those seemed quite practical.

[Bob Janova]

Yes I was going to mention MK. The fact is that MP nukes from low down are annoying, but not enough so to force a winner to concede very much for a quick peace – you'll be out of range of the expensive infra anyway.

[OverCaffeinated]

Yes I was going to mention MK. The fact is that MP nukes from low down are annoying, but not enough so to force a winner to concede very much for a quick peace – you'll be out of range of the expensive infra anyway.

Most alliances are not in the same position that the Grämlins are where most of their nations are high enough in NS that MP nukes cant hit them.

You guys truly have won this game. In my book, Grämlins have been #1 since late last year. I think more folks are starting to realize that now.