Reps for IRON, NPO, Echelon, and TPF

[Zoomzoomzoom]

To be hypocritical, one has to defend something in one situation while arguing against it in another. To pick on one of my favourite opponents (heh), GOD has been consistent in arguing for heavy terms all the way through. That doesn't make them hypocrites, even though they're fighting on the same "side" as Kronos, who have similarly been consistent in arguing against them. It just means that your side does not have a consistent stance on this issue, and if I want to be completely honest, neither does ours.

I too agree with this statement. I can even imagine govts on Karma being torn on the issues.

If it becomes such a large issue then Karma as a "bloc" will cease to exist and the former alliances can make separate white peace agreements or large scale reparation demands.

[Death666Angel]

Echelon - Was already on the downhill slope prior to the war and now is racing down it. Reps? Seriously? I don't know they'll live long enough to pay.

It's good to see people are still able to dream in these trying times. But I can assure you, as long as I live Echelon will not be in debt to anyone.

[Tulafaras]

to be honest even in the alliances who were consistent in their demands the amount of reps can be heavily contested before a final figure is agreed on.

The Iron figure which is being thrown around here is most definitly not the final amount a specific alliance has demanded (quite simply because it was still internal, if it had been a final amount it would have been sent on to the other side).

I don't see Iron in the same league as the NPO, but they definitly were a key member of the Hegemony, so if i had anything to say about it (which i don't) i'd impose reps on them. They might not have profited as much as their allies did, but they were part of the establishment which made the extortion possible.

And yes, i know that the same can be said for some alliances who are on "my" side in this war (or even close allies of my alliance), but those alliances decided that enough was enough and started to change. IRON did not, and now they are involved in this war.

Ps: While IRON might have lost a lot in absolute numbers and score, i'll still bet heavily that they will recover far faster than the MCXA who were let off with practically white peace.

(edit, changed a very confusing phrase)

Edited May 22, 2009 by Tulafaras

[ChairmanHal]

Cause GPA wasn't beat down from 13 million to god knows what? Same goes for MK in regards to Echelon and NPO.

So when mistakes are made, they bear repeating, right?

But let's review...

GPA: Earned a good thrashing because of the basic incompetence of its leadership, which by the time the war started had lost even some of its biggest supporters on the OWF (present company included). Its hollow shell of a bureaucracy promised nothing but nitwittery to compound the situation. While I felt sorry for a lot of the regular members (many of whom moved on to bigger and better things), it was in many respects a righteous kill.

MK: I complained bitterly in the Rok private forums and on IRC about the terms MK agreed to then and still think they were excessive now.

[ChairmanHal]

It's good to see people are still able to dream in these trying times. But I can assure you, as long as I live Echelon will not be in debt to anyone.

They may hold you to that. Hope your nation's bank keeps lots of large denomination bills laying around.

[Captain Flinders]

On that point, 'Karma' has a chance to finally get rid of harsh peace terms.

That's absolute garbage and you know it. Reparations started out small in this world. Great War 1 essentially ended with an a apology. Did the NPO see the kindness of their superiors and dish out gracious reparation amounts from then on? Absolutely not. If you (this being Valhalla for example) really believe that giving easy terms is the proper way of doing things then why did you not do it when you were in power? It seems you online like easy reps when your side is the one paying. Your history and history in general betrays your comments about a peaceful world now. Sadly, I can see this mindset running rampant on the former hegemony side.

[Death666Angel]

They may hold you to that. Hope your nation's bank keeps lots of large denomination bills laying around.

Define "lots of". And despite whatever this topic may suggest: an alliance must also accept the peace terms. If it thinks they are ludicrous, it can not accept them and just keep the enemy busy. If you think Echelon is stupid enough to rely on me to pay its debts, you really underestimate us.

[kingzog]

TPF's NS is about 1/4 of what it was a month ago.

8 million down to 2 million in a month.

Ever heard the phrase "Can't get blood out of a turnip"?

Very true. But you can smash it up and feed it to a newborn....who will promptly spit it out because it's gross.

[Delta1212]

Define "lots of". And despite whatever this topic may suggest: an alliance must also accept the peace terms. If it thinks they are ludicrous, it can not accept them and just keep the enemy busy. If you think Echelon is stupid enough to rely on me to pay its debts, you really underestimate us.

I've been preparing to get rolled and go FAN since December. Have fun trying to outlast me.

[Shamed]

I've been preparing to get rolled and go FAN since December. Have fun trying to outlast me.

Watch out, Delta! You just proved Hal's point that this war was planned!

Edited May 22, 2009 by Black Phoenix

[Matthew Conrad]

IRON- White Peace

NPO- White Peace

Echelon- White Peace

TPF- White Peace

My reasoning is simple.

1- I like all those alliances.

2- They have sustained a ridiculous amount of damage. It's all very well saying 'MK had to pay 82k tech in reps' etc, but when did MK ever lose the 15 million or so NS that NPO/IRON have lost? (just using MK as it's the most common example ). I don't think people realise just how damaging this war has been for those aforementioned alliances. Seriously, just look at the alliance stats.

3- Reps/harsh terms at this point will only cause bitterness, if not amongst the aforementioned alliances; then definitely against their allies and friends.

4- Coming from an alliance who was given relatively light terms, it is very hard to hold any dislike for the alliances who dished them out.

On that point, 'Karma' has a chance to finally get rid of harsh peace terms. I for one would find it impossible to ever give harsh peace terms after the way my foes have treated my alliance, and I wager other alliances would feel the same way. If you inflict the terms that I've seen rumours of, I can guarantee it will come back to bite you in the butt. Every war (untill this war so far) the reps seem to get bigger, and everyone gets rolled eventually.

The problem with NPO white peace is that they are known to hold an unhealthy grudge towards anyone who slights them. They've obviously not changed their point of view lately so it's almost pointless to allow them white peace considering they'll probably be planning revenge regardless. Other than that, I actually agree with most everything else you said. Those other alliances I see as able to become healthy participants of our new age of diplomacy.

[Seerow]

IRON - This is an alliance that has dropped from 20 mill NS to well under 6 mill and declining more every day. Demands of billions in cash and many 10s of thousands in tech for reps is at best misguided unless the point is to permanently cripple the alliance.

I just want to comment on this comment and others like it. Since when has how much the alliance surrendering lost EVER factored into reps? It's always been a factor of what is possible with the alliance at its current statistical value.

Most of the NS lost was from overbloated infra nations taking massive nuke hits. These people once the war ends will still have most of their tech in tact (so they can send tech as reps), and will likely be able to use their warchests to get back up to at least 5-6k infra, which is more than enough to send out 18mil in aid, and then still have about as much to spare in free money going to rebuilding warchests.

billions in cash would in no way cripple any alliance of IRON or NPO's size. Even with their upper ranks decimated for war purposes (yes they dont have 20k infra nations anymore. baww), economically the smaller nations are just as fit to send money. And those too small to send money are more than capable of generating and sending tech.

IRON, NPO, and any other similarly sized alliance is more than capable of meeting reparation demands of billions of dollars and thousands of tech, even after a large scale nuclear war. The question is if they're willing to do it.

Of course to render the whole point moot I'm advocating removing all aiding ability of the alliance. If the alliances feel they are too crippled to send reparations to the victors, I feel they must also be too crippled to help their own smaller and mid sized members. As such all foreign aid to any member within the alliance should be restricted. It saves those mid sized nations some money, but it also means no rebuilding money being passed around within the alliance. Given the options between reps and no aid at all, personally I'd take the reps. But to some alliances just not being able to aid at all may seem like the nicer option.

[Vasiliy]

Somewhere in the order of 500,000 tech would be fair.

Also indefinite 150 tech/$50 million deals.

Good luck Pacifica.

[Zoomzoomzoom]

So when mistakes are made, they bear repeating, right?

But let's review...

GPA: Earned a good thrashing because of the basic incompetence of its leadership, which by the time the war started had lost even some of its biggest supporters on the OWF (present company included). Its hollow shell of a bureaucracy promised nothing but nitwittery to compound the situation. While I felt sorry for a lot of the regular members (many of whom moved on to bigger and better things), it was in many respects a righteous kill.

MK: I complained bitterly in the Rok private forums and on IRC about the terms MK agreed to then and still think they were excessive now.

As I've already stated, I don't give a !@#$. They deserve the same. Go ahead and cry injustice. It should be all too familiar to NPO, TPF, IRON, and Echelon.

I'm not going to argue the legality of the GPA war either. You'll believe what you want on that and I'll keep my opinion. It is neither the place nor time.

[Yggdrazil]

NPO-$1.00

Iron-$0.99

TPF-$0.98: someone on the karmic side needs to send MHawk $0.02, since he has already paid a dollar.

Echelon-$0.97

[JBone]

These alliances should be required to pay back every cent of money and every bit of technology that they stole from everyone else. Nothing more, nothing less, then they should go free.

Wow, for TPF that would be almost a white peace.

[Zhord]

this thread is kind of pointless, it's annoyed my see some people post in both support of us and against us. i could discuss war durations the MK reps avoided (not paid to or negotiated with us). We could talk about how bad terms \m/ where given (not by us, and not taken) but...

at the end of the day some of you hate others around here. always have, always will. few of you listen to anything posted and the only thing that is successfully achieved on these forum is to whip up hate. To fuel the next war, half of you couldn't wait for this one to finish before turning the trolls on you current allies.

Your terms will either become bearable or they wont and not one word posted in this thread will make a difference. Personally i'm still having fun. Others on both side obviously are not we about to fall below 29k.

[KingSuck]

That's absolute garbage and you know it. Reparations started out small in this world. Great War 1 essentially ended with an a apology. Did the NPO see the kindness of their superiors and dish out gracious reparation amounts from then on? Absolutely not. If you (this being Valhalla for example) really believe that giving easy terms is the proper way of doing things then why did you not do it when you were in power? It seems you online like easy reps when your side is the one paying. Your history and history in general betrays your comments about a peaceful world now. Sadly, I can see this mindset running rampant on the former hegemony side.

Personally, because this is the first time I've even been in power and well I'm not really in a position for be handing out terms at the moment

At the same time, times have changed.

[OOC] As an analogy; Just as torture is no longer viewed as ok in RL (where it used to be the norm), harsh terms are no longer viewed as ok in CN. [/OOC]

Believe it or not Valhalla has also changed, we've had our eyes opened so-to-speak and I'd be mightily surprised if we ever gave out harsh terms again.

The problem with NPO white peace is that they are known to hold an unhealthy grudge towards anyone who slights them. They've obviously not changed their point of view lately so it's almost pointless to allow them white peace considering they'll probably be planning revenge regardless. Other than that, I actually agree with most everything else you said. Those other alliances I see as able to become healthy participants of our new age of diplomacy.

That's a pretty negative viewpoint to take tbh, but we can't really know who's right about this for now. Given the way some alliances have treated them in this war I can't really blame them if they do want revenge after this. Although at the same time, I know how it feels to be presented with relatively light terms and I can assure you revenge is definitely not something that springs to mind.

I think it's also worth mentioning that the idea you're putting forward here of 'we need to nullify the danger of them getting revenge by imposing harsh terms' runs parallel to the thought process behind Perma-ZI, harsh terms, eternal war e.t.c; keeping an enemy subdued to stop them being a threat.

Edited May 22, 2009 by KingSuck

[Bob Janova]

Oh yes, anyone who offers NPO an easy peace is clearly a fool. They have already shown once, in GW1, that they will take easy peace and throw it back in your face later. I approve of second chances, but to be fooled twice in the same way would be stupid.

Edit: Re proportional reps and the difference in average member. If you take several of the small alliances that have surrendered to the Hegemony, and look at the proportion of their total tech they have had to pay over (80-110% in some cases), you'd be looking at 4-600k from NPO and IRON. The exact numbers don't matter because they're so much larger than what you will see that it just shows up how ridiculous those reps were.

Edited May 22, 2009 by Bob Janova

[Amoshu]

2- They have sustained a ridiculous amount of damage. It's all very well saying 'MK had to pay 82k tech in reps' etc, but when did MK ever lose the 15 million or so NS that NPO/IRON have lost? (just using MK as it's the most common example ). I don't think people realise just how damaging this war has been for those aforementioned alliances. Seriously, just look at the alliance stats.

There are several nations that have 600m+ warchests that will rebound to prewar or higher stats moments after treaties are signed, before 'no factories' are strictly enforced. At least two, possibly three nations that I fought laid down their weapons and allowed their infra/tech/land/money to be destroyed, saving their warchests for after, to rebuild.

3- Reps/harsh terms at this point will only cause bitterness, if not amongst the aforementioned alliances; then definitely against their allies and friends.

Very true. This is shown to be quite apparent, as everyone out of the freaking woodworks wanted a piece of NPO at the start of this thing. Frankly, I don't think the reps could possibly create a more bitter environment than -15m NS.

4- Coming from an alliance who was given relatively light terms, it is very hard to hold any dislike for the alliances who dished them out.

On that point, 'Karma' has a chance to finally get rid of harsh peace terms. I for one would find it impossible to ever give harsh peace terms after the way my foes have treated my alliance, and I wager other alliances would feel the same way. If you inflict the terms that I've seen rumours of, I can guarantee it will come back to bite you in the butt. Every war (untill this war so far) the reps seem to get bigger, and everyone gets rolled eventually.

The bite on the butt will hurt, and sting, and be every bit as harmful as without the reps, for reasons stated above... but the only difference is one would have the benefit of whichever terms reps are imposed.

Ever heard the saying, "Never insult someone till you've walked a mile in their shoes" ? Whelp, it's because then you're a mile away, only now you've got their $700 Micheal Jordan signature series shoes.

DISCLAIMER In no way did I intend to insinuate anyone's preference on the article of clothing called "shoe". In fact, "shoe" is a wonderful article of clothing. "Shoe" should not be taken under any light circumstances, and one should probably not run/walk/traverse any sort of extended distance without "shoe" , when being accustomed to using "shoe". In fact, this may cause blisters. Micheal Jordan may not have released a signature series shoe, or may have never signed a shoe. The author of this post and the resulting disclaimer does not know, and does not stalk Micheal Jordan. It is unlikely that any party discussed in this post holds a pair or a single shoe signed by Micheal Jordan. This is not a definite exclusion, however.

[Kryievla]

Heh. I'd white peace them all I freely admit to bias; all of those alliances are or have been our allies at some point. However, it's about more than just friendship here. It's about sense, it's about a new era, and it's about something that was done for us. I like how Sucky put it, and agree with all but #2 (seeing as to me, assigning reps has nothing to do with the damage they took/dished, but rather their ability and willingness to pay).

On that point, 'Karma' has a chance to finally get rid of harsh peace terms. I for one would find it impossible to ever give harsh peace terms after the way my foes have treated my alliance, and I wager other alliances would feel the same way. If you inflict the terms that I've seen rumours of, I can guarantee it will come back to bite you in the butt. Every war (untill this war so far) the reps seem to get bigger, and everyone gets rolled eventually.

It is a fine thing to be shown a kindness, especially when you know your alliance would not be entirely undeserving of less mercy. As has been said before, this has not been lost on us. I suspect that giving that level of graciousness to an alliance of great influence and strength, like IRON, would not be wasted at all, but rather would help to perpetuate this vision of a brave new world that so many of you seek.

The Vox movement has brought about a social change, the effects made manifest by this war and it's resolution. While pzi/ezi was largely done away with prior to the war, other things like forced disbandments and extraordinary reps have been chucked out the window since. Least I think they have; I am still watching this last bout with interest. (I recognize that Karma is about social reform only to some, and revenge to others, but it seems to me that the war itself provides a fair and bloody vengeance.) I suspect that the ending peace terms will determine how long the social revolution lasts, as well as set the trend for future conflict resolution.

On top of that, it IS a brave new world. One with mad MPs and insane warchests. FAN has shown us the way. I find it astounding that anyone would *ever* agree to sucky reps, now more than ever. The only thing more astounding in that department is that some people still think to ask for them.

[JoshuaR]

I think it's because I'm a nobody that no one cares what I say.

I don't understand the calls for blood against IRON when GGA, OG, MCXA, etc. got off with nothing. What has IRON done that is any worse?

And I still don't understand how you can single out particular alliances for the crime of not being a good samaritan (OOC see Seinfeld final episode, go to jail for just watching robbery and not helping), yet completely turn a blind eye toward those just as guilty. TORN, with NPO, started this entire war. They got off with nothing because at the time, all of you thought the war would be more even and were happy to get anyone out of the way as quickly as possible.

MHA has an eternal (basically) treaty with the NPO. They drafted this thing well after knowing NPO's character and past exploits. Shouldn't they be just as culpable for allying themselves to the evil scourge of planet bob? How are they so wonderful when the most they've done to stop NPO was not enter this particular war against them?

Sparta has stood by until now.

TOP didn't even cancel the treaty until, what, yesterday?

I could go on and on. And I am a big fan of many of the alliances I mentioned above!

Punish IRON, TPF, and NPO individually according to whatever crimes they have committed, not for who they've been associated with, unless you punish everyone who's been associating with those same people, and you haven't. I think it's a wonderful idea to make these alliances pay back the reps they've received. Perhaps double, triple? Still pretty fair, no?

[SkonesMickLoud]

i could discuss war durations the MK reps avoided (not paid to or negotiated with us).

For the war between MK and RON that never happened???

Edited May 22, 2009 by SkonesMickLoud

[KingSuck]

There are several nations that have 600m+ warchests that will rebound to prewar or higher stats moments after treaties are signed, before 'no factories' are strictly enforced. At least two, possibly three nations that I fought laid down their weapons and allowed their infra/tech/land/money to be destroyed, saving their warchests for after, to rebuild.

While I personally think that those nations you fought are fools; I really don't get why there is this new craze to punish people for having warchests. The fact that they've prepared to rebuild doesn't take away from the fact that they've suffered a huge amount of damage.

Very true. This is shown to be quite apparent, as everyone out of the freaking woodworks wanted a piece of NPO at the start of this thing. Frankly, I don't think the reps could possibly create a more bitter environment than -15m NS. The bite on the butt will hurt, and sting, and be every bit as harmful as without the reps, for reasons stated above... but the only difference is one would have the benefit of whichever terms reps are imposed.

You'd be very surprised. Taking damage whilst dishing it out is painful, but ok. Sending tech to your enemies is a whole different matter, and in 99% of the cases will only cause bitterness and resentment.

There seems to be this commonly shared belief that NPO et co are going to come after Karma for revenge once this was is over, no matter what. Thus is just completely untrue, and thinking that way is only going to make it come true. Giving NPO harsh terms will give them 'valid reasons' for revenge, giving them white peace could result in a completely different scenario.

Personally if I was in NPO/IRON/TPF/Echelon shoes and I was offered the terms I've seen hinted at I would just go VietFAN for a few months (imagine a much larger FAN with MPs, WRCs, tons of cash) and wait for this next conflict to come around

[King Boris]

Wow, for TPF that would be almost a white peace.

Except for the going the way of NoV part.