Reps for IRON, NPO, Echelon, and TPF

[Fort Pitt]

like its been said before, i dont think reps have ever been judged by if alliances can pay them, a few alliances in past wars have had outrageous timeframes and basically had to hand over 50% of the alliance NS over to the victors to pay debts

[Captain Flinders]

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]

Time does not change practice. Practice changes by initiative. You (again this referring to the former hegemony) did not take the initiative to practice better reparations terms so why should you benefit from the power transfer? You abused your power and now tell those with the power to not abuse you. It really is laughable.

It should also be noted that I do support torture or "advanced interrogation techniques" in real life. Obviously that's a tangent for the boiler room but your analogy falls flat on its face as does the rest of your argument.

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 point is not whether you will or won't do it again. The point is that you have done it and the fact that you can no longer do it does not absolve you of that fact.

[JayOvfEnnay]

Except the "little kid" you cite had a nasty habit of going around beating up little kids for their lunch money... oops!

Something makes me think you completely misread what I said. The little kid I cite is the victim BEFORE this war happened, when NPO/cronies (read: you) were still the guys on top, and when you all were attacking alliances that did NOT deserve it. Since GPA seems widely used in this thread, we'll take that one. When was GPA going around beating up other kids for money? =_=' You see where we're going with this?

[KingSuck]

Time does not change practice. Practice changes by initiative. You (again this referring to the former hegemony) did not take the initiative to practice better reparations terms so why should you benefit from the power transfer? You abused your power and now tell those with the power to not abuse you. It really is laughable.

We didn't tell those with power not to abuse us, they chose not to. We've learnt from that and I'm now encouraging others to do the same. It's pretty simple tbqh.

oh and we haven't had a chance to take the 'initiative' for ~9 months, so you're argument is pretty flawed in that respect. I can guarantee you if we had come out before this war and said 'If we win this war we will not be giving harsh terms' it would have been instantly condemned as a cheap PR move. Kinda a lose-lose scenario don't you think?

It should also be noted that I do support torture or "advanced interrogation techniques" in real life. Obviously that's a tangent for the boiler room but your analogy falls flat on its face as does the rest of your argument.

I'm loving the circular logic here. My analogy falls flat on it's face because...that's right; it falls flat on it's face!!

The point is not whether you will or won't do it again. The point is that you have done it and the fact that you can no longer do it does not absolve you of that fact.

Way to completely miss the point, which, since I was replying to your post is a pretty special achievement. Anyhow I'm in a generous modd so I'll lay it out step by step for you

You: if you believe in light terms now, why did Valhalla not give light terms in the past?

Me: Valhalla has changed and almost certainly will be giving out light terms from now on

You: doesn't matter what you do from now on because you did it in the past!!

Yep, you got me there

[bbrownso]

Time does not change practice. Practice changes by initiative. You (again this referring to the former hegemony) did not take the initiative to practice better reparations terms so why should you benefit from the power transfer? You abused your power and now tell those with the power to not abuse you. It really is laughable.

It should also be noted that I do support torture or "advanced interrogation techniques" in real life. Obviously that's a tangent for the boiler room but your analogy falls flat on its face as does the rest of your argument.

The point is not whether you will or won't do it again. The point is that you have done it and the fact that you can no longer do it does not absolve you of that fact.

In a cyclical relationship, it's this thinking that perpetuates the cycle. IMO, I believe harsh reps will just further antagonize the "hegemony" and create more hate. If Karma wants to make a lasting change, they should take the hit and not try to beat the "hegemony" alliance into the ground with reparations. Intitiative typically requires some sacrifice. The gratification of their desire for heavy reparations could be the key to changing the cycle.

But hey, let's just keep making each other angry and using it as justification for what will happen later on.

[The Poet]

tbh as much as I like the idea of forced disbandment because I hate every mother and her dog running an alliance these days...

I would be seriously surprised to see TPF or Echelon get reps even equal to Valhalla or GGA who we may assume are fairly equal in previous crimes. TPF and Echelon fought longer, therefore should face less reps. It's only logical and fair. If TPF really does fight as long as NPO, they definitely deserve white peace.

IRON and NPO.. Eh, MK reps scaled.

[Captain Flinders]

We didn't tell those with power not to abuse us, they chose not to. We've learnt from that and I'm now encouraging others to do the same. It's pretty simple tbqh.

I made a point to say not just Valhalla. Pay attention.

oh and we haven't had a chance to take the 'initiative' for ~9 months, so you're argument is pretty flawed in that respect.

Valhalla and every alliance in the world has/had the chance to take the initiative after every war they fought. The fact that you didn't seize the chance is the reason your alliance is where it is today.

You: if you believe in light terms now, why did Valhalla not give light terms in the past?

Me: Valhalla has changed and almost certainly will be giving out light terms from now on

You: doesn't matter what you do from now on because you did it in the past!!

I didn't say it doesn't matter what you do from now on. However, to date, you have done nothing to make anyone believe Valalla is not the same bullying, extortionist alliance it was before. You can talk all you want but until actions are taken it is all just words.

In a cyclical relationship, it's this thinking that perpetuates the cycle. IMO, I believe harsh reps will just further antagonize the "hegemony" and create more hate. If Karma wants to make a lasting change, they should take the hit and not try to beat the "hegemony" alliance into the ground with reparations. Intitiative typically equrires some sacrifice. The gratification of their desire for heavy reparations could be the key to changing the cycle.

The Karma Coalition has already taken far more initiative than the hegemony has displayed in countless wars. The fact that multiple Continuum alliances were given white, or near white peace is testament to that. That doesn't mean Karma necessarily has to give every Continuum alliance white peace. Their graciousness so far has already proven they are willing to "take the hit" and not be the hegemony. The first time a Continuum alliance got white peace Karma proved how much better they are than the hegemony.

[Calixo]

personally, i don't beleive reparations for parties who joined on behalf of a offensive treaty(or clause within said treaty.), they have with an alliance, should ask for reps, and in some cases the defending alliance should not either. because of total the damamges.If the amount of damage is greater, or critically wounding to the opposing alliance, then ordering reps is like pouring salt on a wound.

reparations for the alliance that was initially attacked, understandable...

and reparations for specific incidents, such as unsanctioned nuclear attacks, but that is more up to the descretion of the alliance.

just my thoughts.

Cal

[Michael McBride]

A certain alliance has decided that they want more than double that already.

Good on said alliance.

I'm all for harsh reps for all of those alliances. Something along the terms of over a billion dollars and hundreds of thousands of tech each would do the trick. And no, my nation wouldn't be seeing a cent of those reps, so that isn't for personal gain.

[Unko Kalaikz]

No peace until the upper nations leave hippy mode. karma.

[The Poet]

No peace until the upper nations leave hippy mode. karma.

If they don't want to leave hippy, they don't have to. It just means reps will have to take the fact into account.

[Qaianna]

(edited to get to the bits I want to throw rocks at)

The Karma Coalition has already taken far more initiative than the hegemony has displayed in countless wars. The fact that multiple Continuum alliances were given white, or near white peace is testament to that. That doesn't mean Karma necessarily has to give every Continuum alliance white peace. Their graciousness so far has already proven they are willing to "take the hit" and not be the hegemony. The first time a Continuum alliance got white peace Karma proved how much better they are than the hegemony.

I'm assuming that the 'countless' part refers to the wars fought as part of the current main one, as many people keep saying that 'Karma' did not exist prior to the huge conflict.

In that case ... well, honestly, the only folks I hold a grudge against, as a loser of the war, are ... um ... there was a guy who nuked me a few times. I'd like to return the favour someday, but it seems like that's acceptable if our alliances find themselves at war again. I like to think I have a place in my alliance in its future, so perhaps this is what I should come away with, shouldn't I? Friendly rivalry?

Oh, right, as a One Vision member I'm by definition incapable of friendship. OK, I'll try to hold my bitterness at the bile spewing there.

Now a serious question, to the many who ... damn, I forget how Tygaland told me to think of them. Assuming that's what I should call him. Either way, for those who like to scream 'return what was stolen' ... who decides which bits were stolen and which bits were from legitimate wars? And no, you don't get to say everything done was legitimate by definition. Gotta show your work on this assignment.

And back to the quote: you insist the first time that a Karma alliance did better, it was better. Works the other way, too. Not accusing (I had to send Tyga a note basically telling him that he was right about what sane reps would look like--mmmm, crow), but something to be careful for.

[Matthew Conrad]

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.

Besides the, sometimes overdone, verbal quips here on the forums, I don't really see how the alliance leaders currently engaged with NPO treating them somehow different from how everyone has been treated. Honestly, compared to how NPO has often treated a hated adversary, I'd say they've been treated much better than they should expect in comparison. If they think the score isn't even, then it'll only prove how little they've changed.

I think we can both agree Valhalla, for the most part, has been given a clean second chance. NPO has already received that and I'm sure we can agree that didn't follow as planned. Honestly, the terms offered to them immediately offered to them after the attack on OV was almost a third chance. I'll give anyone a second chance, but once they prove they didn't take it in good faith is when I lose my usually kind nature.

[Vasiliy]

If they don't want to leave hippy, they don't have to. It just means reps will have to take the fact into account.

Nah, the NPO in the past has demanded on penalty of EZI that upper NS nations leave peace mode before terms are considered.

It's totally fair they get the same treatment.

No terms until they get out of the hippy shield. They should be totally decimated before they're allowed to start paying, it's the NPO way.

Edited May 23, 2009 by Vasiliy

[SpoiL]

Wouldn't want the vaunted hippy shields to save them now would you Karma?

[Mixoux]

Wouldn't want the vaunted hippy shields to save them now would you Karma?

But, but, but, then we're as bad as them!!

[Aloop]

But, but, but, then we're as bad as them!!

Be careful, you're becoming a monster! Ruining the game, etc.

[BamaBuc]

TOP was not involved with the discussion and brainstorming of IRON's terms so keep thinking those 2 are informed, you are sadly mistaken. Like I said ask L_M, WCR, ENI, Fireguy, Joe, hell ask me in a query so I can stop replying to each of your ill informed post.

The parties at war with IRON have worked together to get a number that everyone can get behind, that's how these things work. If you are patient you might even see the final product and then, maybe then, you can quit your !@#$%*ing.

Hahaha. Grämlins are involved, no? Gre and TOP are extremely close. Gre would not leave TOP in the dark on what was being discussed among you guys, even if those figures were never actually demanded. Furthermore, I have never known TOP members to say something like that unless they know what they're talking about.

And I notice that you do not refute the 3b 50k number as you did earlier. That is the number you demanded of IRON. I have two main problems with this number:

1. After the damage they took, it's ridiculous. You're just kicking them while they're down (in before IRON's allies did it so it's okay... Note that RoK was also allied to NPO when they did all these evil things).

2. There are alliances who have a right to restitution. Ragnarok is not one of them. You were never rolled. You were never forced to pay a cent of reps to IRON or anyone. In fact, you were a part of the Hegemony when all the beatdowns and rep-taking was going on. You damn well better send every cent you get to MK, Athens, GATO, GPA, etc. Every damn cent. Otherwise this is just opportunistic pillaging in the name of justice. Restitution goes to those who were wronged, not to the pockets of those who were friends with the accused until things started to look bad. You were never wronged. You stuck with NPO through every supposed crime, including noCB. Only when Karma really got it's momentum going, many months after noCB, did you back out. If IRON is guilty by association, so are you.

-Bama

[The Poet]

Hahaha. Grämlins are involved, no? Gre and TOP are extremely close. Gre would not leave TOP in the dark on what was being discussed among you guys, even if those figures were never actually demanded. Furthermore, I have never known TOP members to say something like that unless they know what they're talking about.

And I notice that you do not refute the 3b 50k number as you did earlier. That is the number you demanded of IRON. I have two main problems with this number:

1. After the damage they took, it's ridiculous. You're just kicking them while they're down (in before IRON's allies did it so it's okay... Note that RoK was also allied to NPO when they did all these evil things).

2. There are alliances who have a right to restitution. Ragnarok is not one of them. You were never rolled. You were never forced to pay a cent of reps to IRON or anyone. In fact, you were a part of the Hegemony when all the beatdowns and rep-taking was going on. You damn well better send every cent you get to MK, Athens, GATO, GPA, etc. Every damn cent. Otherwise this is just opportunistic pillaging in the name of justice. Restitution goes to those who were wronged, not to the pockets of those who were friends with the accused until things started to look bad. You were never wronged. You stuck with NPO through every supposed crime, including noCB. Only when Karma really got it's momentum going, many months after noCB, did you back out. If IRON is guilty by association, so are you.

-Bama

I don't give a !@#$ who's with Karma now that has possibly done this !@#$ in the past, I have it all recorded but we needed a big coalition to win didn't we. We'll deal with the rest of ex-Q and people later, ok?

[BamaBuc]

I don't give a !@#$ who's with Karma now that has possibly done this !@#$ in the past, I have it all recorded but we needed a big coalition to win didn't we. We'll deal with the rest of ex-Q and people later, ok?

I'm sure RoK nations getting all that money will go a long way towards them being "dealt with later".

There are some people who ought to get restitution in this war. OV, MK, Athens, and so on. RoK ain't one of them.

-Bama

[gantanX]

White Peace should be enough IMO..

Unless Karma sides are too scare of NPO and Co's revenge

then Harsh Terms is a must

[The Poet]

I'm sure RoK nations getting all that money will go a long way towards them being "dealt with later".

There are some people who ought to get restitution in this war. OV, MK, Athens, and so on. RoK ain't one of them.

-Bama

Trust me, Rok is quite high up there with FOK/MHA/Gremlins/TOP/Sparta... I'm afraid we can only ever take them one at a time using the others though to help destroy them. It's all quite complicated, rest assured it is all under control however.

[St Jimmy]

White Peace should be enough IMO..

Unless Karma sides are too scare of NPO and Co's revenge

then Harsh Terms is a must

Or if Karma were, you know, an agent of karma. It's not just called that for the sake of irony, you know.

[Nizzle]

Or if Karma were, you know, an agent of karma. It's not just called that for the sake of irony, you know.

I find the need for strong reparations to be hilarious.

I mean, look at their strength charts. Over a year of growth, if not more, is destroyed. I think anything further is asking for blood from a stone.

[greatmagnus]

I find the need for strong reparations to be hilarious.

I mean, look at their strength charts. Over a year of growth, if not more, is destroyed. I think anything further is asking for blood from a stone.

I advocate this stance for every alliance but NPO. Due to their peace mode mentality this war, they have managed to preserve a significant powerbase. If those nations were to come out for a few weeks then I would be all for light terms.