Trashcat's Corner: And They Will Look Up And Shout Save Us

[Heracles the Great]

I implied that postering is going on, yes. As Hal pointed out, that happens EVERY !@#$@#$ WAR. Just cause you take it as slander doesnt mean it actually is. The fact is, you are offended at just about anyone disagreeing with you at all apparently.

You claiming that we gave those terms because we wanted to bring Valhalla to our side (which side is that again?) is completely false and had no factor in our decision and is infact slander. If alliances in the past have grown closer to Valhalla after war, it surely wasn't because of light terms because we all know that everyone in the past has been decimated by Valhalla - therefore how does using Hal's opinion provide your comments with any backing?

I dont think you listen to me. I dont disagree that aid restrictions should be in place. I said that BOTH should be in place. Did you ever stop to consider that in some part of me I think that all the peace terms handed down so far have been bull !@#$? No, you didnt. Im not ignoring any facts. SEVERAL times now I have claimed I wanted to see them banned from outside aid while having to pay reps and several times you have claimed that this is not what I wanted. You dont understand how I feel because you dont give a !@#$ about what this alliance has done to your coalition mates. Just cause you didnt want to see them pay for what they've done doesnt mean we are wrong for wanting the same, even if its just by them having to pay reparations like the ones placed on my alliance. Like the ones that KILLED my alliance. Also, its funny that you guys can claim character assassination and then take jabs at mine. Seriously, you like to dish out, but just hate it when someone actually talks back.

You said that aid restrictions do little to restrict growth and you also said you never wanted huge reps - so what exactly would have asking for 10,000 tech done for your cause (to slow their growth)? Slowed it by an extra day or two? Sounds like a pretty minor descrepancy and definately not one worth this 80 page debacle that we're witnessing (valhalla+this thread).

And where exactly did I take a jab at your character?

[Stumpy Jung Il]

The thing you preach, this "retribution beyond the obvious retribution", is more of the same. In fact, it will result in the Hegemony likely creating a "Karma" of their own in two years time. Doing the same thing over and over does not produce the same results, good sir.

Oh God, am I becoming the monster? Oh God please no! You know what, you are right. Light terms alone are gonna change the world. I mean, it worked great for LUE didnt it? Hows the CoaLUEtion doing these days? I actually think I am the better man cause Im not turning around and doing the exact same thing to the people who robbed me of my home. Once again, you dont know where Im coming from.

Heracles, Im starting to think that everything I say to you is slander. I should start getting out quotes of things Valhalla has said to me in the past so you can see the reformed alliance that you so fervently protect. I think we have different definitions of harsh. Harsh is having to pay more tech then you have (see: TDSM8) something I didnt want to ask of Valhalla. However, a sum of tech for what they've done to MK and other friends of mine doesnt seem unreasonable. However, this argument is basically just a circle, so unless someone has something new to add, Im gonna go do something else.

[HeinousOne]

Yeah, I'm claiming that. AID is fairly worthless to alliances such as Umbrella and Kronos, though I'm unaware if Athens received any. I'm surprised you made such a claim without knowledge.

I am not making a baseless claim. I have heard it talked about and it was talked about your theatre of war. So there is base to the claim I was just letting you say whether or not your alliance received such.

Might to make it right. Might makes right. See, you did say that.

I can speak for Kronos alone, here. We gave the terms we saw fit. We didn't see a need for reparations, especially since we initiated an attack on them and brought their NS down so much. If they come back and try to get revenge, then Karma served the purpose of promoting an environment where wars are prevalent and fair. However, the reason for the terms given do not include any future plans for world domination. I also highly doubt that the political make up of the world will be the same after all is said and done.

Making the world a fair place doesn't necessarily seem like a definition of "Karma". I think you are saying what you want the result of the war to be rather then what Karma was actually about.

I think I made a total of three responses. One of which was the "You may as well have said 'NO U'."

I apologize if you consider that to be thinkspeak for me desperately craving a response from you, which you incidentally haven't really given and I haven't asked for. Shall we drop this portion of our, thus far, stellar conversation?

Yes please, I would have rathered you never even brought up the whole NO U aspect. Although at this point you seem rather busy with a few other conversations.

[Heracles the Great]

You didn't consider how recruitment can work. They can import tech to their capacity so long as they 'import' the sellers to provide for themselves.

Just because you call something 'proof' as you do so often doesn't make yourself entirely correct.

Considering their numbers are the same as they were before the war and that they haven't ever openly recruited and have a very strict control over their membership, I don't think you're point holds much value. Could they change that policy to manipulate the aid restriction? sure - but it'd do more damage than good as it'd inflate their ranks with inactive noobs - it'd be like TOP or GRE doing it.

And while I didn't take the time to watch the video, I laid out the mathmatical evidence that backs my point - isn't that what most people consider proof? or is it just evidence?

[Heracles the Great]

Seeing as people want to continue to ignore the evidence provide and hope that if they say "it's white peace!!" enough times that the world will believe them, I'm going to take my leave from this debacle of a thread. Stumpy - I wish you and Vanguard the best and while I understand disagreeing on what "should" have been done, I really can't understand how you can call it white peace or claim that it did "little to slow their growth" - either way - good luck with your wars and may you find yourself prospering after this war is over.

[Nizzle]

Oh God, am I becoming the monster? Oh God please no! You know what, you are right. Light terms alone are gonna change the world. I mean, it worked great for LUE didnt it? Hows the CoaLUEtion doing these days? I actually think I am the better man cause Im not turning around and doing the exact same thing to the people who robbed me of my home. Once again, you dont know where Im coming from.

Oh no! Not another historical reference! Good thing the game hasn't changed, at all. 5% line at 2k infra, right?

I may not know where you are coming from, but I know where your line of thinking will lead. That's good enough for me.

Scorbolt, HeinousOne, Stumpy: It's been fun. I have no problem recognizing when someone has a point of view opposite of mine and there can be little to no common ground. Do enjoy your evening.

[Scorbolt]

Can they recruit their way to being able to move 85,000 more tech internally? Seriously?

Also, it's proof because it is solid math. I mean, then again, some of us in Kronos don't know anything about building a nation. Any help would be appreciated.

If they so desired.. I imagine they could. This is a variable not accounted for in your solid math. Did I mention anything about Kronos not being able to build a nation? I just gave an element of review that it seems was considered irrelevant in the discussion for peace terms. Given Valhallas recruiting policy I suspect you may be safe in overlooking it but we who will be considering NPOs terms will not. We've seen how they can recruit and also the amount of funds they can move internally.

[Scorbolt]

And while I didn't take the time to watch the video, I laid out the mathmatical evidence that backs my point - isn't that what most people consider proof? or is it just evidence?

From a mathematics perspective I suspect it is simply evidence. I do not detract from the calculations you have done.

[Neo Uruk]

Oh no! Not another historical reference! Good thing the game hasn't changed, at all. 5% line at 2k infra, right?

The game has changed, but not to the point that NPO can't be a threat if given white peace, no matter heavily beaten.

[Tygaland]

If I may paraphrase, "It's not eye for an eye because we aren't quite as bad!". Yes you could ask for worse than 10,000 tech, but just because it's less bad doesn't mean it's good. While you maybe be striving for vengence (as honorable or dishonorable as it may be) umbrella is striving to do good. I'm not going to commend you for asking (or more accurately pestering other Karma members to ask for you) for light reps. I'll save it for alliances that strive to do good (see Gramlins, TOP and Kronos).

An "eye for an eye" means applying the exact same punishment as that that was delivered to you. You used the term, I pointed out why you were wrong.

Did I ever claim this? I don't recall typing that STA started any war. I did imply that you planned other wars, which I'm sure you did (I mean really, I don't think STA got into the UJW merely through treaty obilgations, so were you really left out of planning it? Do you have a signed note saying so?) And if you keep putting vengence before diplomacy, then I'm sure I wont have to wait too long before I can't point one out to you.

The STA was not involved in the UJW planning. We were not and have never been a member of a bloc, least of all the one involved in planning the UJW. STA went to war when Genmay attacked BotS who was a protectorate of the NpO, our ally. So, yes, we did go to war via a treaty and we were not involved in any planning of said war. A signed note? You can go look up and see if STA was in the bloc that fractured when the war began and see if we were in any position to plan it.

Done and done. Sorry if it's not what you were expecting, but please read it as it is a little specific and might require more than, "Yeah, prove it" to respond to.

You didn't provide proof of either allegation. You dodged and evaded but did not provide proof. Show me where the STA demanded the removal of people from Valhalla government, the destruction of wonders, the massive reps and 6 month long full military decom. Unless you can to that your "eye for an eye" claim is false. As for planning the next curbstomp, you still have not shown an example of the STA planning any war, curbstomp or otherwise.

Making up stories may pass for evidence in your world, but not mine.

[Tygaland]

There was this one. Honestly I think their actions in it and at the end of it were justified, though.

As far as I know that's the only one

"Shark War II" was not a new war, it was a resumption of hostilities after WAPA breached the original peace terms from "Shark War I". It was not a war started by the STA, STA assisted an ally that had been attacked and accepted our offer of help via our ODP.

[Neo Uruk]

"Shark War II" was not a new war, it was a resumption of hostilities after WAPA breached the original peace terms from "Shark War I". It was not a war started by the STA, STA assisted an ally that had been attacked and accepted our offer of help via our ODP.

Some people don't understand the concept that you don't need a continuous state of war to have a war be just one (or a continuation).

I'm sure given the number of FAN nations that were in peace mode that they didn't have a continuous flow of wars.

Edited May 24, 2009 by Rey the Great

[Tygaland]

I believe I've addressed how, in fact, this does slow rebuilding of an alliance - and does it far better than demanding a paultry amount of reps - if I failed to do that and you'd like to discuss it further, I'd be happy to.

You haven't actually. If you could explain how leaving all their aid slots open for internal rebuilding blocks up more of their aid slots than a medium level of reps, please go ahead and explain.

Nobody is claiming to have blocked their aid slots completely - nor did we ever claim that not allowing externa aild means they cannot use their aid slots. If we had required reps it would have cost a couple days worth of growth - what we did cost them a couple months worth of growth.

You were the ones using the "we have blocked up their aid slots" rhetoric. Don't blame me when I point out you haven't. Slowing down the growth for a week or two is what punishment is all about last I checked.

So basically we should have demanded 5,000 tech (half the membership of MCXA therefore half their reps - so we're keeping it fair and consistent) instead of what we did? Or is it on top of what we did (but that's not consistent with what the others go, so I guess it'd have to be "instead of" just to be fair across the board).

Well, if reps were ever determined by alliance size you may have a point. However, I never advocated such a system. I advocated on whereby the level of reps was reflective of the alliances role in the Continuum and hence the hegemony we sought to remove. As for the stuff you posted in brackets, I have no idea what you are rambling about. You gave Valhalla virtual white peace so "on top of" is kind of redundant because 5K on top of nothing is still 5K.

And I'm glad you're not an advocate for big reps - I mean that's the only thing that would have slowed Valhalla's growth even the slightest bit without our restriction on outside aid, which you claim "does little to slow the rebuilding of an alliance"

No, any reps would slow them down in rebuilding by filling aid slots they will now use for internal aid to rebuild. Ignoring simple reality does not an argument make.

So if the terms given to Valhalla were actually far more damaging to their growth plans than the terms given to MCXA, GGA, etc - didn't we, infact, actually do exactly what you wanted?

They aren't far more damaging and you saying so does not make it so.

[Tygaland]

You pointed out that it uses up slots, so it was very relevant to that point.

I never claimed it used up all their slots which is why what you tried to imply was ridiculous.

I'm not sure what that has to do with my argument. Just because it wasn't taken into account when determining terms doesn't mean that it isn't more important than terms.

I don't think anyone is downplaying the damage done in war, it just has zero to do with reps.

I'm not saying reparations payments like MCXA's wouldn't have been more appropriate, I'm just arguing against the relative significance of them or the idea that their absence means they got a "free pass".

They did get a free pass unlike SSSW18, AB and TSI. The reps are significant in creating a system of fair and just peace terms as I've said a number of times.

Hey if you weren't for big reps, that decreases it's significance even further.

Not at all. Reps of 10K tech like MCXA received fills up quite a few aid slots that will now be used for internal aid and rebuilding.

[Haflinger]

No, restricting internal aid would hamper the growth process, given that Valhalla's allies aren't in a state to heap mounds of aid over to Valhalla.

Yes, we are.

BAPS-Olympus aid.

BAPS-Invicta aid.

It will still take a while for BAPS to regain their former strength (they lost half their NS in the war), but I'd also like to point out that some of the aid we sent them has already been deleted off those screens. That aid restriction clause is going to permanently affect the distribution of NS in Poseidon, I suspect.

[Neo Uruk]

Yes, we are.

BAPS-Olympus aid.

BAPS-Invicta aid.

It will still take a while for BAPS to regain their former strength (they lost half their NS in the war), but I'd also like to point out that some of the aid we sent them has already been deleted off those screens. That aid restriction clause is going to permanently affect the distribution of NS in Poseidon, I suspect.

Well, then, I guess you've won this round, logical thinkers

[Flonker]

The game has changed, but not to the point that NPO can't be a threat if given white peace, no matter heavily beaten.

Somehow I rather doubt NPO is going to get white peace.

[Buffalo Niagara]

Yes, we are.

BAPS-Olympus aid.

BAPS-Invicta aid.

It will still take a while for BAPS to regain their former strength (they lost half their NS in the war), but I'd also like to point out that some of the aid we sent them has already been deleted off those screens. That aid restriction clause is going to permanently affect the distribution of NS in Poseidon, I suspect.

yeah...over 200 mill in aid just from the 40 nations of Olympus....THUS FAR...but meh. (most going outside of Olympus)...

Valhalla, don't worry we are counting the days my friends.

Edited May 24, 2009 by Buffalo Niagara

[Heyman]

Another good issue. You pull off the biased-yet-impartial thing pretty well, Stumpy.

[Heracles the Great]

You haven't actually. If you could explain how leaving all their aid slots open for internal rebuilding blocks up more of their aid slots than a medium level of reps, please go ahead and explain.

Alright - back to the chalkboard...

Valhalla has ~120 nations - ~30 of which are in the tech selling category more or less and ~90 of which are in the tech buying category. The most common way a high-ANS alliance builds using their aid slots are through the purchase of tech, I hope we agree on this logic... Now with only 150 aid slots per 10 days, that means the most tech they can import to their upper ranks internally is 7,500/10 days - which is 15,000/month (including a payment cycle). Over 3 months, that means the most tech they can import to their upper ranks is 45,000. Considering without this, they could import over 135,000 tech in 3-months, that's a 60+% decrease on their growth.

Now let's look at what "medium level reps" (depending on your definition) would have done. 120-man alliance with 600 aid slots could have sent out 10,000 tech in one cycle using 1/3 of their aid slots, leaving 400 aid slots to send out aid. After that first 10 days, they are open and free to do whatever they please. So all you did was tie up 1/3 of their aid slots for 10 days.

If you really can't understand this, I don't know how better to explain it to you. Simple math makes this very apparent.

You were the ones using the "we have blocked up their aid slots" rhetoric. Don't blame me when I point out you haven't. Slowing down the growth for a week or two is what punishment is all about last I checked.

I agree - slowing down growth for a week or two isn't really punishment - yet it's exactly what you are advocating we should have done. Instead we slowed their growth for 2 months - but again, let's ignore the facts.

Well, if reps were ever determined by alliance size you may have a point. However, I never advocated such a system. I advocated on whereby the level of reps was reflective of the alliances role in the Continuum and hence the hegemony we sought to remove. As for the stuff you posted in brackets, I have no idea what you are rambling about. You gave Valhalla virtual white peace so "on top of" is kind of redundant because 5K on top of nothing is still 5K.

That "ramble" was about keeping the terms fair across the board as to which you advocated - but you obviously got that part since you responded one sentence later. And yes - that 2 months worth of damage to their growth - that sure was nothing... brilliant logic!

No, any reps would slow them down in rebuilding by filling aid slots they will now use for internal aid to rebuild. Ignoring simple reality does not an argument make.

Ignoring simple logic does not an argument make either

They aren't far more damaging and you saying so does not make it so.

90,000 tech will not be received by Valhalla due to these terms - that's far more damaging than the 10,000 tech they would have sent out - so yes, me providing evidence and actually doing the math does make it so.

Edited May 24, 2009 by Heracles the Great

[Iotupa]

I must say, this is one announcement I have missed in my hiatus. Thanks for giving me credit for my photograph of you even though I was gone.

[Tygaland]

Alright - back to the chalkboard...

Valhalla has ~120 nations - ~30 of which are in the tech selling category more or less and ~90 of which are in the tech buying category. The most common way a high-ANS alliance builds using their aid slots are through the purchase of tech, I hope we agree on this logic... Now with only 150 aid slots per 10 days, that means the most tech they can import to their upper ranks internally is 7,500/10 days - which is 15,000/month (including a payment cycle). Over 3 months, that means the most tech they can import to their upper ranks is 45,000. Considering without this, they could import over 135,000 tech in 3-months, that's a 60+% decrease on their growth.

Now let's look at what "medium level reps" (depending on your definition) would have done. 120-man alliance with 600 aid slots could have sent out 10,000 tech in one cycle using 1/3 of their aid slots, leaving 400 aid slots to send out aid. After that first 10 days, they are open and free to do whatever they please. So all you did was tie up 1/3 of their aid slots for 10 days.

If you really can't understand this, I don't know how better to explain it to you. Simple math makes this very apparent.

I think the flaw in your reasoning is you are arguing on an either/or basis. I never said reps instead of restrictions on foreign aid. I said they should have been made to pay reps and have restrictions on outside aid. I'm fairly sure most alliances so far who have been made to pay reps also have restrictions on outside aid so your terms are not worse than those of SSSW18 and AB no matter how you try to spin it.

I agree - slowing down growth for a week or two isn't really punishment - yet it's exactly what you are advocating we should have done. Instead we slowed their growth for 2 months - but again, let's ignore the facts.

Try re-reading what I actually said. I said slowing down growth for one or two weeks was punishment.

That "ramble" was about keeping the terms fair across the board as to which you advocated - but you obviously got that part since you responded one sentence later. And yes - that 2 months worth of damage to their growth - that sure was nothing... brilliant logic!

No, fairness is where the core alliances in the Continuum pay more reparations and have more restrictions placed upon them than peripheral alliances. Even by your "logic" SSSW18, AB and TSI are smaller than Valhalla and are paying far more in reps even thought they too went through war and suffered heavy losses during that war. Your terms were not fair at all, they were a joke. And I never claimed war damage was nothing, I said your requested reparations payments were nothing so to ramble on about "on top of" is dishonest as at present they are paying nothing. But I see you are lapsing into hysterics here

Ignoring simple logic does not an argument make either

Are you saying slots used to pay reps van also be used to send rebuilding aid internally at the same time? Why does Valhalla get these magical double-use aid slots and I don't? Yes, simple logic indeed.

90,000 tech will not be received by Valhalla due to these terms - that's far more damaging than the 10,000 tech they would have sent out - so yes, me providing evidence and actually doing the math does make it so.

Well, if you ignore that MCXA and GGA and others made to pay reps also have the same restrictions on external aid your math would have a point. However, it falls flat because Valhalla's terms are still not worse than those of MCXA and GGA because their tech dealing capacity is reduced as well. But keep going, you may even convince yourself that no reps with foreign aid restrictions is worse than paying reps with the same foreign aid restrictions.

Edited May 25, 2009 by Tygaland

[Monster]

No, fairness is where the core alliances in the Continuum pay more reparations and have more restrictions placed upon them than peripheral alliances. Even by your "logic" SSSW18, AB and TSI are smaller than Valhalla and are paying far more in reps even thought they too went through war and suffered heavy losses during that war. Your terms were not fair at all, they were a joke. And I never claimed war damage was nothing, I said your requested reparations payments were nothing so to ramble on about "on top of" is dishonest as at present they are paying nothing. But I see you are lapsing into hysterics here

Why should have the terms set by others for peripheral alliances have had the ultimate sway in our decision-making process? If we had set all those and then given Valhalla these terms, you might have a point. What you're asking for is to let terms others set dictate ours. Would I have made TSI pay reps personally? No.

Edited May 25, 2009 by Nausea

[Heracles the Great]

I think the flaw in your reasoning is you are arguing on an either/or basis. I never said reps instead of restrictions on foreign aid. I said they should have been made to pay reps and have restrictions on outside aid. I'm fairly sure most alliances so far who have been made to pay reps also have restrictions on outside aid so your terms are not worse than those of SSSW18 and AB no matter how you try to spin it.

Try re-reading what I actually said. I said slowing down growth for one or two weeks was punishment.

No, fairness is where the core alliances in the Continuum pay more reparations and have more restrictions placed upon them than peripheral alliances. Even by your "logic" SSSW18, AB and TSI are smaller than Valhalla and are paying far more in reps even thought they too went through war and suffered heavy losses during that war. Your terms were not fair at all, they were a joke. And I never claimed war damage was nothing, I said your requested reparations payments were nothing so to ramble on about "on top of" is dishonest as at present they are paying nothing. But I see you are lapsing into hysterics here

Are you saying slots used to pay reps van also be used to send rebuilding aid internally at the same time? Why does Valhalla get these magical double-use aid slots and I don't? Yes, simple logic indeed.

Well, if you ignore that MCXA and GGA and others made to pay reps also have the same restrictions on external aid your math would have a point. However, it falls flat because Valhalla's terms are still not worse than those of MCXA and GGA because their tech dealing capacity is reduced as well. But keep going, you may even convince yourself that no reps with foreign aid restrictions is worse than paying reps with the same foreign aid restrictions.

SSSW18

1. SSSW18 surrenders to MOON, DT, BH, and LSR

2. No offensive wars are permitted for the duration of the current conflict. If the conflict is still going on for 30 days, this term will be re-evaluated by all parties.

3. Mandatory tech deals must be done with MOON, DT, BH and LSR. 2500 tech will be the required amount sold to each alliance, at an eventual going rate of 3 million for 100 tech: these must be paid within 3 months of SSSW18's surrender. If this has not been completed within 3 months, this term will be re-assessed by all parties.

4. SSSW18 is considered under the full protection of MOON, DT, Blackhorse and LSR until reparations have been fully paid. At this point it is assumed that SSSW18 is able to fend for itself.

5. All military obligations of SSSW18's treaties are considered null and void until conclusion of the conflict between Karma and Hegemony

6. Any attacks made by any party after May 1 update must be paid for in reparations.

No aid restrictions here

AB

1. All treaties with Echelon will be dissolved as of this surrender.

2. Aurora Borealis will take full responsibility for starting the war and concede defeat at the hands of GOD and Nemesis.

3. 3,000 in technology will be dealt to GOD at a rate of 100T:3M. Nations to sell will be provided in a timely matter by the Aurora Borealis government.

4. Aurora Borealis will decommission all nuclear weapons and navy vessels.

5. Aurora Borealis may remilitarize after a period of one month.

6. No aid will be given to alliances or nations engaged with the Karma coalition; including information, financial, military or spy operations.

6a. No Aurora Borealis members will engage in secret foreign aid.

7. The terms will be considered expired and completed once all tech has been paid and the one month period is up.

8. Refusal or subversion of the above terms will result in continued warfare.

No aid restrictions here

MCXA

5) MCXA may not in any way aid nations or alliances at war with Karma . This includes resuming warfare, sending military or financial aid, or engaging in spy operations against the Coalition.

10) Reparations, totaling 10,000 tech, payable to the following alliances in this amount:

13) For the duration of these terms, MCXA nations are not permitted to receive any foreign aid from non-MCXA nations. This includes individuals who surrendered prior to MCXA's surrender.

14) The above stated terms are valid until all repartition payments have been completed. Violation of these terms may result in the resumption of war at the discretion of VE, ARES, AZTEC and their allies.

MCXA got aid restrictions but only until they can pay off the 10k tech - with 300 nations and 1500 aid slots they can pay off 10,000 tech in 10 days - are you kidding me? 200 nations using 1 aid slot each can send 50 tech and have those paid off in one cycle... you really think that's comparable to 90 days of no outside aid?

GGA

Article V: Reparations

GGA shall pay a sum of 250 million and 2,500 technology to Athens as war reparations. To facilitate the payment of reparations, aid transactions from outside the alliance may not be accepted by GGA members until the reparations have been paid in full. Aid transactions from outside the alliance which are mistakenly accepted must be returned to the sending party. Any terms not otherwise marked as permanent shall last until all reparations are paid, or until the end of 30 days, whichever is later. Furthermore, a GGA Triumvir will draw a picture of 4 Stickmen and present it on the OWF.

GGA got aid restrictions but again, only until the reps have been paid. It'd take 84 aid slots to send over the $3m and 50 aid slots to send over 2,500 tech - with 190 nations, thats less than 1 aid cycle. Again - you really think that's comparable to 90 days of no outside aid?

So... while you are all about fairness and tougher terms for those closest to the "hegemony" you are ignoring the fact that we did exactly what you wanted.

FAKEEDIT: Yeah I did misread what you said about two weeks of growth being punishment - my bad

Real EDIT: Added AB since you brought them up

Edited May 25, 2009 by Heracles the Great

[Rafael Nadal]

Alright - back to the chalkboard...

Valhalla has ~120 nations - ~30 of which are in the tech selling category more or less and ~90 of which are in the tech buying category. The most common way a high-ANS alliance builds using their aid slots are through the purchase of tech, I hope we agree on this logic... Now with only 150 aid slots per 10 days, that means the most tech they can import to their upper ranks internally is 7,500/10 days - which is 15,000/month (including a payment cycle). Over 3 months, that means the most tech they can import to their upper ranks is 45,000. Considering without this, they could import over 135,000 tech in 3-months, that's a 60+% decrease on their growth.

Now let's look at what "medium level reps" (depending on your definition) would have done. 120-man alliance with 600 aid slots could have sent out 10,000 tech in one cycle using 1/3 of their aid slots, leaving 400 aid slots to send out aid. After that first 10 days, they are open and free to do whatever they please. So all you did was tie up 1/3 of their aid slots for 10 days.

If you really can't understand this, I don't know how better to explain it to you. Simple math makes this very apparent.

I agree - slowing down growth for a week or two isn't really punishment - yet it's exactly what you are advocating we should have done. Instead we slowed their growth for 2 months - but again, let's ignore the facts.

That "ramble" was about keeping the terms fair across the board as to which you advocated - but you obviously got that part since you responded one sentence later. And yes - that 2 months worth of damage to their growth - that sure was nothing... brilliant logic!

Ignoring simple logic does not an argument make either

90,000 tech will not be received by Valhalla due to these terms - that's far more damaging than the 10,000 tech they would have sent out - so yes, me providing evidence and actually doing the math does make it so.

All you're doing is stunting their ability to import from outside the alliance. Anything they have internally is unaffected. Any tech or money they have currently remains intact. You are not hindering their internal growth, by A) not making them pay reps, which would affect the tech and money they have on hand, and B ) not tying up their aid slots at all, allowing them full access to rebuild. Saying they can't tech deal doesn't hinder the use of aid slots. Yes, I understand they can't import buy as much tech now as they could without the outside aid restriction.

Edit: I guess I'll sum up my thoughts here, seeing as I've been mostly gone for a while and missed 40 pages of the Valhalla topic. I agree with Kronos and Umbrella, the terms are yours to dictate, seeing as you were on that front, and that is how Karma is handling the surrenders. I also agree with you that you have no obligation to take others' concerns, wishes, desires, etc into consideration, especially of parties to whom you're not directly tied. Saying that, your complete dismissal of these others' concerns, wishes, desires, etc on the basis that you are not allied and owe us no consideration in your thought process is a double edged sword. You're certainly not winning too many friends or endearing yourselves to us, though perhaps the same can be said for those disagreeing with you as well. However, how you have treated those of us by flat out dismissing our concerns and desires, again, you have the right to, will certainly stay in our memories, some of us longer than others, some of us more fervently than others. All I can say is that I hope you don't need/want any of us to do anything or seriously take into consideration your concerns in a situation you're not directly involved in, seeing as you've irked many of those in power in these outside alliance. Obviously, that won't be a problem if you never need us to do anything, and I'm sure several of you will remember the way this disagreement was voiced, and its ferocity. Every decision has its implications, if not consequences, and I just hope you understand the implications of your decision, and more importantly (at least in my mind) how you've come to this decision.

Edited May 25, 2009 by Rafael Nadal