King Srqt Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 If you are referring to the "we" in the first sentence, i meant Gremlins. It is pretty clearly said in the codex that should Gremlins enter an offensive war, goals of it must be determined beforehand. If you want our guns, we get a say in it. Thats usually how it works for everyone. Well than I am going to assume you are referring to these sections II. On ReparationsThe Grämlins shall not pay reparations for defensive wars and shall not demand reparations for offensive wars. III. On Peace Terms Peace terms shall not be used to humilate the opponent or to cripple him economically beyond the need to remove the current and immediate threat to the alliance. No terms shall be offered which The Grämlins would not consider acceptable if the sides were switched. The terms shall reflect the opponents' behavior during battle. Seeing as though RoK was in a defensive war it is not against the codex to ask for reps (which I believe you have already acknowledged) and quite frankly even if RoK got twice this amount from IRON the reps would be neither humiliating nor would they be crippling so I do not at all see how RoK went against the guidlines laid out in your own codex. Would you care to elaborate on your stance to clarify this for me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rishnokof Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 Yeah, that's the right attitude. You beat their asses, as indicated by your comrade claiming you needed the reps to rebuild. If I got the beating they did, I'd say my $@! was beat. It's a fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellAngel Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 You didn't even phrase your post anywhere near that of answering a personal opinion. I wouldn't have been understanding of someone calling my alliance delusional for reasons that contradict stated policy either. Fair enough, sorry for not making it any clearer You didn't even phrase your post anywhere near that of answering a personal opinion. I wouldn't have been understanding of someone calling my alliance delusional for reasons that contradict stated policy either. The problem with this is that what is seen as reasonable is a matter of opinion. I think we found a good compromise in this one, but i found the demands RoK first had to be unjustified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Xander the Only Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 To the victor belong the spoils. Congrats on reaching peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejarue Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 Well than I am going to assume you are referring to these sectionsSeeing as though RoK was in a defensive war it is not against the codex to ask for reps (which I believe you have already acknowledged) and quite frankly even if RoK got twice this amount from IRON the reps would be neither humiliating nor would they be crippling so I do not at all see how RoK went against the guidlines laid out in your own codex. Would you care to elaborate on your stance to clarify this for me? I am also interested in seeing the answer to this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Z Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 The problem with this is that what is seen as reasonable is a matter of opinion. I think we found a good compromise in this one, but i found the demands RoK first had to be unjustified. Unjustified? That's pretty funny. As Srqt noted earlier, the original reps demands were neither crippling nor humiliating. Calling them unjustified is stretching it pretty far, at best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 Fair enough, sorry for not making it any clearerThe problem with this is that what is seen as reasonable is a matter of opinion. I think we found a good compromise in this one, but i found the demands RoK first had to be unjustified. Methinks perhaps one of those was not meant to be directed at me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellAngel Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 Unjustified? That's pretty funny. As Srqt noted earlier, the original reps demands were neither crippling nor humiliating. Calling them unjustified is stretching it pretty far, at best. See... matter of opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellAngel Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 I am also interested in seeing the answer to this. I didnt say they were. As i said, we came to a good compromise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delgursh Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 (edited) Regardless of the discussion over whether reps are justified or not, I'm very satisfied how IRON handled the war. Anyone who needs reps from us to get back on their feet gets it too I think. We'll be just fine regardless. Grems, MHA, Fark and all of ya, good show. You guys were a tough fight It was a pleasure fighting you. Don't forget, IRON cut NV loose after the Coalition War for reps after alot of others wanted them....we're not as bad as you all seem to think Edited May 27, 2009 by delgursh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terveis Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 From my personal experience on this, in the future i will not engage in similar circumstances until it is clear that all parties on the same side are on the same page. Makes things a lot easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalaskan Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 Unjustified? That's pretty funny. As Srqt noted earlier, the original reps demands were neither crippling nor humiliating. Calling them unjustified is stretching it pretty far, at best. Then post them, and let those that read them make their own opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 To the victor belong the spoils.Congrats on reaching peace. Thread over, everybody can pack up and go on over to the GGA threads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 (edited) Intervening in the discussion about the justification of the reparations, I agree with HellAngel that it's matter of opinion. RoK had all the right to ask and push for the reps they thought were justified, but our Härmlins also have all the right to make clear which requests they'd support, and which they wouldn't. When two allied parties are finding an agreement over a delicate issue one would hope that both their sovereignties are respected - that is what happened AFAIK. As in the end an accord was found and published, I don't see what's the possible use of bringing back the discussion that preceded it - unless one likes running in circles, that's a respectable position as well, of course... [Edit:grammar] Edited May 27, 2009 by jerdge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalaskan Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 (edited) Thread over, everybody can pack up and go on over to the GGA threads How ironic; I heard that from a hedgemonic side less the GGA threads a couple years ago. The fact of the matter is that these terms are meant to keep IRON suppressed, regardless of what is said here. We all know it, Tyga and numerous other leaders with an anti NPO vision have made it clear. They want HIGH reps to keep the NPO and their friends from coming back to do what they have done several times already. I still contend it is impossible. NpO is no longer with them, many great minds that were exclusive to that side are now on the other, and NPO is being taken down so far; it will inevitably make their diplomatic positioning to make such a resurgence impossible. (Not to mentionn the sheer hatred of them from owning this game for so long.) Let me be the first to say, I have been on that losing side most of my nations history. I have been beaten down by NPO personally. Shoot, IRON, TOP, NPO and FAN were fighting me in GWIII. (This should point to the fact Legion being a paper tiger was quite misleading.) In fact they were a moderate force...just not the caliber of 3 of those alliances fighting them. Quite the military adversaries. Any alliance facing those odds would have fallen at that pace. My nation is half the strength, or more of what it should have been. There are several nations younger than myself in various alliances that I lead militarily with a higher NS than myself. Chefjoe is ironically included. If you think it is due to ignorance you are sorely mistaken. It is, in fact, due to honor. Regardless, don't spin the words. ROK wants to hurt IRON...who really did nothing bad in this war other than fight to honor a treaty. Hell, they even flat out said they were moving away from the NPO and were pissed at the antics, and being put in the position they were put in. But they had to do what they were honor bound to do. ROK personally stated on several fronts they fought an honorable war. I believe the original reps were against the codex of Gremlins...who were so loved before this war for their honor. Now you laugh at them over it, and manipulate the very codex you hailed. Irony at its finest. Commence spin. Edited May 27, 2009 by Chalaskan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakura Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 (edited) when/if NPO surrenders, i hope to see an extra 0 on the end of all those numbers More likely, the number of zeroes would be from a different "billion" than the number of zeroes here. In other words, a long billion, rather than a short billion. (eg: 1,500,000,000,000) Article 5. a. IRON shall not send or receive aid from any alliance, other than itself, and the alliances to which it is surrendering. b. IRON is encouraged to participate in foreign aid deals with nations of the Alliances of Karma as a demonstration of goodwill and the desire to see all involved nations recover from the recent extermination of billions of innocent pixels. Does this mean that non-Hegemony alliances that participated on the Karma side aren't allowed to buy tech from IRON? If it means they can, I can think of a few who would be interested in buying tech. (Edit: Clarity) Edited May 27, 2009 by Sakura Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 What counts as 'crippling or humiliating' reps is a matter of opinion – the opinion of most of Grämlins is that the final terms are not that, but that the original numbers mooted would have been. This is why we have discussions between alliances, to come to an agreement despite differing opening opinions – and I think we did that. The sniping between Grämlins and Ragnarok here is rather unseemly in my view . Our Codex requires that rough peace terms should be talked through with all participants before entering, as well as for those terms to be appropriate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamJoe Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 Ahh, of course this had to happen on the day I was too busy to rule my nation Anyway, here's my belated thanks to our opponents at IRON. Due to R.O.C.K.'s small member base I don't think many of you even noticed we were there, but those who had the chance to meet our guys on the battlefield did more than fine and acted honorably. I'm very grateful that our larger guys managed to find a couple of fruitful nuke trades and that somebody finally taught our smaller nations why "Guerrilla Camps" are written with red flashing capitals on our war guides Congrats on the peace and good luck with rebuilding. EDIT: I forgot to hail our side, but I guess that goes without saying. MHA and Fark taught me that very well too. I got caught with only 2 GCs . I think I won like 10-12 offensive ground battles total. Thank god for my SDI. Here is to peace and hopefully a renewed friendship with my MHA/FARK opponents and others I did not get to face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azrael Alexander Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 Thank god for my SDI. I have said this many a time during this war Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morskov Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 That would be incredibly boring. Can you imagine an OWF where everyone is on the same side? See: Time between GWIII and WotC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred von Tirpitz Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 (edited) What counts as 'crippling or humiliating' reps is a matter of opinion – the opinion of most of Grämlins is that the final terms are not that, but that the original numbers mooted would have been. This is why we have discussions between alliances, to come to an agreement despite differing opening opinions – and I think we did that. The sniping between Grämlins and Ragnarok here is rather unseemly in my view .Our Codex requires that rough peace terms should be talked through with all participants before entering, as well as for those terms to be appropriate. Bob Janova, the voice of reason, calming troubled seas, as always. The final outcome of the discussions, deemed acceptable to all, a better resolution than one originally being debated. That is correct. And to those saying "Thank God for my SDI" to them i say, SDI technicians are seriously susceptible to being bribed by IRON. Mine never seemed to work against IRON. Plus, IRON nukes hurt more than Pacifican nukes. Much more. Edited May 27, 2009 by Alfred von Tirpitz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalaskan Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 (edited) See: Time between GWIII and WotC More like between GWI and GWII. Bob Janova, the voice of reason, calming troubled seas, as always. The final outcome of the discussions, deemed acceptable to all, a better resolution than one originally being debated. That is correct. You sir, just gained mass respect. Edited May 27, 2009 by Chalaskan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KagetheSecond Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 Congratulations on peace, guys. Hope everyone recovers swiftly. As for the reps discussion, as a third party and fairly casual player, seeing the terms demanded by RoK in relation to the other alliances receiving reparations made RoK's piece of the pie seem both massive and unfair. I'm certain that someone has posted what the breakdown of how much tech/money each member in IRON will have to pay, but it's mainly about the shock of seeing 20,000 technology and $1,500,000,000 in reparations to Ragnarok It looks like you're kicking them while they're down. While I understand that IRON did the same thing on multiple occasions, doing the same to them lessens your credibility in the eyes of players who aren't privy to the inner workings of Karma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mykep Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 It looks like you're kicking them while they're down. While I understand that IRON did the same thing on multiple occasions, doing the same to them lessens your credibility in the eyes of players who aren't privy to the inner workings of Karma. Good thing Rok isnt Karma. Also Bob posted, thread is over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalaskan Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 (edited) Good thing Rok isnt Karma. Also Bob posted, thread is over. So...who is Karma? GOD? C&G, Superfriends, NpO, STA? I'm confused here. Cause really, no one wants to claim being Karma. Anti NPO would be a good definition, but it doesn't work. There are so many variations to this. Really, Karma is not a coalition. It is a matter of circumstance. But many major alliances in that side of the war are playing a major role in what reps. get paid regardless of their involvement. Some claim that certain individual alliances are pushing for lightened reps for their own gain, while they just want to be honorable. Others see the truth. Honor is a virtue. Others see the fact that some are pushing for heavy reps, while others are folding to their whim for political position after this war. Edited May 27, 2009 by Chalaskan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.