Rush Sykes Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 This reads kinda like your infamous "triple flank break off attack" I must admit, this made me spit out pepsi on my monitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramirus Maximus Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 And that why yall continue to refuse perfectly rational and even deliciously vindictive ways to end this war.When have we refused deliciously vindictive ways?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 You seem to imply it occured solely because of external pressures as well. My statement was in regards to us working to end it, rather than as you indicate support it fully. Considering how often NPO told them "Come out of peace and fight before peace" on the boards here, it strikes me as a bit odd they would do a 180 of their stance. Also vox disbanded before getting peace from NPO iirc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waterana Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I can: so that you can't get out of this by punishing your smallest nations. It would be the height of cowardice for you to force the weakest among you to shoulder the burden of these or any reps, yet without these terms we know that's exactly what you would do.Dont tell me what the NPO would or wouldnt do. As a leader of our tech efforts, we would never force nations to sacrifice their own resources to furnish materials. We procure tech by giving small nations money, and we produce money by having large volunteer banks collect. Just like every alliance does. Either you truly do have a massively warped perspective of us, you have forgotten how CN economics work, or your just illogically trying to buttress a physically impossible set of rules with emotional backing, out of malice or ignorance I dont know. Once you have paid enough reps to be below 100 tech, then tech will be cheap for you again. Because then by your rules you cant give it away for reps. They don't want the small nations to pay the tech reps because they know full well with our current army of procurer size nations, including knocked down ex big now small nations, such as mine, we can pump out a lot of tech easily, and quickly have those reps paid off. Just another way to twist the knife and drag out the whole ordeal for as long as possible while trying, but failing, to look like they're doing us a favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Their terms are not near the level of your terms. There are a few alliances that would disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strykewolf Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Round One negotiations failed.... I'd highly recommend a round Two. Okay...the 90% is !@#$%^&*. I think at best we've had 83% And some of us live in the same town. Late reply on that...had to check a few things. Anyways....keep negotiating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrideAssassin Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 [22:02] <Jonathan_Brookbank> Hello, sir.[22:08] <Iamthey[iRON]> Good evening [22:08] <Jonathan_Brookbank> You are IRON council, correct? [22:08] <Iamthey[iRON]> Yes Have fun. No problem. Iamthey was informed that he spoke wrongly. OH SNAP! Again, one misguided statement, (albiet from a council member) does not an argument (or a policy) make. You're grasping at straws here. "Karma" claims that NPO&friends chased people via IPs which is patently absurd. If you don't want to be found, you will not be found. Try harder. The argument is patently ridiculous. You're fighting a baseless war founded on nonexistant principals. GW I? Moo had no part in that. NpO was allied with NPO, are you calling them out? Nah. EZI? A "Karma" boogyman and utter JOKE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gears of War Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I'm late to the party, but I would like to say that I think the terms laid out in the OP are well deserved, I very much like those numbers, and I hope they only go higher. Have a great day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 They don't want the small nations to pay the tech reps because they know full well with our current army of procurer size nations, including knocked down ex big now small nations, such as mine, we can pump out a lot of tech easily, and quickly have those reps paid off. Just another way to twist the knife and drag out the whole ordeal for as long as possible while trying, but failing, to look like they're doing us a favour. The only favour they are doing is giving you more rope. I'm somewhat glad you admit why NPO has been recruiting so many new nations though, it will be interesting to see if NPO continues to recruit so many new nations now that they will no longer be needed for tech reps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Are you saying the ends don't justify the means? Are you saying helium tastes better than strawberries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 There are a few alliances that would disagree. They are blinded by hate and now act like NPO or worse and use the "NPO did it too, its not our fault" excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rajistani Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I can understand the anger on both sides. The monetary reps I have no problem with; perhaps a bit harsh, but no more so than I would expect NPO to give if they were in Karma's position.However, the military terms do seem a bit disturbing. No need to make this a perpetual war, there have been too many. There is a difference between justice and vengeance, and I want to see justice done. Thread winner. As a neutral party I have to feel the same way. Those involved directly with the terms creation will venomously defend them (and those they are offered to will always detract them for that matter). The nations Pacifica possesses that maintain over 1,000 technology can not be described with the term "handful". There are 178 nations above that mark, with 78 nations possessing above 2k technology. An additional two weeks of war would likely not lessen the number of Pacificans with 1k technology or more to a number less than 70. Besides, many Pacificans currently in the range of 1-2k technology still have sizeable warchests that could be utilised towards repurchasing a couple hundred technology or so, if Pacifica wished to increase the number of nations to be deal with reparations payments. As for your comment about 1/6 (wow, a sixth? Big deal.) of those nations nearing ZI, I wasn't aware that would stop them sending out technology reparations or made them unable to make some repurchases with left-over warchest funds. These nations also have to take 14 days of nukes, which is about 2,000 tech, all things considered. And THEN, and only then, will the nations STILL above 1k be able to pay the 300k tech. That is simply impossible. Just cowboy up and deal with it like a man, you fat cow.We did. I believe they are "dealing with it" by not accepting terms. Almost exactly like FAN did. Among nation leaders, yes. Noone can ever make an alliance quit (as FAN and OcUK have proved) or make a nation delete. You could be bill locked and eternal ZIed, but hell you don't have to delete. Even at eternal ZI, you aren't billlocked long, because your bills are max 20 dollars (if u have 0 trades), and your collection is around $100. Thats assuming you kept 0 improvements, easy to unbilllock yourself; and eventually they will have to send noob nations to declare on you, who you should easily be able to pick off money from. Even if they are sent 3 million, etc. Okay, and? For the vaunted NPO masses, who are 100% active and make sure to check their inboxes constantly for love letters from their Emperor, this shouldn't take more than 5 minutes, right? It's been stated that NPO has ghosts. Some of which are in peace mode, and can't be forcefully removed, and some of which that have joined after the war started. Which means they cannot get rid of them. A cynic could say Karma placed some nations there to ensure NPO wouldn't be able to live up to terms. Those that whine about Karma being hypocrites: No one cares. No one. Alliances on the Karma side wanted war. War is about winning. These terms ensure victory so NPO can't come back knocking on our doors next month. It will put them back in time (or stop progressing) so they will always be hindered by this defeat. Since being being on the losing side should actually make you feel like a loser and make you loose. Loose a lot. Opposed to the 'Let's fight a week to get the warmongers off our back, say how honorable we all are and go back to buying infra' mentality that has infected CN (as clearly shown in the first week of this war). That is what NPO has been doing for 3 years. I am a neutral party in this ( I joined GDA after they surrendered); but honestly your comment here is ... backwards to say the least. NPO has no $$$: Unfortunately the game has spy ops now, so NPO warchests are pretty much an open secret Not to mention the screenshots SethB accepted that started this war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Also vox disbanded before getting peace from NPO iirc. We did. We had no idea what would happen then, as by precedent of what they did to CIS disbandment does not count unless they sign off on it, but we dared them to try it and they've decided (wisely, for once) that there are bigger problems facing them. They refused us peace repeatedly, so yeah. There's that argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waterana Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 The only favour they are doing is giving you more rope.I'm somewhat glad you admit why NPO has been recruiting so many new nations though, it will be interesting to see if NPO continues to recruit so many new nations now that they will no longer be needed for tech reps. Wow, you have a wonderful imagination. Where the hell did I mention recruiting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadshot Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 So the neutral GPA was a credible 'threat'?? a politically isolated GATO was a credible threat?? I don't pretend to know the inner workings of Pacifica. And at the time of both of those wars, I wasn't in NATO gov either, so I can't comment about what all was going on. I will only say, what is perceived as a threat to me, may not be to you. And vice versa. I was merely pointing out that it seems illogical to promote destroying an alliance because they pose a threat in one sentence and condemn it in another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rajistani Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Reps not payable: Math done by others already in this thread, also NPO made its' own decision not get come out of hippy mode couple of weeks back, could have shortened the war and losses None of the math, including NPOs has been correct. Attacked by NPO after disarming for peace terms: FAN There are plenty of screen shots of those offending. FAN chose to defend those that were not complying to peace terms. Unending war carried out by NPO: FAN FAN said that they would only accept white peace. NPO (and friends, I should add), didn't give them white peace, does that make them the bad guys? Shall I point you towards the original post of this thread? Disbanded due to NPO: NAAC, LUE, GOONS, Genmay etc You can't exactly force an alliance to disband, but I do see your point. Nations E/PZIed by NPO: Multiple first person accounts No perma-ZIs have been proved (yet, I should add). With the exception of Johnathan Brodbank (spelling error?), but he rerolled under the same name... High reps demanded by NPO: Multiple quotes in the thread so far I do not ever recall the reps by NPO having to be paid for by nations over a certain size limit. Bank nations forced out of peace mode by NPO: GATO Agreed; GATOs nations may not have necessarily been banks, but again I see what you mean. I think the above covers just about every possible outcome of the war, whichever scenario plays out, Karma certainly got NPO real good. And vice versa, it was not too long ago when reps were representative of the damage caused by the losing alliance. So by this amount of reps, one could guess that NPO dealt a lot of damage on their way down. What? Ivan Moldavi commited most of these "crimes" that NPO is currently being blamed for. He is on Karma's side now, leader of one of the Karma alliances, if you take the loose definition of Karma as the alliances that declared on NPO and its allies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rajistani Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Sorry for the multiple posts, but i had too many quotes. Johnathan Brookbank.... Okay... How is that EZI?He rerolled under the same name? Just quoted to prove an earliar point of mine. The wars with FAN and Vox may be over, but that doesn't mean they never happened. The only reason those two haven't been added to the disbanded list is because they managed to hang on long enough. Agreed that it will be remembered, but also agreed that they managed to hang on, other alliances like ONOS or TDSM8 or whomever did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrototyoeRuler Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 The terms are easily paid, stop with the useless attempts to gain PR. It really just makes you look pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrotskysRevenge Posted June 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Hardly. The difference between Tyga, ES, Random & co and NPO is that ES, Tyga, Random and co already fought a war over what they did, got swamped, and surrendered. NPO is refusing, which is fine. Refusing to accept terms that are physically impossible to carry out is not refusing peace. Countering with higher reps is not refusing peace. I have stated we lost. I have stated we are beaten. I have let go of a doctrine that means more to the Order than almost anything else. We are not whining about paying reps; we are pragmatically stating that it is not physically possible to pay them in the way Karma has stipulated. We have offered higher reps. Continuing to repeat the opposite does not make it so; it only reinforces your refusal to give terms that are actually realistic and meant to be accepted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Are you saying the ends don't justify the means? I'm saying there is no end when certain means are executed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorkingClassRuler Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 What is MHA's stance on this anyway? After all you still have an eternal treaty with them^^ We have not received any requests for assistance from the NPO in joining reparation discussions, nor were we involved on the Karma side either. Personally, I think that as NPO were self-assured enough to start a war we disagreed with and told them we could not support, then they must be self-assured enough to handle their own rep discussions. Had they asked, I would have told them to take the terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I believe they are "dealing with it" by not accepting terms. Almost exactly like FAN did. FAN accepted terms, you'll find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Considering how often NPO told them "Come out of peace and fight before peace" on the boards here, it strikes me as a bit odd they would do a 180 of their stance.Also vox disbanded before getting peace from NPO iirc. They did a 180 a year ago when they said that order was completely rescinded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Thus if three nuclear nations each drop one nuke a day on a target As we tried very patiently to explain to NPO government, it is not possible to nuke a nation more than once a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrideAssassin Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 The terms are easily paid, stop with the useless attempts to gain PR. It really just makes you look pathetic. PR nothing. I will not stop voicing my personal opinion. Try an' make me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts