enderland Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Actually in both engagements Athens declared on NPO. Not the other way around. As stated these terms are far beyond those given to MK and Athens. Oh please you are going to try to make the argument that Athens was as aggressive as NPO was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Also for those who care:181 nations, assuming it takes 3 weeks to rebuild to a reasonable amount of infra. 15M/250 tech being sent out per nation (assuming no DRAs even though most probably have it). That amounts to 2.7B/45k tech per cycle that can be paid out. HARDLY undoable. The cash part could be paid off quickly, or, put off towards the end to "further rebuilding." Stop trying to tell me these terms are undoable. Now redo the numbers to account for the loss of nations that fall below the 1k tech limit after an estimated 20 days of nuclear war? Anyone with less than 2500+ tech would be below that limit, giving you around 50 nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Actually in both engagements Athens declared on NPO. Not the other way around. As stated these terms are far beyond those given to MK and Athens. But the instigator remains the same. The alliance at the core of the wars, pushing for the wars, was none other than the NPO. Athens honoring treaties ...oh the horror, surely they deserve harsh treatment and harsh terms ...right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadshot Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 My post will never be read, but I'd like to counter one quote. "Neither we nor anyone on Planet Bob have ever been subjected to terms with such clauses designed to keep an alliance destroyed for so long."What about those "indefinitely under our viceroyship" clauses? I read it dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Oh please you are going to try to make the argument that Athens was as aggressive as NPO was? No but to characterize NPO attacking athens is incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Karma dont list: EZI (check) Harsh reps (check) Perpetual war (check) Forcing nations to come out of peace (check) Destruction of alliances (check) Reps force alliances to disband (check) Forcing policy change (check) Forum bullying (check) Forced regime change (check) Viceroy (banned from CN) shame, it was the only one left Congrats to the Karma bloc, you are everything you said you wouldnt be and more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letum Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 You are forgetting that every peace terms have a purpose. Here are several:1) Give NPO harsh reps, similar to the reps they have given others. 2) Limit NPO's ability to rebuild, build a coalition, and initiate a similar "GW2" scenario 3) Punish NPO's higher infra and tech nations, who were the ones who received reps from past wars. I see no problem with any of these purposes, as they all fit the "Karma" label very well. Would us paying you 300k tech and 8 billion starting immediately, as we offered to, not fulfil these demands? Or do you think that going from having destroyed 73% of our pre-war NS to having destroyed 77% will do the trick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Now redo the numbers to account for the loss of nations that fall below the 1k tech limit after an estimated 20 days of nuclear war? Anyone with less than 2500+ tech would be below that limit, giving you around 50 nations. You missed the part that reads something like "if NPO simply cannot pay these terms after NPO agrees than they will be scaled down accordingly". Nice try though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 But the instigator remains the same. The alliance at the core of the wars, pushing for the wars, was none other than the NPO. Athens honoring treaties ...oh the horror, surely they deserve harsh treatment and harsh terms ...right? NPO didn't start the war against polar or hyperion, however it was that athens became involved. They were not an instigator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 You missed the part that reads something like "if NPO simply cannot pay these terms after NPO agrees than they will be scaled down accordingly".Nice try though. Read revanches post about not changing things due to "NPO incompotence' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Now redo the numbers to account for the loss of nations that fall below the 1k tech limit after an estimated 20 days of nuclear war? Anyone with less than 2500+ tech would be below that limit, giving you around 50 nations. The terms are for nations with over 1k tech now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Karma dont list:EZI (check) Harsh reps (check) Perpetual war (check) Forcing nations to come out of peace (check) Destruction of alliances (check) Reps force alliances to disband (check) Forcing policy change (check) Forum bullying (check) Forced regime change (check) Viceroy (banned from CN) shame, it was the only one left Congrats to the Karma bloc, you are everything you said you wouldnt be and more. Way to fail, bro. Karma hasn't done all those things this war. I'd say nice try, but it really wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venizelos Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 during the GATO-1V war i entered peace mode to regroup for 5 days. i distinctly remember being messaged by mary the fantabulous, who, full of arrogance, declared that the NPO would PZI me if i stayed in peace mode for more than 5 days. therefore, how was this policy never enforced? and NPO complaining that they are offered harsh terms is hilarious. the proponents of the "we do whatever we want and why don't you do something to change it" are complaining that others are giving them a taste of their poison and expect people to sympathise with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jgoods45 Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I would like to see any of the alliances attacking NPO that came close to their level of terms. Why hello there We paid 14k in total, 8000 to NPO, 4000 to TPF , and 2000 in tech deals to SSSW18 at a rate of 2mill/150 tech. We only had 16k tech in total as an alliance. We also had to decommission our military wonders. We where less then a month old when we surrendered and started paying reps. We had no banks, we where not allowed to accept outside aid to help pay for those reps. But, we didn't !@#$%* and complain in public about it, we accepted defeat, and started working on repairing our alliance and getting those reps out the door. I believe those terms where a blessing in disguise. From those terms, Athens pulled tighter together, we formed friendships with other alliances who would later become some of our closest allies and we came out of terms stronger and more prosperous. Its a damn shame the NPO would go this low in an attempt to garner more support for their side. In the end, Karma and Karma alone will decide what the terms will be. No outside pressure will be able to change what we think to be just and fair terms for the NPO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yates Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Just out of curiosity, when does the NPO plan on updating their web page? I was just here and saw that there are still prominent references and links to the Moldavi Doctrine. With apologies, I just found it odd to see this declaration but that nothing had changed on your site yet. Thanks and good luck in your peace process! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krack Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 No but to characterize NPO attacking athens is incorrect. I'll admit, it was pretty awful and mean spirited of Athens to repeatedly headbutt NPO's fist like they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Way to fail, bro.Karma hasn't done all those things this war. I'd say nice try, but it really wasn't. A few of them are in this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 The terms are for nations with over 1k tech now. Read revanche's post regarding the expected drop in nations below the 1k line after the war period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Would us paying you 300k tech and 8 billion starting immediately, as we offered to, not fulfil these demands? Or do you think that going from having destroyed 73% of our pre-war NS to having destroyed 77% will do the trick? That would depend on who would be paying the tech and the reps. If it would be the majority of your lower tier nations, than I would imagine it would not suffice. If you agreed that it would be your top 90% I would imagine such a stipulation might have sufficed if you had offered it in your counter offer. A few of them are in this thread Talking and doing are different, you know. Karma talked about those things. NPO and Hegemony did them for 2 years. A better try, but not quite up to "nice" yet. Edited June 13, 2009 by Caliph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Read revanche's post regarding the expected drop in nations below the 1k line after the war period. Revanche is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrototyoeRuler Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I would venture that the same goes for you, aye?Don't feel bad because you were lead astray and your entire campaign was predicated upon flasehoods. It's okay. You're cute, I like you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Why hello there We paid 14k in total, 8000 to NPO, 4000 to TPF , and 2000 in tech deals to SSSW18 at a rate of 2mill/150 tech. We only had 16k tech in total as an alliance. We also had to decommission our military wonders. We where less then a month old when we surrendered and started paying reps. We had no banks, we where not allowed to accept outside aid to help pay for those reps. But, we didn't !@#$%* and complain in public about it, we accepted defeat, and started working on repairing our alliance and getting those reps out the door. I believe those terms where a blessing in disguise. From those terms, Athens pulled tighter together, we formed friendships with other alliances who would later become some of our closest allies and we came out of terms stronger and more prosperous. Its a damn shame the NPO would go this low in an attempt to garner more support for their side. In the end, Karma and Karma alone will decide what the terms will be. No outside pressure will be able to change what we think to be just and fair terms for the NPO. You have complained about it nearly every day for the last 11 months. You are asking less nations than you had to pay 39 times more than you after a nuclear war that lasted 7 times as long. Sorry you're not even close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramirus Maximus Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I've caught up! That deserves a smoke, which at my age is something. By the time I get back, I expect at least 10 more pages! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverlordOeboema Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 how many nations will have more then 1k tech after they fought 2 rounds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Karma dont list:EZI (Not in the terms) Harsh reps (Too bad) Perpetual war (Didn't refuse to offer terms, so no) Forcing nations to come out of peace (Damn straight) Destruction of alliances (Nada) Reps force alliances to disband (You wish, the terms are doable and wouldn't have been offered if they weren't) Forcing policy change (When the policy is dominance, damn straight) Forum bullying (;_ Forced regime change (Where's that in the terms, eh?) Viceroy (Yeah, something we've really advocated for.) shame, it was the only one left Fixed it for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts