kingzog Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) With regards to TPF, they should disband for what they did to Norden Verein. Please do not taken Norden Verein's name in vain like that. Its end was sad, but a greater alliance emerged from its ashes. I have already stated elsewhere that I am prepared to give the Phoenix Federation another chance, since individuals like TBB and Slayer are gone. Also I have a theory, you can do anything you want, you can not kill us. If you do that sparks off a Holocaust (Using raw definition of the word not direct reference to WW2). So pick your battles, also for where we are, you want to do all the effort to kill us, there are more important things than us, such as finishing education, job, family, etc. I'm not sure, but I think this is the 'too cool for school' argument....in reverse and possibly in need of a nap? Also, even though my reading in this thread is roughly twenty-or-so pages behind, I really feel I must comment on the image in Zeta Defender's sig. I leave it to the discerning reader to determine which comment is mine. Didn't FAN say long ago that they wouldn't discuss peace unless it was white peace? Seems they had a choice and choose the option that they were willing to fight for above leaving war as soon as possible. The NPO also said it would not discuss peace until FAN "came out to play." FAN didn't do this because they didn't trust the NPO, and had excellent reasons not to do so. Edited June 13, 2009 by kingzog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) If you look again you will see most of them are ex-hegemony, the only surprise is that people believed their rubbish about change. They really meant a change of those in power, not the way those in power act. I repeat my belief that this is little more than a rebalancing based on geopolitics. Sparta will likely be the next target of all this war mongering. Edited June 13, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angrator Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I apologize too you Angrator.. I didnt notice your NSO tag as i am extremely tired, bien upp all night reading 1089 posts my eyes are getting crossed. No worries. There are a lot of posts to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainJohn Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 B2) Reparations of up to 300,000 tech and $7,000,000,000 will be assessed upon the New Pacific Order.Harshest terms I've ever seen in war history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Also, I forgot to mention in my last post: If any individual feels that their nation is being treated unfairly for sins of others, you are (and have been for some time) free to surrender individually. Is this something Gramlins would accept if defeated? You know that people who changed to karma POW were officially allowed by Karma to be poached by karma alliances. In essence you are asking people to desert from NPO to karma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Once again, look at the peace terms given to most alliances that engaged on the Hegemony side, and compare those with terms given to treaty-bound alliances (or initial defenders) in wars against the Hegemony in the past. If you can't see a difference between large reps (GPA) or even disbandment (IAA) on the one hand, and small reps (GGA) or zero terms (several) on the other, then you are totally blind – in your case, wilfully. NPO will not receive an easy peace, not because Karma is not a force for change but because it stands for justice, and the NPO has a long list of crimes to atone for. Oh yes, plus the last time it was given an easy peace it came back and attacked its merciful victors and then claimed it had won anyway. Since you're 'semi retired' I know you're just trying to get a raise with your post and don't really believe what you're saying, so I'll leave it there. Edit: Is this something Gramlins would accept if defeated? Some might. I wouldn't, but I wouldn't complain about being attacked for the sins of others, either. Either you consider yourself to be a part of a single entity and fight to defend it, or you consider the sins to be of others and consider individual surrender appropriate. You can't try to argue both points simultaneously. Edited June 13, 2009 by Bob Janova Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petrovich4 Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Quite a few of them do. And even if they don't, it's not Karma's fault that you didn't have your alliance prepare properly for war before starting one. As someone said, your nations are not the only ones to lose significant amounts of infra; many Grämlins have rebuilt thousands of infrastructure, as have many in IRON. Matt Miller rebuilt 15,000 infra after fighting for a month. Don't claim that two weeks will completely destroy a nation, unless the NPO is a special brand of weak. Was it a month - wow, I thought it was two weeks. Also, I have to add that Matt Miller had 2 offensive and 3 defensive wars and was still able to buy back 15k infra. Most likely, NPO nations will only have 3 defensive wars. If NPO and their verbal meatshields continue to cry, I will enjoy the war statis my nation will be in for the rest of the summer... and onwards if it must be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R&R-Viking Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Having fought NPO for near two months now, it's not surprising to me they don't expect nations with a billion dollar warchest to survive 14 days of war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 How could you not have expected revenge-driven peace terms, when those are the only terms you have ever demanded? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boscher Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) Happy to see this, NPO has to be further destroyed otherwise it was all for nothing. Edited June 13, 2009 by boscher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoomzoomzoom Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Congrats on getting terms! Too bad you didn't accept them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kindom of Goon Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Terms may be harsh, dont see how they're unpayable though. Alos people crying hypocrisy and 'you're as bad as us/them' need to stop, seriously. That party line might have worked a little better if you hadn't overused it a couple of hours after the war began before anyone even surrendered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angrator Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 If you look again you will see most of them are ex-hegemony, the only surprise is that people believed their rubbish about change. They really meant a change of those in power, not the way those in power act. I don't know. I hope to Admin you are wrong. I hope everyone will learn the example from the NPO. Hubris is a dangerous thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
presidentpants Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Terms may be harsh, dont see how they're unpayable though.Alos people crying hypocrisy and 'you're as bad as us/them' need to stop, seriously. That party line might have worked a little better if you hadn't overused it a couple of hours after the war began before anyone even surrendered. the holdup is the 90% clause that means some indefinite period of war reps themselves would be acceptable, but even the higher counteroffer has been refused they are pretending to be a force for justice, and do not really want peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Having fought NPO for near two months now, it's not surprising to me they don't expect nations with a billion dollar warchest to survive 14 days of war. I lost over 8k infra, 8k land, 2k tech and $450m in 2 weeks of war. Thats over $780m worth of infra, $60m and 60 slots for tech along with the $450 fighting. Including the land cost the war cost me over $1.5 billion. Big nations make big losses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petrovich4 Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I lost over 8k infra, 8k land, 2k tech and $450m in 2 weeks of war. Thats over $780m worth of infra, $60m and 60 slots for tech along with the $450 fighting. Including the land cost the war cost me over $1.5 billion. Big nations make big losses. ...and many NPO nations would still have over half a billion in their war chest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tojamn Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 ...and many NPO nations would still have over half a billion in their war chest. lol, now thats funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) 'Including the land' is a pretty transparent ploy to make the number bigger, who buys land anyway? It only costs $200m to get from 0 to 4999 infra, anyway. At that point you net around $5m a day and can therefore easily pay off reps. (e: can't type ) E: Tojamn, it's true, a few of your nations enjoying their break at the Peace Mode Resort are sitting on around $2bn. Kind of sucks that they won't fight to help out ordinary guys like you, huh? Edited June 13, 2009 by Bob Janova Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 How the hell do you lose 450 million in 2 weeks? Were you buying land and infra as it was getting destroyed? Ever heard of the term turtling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weirdgus Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I don't get people saying "those beaten down NPO nations with around 1k tech and infra in the ~10k NS range still have 500M-400M-250M warchests left after 7 weeks of war"...where does that money come from? Does it just randomly appear to some nations or what?! Get over yourselves,the idea that ZIed/low infra'd and bill-locked nations can send out reps at max aid slots per cycle is nothing but a pipe-dream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheThirdMark Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 The thing Im about to say is stricktly my opinion and not my Alliances or the other Alliances opinion that are Karma-sided. Huge Rep demands are not for rebuilding. In case it ever did cover the costs of war it was sheer luck or agreed between the Alliances in that conflict. In my opinion its for two reasons: 1. Other Alliances can grow a bit harder where the NPO cant. Simply because they have to send Cash/Tech. It will slow them down. Not stop them. 2. They serve as a lesson. When you ask unusual Reps you are bound to be offered them in a later stage yourself. Oh wait, Karma. Reason 1 I endorse fully. The NPO should be booted out the Sanction Race and be kept out for a month or so. In a month a lot can change and the NPO can prove its fellow BoB citizens that they indeed believe in change. I hear many NPO-members saying here that its not their fault that the NPO did what it did. Even though I can understand the sentiment in that (no member approves all that is done by their Gov) its weird that they continue to be in an Alliance for so long where the same facts happened over and over. Reason 2 though I disagree on a few points. Not the high Reps but the hight of it (with that I mean the extra addition for the nations hiding in Peace) in total. Even though the amount can be reached easy (NPO has at least 20B cash) it offends me to raise it with that amount each day. Normally the goal will justify the meanings. But if this continues the meanings will destroy the goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 ...and many NPO nations would still have over half a billion in their war chest. Let me know what that is after their further 2 week beat down that will probably drop them below 3m NS and take a sizable chunk of the money they have left followed by the biggest reps in history, which will probably also be the biggest proportionally based on NS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petrovich4 Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I don't get people saying "those beaten down NPO nations with around 1k tech and infra in the ~10k NS range still have 500M-400M-250M warchests left after 7 weeks of war"...where does that money come from? Does it just randomly appear to some nations or what?!Get over yourselves,the idea that ZIed/low infra'd and bill-locked nations can send out reps at max aid slots per cycle is nothing but a pipe-dream. Sir, reading comprehension FTW. I, and others are referring to NPO nations that have been in peace mode since the beginning of the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 (edited) How the hell do you lose 450 million in 2 weeks? Were you buying land and infra as it was getting destroyed?Ever heard of the term turtling? When I fight I try to do maximum damage, I dont care about the damage I take. I had to buy land infra to keep me above the minimum for my man pro. edit: navies are expensive, so is fighting 6 guys all out. Edited June 13, 2009 by Alterego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantanX Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 well, NPO is on the losing sides, so they only have two Options 1. Keep Fighting 2. Accept the terms and live to fight another day.. (a karma on Karma maybe in 1 year or two ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts