NPO's Reps - An attempted unbiased View

[Vespassianus]

An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.

Karma went war against NPO for revenge, Karma won, NPO is down to 6mil NS from 22 mil, lost so many members, they suffered enough for their sins. I understand that some people who got bad terms from NPO want revenge for it too, but i don't .understand that some alliances who fought on the side of NPO in the past want reps too. NPO will recover sooner or later, on matter of terms and they will also wanna punch back and it will go on forever. Karma had a chance to set up good peace standards, but they failed it. They claimed "evil NPO", but they became the evil.

The peace mode part is !@#$, if you failed to stagger and they could flee to peace mode deal with it. Ok there are lots of banking nations why is necessary to kill peace lovers?

[Haflinger]

Considering large bank nations should compose the majority of that count and also be active members

NPO banks are frequently nations with lower activity levels. Their more active members usually get funneled towards the frontline military.

[Dochartaigh]

This is a fine example of a the sort of foolish arrogance that we are so often accused of.

Hopefully I will still be around in the game by the time this sort of talk comes back to haunt you.

hahahaha. You realize that i was Polar during the SPW and NPO chose to ditch the OoO and allow Polaris to be stomped on.

As for arrogance, what exactly is arrogant about me bringing up NPO past actions as a reason for them to be stomped and deserving of harsh reps. Seems that NPO allowed Polaris to be stomped on and get harsh reps for exactly those same reasons.

so please by all means, make it an ad hominem attack instead of actually attacking the content of my post.

[TypoNinja]

So for years we heard the skill and efficiency of the Pacifican bank trumpeted to one and all. But now when we tell you to put your money where your mouth is (pun intentional) suddenly it can't be done?

Your a product of your own arrogance, we took you at your word for how well your banks operate and when we expect you to operate as such your answer is "no we lied, our banks suck".

Somehow I'm having a hard time feeling sorry for you.

[Dochartaigh]

FAN said they would only take white peace; NPO is paying the reps, they have no problem doing so.

yeah that was the second time around after NPO screwed them over with the first set of peace terms and subsequently attacked the entire alliance over a few probable accounts of nations actually not abiding by the peace terms. The rest were quite questionable. Then the second war lasted 2 years or so.

NPO is not paying reps as they seem to have quite a huge problem with doing so. i thought that was the point of this thread here.

[Vladimir]

So for years we heard the skill and efficiency of the Pacifican bank trumpeted to one and all. But now when we tell you to put your money where your mouth is (pun intentional) suddenly it can't be done?

Your a product of your own arrogance, we took you at your word for how well your banks operate and when we expect you to operate as such your answer is "no we lied, our banks suck".

Somehow I'm having a hard time feeling sorry for you.

When we spoke of the efficiency of our bank, we were doing so with the understanding that it hadn't just gone through a lengthy nuclear war that completely decimated all of its nations. Speaking of someone's efficiency also doesn't imply that they are omnipotent -- saying 'I am efficient at manufacturing cars' and then telling a buyer that you can't manufacture a million cars every 20 seconds isn't a contradiction.

[Haflinger]

NPO is not paying reps as they seem to have quite a huge problem with doing so. i thought that was the point of this thread here.

NPO offered 300K tech and 8 billion dollars in reps. This was refused by the alliances at war with them. At least read Moo's OP

[Dochartaigh]

An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.

Karma went war against NPO for revenge, Karma won, NPO is down to 6mil NS from 22 mil, lost so many members, they suffered enough for their sins. I understand that some people who got bad terms from NPO want revenge for it too, but i don't .understand that some alliances who fought on the side of NPO in the past want reps too. NPO will recover sooner or later, on matter of terms and they will also wanna punch back and it will go on forever. Karma had a chance to set up good peace standards, but they failed it. They claimed "evil NPO", but they became the evil.

The peace mode part is !@#$, if you failed to stagger and they could flee to peace mode deal with it. Ok there are lots of banking nations why is necessary to kill peace lovers?

this post is funny and really fails to look at NPO's past actions in regards to PM nations they are at war with. And yes, one of the reasons for the terms i suspect is the very reason you put, NPO will want vengeance. They have proved this with GWII/GWIII. Even the title of GWIII for NPO, "War of Retribution", was due to vengeance against Legion for GWI actions. so yes, anyone with a brain will know NPO wants vengeance and given the last time they got white peace and how quickly the rebuilt and waged war against CoaLUEtion alliances, no one wants a repeat.

As for good peace standards, this war has been by far the most lenient war in the history of CN. We have not seen any viceroys handed out and for the most part, except a few occassions, seen largely white peace or small reps that were quite lenient. Thus far it is only NPO who is truly being hit hard by terms and while they may have not been ones to give high reps, the other terms they have given were in many ways harsher.

[Dochartaigh]

NPO offered 300K tech and 8 billion dollars in reps. This was refused by the alliances at war with them. At least read Moo's OP

i did actually. but i kinda agree on hitting the PM nations as that damages NPO more than does having to pay another 1 billion in reps either cash or tech.

[TypoNinja]

When we spoke of the efficiency of our bank, we were doing so with the understanding that it hadn't just gone through a lengthy nuclear war that completely decimated all of its nations. Speaking of someone's efficiency also doesn't imply that they are omnipotent -- saying 'I am efficient at manufacturing cars' and then telling a buyer that you can't manufacture a million cars every 20 seconds isn't a contradiction.

It's been so often by so many, once more won't hurt.

If your banks are carrying such small war chests that two weeks of war renders them poverty bound, you are doing it wrong.

Edit: to=/=it

Edited June 13, 2009 by TypoNinja

[Haflinger]

i did actually. but i kinda agree on hitting the PM nations as that damages NPO more than does having to pay another 1 billion in reps either cash or tech.

Right, you can hold that opinion; but don't try to say that NPO is unwilling to pay reps, when their counteroffer included a pretty significant reps payment.

[Dochartaigh]

Right, you can hold that opinion; but don't try to say that NPO is unwilling to pay reps, when their counteroffer included a pretty significant reps payment.

true. i apologize for forgetting about the counteroffer.

[Vladimir]

It's been so often by so many, once more won't hurt.

If your banks are carrying such small war chests that two weeks of war renders them poverty bound, you are doing it wrong.

Edit: to=/=it

"A nation at war will lose 9,840 infra, 2115.5 tech, and 5808 land. All nations but 25 will be ZIed. We will have two nations above 5K infra.

[...]

Now, some people are going to claim "massive war chests." It ain't there people. 7 weeks of nuclear war, plus stints in PM, or for our banks, 7 weeks in PM, hurts those warchests a lot, even billion dollar warchests. Yes, some nations might have billion dollar warchests at the end of the war, but the catch has never been the size of the warchest, but how much you can send out. 18M/cycle just doesn't even take out a chunk of these types of reparations." [1]

And that's a minimum, since war would last longer (possibly much longer) than two weeks. Having a maximum of 2 nations over 5k infrastructure doesn't lend itself well to paying $7 billion and 300k tech in reparations.

[shahenshah]

If your talking surrender terms with somebody, and when they don't like it, instead of addressing concerns to you they run to the OWF are you more likely to

1. Cave and give them better terms.

or

2. Remember that you are the victor in a war they started and remind them that victors dictate terms and any concessions are an act of generosity from you.

Of course Londo told them the terms wouldn't change, he'd just finished getting 18 (i think it was 18) alliances to agree on something, He can speak for his alliance and maybe a couple of his closest allies, but not everybody. I have a hard enough time getting 4 guys together once a week for a D&D game, and you think instant answers are going to come from 18 alliance leaders who may or may not be on the same time zones?

Does it suck for the NPO that fighting continues while the admittedly slow process goes on? yes it does. But thats something they can balance agaisnt the terms, taking them now ends the fighting sooner while more talks makes the fighting go on longer.

Bit Surprised there coming... from someone who thinkgs getting 17x people online is no biggie.

[Dochartaigh]

"A nation at war will lose 9,840 infra, 2115.5 tech, and 5808 land. All nations but 25 will be ZIed. We will have two nations above 5K infra.

[...]

Now, some people are going to claim "massive war chests." It ain't there people. 7 weeks of nuclear war, plus stints in PM, or for our banks, 7 weeks in PM, hurts those warchests a lot, even billion dollar warchests. Yes, some nations might have billion dollar warchests at the end of the war, but the catch has never been the size of the warchest, but how much you can send out. 18M/cycle just doesn't even take out a chunk of these types of reparations." [1]

And that's a minimum, since war would last longer (possibly much longer) than two weeks. Having a maximum of 2 nations over 5k infrastructure doesn't lend itself well to paying $7 billion and 300k tech in reparations.

Cortath fails to realize that as a nation has less infra less is destroyed in nukes, ground attacks, air attacks and so on. He also fails to realize that inevitably some nukes will be thwarted, some ground attacks will fail, some air attacks won't go through.

so those numbers he quoted will not hold true the entire 2 weeks. so you can quote the maximum damage will be even less than the 9,840 infra lost, 2115.5 tech lost, and 5808 land lost.

I am also going to assume that NPO nations will strike back, thus gaining more land and tech in winning ground attacks.

so please stop acting as if Cortath is utterly right and that this damage is the exact damage that will occur for 2 weeks of war.

[Vladimir]

Cortath fails to realize that as a nation has less infra less is destroyed in nukes, ground attacks, air attacks and so on. He also fails to realize that inevitably some nukes will be thwarted, some ground attacks will fail, some air attacks won't go through.

so those numbers he quoted will not hold true the entire 2 weeks. so you can quote the maximum damage will be even less than the 9,840 infra lost, 2115.5 tech lost, and 5808 land lost.

I am also going to assume that NPO nations will strike back, thus gaining more land and tech in winning ground attacks.

so please stop acting as if Cortath is utterly right and that this damage is the exact damage that will occur for 2 weeks of war.

With 3 top-end nations fighting, you will be nuked every day no matter how many your SDI stops (trust me). Even rebuying your entire air-force every single day (which is necessary due to the damage done by nukes and attacks) you are very lucky to stop even 1 if the attackers are at all competent (and given how keen Karma are on this, we can assume that they would put good fighters in -- nuke followed by 6 (12 if it's at update) attacks equals complete destruction that cannot be prevented. Same goes for ground attacks. And of course, defending yourself by rebuying a top-end airforce and army every day depletes tens of millions from your warchest every single day. With the change to the war-system just the other day (thanks, admin), turtling is no longer an option.

Damage becomes less when you're already beginning to hit bottom, and if you had read it, Cortath addressed this point in his post: "Certainly, as one gets lower, the damage will lessen, but once you're that low, it doesn't matter much, from a rebuilding perspective. It's buying higher infra that is impossible."

And as I already noted, since the war would in all probability last longer than the 14 days, the damage would in all probabilty be more, not less, than the figures Cortath quoted.

[Dochartaigh]

With 3 top-end nations fighting, you will be nuked every day no matter how many your SDI stops (trust me). Even rebuying your entire air-force every single day (which is necessary due to the damage done by nukes and attacks) you are very lucky to stop even 1 if the attackers are at all competent (and given how keen Karma are on this, we can assume that they would put good fighters in -- nuke followed by 6 (12 if it's at update) attacks equals complete destruction that cannot be prevented. Same goes for ground attacks. And of course, defending yourself by rebuying a top-end airforce and army every day depletes tens of millions from your warchest every single day. With the change to the war-system just the other day (thanks, admin), turtling is no longer an option.

Damage becomes less when you're already beginning to hit bottom, and if you had read it, Cortath addressed this point in his post: "Certainly, as one gets lower, the damage will lessen, but once you're that low, it doesn't matter much, from a rebuilding perspective. It's buying higher infra that is impossible."

And as I already noted, since the war would in all probability last longer than the 14 days, the damage would in all probabilty be more, not less, than the figures Cortath quoted.

and while what you say is most likely true, the problem you are putting to this is one of rebuilding NPO, which to my knowledge is not of concern to Karma and the alliances arrayed against you. The issue is one of paying off the reps, not rebuilding NPO.

[Vladimir]

and while what you say is most likely true, the problem you are putting to this is one of rebuilding NPO, which to my knowledge is not of concern to Karma and the alliances arrayed against you. The issue is one of paying off the reps, not rebuilding NPO.

That is indeed a concern of mine, but has nothing to do with what I said. I am well informed by all of the Order's economic advisers that paying the reparations on current terms (when taking the war, who is permitted to pay, response rates, etc into consideration), would be an impossibility.

"Having a maximum of 2 nations over 5k infrastructure doesn't lend itself well to paying $7 billion and 300k tech in reparations."

Edited June 13, 2009 by Vladimir

[Dochartaigh]

That is indeed a concern of mine, but has nothing to do with what I said. I am well informed by all of the Order's economic advisers that paying the reparations on current terms (when taking the war, who is permitted to pay, response rates, etc into consideration), would be an impossibility.

"Having a maximum of 2 nations over 5k infrastructure doesn't lend itself well to paying $7 billion and 300k tech in reparations."

again, my point was the terms in no way reflect what NPO's concerns are at all. they instead reflect the concerns of the alliances arrayed against NPO, and thus rebuilding of NPO is not included in that reflection. also, after rereading Moo's post in the Imperial Decree thread,

"B2) Reparations of up to 300,000 tech and $7,000,000,000 will be assessed upon the New Pacific Order. This shall be determined dependent on their ability to pay after the aforementioned period of war, in the judgment of the Karma signatories of this document. All reparations of technology must be paid by nations with greater than or equal to 1000.00 technology at the end of the above-mentioned 14 day period."

i do believe that the first bolded two words and the bolded sentence have been largely ignored by NPO and in fact everyone it seems, in this argument. Thus, if it is deemed impossible by Karma that NPO can pay 300k tech and $7 billion then the numbers will be lowered. so, really what is NPO's next excuse about these terms as it actually seems (upon rereading them and pointing out the bolded sections) that after the two weeks of war, if those nations are as heavily damaged as NPO believes they will be, NPO could very well end up paying much less than the max terms of 300k and $7 billion.

[TypoNinja]

That is indeed a concern of mine, but has nothing to do with what I said. I am well informed by all of the Order's economic advisers that paying the reparations on current terms (when taking the war, who is permitted to pay, response rates, etc into consideration), would be an impossibility.

"Having a maximum of 2 nations over 5k infrastructure doesn't lend itself well to paying $7 billion and 300k tech in reparations."

You've missed the point, a ZI nation with 100 million war chest can rebuild him self to banking range quite easily. Their state of ZI is immaterial their war chests will not have been depleted, they've been in peace mode the whole time. They could completely turtle and lose a maximum of one defeat alert a day in cash, your telling us your banks have under 200 mil on them?

Your forgetting why this term was included, its targeting the nations that have not fought this war, your front page rankings contains only one man under 10k infra and hes at 9k, most are more like 13k. With one truly impressive 19k infra on him.

These twenty nations should easily be sitting on more than enough war chest to survive two weeks of war and then rebuild them selves to a range where paying the reps is no longer burdensome. They won't be epically large anymore no, but the '2 nations above 5k infra' you suggest is a fairy tale.

Your second page of nations is obviously not as large, but still most are in the 9k infra range, some higher some lower, regardless, they as well should easily have war chests large enough to weather the storm and then rebuild.

Your third page, has some as low as 5k infra, but again a good number above that as well. They also should have war chests large enough to recover after the fighting has ended. though perhaps only to a lesser extent.

Will it hurt? Oh yes. Will your alliance be a shadow of its former power? Oh yes. It is possible to pay off regardless? Oh yes.

[Qaianna]

Your forgetting why this term was included, its targeting the nations that have not fought this war, your front page rankings contains only one man under 10k infra and hes at 9k, most are more like 13k. With one truly impressive 19k infra on him.

These twenty nations should easily be sitting on more than enough war chest to survive two weeks of war and then rebuild them selves to a range where paying the reps is no longer burdensome. They won't be epically large anymore no, but the '2 nations above 5k infra' you suggest is a fairy tale.

Your second page of nations is obviously not as large, but still most are in the 9k infra range, some higher some lower, regardless, they as well should easily have war chests large enough to weather the storm and then rebuild.

Your third page, has some as low as 5k infra, but again a good number above that as well. They also should have war chests large enough to recover after the fighting has ended. though perhaps only to a lesser extent.

Will it hurt? Oh yes. Will your alliance be a shadow of its former power? Oh yes. It is possible to pay off regardless? Oh yes.

I did cut a little to help highlight the bits that I'd like to question.

First..when sorting by pages, the key item might be to sort by infrastructure, as that's one of the items involved in the actual terms that were proposed. Makes it easy to see a part that would be affected.

If it's meant to target those that did not war, why not actually specify the ones that didn't war? 'Nation X has been sitting in peace mode since the war started, bring him out!'. Remember, nations will rise as the ones who were at war get bombed. It also helps open a dialogue of why, just in case the issue is 'Nation X just lost his computer in a divorce settlement' or something like that. As a counterpoint, I did fight a round in the war, and then got to peace mode when a stagger on my nation didn't fulfill itself. I was ready to come out, but then we surrendered. By that point, I was on the second page of nations. Was I a bank? (In a bit of irony, I can answer that--I was serving as one up until shortly before the war.)

[Vladimir]

again, my point was the terms in no way reflect what NPO's concerns are at all. they instead reflect the concerns of the alliances arrayed against NPO, and thus rebuilding of NPO is not included in that reflection. also, after rereading Moo's post in the Imperial Decree thread,

"B2) Reparations of up to 300,000 tech and $7,000,000,000 will be assessed upon the New Pacific Order. This shall be determined dependent on their ability to pay after the aforementioned period of war, in the judgment of the Karma signatories of this document. All reparations of technology must be paid by nations with greater than or equal to 1000.00 technology at the end of the above-mentioned 14 day period."

i do believe that the first bolded two words and the bolded sentence have been largely ignored by NPO and in fact everyone it seems, in this argument. Thus, if it is deemed impossible by Karma that NPO can pay 300k tech and $7 billion then the numbers will be lowered. so, really what is NPO's next excuse about these terms as it actually seems (upon rereading them and pointing out the bolded sections) that after the two weeks of war, if those nations are as heavily damaged as NPO believes they will be, NPO could very well end up paying much less than the max terms of 300k and $7 billion.

Karma made it clear both in private and on the forum through the figures and justifications that they have thrown about that they believe we can pay the full amount regardless of what happens. In doing so they have demonstrated either a great ignorance of our capabilities or a great maliciousness in trying to force us to break them; thus even in the extraordinarily unlikely event that they did lower the reparations, current indicators are that they would still far exceed our capabilities.

You've missed the point, a ZI nation with 100 million war chest can rebuild him self to banking range quite easily. Their state of ZI is immaterial their war chests will not have been depleted, they've been in peace mode the whole time. They could completely turtle and lose a maximum of one defeat alert a day in cash, your telling us your banks have under 200 mil on them?

etc

No I didn't.

[TypoNinja]

I did cut a little to help highlight the bits that I'd like to question.

First..when sorting by pages, the key item might be to sort by infrastructure, as that's one of the items involved in the actual terms that were proposed. Makes it easy to see a part that would be affected.

If it's meant to target those that did not war, why not actually specify the ones that didn't war? 'Nation X has been sitting in peace mode since the war started, bring him out!'. Remember, nations will rise as the ones who were at war get bombed. It also helps open a dialogue of why, just in case the issue is 'Nation X just lost his computer in a divorce settlement' or something like that. As a counterpoint, I did fight a round in the war, and then got to peace mode when a stagger on my nation didn't fulfill itself. I was ready to come out, but then we surrendered. By that point, I was on the second page of nations. Was I a bank? (In a bit of irony, I can answer that--I was serving as one up until shortly before the war.)

I agree it could be worded better, or a solution like that worked out (we want those who didn't fight to do so, all of them at once doing so isn't necessary, just that it happens. Doing all of it at once benefits the NPO though., if it takes 4 weeks for everything to roll around whoever came out first ends up in longer wars.)

Unfortunately, exploring options like that is something the NPO threw out the airlock when they ran to the OWF instead of saying "hey all of em at once? what about just keeping a list?" They went for the PR stunt instead of a real solution. Their counter offer they knew would be rejected, a billion more isn't a lot of money for an alliance of that size, one aid cycle if their banks are all intact.

In essence they offered KARMA one aid cycle of cash in exchange for letting the majority of the high nations escaped untouched, its a lousy deal. The goal of the terms as I see it is to make sure the NPO can't come gunning for anybody any time soon. The alternative the NPO offered would have taken all the teeth out of the terms, I'd have been shocked if it was accepted.

Edited June 13, 2009 by TypoNinja

[Prince Yvl]

So you tell us, Vlad: What do you think is a reasonable amount of time for NPO to be stuck repaying reps and rebuilding, given all that you (as in NPO) has done? I want to know what you would do in our shoes.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Prince Yvl

[Qaianna]

I agree it could be worded better, or a solution like that worked out (we want those who didn't fight to do so, all of them at once doing so isn't necessary, just that it happens. Doing all of it at once benefits the NPO though., if it takes 4 weeks for everything to roll around whoever came out first ends up in longer wars.)

Unfortunately, exploring options like that is something the NPO threw out the airlock when they ran to the OWF instead of saying "hey all of em at once? what about just keeping a list?" They went for the PR stunt instead of a real solution. Their counter offer they knew would be rejected, a billion more isn't a lot of money for an alliance of that size, one aid cycle if their banks are all intact.

In essence they offered KARMA one aid cycle of cash in exchange for letting the majority of the high nations escaped untouched, its a lousy deal. The goal of the terms as I see it is to make sure the NPO can't come gunning for anybody any time soon. The alternative the NPO offered would have taken all the teeth out of the terms, I'd have been shocked if it was accepted.

In all seriousness, I don't know if the Order was aware that this was the goal, instead of just smacking them around harder. How was the term itself presented?