Are We Harsh?

[Viluin]

And your point is? Your alliance has lost over 18 million NS since the start of this war. Anything you've done to RoK doesn't even compare.

How many alliances were outnumbered like this and still doing considerable damage after nearly 2 months of war? How many of them did not roll over and turtle? Not many. Hell, there's only a handful of alliances that even know what it's like to fight a war for more than 2 weeks.

My point was, that the war is not going smoothly for Karma right now. Yes, we lost 16 million NS, but I'm talking about the fights that are happening right now. Prolonging this war doesn't really do any meaningful damage to us anymore, most of us are below 1000 infra already, but all those 3-4k infra nations on the Karma side being nuked down to <1000 in a single war are definitely feeling it.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Viluin

[Inquisitor Tolkien]

I see we've hit the stage of trying to make it look like you are actually winning this war, I see.

Total NS loss is irrelevant. People can rebuild with any reasonable sized warchests. What those numbers don't tell you is the total warchests those nations have, and the amount those former-top tier NPO nations have is dropping considerably. Plus the numbers don't tell you how much is being done as a monetary amount. As the majority of your nations are below 15k NS and all of the nukes you are throwing are at small nations, it is far less then a few wars up top, where infrastructure is infinitely more expensive. In short: the damage you are doing is against small nations that can be easily rebuilt after the war. The damage we are doing to your warchests, however, is much larger and much more important as it prevents formerly top tier nations with oodles of wonders from rebuilding to anywhere close to where they were before the war. The discrepancy in damage that you are doing right now, however, is due to the fact that your nations are nuking us, whereas we don't have nearly enough people small enough to lob nukes back. Nor, quite frankly, enough people active enough in the lowest-most ranks to keep up the 3-4v1s that you saw during the early stages of the war, when your nations encompassed the upper-mid echelons of the NS range.

So in short: we're depleting your warchests, and that's the whole point of continuing the war. Eventually, your nations will start running out of warchests and they will be dragged down to ZI, losing you a nation with dozens of wonders that make up billions of dollars and years of investment. That quite frankly is worth more to us then the loss of a few thousand easily rebuilt/cheap infra.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Tolkien

[TypoNinja]

Sure, but keep in mind that we have 500 active wars (kinda disappointing actually, only 500 wars? That's a military failure on karma's part right there.. and we declared many of those wars ourselves too) and Ragnarok only has 200.

http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.as...search=Ragnarok

It's actually quite interesting to see how many of RoK's wars were declared by us. You don't see that often from an alliance that's way outnumbered, not after nearly 60 days of war. Heck, I had open defensive war slots for nearly a week until someone took them, and I'm at 13-17k NS. I highly suspect many nations on the other side are afraid to fight veterans.

It doesn't matter how you look at it really, at this point in the war it's not going very well for Karma.

Its quite simple really, your alliance has been beat the $%&@ up, something like 4/5th's of it is below 10k NS, even 18 on one you actually have numbers on us that low. Nobody else got beat up so hard. I'm at 4k NS (reroll) and there are less than 40 nations in range to declare on. You have people with nukes at 5k NS, so yea your doing lop sided damage, but who cares? taking 50k NS off an alliance when your only hitting targets under 10k ns doesn't matter much, infra is dirt cheap this low. I'm spending more on cruise missiles than infra at this point.

So yea you are still doing damage, but your like the black knight screaming "Come back I'll gnaw your ankles off!" the damage you can accomplish is nothing to be proud of. Get Kingdom of Dark out of peace mode and have him start lobbing nukes, then you might start doing damage worth bragging about.

[Inquisitor Tolkien]

Considering how expensive infrastructure is in those ranges, I would say it probably does more damage money-wise then the whole of the NPO as they are now.

[TypoNinja]

Considering how expensive infrastructure is in those ranges, I would say it probably does more damage money-wise then the whole of the NPO as they are now.

Hes also got like 11k tech and a WRC, those nukes are gonna sting.

[Viluin]

I see we've hit the stage of trying to make it look like you are actually winning this war, I see.

Total NS loss is irrelevant. People can rebuild with any reasonable sized warchests. What those numbers don't tell you is the total warchests those nations have, and the amount those former-top tier NPO nations have is dropping considerably. Plus the numbers don't tell you how much is being done as a monetary amount. As the majority of your nations are below 15k NS and all of the nukes you are throwing are at small nations, it is far less then a few wars up top, where infrastructure is infinitely more expensive. In short: the damage you are doing is against small nations that can be easily rebuilt after the war. The damage we are doing to your warchests, however, is much larger and much more important as it prevents formerly top tier nations with oodles of wonders from rebuilding to anywhere close to where they were before the war. The discrepancy in damage that you are doing right now, however, is due to the fact that your nations are nuking us, whereas we don't have nearly enough people small enough to lob nukes back. Nor, quite frankly, enough people active enough in the lowest-most ranks to keep up the 3-4v1s that you saw during the early stages of the war, when your nations encompassed the upper-mid echelons of the NS range.

So in short: we're depleting your warchests, and that's the whole point of continuing the war. Eventually, your nations will start running out of warchests and they will be dragged down to ZI, losing you a nation with dozens of wonders that make up billions of dollars and years of investment. That quite frankly is worth more to us then the loss of a few thousand easily rebuilt/cheap infra.

Rebuilding from 500 back to 3500 infra is not hard but it's not something that can be accomplished with a quick aid boost either. These are nations with little to no wonders and they don't have all improvements, rebuilding isn't as easy for them as it sounds. As for your point about warchests, mine has gone down by.. wait, it went up by $500k the past few days, and I didn't even collect taxes. Not to mention I'm stealing 20-30 tech a day. War is cheap at this level and I dare say it can be profitable. If you're counting on the depletion of warchests it'll take a while. Weeks, if not months.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Viluin

[Melchior]

To my knowledge, several economists have calculated the means of these terms, and consider them easily repaid.

[Thom98]

To my knowledge, several economists have calculated the means of these terms, and consider them easily repaid.

I think that is not taking into account the part of the terms having their "bank" nations in a war for more than 2 weeks.

[Inquisitor Tolkien]

Any nation above 4k infra can bank (I know because I've done it last war and still grown), and to get to such a mark takes less then 100 million.

The idea of a bank nation is outmoded, and anyone still using them as a military tactic should be ashamed. The greater part of an alliance can bank.

[New Frontier]

CoaLUEtion: LUE, GATO, CGS(CDS), SRI, ICSN, DDA, AoAN, GGA, TAGA, OIN, NAAC, ONOS, FIS, LOSS, ODN

How many of these alliances are still around

Then how many alliances are shadows of what they once were

NPO get to continue to play the game. Anything less than forced disbandment are light terms

I would like to point out that ONOS and FIS were not members of the CoaLUEtion.

[Matthew Conrad]

I think that is not taking into account the part of the terms having their "bank" nations in a war for more than 2 weeks.

The fact that we have the size of all their warchests has factored into those reps. They will still have plenty of money after 2 weeks.

[TypoNinja]

I think that is not taking into account the part of the terms having their "bank" nations in a war for more than 2 weeks.

And everybody keeps glossing over the part where it says reps will go down in the event the NPO becomes unable to pay them. but really, if it takes only about 100 mil to climb back into banking range, and these self professed banks are hanging onto warchests so low (we know they aren't, IG spy ftw) that they are broke after two weeks of war then they are quite possibly the &#33;@#&#036;%^ banks ever on planet bob.

[KingEsus]

Pah. The masses will always bay for blodd. To show mercy is real power.

[Matthew Conrad]

Pah. The masses will always bay for blodd. To show mercy is real power.

So you're saying NPO has been powerless for most of it's existence?

[Inquisitor Tolkien]

Pah. The masses will always bay for blodd. To show mercy is real power.

Then the CoaLUEtion was an omnipotent God and the NPO has been an amoeba in alcohol.

[Mixoux]

Pah. The masses will always bay for blodd. To show mercy is real power.

Man, you just set yourself up to be quoted and ridiculed for the next 2 pages.

[TypoNinja]

Pah. The masses will always bay for blodd. To show mercy is real power.

Man, you just set yourself up to be quoted and ridiculed for the next 2 pages.

Two pages? I bet that starts appearing in sigs. Its pure propaganda gold. You can't make up stuff that good.

[Inquisitor Tolkien]

Two pages? I bet that starts appearing in sigs. Its pure propaganda gold. You can't make up stuff that good.

Too late. Already done a few hours ago.

[goddammit]

Yes, the terms are too harsh. Yes, it is a good thing.

Harsh terms breeds resentment and resentment breeds polarity. A multi-polar game is all I've been hoping for since the fall of the League.

[Strykewolf]

Voted yes. For the most part I dislike reps to begin with. ((shrugs))

[Starbuck]

To harsh, no. If anybody at the table of nagotation cares to read some suggestions for making these terms harsher,

*Removal of Emperor and the IO's from the alliance.

*Move the NPO to the Grey shere indefinatly.

*Only 15 nations may be in peace mode at one time.

*Limit the Alliance to 10 nuclear weapons.

*Require demilitarization of all military wonders, improvements, tanks, plans, navies, and 30% military soldier cap for a year.

*An apology to each and ever alliance the New Pacific Order has taken part in the destruction of.

*No nation other than those forced to leave, may leave the AA for a period of 90 days, doing so is subject to attack until they return to the AA.

*Required to repay all reperations ever accepted to the still existing alliances.

*Cancelation of all military treaties and forbid the signing or upgrading of any military grade treaties for one year.

*Charter must be rewritten and approved by all alliances currently at war with the NPO.

*For a period of 1 year the NPO is not promitted to be a sactioned alliance.

This is just a few suggestions off the top of my head, I would recommend taking about 3-5 of these and adding them to the terms that already exist and then you hit in the ball park of being even use them all and you are square on fair terms, my personal favorites are, 1,2,5,8, and 10

[simon2269]

Terms are set by the victors, the victors will say the terms are light or fair, the losers will say they are harsh. You cannot please all of the people etc.

Either way what you really want is 2 diametrically opposed groups who can periodically slug it out, whether it is NPO vs X or X vs Y does not really matter.

[Doitzel]

Terms are set by the victors

Spoken with the stunning wisdom and insight that is born only of the GGA.

*Sigh*

The terms are harsh but not unfair. Karma has displayed flexibility. NPO does not want to accept them and the dancing around lately is just an attempt to soften Karma's resolve and weasel better terms. Karma would do well to send out a clear, unified message, at all levels, in responce as their piecemeal and lukewarm counter-arguments are being lost to the weight of numbers -- something that should favour them. Even if they have to repeat the same exact thing incessantly until they're blue in the face, it's an improvement over the sputtering they've been doing.

[Ogaden]

Spoken with the stunning wisdom and insight that is born only of the GGA.

*Sigh*

The terms are harsh but not unfair. Karma has displayed flexibility. NPO does not want to accept them and the dancing around lately is just an attempt to soften Karma's resolve and weasel better terms. Karma would do well to send out a clear, unified message, at all levels, in responce as their piecemeal and lukewarm counter-arguments are being lost to the weight of numbers -- something that should favour them. Even if they have to repeat the same exact thing incessantly until they're blue in the face, it's an improvement over the sputtering they've been doing.

I'm actually a lot more interested in the opinions of those who have not posted, rather than the 10-20 people who have stated the same opinion 4000 times.

[von Metternich]

I'd say we're being harsh yet fair. Its in our capability to decide the terms and conditions. Also, I think we should treat everyone as POWs. Then only the leadership would receive harsh punishments and slighlty less for the standard everyday Joe NPO.

Just my 2 cents.