Jump to content

NPO - A Suggestion


Stetson76

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 382
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

as far as NPO worried about getting attacked and not being able to defend themselves might i point out that they'd be protected by the largest coalition of nations (and i speak for myself here) with plenty of nations who even after this massive war would still be eager to jump any one who gets a bright idea about raiding NPO.

As far as this "whole impossible to pay reps" im sure Karma intends for this terms to take awhile to fulfill but it would be hardly advantageous to any of the Alliances fighting for this to drag out into a year long conflict.

Accept the terms and get on with the rebuilding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hehheh.

This conspiracy theory always cracks me up.

Since we have this legion of hidden banks, why bother demanding our banks come out of peace mode?

In fact you should just attack every alliance applicant in the game, they might be a bank of ours.

Conspiracy theory? More like tried-and-true NPO tactic. For people who are always shouting that we should remember the "Great Patriotic War" you seem to do a lot of forgetting about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No more NPO surrender threads. They have chosen to continue warfare so let them keep fighting. If they are unable to abide by and accept the surrender terms it is their sovereign right.

I personally respect their sovereign decision to continue to take a pounding and drag their remaining allies down with them.

Onward ... Erm Downward NPO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hehheh.

This conspiracy theory always cracks me up.

Since we have this legion of hidden banks, why bother demanding our banks come out of peace mode?

In fact you should just attack every alliance applicant in the game, they might be a bank of ours.

There is always going to be a paranoid element in any war, i got accused of being a "secret" NPO nation by afew "karma" alliances while i was a none on the red sphere, even though i was a none a month before the conflict till 3 weeks in staying in war mode the whole time.

Some people are more paranoid than most it seems

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, what a garbage idea.

First of all, let's pretend it's not garbage; way to ruin it by making it public.

Why it's garbage; you think Moo can just randomly run up to a Karma rep and be like "OK WE SURRENDER AND WE ONLY HAVE 30 IN PM HAHAHAH WE FOOLED YOU"? Your plan is almost flawless but you forgot 1 minor details; you didn't take into account that Karma is a group of people, and not, in fact, a bunch of tadpoles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, what a garbage idea.

First of all, let's pretend it's not garbage; way to ruin it by making it public.

Why it's garbage; you think Moo can just randomly run up to a Karma rep and be like "OK WE SURRENDER AND WE ONLY HAVE 30 IN PM HAHAHAH WE FOOLED YOU"? Your plan is almost flawless but you forgot 1 minor details; you didn't take into account that Karma is a group of people, and not, in fact, a bunch of tadpoles.

So basically you're saying that you wouldn't live up to the terms that have been indefinitely offered? I've seen no shortage of Karma reps state that these are the terms take them or leave them. Now you're saying that "these are the terms, take them if we want to still give them to you, or leave them."

After encouraging NPO to trust you guys through this thread, I guess I'll have to admit that I was wrong. I just hope, in a general sense, that the rest of Karma isn't as fluid in their ethics. In other words, you're right, you guys are no longer tadpoles, you've grown up to be big bad toads. :P

And to Kingzog, how could you kick a cute little pup like this?

051205Bronx_03.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So basically you're saying that you wouldn't live up to the terms that have been indefinitely offered? I've seen no shortage of Karma reps state that these are the terms take them or leave them. Now you're saying that "these are the terms, take them if we want to still give them to you, or leave them."

After encouraging NPO to trust you guys through this thread, I guess I'll have to admit that I was wrong. I just hope, in a general sense, that the rest of Karma isn't as fluid in their ethics. In other words, you're right, you guys are no longer tadpoles, you've grown up to be big bad toads. :P

First, to make something clear... I do not represent Karma. Yes, Nueva Vida was there at the start, but now our role is much smaller, and we are currently only here to support a friend (and even that is dwindling due to the conditions in the field, but thats another story). I certainly am not at war with NPO, and the terms offered are not my terms, nor am I aware of anything "indefinite" period, so, if that's what they told NPO, then that's what they are.

However, as I said, there is a human factor.

I have absolutely 0 say in the surrender terms. In fact, I don't even know who to make suggestions to if I did want to... but if I were giving someone surrender terms, they are given in good faith. If the people I am dealing with don't feel obligated to deal in good faith, then the word I gave them will be taken away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best possible scenario that I can think for KARMA is to keep the NPO at war for as long as possible.

Just taking a look at IRON's stats, in one month since their surrender, they've gained over a million NS and over 300k infra and I suspect their growth will exponentially increase as those nations that were crushed begin to hit 6-7k infra marks. This from an alliance of 570 people. Given a chance to rebuild, I would hardly be suprised to see NPO (which currently has 100 additional members compared to IRON) be able to make similar rebuilding accomplishments and within 6 months to a year, barring any signifigant wars, the NPO will probably be a signifigant player again and by 16 months tops they should have their warchests built up again and be ready to avenge themselves, which I think it's safe to say they will certainly try to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just going to say this. The NPO has been defeated, and wants peace. I have a suspiscion that many Karma alliances want their victory finished. Just change the 90% rule. Is that that hard? People continually realize that that is the only issue here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best possible scenario that I can think for KARMA is to keep the NPO at war for as long as possible.

Just taking a look at IRON's stats, in one month since their surrender, they've gained over a million NS and over 300k infra and I suspect their growth will exponentially increase as those nations that were crushed begin to hit 6-7k infra marks. This from an alliance of 570 people. Given a chance to rebuild, I would hardly be suprised to see NPO (which currently has 100 additional members compared to IRON) be able to make similar rebuilding accomplishments and within 6 months to a year, barring any signifigant wars, the NPO will probably be a signifigant player again and by 16 months tops they should have their warchests built up again and be ready to avenge themselves, which I think it's safe to say they will certainly try to do.

You are assuming of course that a gaggle of alliances that generally dislike each other and are only united in their even greater dislike of us could keep up such a vindictive charade for that long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just going to say this. The NPO has been defeated, and wants peace. I have a suspiscion that many Karma alliances want their victory finished. Just change the 90% rule. Is that that hard? People continually realize that that is the only issue here.

No it's not hard, but NPO doesn't really have a say in the terms. There are two options: Accept them or Deny them, there is really no negotiation to be had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it's not hard, but NPO doesn't really have a say in the terms. There are two options: Accept them or Deny them, there is really no negotiation to be had.

I believe you mean 'reject' them, unless you want us to deny they exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it's not hard, but NPO doesn't really have a say in the terms. There are two options: Accept them or Deny them, there is really no negotiation to be had.

Do you really want eternal war? We have stated why that is impossible to accept, as it would easily result in us accidentally violating the terms. Is the 90% really whats important to these terms? You couldnt just track our banks and hit them whenever they leave peace mode? They are going to need to leave it to pay our massive terms.

Edited by muffasamini
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is always going to be a paranoid element in any war, i got accused of being a "secret" NPO nation by afew "karma" alliances while i was a none on the red sphere, even though i was a none a month before the conflict till 3 weeks in staying in war mode the whole time.

Some people are more paranoid than most it seems

It comes with the territory.

Now that the spies have started with them, the paranoia will only increase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you really want eternal war? We have stated why that is impossible to accept, as it would easily result in us accidentally violating the terms. Is the 90% really whats important to these terms? You couldnt just track our banks and hit them whenever they leave peace mode? They are going to need to leave it to pay our massive terms.

How is that any different than what happened with FAN? I find it ironic that your fear here is that Karma will start acting like the NPO. I think your fear is unfounded. Even if you believe a few of the alliances involved would act like the NPO and declare on a minor term violation, most of the Karma alliances would want nothing to do with it. Meaning those few that you could see wanting to would lack the support needed. I dont think you need to worry about Karma pulling an NPO, there is simply too many players who would have no part of it for that sort of thing to get through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it's not hard, but NPO doesn't really have a say in the terms. There are two options: Accept them or Deny them, there is really no negotiation to be had.
Deny: to refuse to agree or accede to: to deny a petition.

The greatest victim of the war, sethb, will be your ego. Because when the war is done, you'll be right back where you started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If infra is the first thing that comes to your mind when you hear lose, then that's quite sad.

Well considering this has been my second ZI of the war, I think I can say with some authority that you don't know what you're talking about.

I use this thing called 'sarcasm', for humorous purposes you see. I allude to the possibility that sethb might oh, damage my income-generating capabilities in mock horror.

This is what us earthlings refer to as 'humor'.

Edited by James Dahl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...