enderland Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 There is, but do you honestly think those type of people are left after that long of a war? Considering that some of them have been in peace mode a while (not sure how many rounds of war/etc they all received) they might not have really taken that much damage. If the entire alliance of 1k tech nations had been in war mode the whole time then yes, I would strongly doubt any of them would leave. But many of them have not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 (edited) Madam, I'm offended that you feel it's appropriate to judge my character based on such a small sampling of my posts. This is, sadly, indicative of the low state into which these forums have recently fallen.Excluding Caffine1 is a stupid term and should never have made it out of the first draft, but the rest of it seems fine (not sure about who started the war, so I have no place to comment there). I know that people are moaning and gnashing about how evil all these alliances are, and how they're Just Like the Hegemony (irony) they claim to be fighting, but this is nothing like any number of unmerited gang-bangs meted out by 1V/Q/etc. We'll have to see how the new "powers" do in the future before we can start saying things like "See! See! They're just as bad!" Seriously though, whiners. To be fair, that term wasn't in the early drafts and actually got put in somewhere between the original offer to Echelon a month or so back, and its acceptance. I'm not entirely sure how it came about, to be honest. On an unrelated note, this also seems as good a place as any to admit that I was mistaken about how long it would take Echelon to pay their reps. They estimate about two months, not the one month I stated. My apologies to them for that. Edited July 6, 2009 by NoFish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 (edited) As stated previously, original terms stated that caffine was to be ejected and various levels of EZI. It also had some slightly ooc stuff specifically for caffine contained within the terms. If he didn't choose to leave a week ago these terms would still be there. Very interesting. Edited July 6, 2009 by shahenshah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Very interesting. And also pretty false. I never saw or supported anything involving individuals getting ZI'd. Humiliated for hiding in peace mode? Sure, but not singled out for beat downs. Might've been talked about (didn't really pay attention to some of the chats) but it certainly wasn't in any of the official drafts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 I realize it's probably not necessary to echo what my Lord said, but that post from Desperado is a complete and utter lie. The only previous term relating to Caffine1 was that he would have to put a line in his bio to humiliate him for staying in peace mode for the whole war. Say what you will about that, it's wholly different from EZI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Congrats on Peace, Echelon. Even if they are pathetic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daimos Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 /salute Echelon "I will rest when I die" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrono Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Even if they are pathetic Is that really necessary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 (edited) 1. The following reparations will be paid by Echelon for instigating the war and the damage caused thereafter:10,000 technology and three jars of jam to GOD 300 million and 7,500 technology (Aided in packages of 3m/50) to MA 10,000 technology to MK on behalf of GR 1,500 technology or money equivalent, at an exchange rate of 3 mil per 50 to Athens 5,000 technology to TTK 1 technology to R&R 1a. No Echelon nation under 1,000 tech will be allowed to pay reparations. Only 26 Echelon Nations are over 1k Tech ATM, and they collectively hold ~44.7k Tech. I have a few questions: 32.5k Tech is ~73% of 44.7k Tech.Do you find it to be an appropriate punishment for an alliance that went to war to fulfill a treaty, apparently without any genuine hate against your party? 32.5k Tech requires 650 Aid packs, that divided among 26 Nations theoretically means 25 Aid cycles (as only 17 Echelon Nations are above 1,250 Tech it will probably take a little longer). This means that Echelon may have to be paying reparations until March or April, 2010.(Forget my flawed math, lol. Shamshir is right when he says I'm getting slow... )Do you find this consistent with the objective of defending OV in the first place, and of putting an end to "hegemonistic abuses"? What is the rationale behind 1a, anyway? 8. Echelon admits that it started the war and that it was defeated soundly, and hereby surrenders to the collective might assembled. I thought that Echelon entered in the war in defence of the NPO, and that nobody challenged that reason at the time. Is there anything I am missing? 10. Should Caffine1 rejoin Echelon he is permanently banned from holding any government position within the alliance. Having been subject to a similar term I express my solidarity for Caffine1. If he remembers me he will surely find this significant... (However, the "permanent" terms are never really permanent, believe me.) 1 technology to R&R R&R (ooc: be careful and don't really take it, anyway: insubstantial aid packs are forbidden by the game's rules.) To "Karma": if you find my questions to be "irritating" please just ignore them: I don't wish to start a "fight". Edited July 6, 2009 by jerdge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Only 26 Echelon Nations are over 1k Tech ATM, and they collectively hold ~44.7k Tech. I've said it before, but they had around 100k tech total and about 90k tech in nations that could pay when these terms were given to them. It strikes me as poor policy to give someone lighter terms for not surrendering when you would have liked them to, and continuing to damage your alliance. I have a few questions: 32.5k Tech is ~73% of 44.7k Tech.Do you find it to be an appropriate punishment for an alliance that went to war to fulfill a treaty, apparently without any genuine hate against your party? 32.5k Tech requires 650 Aid packs, that divided among 26 Nations theoretically means 25 Aid cycles (as only 17 Echelon Nations are above 1,250 Tech it will probably take a little longer). This means that Echelon may have to be paying reparations until March or April, 2010.Do you find this consistent with the objective of defending OV in the first place, and of putting an end to "hegemonistic abuses"? What is the rationale behind 1a, anyway? Firstly, Echelon thinks they'll take about two months to pay these off, and the terms specify that they have to pay them within three. The rationale between 1a is to reduce Echelon's current and future military power. That's all. You won't find us feigning any moral high ground here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonewall14 Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Well glad you got peace but welcome to the new tyrants regime with the same malice and bullying as before just new masters... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Firstly, Echelon thinks they'll take about two months to pay these off, and the terms specify that they have to pay them within three. They're right: I made a very silly mistake in my math. My apology. Thanks for your reply, why we're on it, by the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Metternich Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 1 technology to R&R haha I lol'd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vespassianus Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Well ccongrats and good luck to Echelon, they acted honorably and i think they deserve better terms. They went war for their ally when none did it and fought like hell. Banning people from gov is never funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweety Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Is that you BnT? I see you've worked on your spelling, but you're not fooling me. That sarcasm and flawlessly executed smiley gave you away! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Another hurdle jumped by Karma. Now you people are telling Echelon who can and cant be in Echelons government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornmean9 Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Well glad you got peace but welcome to the new tyrants regime with the same malice and bullying as before just new masters... yes congrats on peace to harsh terms from the new hegemony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brotherington Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 It's good to see at least one alliance answering for their past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbysmalPea Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 It's good to see at least one alliance answering for their past. Now on to all the others! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweety Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Now on to all the others! Here, here! I know I for one didn't fight the 'Karma' war to end all injustice. I simply wanted the power to be on the dealing end of it. (I have a funny feeling I'm going to have to re-iterate that, no, this is not sarcasm). I see no reason why NPO should enjoy 3 years of fun at the expense of others, and we're not even allowed 6 months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 (edited) Here, here!I know I for one didn't fight the 'Karma' war to end all injustice. I simply wanted the power to be on the dealing end of it. (I have a funny feeling I'm going to have to re-iterate that, no, this is not sarcasm). I see no reason why NPO should enjoy 3 years of fun at the expense of others, and we're not even allowed 6 months. At least you admit you are acting the way NPO acted for 3 years, when your 6 months are up will it be your turn to get yours? [OOC]Question to Karma. Who deleted all the DoWs from wiki today and what are you trying to hide? Edited July 6, 2009 by Alterego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 I've said it before, but they had around 100k tech total and about 90k tech in nations that could pay when these terms were given to them. It strikes me as poor policy to give someone lighter terms for not surrendering when you would have liked them to, and continuing to damage your alliance. Yeah, the statistical well-being of your own alliance is paramount. There is no greater morality. Now where have I heard that before? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 [OOC]Question to Karma. Who deleted all the DoWs from wiki today and what are you trying to hide? Wow way to level a baseless accusation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorponok Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 All the best in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagicalTrevor Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 It's good to see at least one alliance answering for their past. Amen to that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.