Ragashingo Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 The Karma War is more or less over (I don't really think TPF counts...) so now it's "THE FUTURE" and everything from top spot to the new laws and standards of CN are up for grabs. Here's hoping everyone learned something this time and we don't get back to a pre Karma War state in a year or so... Helpfully I've made a short list of the things I hoped ya'll learned: 1. Griefing players is a bad thing. We should tolerate many things. Spying, scheming, aggression, back room dealing, etc. But one thing we should not allow is griefing. All the former things help make the game interesting, so does the latter I suppose but it does so to the extreme detriment to the game. I hope that we as a community will be more willing to deal with true griefing if and when it arises again. No matter where it comes from. 2. Frequently reviewing treaties and the friendships they should be based upon is a must. Obviously the NPO suffered greatly because it overestimated its ties with its allies, but multiple alliances on the Karma side also did some strange treaty hoop jumping to carry out their desired policies. Frankly the Karma War, despite ending the way I wanted it to, was not a clean war in regards to treaties. I'd suggest a monthly review of all your treaties just so you don't have to look stupid when you have to suspend a treaty in the middle of a war because you are unsure of where your loyalties lie. 3. There are a handful of arguments around here that eventually lead to people saying something like: "Well then do something about it because talk will never change things." The Karma War has totally debunked that concept. It proved beyond a doubt that being in a powerful alliance is in no way a requirement to change the world. All you need is sound ideals, fierce determination, and some people who know how to talk. The door is now open to the free unhindered clashing of ideas and ideals without terrible repercussions. So lets see some great debates on... Well on everything! Anyway thats three things. Got anymore? Or got something to say about my list. Speak up, or else! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Although I agree with number 1, I don't quite see how it's something we learned from the Karma war. Maybe I just missed something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Savage Man Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Well I hope people will learn, but they won't. Such is life. Even if everyone around now were to learn these lessons, then the noobies would need to learn too and it just won't happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) I'd suggest a monthly review of all your treaties just so you don't have to look stupid when you have to suspend a treaty in the middle of a war because you are unsure of where your loyalties lie. So like 'The Monthly Treaty Review' that would be updated monthly, somewhat like the sanction race? Edited July 22, 2009 by King Alias Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I don't think anyone learned a damned thing; "victors" or "defeated." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Although I agree with number 1, I don't quite see how it's something we learned from the Karma war. Maybe I just missed something. Well many alliances turned a blind eye to #1 for a long long time until the Karma War and perhaps some of the events leading up to it. The war finally forced people to choose sides and most actually choose the right side. Hopefully they will remember it and won't drift too far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 So like 'The Monthly Treaty Review' that would be updated monthly, somewhat like the sanction race? I was thinking more of internal alliance reviews. An alliance needs to make sure its policies, beliefs, and intentions match up with who it has treaties with. Especially military treaties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I don't think anyone learned a damned thing; "victors" or "defeated." I think you're wrong. But we'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I was thinking more of internal alliance reviews. An alliance needs to make sure its policies, beliefs, and intentions match up with who it has treaties with. Especially military treaties. So alliances are going to start doing this because you said? I think one person from a neutral, political standpoint should review all the alliances treaties. That would bring more attention to the alliances government about the worth of their treaties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xoindotnler Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 It's never cool to be at the losing side, but damn it is fun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Well, two things I would hope people learned were. 1. As corny as this will sound, with great power, comes great responsibility. NPO had a lot of power and abused it. In the end, Karma got to them because of it. 2. Anyone can make a difference. Although, when I mention this, I guess I'm kinda bias because of the whole Vox thing, but it also applies to most, if not all the alliances fighting on the Karma side. They brought down one of the most powerful alliances in CN history, a task that was thought impossible. Any person in this game can make a difference, they just need to know how. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I don't think anyone learned a damned thing; "victors" or "defeated." I have to agree with this man. Some standards could be changed but nothing more than that, and remember this is a double standards game so even it is a great thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 So alliances are going to start doing this because you said? I think one person from a neutral, political standpoint should review all the alliances treaties. That would bring more attention to the alliances government about the worth of their treaties. First off, find me a single person with a neutral political point of view around here. Good luck... Secondly, it is for the alliances themselves to decide where they want to go and who they want to go there with. A neutral person that isn't privy to the feelings and opinions and goal of two allied alliances really isn't qualified to review their treaties. The problem we saw in the Karma War was people signing treaties of convenience while they outright ignored the fact that they had many large policy disagreements with their treaty partners. That's just ridiculous and hopefully we won't see it happening again anytime soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I don't think anyone learned a damned thing; "victors" or "defeated." Just gives us all the more reason to stick around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I have to agree with this man.Some standards could be changed but nothing more than that, and remember this is a double standards game so even it is a great thing. Well the standards (I think) we've changed are pretty huge changes. Fair peace terms, the near complete abolishment of ZI lists, etc. Maybe there will even be less use of double standards. And remember double standards are not something that must be, just something that historically have been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaBuc Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 It's never cool to be at the losing side, but damn it is fun Yeah, I've had a blast. And I'm actually not half bad at war anymore. -Bama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shodemofi-NPO Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 So alliances are going to start doing this because you said? I think one person from a neutral, political standpoint should review all the alliances treaties. That would bring more attention to the alliances government about the worth of their treaties. Why would anyone listen to what someone not in their alliance has to say about their relatons with another alliance? Ragashingo was making a suggestion for alliances to do so on their own. If someone tried to tell me that they thought one of my treaties should be cancelled, and they weren't in my alliance, I'd completely ignore them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xoindotnler Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Yeah, I've had a blast. And I'm actually not half bad at war anymore. -Bama Indeed it was very learn full for some of us . 10/10 would do again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Well the standards (I think) we've changed are pretty huge changes. Fair peace terms, the near complete abolishment of ZI lists, etc. Maybe there will even be less use of double standards. And remember double standards are not something that must be, just something that historically have been. Ask NPO, Echelon and soon TPF about how fair their peace terms are. I'm not saying that they do not deserved it, but well deserved or not it is far from being fair. Look now to IRON peace terms, how much more fair they are and why? Because IRON is less guilty than them in Hegemony's "crimes"? No, they are just "well-conected". Not to mention how the ex-Q members now are guiltless and nearly saints just because they changed sides before war. See? Double standards still have being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Death II Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 God, how wierd is it gonna be like in 2 years, we are gonna be all old and stuff and the new players will come in and repeat the same mistakes we made and us old folk will be like YOU YOUNGINS, STOP RUININ TEH CN AND LEARN FROM HISTORY!! lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Ask NPO, Echelon and soon TPF about how fair their peace terms are. I'm not saying that they do not deserved it, but well deserved or not it is far from being fair. Look now to IRON peace terms, how much more fair they are and why? Because IRON is less guilty than them in Hegemony's "crimes"? No, they are just "well-conected". Not to mention how the ex-Q members now are guiltless and nearly saints just because they changed sides before war. See? Double standards still have being. Whats done is done in regards to the peace terms. I certainly don't think IRON or any Q alliance is regarded as saints though. They all have a lot of work to regain their political footing. It will be fun to watch and comment on though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 God, how wierd is it gonna be like in 2 years, we are gonna be all old and stuff and the new players will come in and repeat the same mistakes we made and us old folk will be like YOU YOUNGINS, STOP RUININ TEH CN AND LEARN FROM HISTORY!! lol I'm already old! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 The Karma War is more or less over (I don't really think TPF counts...) Anyway thats three things. Got anymore? Or got something to say about my list. Speak up, or else! I guess having any respect for those who actually stay the course is a lesson yet to be learned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Ask NPO, Echelon and soon TPF about how fair their peace terms are. I'm not saying that they do not deserved it, but well deserved or not it is far from being fair. Look now to IRON peace terms, how much more fair they are and why? Because IRON is less guilty than them in Hegemony's "crimes"? No, they are just "well-conected". Not to mention how the ex-Q members now are guiltless and nearly saints just because they changed sides before war. See? Double standards still have being. The punishments for those who fought on the Hegemony sign was rarely ever proportional to their involvement. This war was never about any sort of "justice" or principles of any kind. It was simply a war. That's it. It couldn't be about justice, or else several of those Karma alliances, such as Sparta, MHA, Gremlins, TOP, and FOK, and others either formerly in the Continuum or allied to it, such as the Superfriends, would have had to answer for what they did while benefiting from the Pax Pacifica. No, we got the same minds as we do before. Maybe they were just minions under the NPO, but they served them none the less. Now they're running the show. Don't count on anything changing, slowly, but surely, we will see power centralize and attitudes change to the point of abuse of the common folk. Then we're back to where we were before, and this war will have been for naught. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shodemofi-NPO Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Whats done is done in regards to the peace terms. I certainly don't think IRON or any Q alliance is regarded as saints though. They all have a lot of work to regain their political footing. It will be fun to watch and comment on though. I think he's referring to alliances such as Sparta which were members of Q up until the last second but are now considered leaders of the side that was formerly Karma. 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.