The emergence of "Do not surrender syndrome"

[Arthur Blair]

No one should surrender because in this war your actions are the fault of your enemy. So the worse you get, the more you must punish those against you. This will eventually lead to the EZI of the entire TOP coalition. We may be monsters for them attacking us, but they are the monsters for us continuing the conflict. I have seen the light.

[Corinan]

The New Sith Order invented the "Do not surrender syndrome."

[Mack Truck]

[quote name='Corinan' date='11 February 2010 - 11:38 PM' timestamp='1265895494' post='2174646']
The New Sith Order invented the "Do not surrender syndrome."
[/quote]

After FAN.

[Alterego]

[quote name='Arcturus Jefferson' date='11 February 2010 - 02:21 AM' timestamp='1265854914' post='2173653']
Large reparations didn't start with the K War. As someone who has allegedly been playing since '07 you should remember that.
[/quote]
According to Archon the Karma war was to be the end for super reps. He was right, we now have mega reps thanks to Karma

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='11 February 2010 - 02:27 AM' timestamp='1265855274' post='2173664']
Woah there, "established as the norm"? Are you kidding? There were like 3 Hegemony alliances that were given significant reps to pay, out of 40+.
[/quote]
This war has no central command like the Karma war. Every front on the Supercomplaints side is going to want massive reps if they win because of the heavy damage they are taking.

[quote name='Arthur Blair' date='11 February 2010 - 12:34 PM' timestamp='1265891655' post='2174572']
This will eventually lead to the EZI of the entire TOP coalition.
[/quote]
Its already in progress the onus is on the bigger side to stop it. The side being curbstomped is powerless to stop themselves being curbstomped without years of reps, gov bannings, forced disbanding of blocs etc. Its better to die on our feet than live on our knees. Packing our bags and leaving is the only option available.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Alterego

[Kindom of Goon]

[quote name='Alterego' date='11 February 2010 - 02:18 PM' timestamp='1265897938' post='2174702']
This war has no central command like the Karma war. Every front on the Supercomplaints side is going to want massive reps if they win because of the heavy damage they are taking.[/quote]

Hmm, we were not planning anything more than white(ish) peace should we end up being the victors, guess I'll have to tell my gov that we're wrong. You must have an impressive spy network to know what every front is going to offer as well.

[quote]The side being curbstomped is powerless to stop themselves being curbstomped without years of reps, gov bannings, forced disbanding of blocs etc. Its better to die on our feet than live on our knees. Packing our bags and leaving is the only option available.
[/quote]

Protip: when you try your hand at propaganda try to be a little more subtle, otherwise you'll just lose all credibility.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Kindom of Goon

[Alterego]

[quote name='Kindom of Goon' date='11 February 2010 - 02:31 PM' timestamp='1265898686' post='2174719']
Hmm, we were not planning anything more than white(ish) peace should we end up being the victors, guess I'll have to tell my gov that we're wrong. You must have an impressive spy network to know what every front is going to offer as well.
[/quote]
Your front is more than just your alliance. There are 5 fronts unless Im mistaken and each front is capable of producing a Karma like slavery reps plan.

[quote name='Kindom of Goon' date='11 February 2010 - 02:31 PM' timestamp='1265898686' post='2174719']
Protip: when you try your hand at propaganda try to be a little more subtle
[/quote]
Subtlety is a lesson I never learned.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Alterego

[Arthur Blair]

[quote name='Alterego' date='11 February 2010 - 02:18 PM' timestamp='1265897938' post='2174702']
Its already in progress the onus is on the bigger side to stop it. The side being curbstomped is powerless to stop themselves being curbstomped without years of reps, gov bannings, forced disbanding of blocs etc. Its better to die on our feet than live on our knees. Packing our bags and leaving is the only option available.
[/quote]

Your side should have thought of that before trying to destroy us. Just because it is smaller in this war does not guarantee it will be in the next. We have no choice. You do.

[Alterego]

[quote name='Arthur Blair' date='11 February 2010 - 02:38 PM' timestamp='1265899101' post='2174730']
Your side should have thought of that before trying to destroy us. Just because it is smaller in this war does not guarantee it will be in the next. We have no choice. You do.
[/quote]
There are no PEACE/Poseidon alliances trying to destroy C&G.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Alterego

[Kindom of Goon]

[quote name='Alterego' date='11 February 2010 - 02:35 PM' timestamp='1265898957' post='2174725']
Your front is more than just your alliance. There are 5 fronts unless Im mistaken and each front is capable of producing a Karma like slavery reps plan.

[/quote]

Yeah you're probably right. Infact I wouldn't be surprised to see BAPS pay 1000 times more than what the slavery reps plan made them pay in the Karma war. How much was that again?

[Arthur Blair]

[quote name='Alterego' date='11 February 2010 - 02:46 PM' timestamp='1265899607' post='2174741']
There are no PEACE/Poseidon alliances trying to destroy C&G.
[/quote]

You are all the same, even if you're not fighting. I learned that from TOP.

[Alterego]

[quote name='Kindom of Goon' date='11 February 2010 - 02:48 PM' timestamp='1265899706' post='2174742']
Yeah you're probably right. Infact I wouldn't be surprised to see BAPS pay 1000 times more than what the slavery reps plan made them pay in the Karma war. How much was that again?
[/quote]
Like I said multiple fronts all with alliances from the Karma war wanting what the Karma big boys deemed as acceptable last time around.

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='Mack Truck' date='11 February 2010 - 08:53 AM' timestamp='1265896407' post='2174671']
After FAN.
[/quote]
Yes. This is accurate.

I have always respected FAN for what they put up with, even if they are just another bandwagoner in the current war.

That being said, the NSO has no plans to surrender or accept any terms. There are provisions in our Charter for the removal of the Emperor so if anyone wishes to see NSO surrender they should consult our Charter and start prodding the appropriate people to have me removed.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Ivan Moldavi

[Arcturus Jefferson]

[quote name='Alterego' date='11 February 2010 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1265897938' post='2174702']
According to Archon the Karma war was to be the end for super reps. He was right, we now have mega reps thanks to Karma
[/quote]
Archon never spoke for me. Personally, the K War was about securing my alliance's and (some) of my allies' futures against the Pacifican threat and their mindless muscle.

[Jinnai]

[quote name='Arcturus Jefferson' date='11 February 2010 - 01:14 AM' timestamp='1265872450' post='2174252']
You could ask GPA how it felt when you did it to them.
[/quote]
Wasn't playing CN then so, no, I can't ask because I didn't do it.

[Arcturus Jefferson]

[quote name='Jinnai' date='11 February 2010 - 11:29 AM' timestamp='1265905764' post='2174874']
Wasn't playing CN then so, no, I can't ask because I didn't do it.
[/quote]
You joined an alliance that did, so you tacitly endorse it.

[Style #386]

[quote name='Alterego' date='11 February 2010 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1265897938' post='2174702']
According to Archon the Karma war was to be the end for super reps. He was right, we now have mega reps thanks to Karma
[/quote]
Wrong, though it does make me giggle to hear people saying this. Karma was to put an end to [i]draconian[/i] reps; ie. reps that don't fit the crime. If you $%&@ up big-time, you pay big-time. And example of draconian reps would be GPA having to pay a then-unprecedented amount for a few mild mistakes. NPO received large reparations as punishment for many months of unchecked behaviour, specifically the imposition of draconian reps on others.

[quote name='Alterego' date='11 February 2010 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1265897938' post='2174702']
This war has no central command like the Karma war. Every front on the Supercomplaints side is going to want massive reps if they win because of the heavy damage they are taking.
[/quote]
Out of curiosity, why do you keep labelling the side "Supercomplaints" and in the same breath concede that there's no central command? Seems somewhat paradoxical, no?

[quote name='Alterego' date='11 February 2010 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1265897938' post='2174702']
Its already in progress the onus is on the bigger side to stop it. The side being curbstomped is powerless to stop themselves being curbstomped without years of reps, gov bannings, forced disbanding of blocs etc.
[/quote]
Wrong again. The onus is not on the bigger side to go to the losers every day and ask "hey are you ready to surrender yet?" When the losers are ready to call it quits, the onus is on [i]them[/i] to recognize it and take necessary steps to end the war.

I suppose one could make the case that it is a bilateral decision, in that the winning side can continue to persecute the war after the losing side is ready to concede defeat. Regardless, the argument is presently irrelevant as neither side has conceded defeat [by the way, "let's declare white peace and go our separate ways" is not a concession of defeat].

[junkahoolik]

[quote name='Style #386' date='11 February 2010 - 10:28 PM' timestamp='1265920104' post='2175400']
Wrong, though it does make me giggle to hear people saying this. Karma was to put an end to [i]draconian[/i] reps; ie. reps that don't fit the crime. If you $%&@ up big-time, you pay big-time. And example of draconian reps would be GPA having to pay a then-unprecedented amount for a few mild mistakes. NPO received large reparations as punishment for many months of unchecked behaviour, specifically the imposition of draconian reps on others.
[/quote]

it only turned to that in the late phases of the war when there were only a few alliances left and there was no need for more PR points at the beginning of the war it was advertised as the war to end all reps paying (hence why a high number of alliances that surrendered then received white peace even when there was much talk that they should receive high reps and i think Echelon was the main example given, i'm not sure). but, it can be spindled anyway the winner seems fit after the war is over, of course. history is only made of the stories the winners say, hence why they are most often seen as heroes within their circle and antagonists within the enemy ranks (*hint*archon*hint*)

[mattski133]

[quote name='Style #386' date='11 February 2010 - 08:28 PM' timestamp='1265920104' post='2175400']
Wrong, though it does make me giggle to hear people saying this. Karma was to put an end to [i]draconian[/i] reps; ie. reps that don't fit the crime. If you $%&@ up big-time, you pay big-time. And example of draconian reps would be GPA having to pay a then-unprecedented amount for a few mild mistakes. NPO received large reparations as punishment for many months of unchecked behaviour, specifically the imposition of draconian reps on others.


Out of curiosity, why do you keep labelling the side "Supercomplaints" and in the same breath concede that there's no central command? Seems somewhat paradoxical, no?


Wrong again. The onus is not on the bigger side to go to the losers every day and ask "hey are you ready to surrender yet?" When the losers are ready to call it quits, the onus is on [i]them[/i] to recognize it and take necessary steps to end the war.

I suppose one could make the case that it is a bilateral decision, in that the winning side can continue to persecute the war after the losing side is ready to concede defeat. Regardless, the argument is presently irrelevant as neither side has conceded defeat [by the way, "let's declare white peace and go our separate ways" is not a concession of defeat].
[/quote]

You been watchin the Architect part of the Matrix?

Plenty of alliances are fine with white peace and plenty are not. I think it's a case by case and to say otherwise is just making a wrongful, blanket statement.

This war is not going to drag on forever because of fear of reps, it is going to drag on forever because 150 TOP nations with 1000 infra and $1,000,000,000 warchests can fire nukes pretty much as long as they want to, and far longer than anyone in CDT or Duckroll, or whoever else can afford to. It seems like TOP went from Day 1, we're gonna knock the smiles off your faces C&G to Day 2, we'll never surrender!

[Bob]

[quote name='junkahoolik' date='11 February 2010 - 04:17 PM' timestamp='1265923069' post='2175488']
it only turned to that in the late phases of the war when there were only a few alliances left and there was no need for more PR points at the beginning of the war it was advertised as the war to end all reps paying (hence why a high number of alliances that surrendered then received white peace even when there was much talk that they should receive high reps and i think Echelon was the main example given, i'm not sure). but, it can be spindled anyway the winner seems fit after the war is over, of course. history is only made of the stories the winners say, hence why they are most often seen as heroes within their circle and antagonists within the enemy ranks (*hint*archon*hint*)
[/quote]
No, it didn't. Saying it doesn't make it true, it just makes you look silly~!

[Style #386]

[quote name='junkahoolik' date='11 February 2010 - 04:17 PM' timestamp='1265923069' post='2175488']
it only turned to that in the late phases of the war when there were only a few alliances left and there was no need for more PR points at the beginning of the war it was advertised as the war to end all reps paying (hence why a high number of alliances that surrendered then received white peace even when there was much talk that they should receive high reps and i think Echelon was the main example given, i'm not sure). but, it can be spindled anyway the winner seems fit after the war is over, of course. history is only made of the stories the winners say, hence why they are most often seen as heroes within their circle and antagonists within the enemy ranks (*hint*archon*hint*)
[/quote]
I'm not following here. I don't recall anyone saying that the Karma War would end all reps. In fact I am quite certain that they did not, as it was from day one the intention to extract reps from NPO, IRON, and other central hegemony figures. Fringe alliances were given white peace so that more firepower could be brought to bear on the central opposition.

[quote name='mattski133' date='11 February 2010 - 05:13 PM' timestamp='1265926386' post='2175628']
You been watchin the Architect part of the Matrix?

Plenty of alliances are fine with white peace and plenty are not. I think it's a case by case and to say otherwise is just making a wrongful, blanket statement.

This war is not going to drag on forever because of fear of reps, it is going to drag on forever because 150 TOP nations with 1000 infra and $1,000,000,000 warchests can fire nukes pretty much as long as they want to, and far longer than anyone in CDT or Duckroll, or whoever else can afford to. It seems like TOP went from Day 1, we're gonna knock the smiles off your faces C&G to Day 2, we'll never surrender!
[/quote]
I don't follow the Matrix reference. :[

TOP's nations, while generally strong, are not uniformly strong. For every Stukov there is a BoboTheGreat [had a couple hundred mil]. Spy ops on some peace moded nations reveal similarly low amounts in some other TOP nations at ~10k infrastructure. Whether or not these nations have the will to fight for no fixed duration from bill lock is yet to be discovered, and if not, the willingness of the better prepared is also unknown.

[Feanor Noldorin]

The fact people don't want to surrender is a good thing, imo.

[Bob]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' date='11 February 2010 - 05:50 PM' timestamp='1265928652' post='2175720']
The fact people don't want to surrender is a good thing, imo.
[/quote]
Basically this states my thoughts as well. I only view surrenders from nations under 100 days old, or completely noobish in ways as acceptable.

Personally, TOP nations I am at war with have yet to send me surrender terms, nor have I sent them any.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris

[Drai]

[quote name='Alterego' date='11 February 2010 - 06:18 AM' timestamp='1265897938' post='2174702']
Its already in progress the onus is on the bigger side to stop it. The side being curbstomped is powerless to stop themselves being curbstomped without years of reps, gov bannings, forced disbanding of blocs etc. Its better to die on our feet than live on our knees. Packing our bags and leaving is the only option available.
[/quote]
Can't wait for those [i]years[/i] of reps, gov bannings, and bloc disbandments we've been planning

Seriously? I haven't heard of anything like that.

[Style #386]

[quote name='Drai' date='11 February 2010 - 05:54 PM' timestamp='1265928867' post='2175734']
Can't wait for those [i]years[/i] of reps, gov bannings, and bloc disbandments we've been planning

Seriously? I haven't heard of anything like that.
[/quote]
Oh, you will.

[jerdge]

[quote name='Alterego' date='11 February 2010' post='2174702']Every front on the Supercomplaints side is going to want massive reps if they win because of the heavy damage they are taking.[/quote]
Assuming that we win our front and that nobody in the other side makes anything particularly stupid - and although I am not an official MHA spokeperson - I can anyway assure you that the MHA will not ask for "massive reps".
I can't completely exclude that we may ask something, especially to those that attacked us (GGA, NADC, MCXA and Echelon this far, with TUF already out of the equation) but you won't call it "massive".

On the other hand, probably you weren't thinking of us when talking of "Supercomplaints" (I'm just using the names I read in the newspapers [size=1][color=grey][ooc][/color][/size] [i]= see in the Wiki[/i] [size=1][color=grey][/ooc][/color][/size]).