Jump to content

The End. It's coming.


Syzygy

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='20 February 2010 - 09:50 PM' timestamp='1266702604' post='2194133']
Obviously, paying out tech hurts large nations. If you want tech reps then paid for deals from some third party alliance is the best solution for everyone.[/quote]
That's an interesting idea. Giving a surrendering alliance the option to give reparations of X tech from their own nations or 2X tech from 3rd party nations could be acceptable to both sides and, let's face it, that's what surrender terms are all about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 586
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Tautology' date='20 February 2010 - 02:56 PM' timestamp='1266706571' post='2194192']
That's an interesting idea. Giving a surrendering alliance the option to give reparations of X tech from their own nations or 2X tech from 3rd party nations could be acceptable to both sides and, let's face it, that's what surrender terms are all about.
[/quote]
Yeah, I mean as long as the 3rd party nations are reliable that's definitely a good idea. I particularly like the scaled factor should they choose to do it via outside nations, but like you said it gives both sides a few options which is nice.
[quote name='Bob Janova' date='20 February 2010 - 01:50 PM' timestamp='1266702604' post='2194133']
But if your alliance has few large nations, receiving cash is probably better. For a mixed composition alliance, a mixture is probably better.
[/quote]
I don't think anybody was talking about an alliance that only had "a few" large nations, otherwise the whole keeping some small nations as tech sellers thing wouldn't have been mentioned.

I mean, I agree with what you're saying but I don't really know why it was brought up.

Edited by Drai
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Drai' date='20 February 2010 - 01:46 PM' timestamp='1266695163' post='2194000']
Again though, they've said multiple times they're not looking to end on anything but white peace so this is all pretty pointless if that's the stance.
[/quote]
It is not the stance. Refer to Saber's post here: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=81101&view=findpost&p=2190311

[quote name='Saber' date='18 February 2010 - 04:00 PM' timestamp='1266530440' post='2190311']
If you find our offer of global white peace unacceptable you are free to offer alternatives. [...]
[/quote]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='mitchh' date='21 February 2010 - 03:54 PM' timestamp='1266796448' post='2195620']
It is not the stance. Refer to Saber's post here: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=81101&view=findpost&p=2190311
[/quote]
Instead of dancing around the point, is that a direct question as to how much tech should be paid? Or is there some alternative Saber had in mind? I realize he's leaving it open to us but he has to be expecting something (likely tech reps).

Edited by Drai
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Drai' date='22 February 2010 - 07:18 AM' timestamp='1266823095' post='2196824']
Instead of dancing around the point, is that a direct question as to how much tech should be paid? Or is there some alternative Saber had in mind? I realize he's leaving it open to us but he has to be expecting something (likely tech reps).
[/quote]

Speaking purely as a nobody member of TOP, how about we pay C&G 9 billion (deferred payment) in return for an immediate white peace with C&G while we play stabby stabby with NpO for a few more months??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Some-Guy' date='22 February 2010 - 10:53 AM' timestamp='1266864805' post='2197581']
Speaking purely as a nobody member of TOP, how about we pay C&G 9 billion (deferred payment) in return for an immediate white peace with C&G while we play stabby stabby with NpO for a few more months??
[/quote]
I think it's been made pretty clear that C&G members would prefer tech. For the most part we have warchests to rebuild to a decent level and the capacity to aid the nations that don't.

Also :lol1: at the NpO thing, I have no idea how that would turn out for anybody involved, including the bystanders.

Edited by Drai
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Drai' date='22 February 2010 - 09:02 PM' timestamp='1266872522' post='2197776']
I think it's been made pretty clear that C&G members would prefer tech. For the most part we have warchests to rebuild to a decent level and the capacity to aid the nations that don't.

Also :lol1: at the NpO thing, I have no idea how that would turn out for anybody involved, including the bystanders.
[/quote]

Alright, we both go find some tech sellers, you guys sort out anyone who defaults on selling (we send the cash, it counts), the payment reduces by 15% every month regardless of our ability to find sellers, we'll fund, what, 75k tech?

Fine, that's a 4.5 billion discount on my last offer.

You guys want pretty words? We got them.

Our collations peace out and mandatory NAP, kill some treaties if you like, TOP and NpO fight it out while C&G builds.

Let's put people in a room for the SomeGuy-Drai peace deal.

Can you afford to let NPO grow unchecked? :smug:

/notthepositionoftheorderoftheparadox

Edit: Oh, and SomeGuy for MK Viceroy.

Edited by Some-Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Some-Guy' date='22 February 2010 - 02:10 PM' timestamp='1266876601' post='2197895']
Alright, we both go find some tech sellers, you guys sort out anyone who defaults on selling (we send the cash, it counts), the payment reduces by 15% every month regardless of our ability to find sellers, we'll fund, what, 75k tech?

Fine, that's a 4.5 billion discount on my last offer.

You guys want pretty words? We got them.

Our collations peace out and mandatory NAP, kill some treaties if you like, TOP and NpO fight it out while C&G builds.

Let's put people in a room for the SomeGuy-Drai peace deal.

Can you afford to let NPO grow unchecked? :smug:

/notthepositionoftheorderoftheparadox

Edit: Oh, and SomeGuy for MK Viceroy.
[/quote]I think part of the convenience of tech reps is that we don't have to worry about finding sellers. I mean, if you're trying to subtly suggest that we want the tech coming from you guys to damage you further that's not what I was getting at (although it would explain the mass resistance against tech reps from TOP members in this thread). As long as we have incoming tech I'm happy. (and now I sound greedy D:)

Supporting the viceroy though, keep Archon in line.

And finally, obligatory Roll NPO!

Edited by Drai
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Some-Guy' date='22 February 2010 - 04:10 PM' timestamp='1266876601' post='2197895']
Alright, we both go find some tech sellers, you guys sort out anyone who defaults on selling (we send the cash, it counts), the payment reduces by 15% every month regardless of our ability to find sellers, we'll fund, what, 75k tech?

Fine, that's a 4.5 billion discount on my last offer.

You guys want pretty words? We got them.

Our collations peace out and mandatory NAP, kill some treaties if you like, TOP and NpO fight it out while C&G builds.

Let's put people in a room for the SomeGuy-Drai peace deal.

Can you afford to let NPO grow unchecked? :smug:

/notthepositionoftheorderoftheparadox

Edit: Oh, and SomeGuy for MK Viceroy.
[/quote]
You sold me at stopping the NPO from growing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Drai' date='22 February 2010 - 10:27 PM' timestamp='1266877669' post='2197941']
I think part of the convenience of tech reps is that we don't have to worry about finding sellers. I mean, if you're trying to subtly suggest that we want the tech coming from you guys to damage you further that's not what I was getting at (although it would explain the mass resistance against tech reps from TOP members in this thread). As long as we have incoming tech I'm happy. (and now I sound greedy D:)
[/quote]

Huh, we're almost agreed in principle, just two guys talking trash, plus TOP gets to take on NpO.

Amazing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something about MK leaving our allies who came in to [s]defense[/s] defend us at war being an absolute joke here

Edited by Penlugue Solaris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Drai' date='22 February 2010 - 01:18 AM' timestamp='1266823095' post='2196824']
Instead of dancing around the point, is that a direct question as to how much tech should be paid? Or is there some alternative Saber had in mind? I realize he's leaving it open to us but he has to be expecting something (likely tech reps).
[/quote]
It had nothing to do with dancing around anything. I leave that to the fine Congolese ice dancers.

There was nothing more intended in my post beyond informing you of the stance at the time.

Then something about viceroys, emperors, rolling entity xyz, NPO, NpO, MK, Archon, and smugness.

Edited by mitchh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' date='23 February 2010 - 12:05 AM' timestamp='1266879954' post='2198026']
Something about MK leaving our allies who came in to [s]defense[/s] defend us at war being an absolute joke here
[/quote]
No, the absolute joke here is how those allies (or rather, ally) sanctioned the attack on you in the first place :awesome:

That is the joke.

Carry on now, gents.

Edited by Branimir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' date='22 February 2010 - 11:05 PM' timestamp='1266879954' post='2198026']
Something about MK leaving our allies who came in to [s]defense[/s] defend us at war being an absolute joke here
[/quote]

Oh Bob, I know MK would hardly betray a friend, really I do.

But you really think NpO came to your side to with naught but altruism?

Does Polar deserve your love?

Nah, mate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Branimir' date='22 February 2010 - 06:12 PM' timestamp='1266880326' post='2198048']
No, the absolute joke here is how those allies (or rather, ally) sanctioned the attack on you in the first place :awesome:

That is the joke.

Carry on now, gents.
[/quote]
I can accept that.


[quote name='Some-Guy' date='22 February 2010 - 06:28 PM' timestamp='1266881297' post='2198072']
Oh Bob, I know MK would hardly betray a friend, really I do.

But you really think NpO came to your side to with naught but altruism?

Does Polar deserve your love?

Nah, mate.
[/quote]
Tell you what: Disband TSO and we have a deal. I'm sure Polaris would be perfectly fine with that deal :v:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, a post of mine from another thread, with thoughts that fall into line with the general idea of the original post.

[quote]Johnny, Johnny, wouldn't you say that they had plenty of solid evidence that C&G would attack them?

Ponder this: If I wished to attack any one member or an ally of C&G (in defense of another ally, you know, as a treaty obligation), then I would expect all other members of C&G to come to the first member's defense and then attack me. I then KNOW that all of C&G will attack me. At this point, I have solid evidence, garnered through simple logic, that I will be at war with all of C&G. Armed with this knowledge, I can safely declare war on all of these alliances, assured that this gives me the greatest tactical advantage possible in a war of this magnitude and with my nation strength and cash reserves.

(Please note that while this may have been a tactical act of brilliancy, it was a strategical blunder. I do not advocate this method of warfare. Even though I suggested to PC that they had every right to ask for assistance of allies in a "defensive war" against Polar in the beginning simply because Polar planned on attacking them through a shrewd means of manipulating the letter of the law (treaty) even while asking PC's allies to violate the spirit of it...

But back to TOP. In this day in age, when only Starcraftmazter feels free to declare war on alliances simply for being on the other side of a coalition - and not through direct treaties -, TOP allowed not just the C&G union and any other direct allies of some possible "individual" target to respond, but allowed all of C&G and ALL of the individual alliances' allies within C&G to have a direct, letter-of-the law rationale for attacking TOP. So yes, although the brilliant stat collectors figured they'd gain the upper hand in a war that WAS INDEED SURE TO COME ABOUT, they did make a simple strategic mistake in allowing C&G+allies to respond instead of just target+allies.)

And then we also have the interesting added layer of complexity, the fact that C&G, indeed desiring the destruction of TOP, used this war declaration as propaganda and fuel in being able to call this a "new" war, one in which they could call the shots rather than Polar or \m/.

TOP should have seen that coming too, especially if they were indeed paranoid about a scenario just like this one.
---

So now we have this giant war. We have the propaganda flowing. One side (SuperGrievances we shall call them,or SG for short) offering white peace to individual alliances in order to strengthen their grips around the necks of those alliances remaining on the Stat Collector side of things. And here in this thread we have the Grub Not Grub (GNG) side offering the very same deal to alliances on the SG side. Whereas one is hailed as merciful, the other is derided. An interesting tactic in the war of propaganda. I tip my hat to SG, as it seems that that war (the war of propaganda) is also leaning your way.

But what about the final outcome of this war?

SG want to hurt TOP and Co, just as they have recently hurt Pacifica. Perhaps they really do think they were wronged. TOP and Co believe themselves to have been links in an earlier chain of events, with no choice but to be pulled ahead by the ring(s) of metal before them. And maybe they did think this would be a good chance to reduce the future threat, imagined or not. What of it? They still entered into the war because of those links of chain, it would have happened anyway.

My opinion, just the small tiny opinion of one lone nation ruler, one lone nineteen-nation alliance leader, is that I am glad I am not part of any of this machine. And yet somehow, for some reason, I am drawn toward it, a voyeur, wondering whether the talking heads really believe what they say (I doubt it, but who cares, it's what I'd do in their place. It's a war of propaganda!), and wondering still if the lesser pawns believe what they think the officers believe (I sure hope they at least put some thought into the matter and form their own opinions, whatever those opinions may be).

Oh right, the opinion. Meh, ask yourself why you are fighting, what it is exactly that you perceive to be the wrong. Then ask yourself how you can prevent that wrong from occurring in the future.

If you believe the other side wants you dead, then maybe you should destroy it after all.

If you believe the other side is fighting without heart, but only to fight allies of allies of allies of allies, then maybe you should lend them your own hearts.

If you don't actually believe in the propaganda of your side, then maybe you should lobby for peace.

Finally, if you believe the other side really did constitute a threat to yourself, ask,

well be that as it may, how do I want this world to look when I am done with it?

Be the change you want to see in the world. And make it as you may. [/quote]

And because I seem to have missed where this was noted before:
[quote]04:55:19 <The_Chief>: hey archon
04:55:27 <The_Chief>: are you telling us to peace out asap or what
04:55:42 <Archon>: I'm asking you to grant Polar a white peace.
04:55:47 <Archon>: I know I've got NOTHING to stand on
04:55:54 <Archon>: except to trust me and my faith.
04:56:01 <The_Chief>: I started talking to Grub about 15 minutes before TOP started rolling
04:56:06 <The_Chief>: pending PC's approval, this !@#$ is over
04:56:17 <Archon>: Keep me posted.
04:58:18 <The_Chief>: will do
05:37:35 <The_Chief>: I posted the peace thread[/quote]
Where is the thread where it's pointed out that Archon is obviously creating the artificial Polar peace so as to have an even "higher" moral ground? Where peace was desired ASAP and conveniently "15 minutes before TOP started rolling."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='JoshuaR' date='23 February 2010 - 09:49 AM' timestamp='1266915189' post='2198818']
First, a post of mine from another thread, with thoughts that fall into line with the general idea of the original post.



And because I seem to have missed where this was noted before:

Where is the thread where it's pointed out that Archon is obviously creating the artificial Polar peace so as to have an even "higher" moral ground? Where peace was desired ASAP and conveniently "15 minutes before TOP started rolling."
[/quote]
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79467&view=findpost&p=2151175
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79467&st=120&p=2151083&#entry2151083

That thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Arthur Blair' date='11 February 2010 - 08:54 AM' timestamp='1265896652' post='2174676']
What would you have us do? Accept their offer of white peace so that they may come for us again with another flimsy CB?
[/quote]
You and I know that is not happening, C&G out numbers TOP and IRON 10 to 1, And all of TOP and IRON's allies have been beaten down, it would take them years before they can scrape together a force and threaten you again. So cut this feel sorry fo rus we are the victims crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='BlkAK47002' date='28 February 2010 - 05:14 AM' timestamp='1267330667' post='2207466']
You and I know that is not happening, C&G out numbers TOP and IRON 10 to 1, And all of TOP and IRON's allies have been beaten down, it would take them years before they can scrape together a force and threaten you again. So cut this feel sorry fo rus we are the victims crap.
[/quote]
This is false. TOP still holds massive amounts of tech and with their remaining warchests they'll recover record fast if we grant them white peace. Obviously we will not allow this to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='der_ko' date='28 February 2010 - 12:21 PM' timestamp='1267356277' post='2208128']
This is false. TOP still holds massive amounts of tech and with their remaining warchests they'll recover record fast if we grant them white peace. Obviously we will not allow this to happen.
[/quote]
Who sows wind, reaps a storm. -Croatian saying

Edited by Saber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='der_ko' date='28 February 2010 - 11:21 AM' timestamp='1267356277' post='2208128']
This is false. TOP still holds massive amounts of tech and with their remaining warchests they'll recover record fast if we grant them white peace. Obviously we will not allow this to happen.
[/quote]

So we have 2 options:

1. Surrender and lose our tech while CnG gains tech, or

2. Keep fighting and lose our tech while CnG loses tech.

What would you choose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Saber' date='28 February 2010 - 06:23 PM' timestamp='1267378000' post='2208466']Who sows wind, reaps a storm. -Croatian saying[/quote]
That is a terrible English version of our saying, 100% different in wording from our own, similar only in the basic idea conveyed.

To make up for this falsehood, you are to write an essay "Why Croatian is superior compared to English" on minimum of 4 cards of text delivered to me via p.m. You have a week time to write it up.

Anyway, I found that the amount of will to surrender is *negatively proportional to the amount of one's warchests.


*hopefully that is the correct mathematical term, as I hate mathematics and try to ignore/avoid it as much as I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Vladimir Stukov II' date='28 February 2010 - 11:33 AM' timestamp='1267378617' post='2208479']
So we have 2 options:

1. Surrender and lose our tech while CnG gains tech, or

2. Keep fighting and lose our tech while CnG loses tech.

What would you choose?
[/quote]It depends. See TOP loev being good at the game, you were not built to be FAN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...