Stumpy Jung Il Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='IronMan17' date='17 February 2010 - 04:58 PM' timestamp='1266443881' post='2188047'] If anything, this is helping C&G. It allows TOP to not be able to aid MONEY to its nations or allies. Simple as it is, they are just completing there deals, and that's it. If you have issues with them completing a contract, We will remember it the next time we work with you. [/quote] Thats not how that works at all. Most TOP nations dont need money, they need more tech so they can do more damage with this little gizmo called the WRC. Maybe you've heard of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yawoo Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='IronMan17' date='17 February 2010 - 04:01 PM' timestamp='1266444113' post='2188059'] Since when does 50 tech do massive damage, if anything it might add a few infra damage at the max. [/quote] Notice I didn't say [i]massive[/i] damage, I said [b]more[/b] damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiao Weng Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 This is a trouble of your own making. One should never assume that business relations are considered normal during a state of conflict, [i]especially[/i] when your business partner is involved. Your contracts should include a wartime clause specifically for that purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franklin Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Yawoo' date='17 February 2010 - 02:00 PM' timestamp='1266444049' post='2188056'] Except, it doesn't help C&G as the TOP nations reciving the tech just grow stronger enabling them to dish out more damage to the members of C&G... [/quote] Becuase you know we have sent out SOOOOOO much tech already. In reality there have been very few deals and hardly any left after which no more deals will be taking place anyways, I fail to see a problem here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lebubu Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Franklin' date='17 February 2010 - 10:55 PM' timestamp='1266443718' post='2188040'] And so you, a third party outside an agreement made upon by two different parties, have what right to dictate or levy orders on a trading/economic business transaction that (as I have already mentioned) will not be renewed until the ending of the conflict? [/quote] We have every right to take action against what is essentially an aggressive action against us - enabling our enemies to do more damage. You're free to continue the deals, but don't be surprised if we decide to stop them for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkphysics Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 Looking at the aid screens and then comparing them to the comments about the TOP nations growing stronger etc ... It's kind of laughable. I am not going to 100% say this, but I would gather that the TOP nations in combat are losing tech faster than they can buy it on 10 day intervals. As well, looking at the aid figures, TOP is not their sole buyer which would further supplant the theory that they are simply doing business and completing out their obligations and then discontinue service till post war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helstrm Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 So what I am hearing is that an armed criminal held up in a building surrounded by cops, UPS shows up with a case of bullets. The cops should let the UPS guy deliver the bullets since they were ordered 3 weeks prior to the shoot out... Makes sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronMan17 Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Yawoo' date='17 February 2010 - 04:02 PM' timestamp='1266444174' post='2188063'] Notice I didn't say [i]massive[/i] damage, I said [b]more[/b] damage. [/quote] If you are crying over 2 infra, you need to get a life. Contracts come first, thats hows it has ALWAYS been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 You make a very valid and reasonable argument. Unfortunately, there is a custom of suspending tech deals during war and your alliance's continuing to conduct deals and send tech runs counter to this. If it were me, I'd be inclined to let you continue sending the deals until they are completed if you agreed to not conduct any future deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neneko Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Merrie Melodies' date='17 February 2010 - 10:57 PM' timestamp='1266443847' post='2188045'] How can MK support GOD and threaten these people at the same time? If GOD can continue to demand reps of NPO and consider it to not be an act of war how are these people who are honoring a contract that took place prior to the war any different? [/quote] Did GOD join cng? I missed the announcement. GOD make their own decisions and we make ours. We thought it was a good idea to let pacifica put the reps on hold during the war, god did not. We don't interfere with their decisions. You're really grasping for straws if you try to use a decision god made to call cng hypocrites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkphysics Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Duncan King' date='17 February 2010 - 02:04 PM' timestamp='1266444256' post='2188071'] You make a very valid and reasonable argument. Unfortunately, there is a custom of suspending tech deals during war and your alliance's continuing to conduct deals and send tech runs counter to this. If it were me, I'd be inclined to let you continue sending the deals until they are completed if you agreed to not conduct any future deals. [/quote] They already agreed to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yawoo Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Franklin' date='17 February 2010 - 04:03 PM' timestamp='1266444214' post='2188066'] Becuase you know we have sent out SOOOOOO much tech already. In reality there have been very few deals and hardly any left after which no more deals will be taking place anyways, I fail to see a problem here. [/quote] Allow me to explain the problem since you don't understand. Tech allows nations with WRCs to deal more damage. Many TOP nations have WRCs, thus the tech you're sending the TOP nations enables those nations to deal more damage to the members of C&G. See the problem? Through your alliance's tech deals, you're helping fund TOP's war machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kzoppistan Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Bungalo Bill' date='17 February 2010 - 05:58 PM' timestamp='1266443934' post='2188050'] Most people usually consider technology war aid because it effects the damage done by nuclear attacks and what not. I thought it was standard procedure to halt tech deals with combatants anyways, but I guess not. [/quote] I guess not. MK's aid screen: http://www.cybernations.net/search_aid.asp?searchstring=Declaring_Alliance%2CReceiving_Alliance&search=Mushroom%20Kingdom&anyallexact=exact I'm seeing quite a lot of tech dealing going on in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yawoo Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='IronMan17' date='17 February 2010 - 04:04 PM' timestamp='1266444256' post='2188070'] If you are crying over 2 infra, you need to get a life. Contracts come first, thats hows it has ALWAYS been. [/quote] I'm not "crying" I'm simply explaining why there is a problem, if you can not grasp that fact then I suggest you leave the topic as it won't become any clearer than how I have explained the problem. Contracts are almost always suspended during war because it will drag the alliance sending the money, tech, etc... into the conflict. That, is how it has always been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorbolt Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Franklin' date='17 February 2010 - 03:03 PM' timestamp='1266444214' post='2188066'] Becuase you know we have sent out SOOOOOO much tech already. In reality there have been very few deals and hardly any left after which no more deals will be taking place anyways, I fail to see a problem here. [/quote] I see a new one starting up. I don't think there would be a problem if you just agreed to postpone starting new tech deals. This, however, does not appear to be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronMan17 Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Kzoppistan' date='17 February 2010 - 04:06 PM' timestamp='1266444374' post='2188077'] I guess not. MK's aid screen: http://www.cybernations.net/search_aid.asp?searchstring=Declaring_Alliance%2CReceiving_Alliance&search=Mushroom%20Kingdom&anyallexact=exact I'm seeing quite a lot of tech dealing going on in there. [/quote] Nice catch, and again we find that MK is hypocritical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 Not much of a stretch at all, an alliance fighting on your side has made a point of saying sending tech/money during war isn't a act of war, president was set, by a group on your side of the court no less. Unless I missed MK in NPOs thread denouncing GOD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Delta1212' date='17 February 2010 - 04:02 PM' timestamp='1266444157' post='2188061'] NoCB was fought over the fact that a tech deal was done with someone on a ZI list. Which alliance is it that loves bragging about engineering that whole war again? [/quote] GGA and Valhalla. Citadel (Including TOP) and your allies in Rok and Fark attacked Polar for unrelated reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilrow Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='lebubu' date='17 February 2010 - 03:48 PM' timestamp='1266443300' post='2188023'] Your contractual obligations can be put on hold until after the war. [/quote] Hahaha....double standards in CyberNations....never Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Duncan King' date='17 February 2010 - 05:04 PM' timestamp='1266444256' post='2188071'] You make a very valid and reasonable argument. Unfortunately, there is a custom of suspending tech deals during war and your alliance's continuing to conduct deals and send tech runs counter to this. If it were me, I'd be inclined to let you continue sending the deals until they are completed if you agreed to not conduct any future deals. [/quote] We just started monitoring the aid screens now, that it is about 3 cycles in, or three weeks. If you still have deals going on..what? Even if you were sent the money on the last day before war, it still should be over. January 28–29: TOP, IRON, DAWN, and TORN attack C&G, while the NpO-\m/ War draws to a close. So, let's say that a member of TOP sent for tech on the last available day, the 1/28. If you go 20 days after that, the last aid should be sent 2/17, correct? I would also like to note how you were not attacked over this, but basically given a cease and desist. No one has attacked you, but if you keep doing deals we will, because it means you started a new tech deal DURING the war. We will not tolerate that. Consider this a warning. Franklin, I apologize that you took the message the wrong way. East India Company will be fine, as along as no further aid is sent out. If further aid is sent out, then actions might be taken. However, we are a reasonable group of people, willing to work out the situation as it goes. Please contact a member of CnG government if you have tech deals that will extend beyond today for some odd reason, and explain why. [quote name='Scorbolt' date='17 February 2010 - 05:08 PM' timestamp='1266444488' post='2188079'] I see a new one starting up. I don't think there would be a problem if you just agreed to postpone starting new tech deals. This, however, does not appear to be the case. [/quote] This is an act of war, and if CnG chooses to, we can persecute. In terms of MK doing tech deals, yup. Stop us. War isn't fair. War has never been fair. The advantage to the larger side is that we can afford to conduct tech deals as we have the coverage to protect our sellers, while TOP does not. Edited February 17, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandwich Controversy Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Kzoppistan' date='17 February 2010 - 05:06 PM' timestamp='1266444374' post='2188077'] I guess not. MK's aid screen: http://www.cybernations.net/search_aid.asp?searchstring=Declaring_Alliance%2CReceiving_Alliance&search=Mushroom%20Kingdom&anyallexact=exact I'm seeing quite a lot of tech dealing going on in there. [/quote] And it's the sovereign right of TIFDTT to do something about it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Kzoppistan' date='17 February 2010 - 04:06 PM' timestamp='1266444374' post='2188077'] I guess not. MK's aid screen: http://www.cybernations.net/search_aid.asp?searchstring=Declaring_Alliance%2CReceiving_Alliance&search=Mushroom%20Kingdom&anyallexact=exact I'm seeing quite a lot of tech dealing going on in there. [/quote] Yes, but the difference this time is clearly that MK is the benefactor and is on the larger side, so whatever they do is correct. If TOP were on the winning side, then these deals would be fine. It's your basic might makes right hypocrisy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafael Nadal Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Bilrow' date='17 February 2010 - 02:09 PM' timestamp='1266444555' post='2188083'] Hahaha....double standards in CyberNations....never [/quote] Yes, MK refused to grant permission for you to postpone reps payments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neneko Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Merrie Melodies' date='17 February 2010 - 11:08 PM' timestamp='1266444510' post='2188081'] Not much of a stretch at all, an alliance fighting on your side has made a point of saying sending tech/money during war isn't a act of war, president was set, by a group on your side of the court no less. Unless I missed MK in NPOs thread denouncing GOD. [/quote] Oh right they're on our side. That explains why we're responsible for their decisions and presidents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 [quote name='Kzoppistan' date='17 February 2010 - 03:45 PM' timestamp='1266443102' post='2188014'] A well written response to bullying. Good luck, East India Company. [/quote] Bullying? It's long standing not to send out out during a war, it's supplying the enemy. We are handling it nicely and asking for it not to happen, i think it's quite fair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts