More peace

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Wad of Lint' date='28 February 2010 - 04:41 PM' timestamp='1267393521' post='2208834']
This is the crux of the issue. At what point are large reps justified verses bullying? Is it perspective? What is the difference between these reps and those that have been requested by others through the years?
[/quote]
It depends on mitigating circumstances, and as you suggest, perception of said events. If you have an alliance which didn't
take as much damage, reps are alright -- the amount, lets not try to theoretically speak about as we'll have all these "what ifs." If you pulverize an alliance, I believe in white peace as if they are barely able to repair themselves they'll hardly be able to pay others -- it just keeps the world spinning. As I said, it's all subjective.

Does MK have every right to be upset with their terms from 2 or so years ago? Absolutely. But it saddens me to see members such as Crow saying such stupid things as what he did without realizing his own alliance's past.

[Bob Janova]

[quote]Anyone and everyone complaining about harsh reps is an idiot because these weren't required to be accepted[/quote]
Yeah I'm going to jump on the bandwagon that's pointing out that C&G has done an awful lot of this over the last 18 months.

[Mussolandia]

These terms bring Sparta into the spotlight. They're such a dull alliance otherwise.

[quote name=Crowdog]They didn't have to accept the reps if they felt they were so unjustified.[/quote]

[size="2"]Thank you for using large text and for bringing up some of the same rhethoric the NPO has used for years.[/size]

[Sephiroth]

Some alliances are consistently honorable about their terms, others are not. Its clear RIA, VE, LOUD, and LoSS could of asked for reps as well but chose not to. Good show to those 4 on not asking any and TOOL for fighting honorably. Good luck rebuilding.

Edit: I see VE didn't ask reps either, good show to them as well.

Edited February 28, 2010 by Methrage

[shilo]

Kudos to RIA, LOUD, VE and LoSS for not being asshats, a big shout out goes to TOOL for fighting long and hard for its allies, against very unfavorable odds.
To the rep taking tough guys, wow, you are so strong...

edit: thanks for the reminder, kudos goes to VE as well

Edited February 28, 2010 by shilo

[Dochartaigh]

/me loves how everyone forgets VE as one of the alliances fighting TOOL that did not take reps.

[Thunder Strike]

For people arguing that reps are too harsh TOOL could have gotten out the war a lot earlier if they wished, but they choose to stay in.
To those saying that it was to defend allies they weren't actually able to do or doing this since they were getting curbstomped. But either way they choose to stay in.

And to TOOL, next time can you actually put up a fight, my opinion on your alliance has gone way down throughout this war. My targets generally didn't care about fighting and prefered to turtle, I was very disappointed. Take some war lessons from Argent.

[Zoomzoomzoom]

[quote name='Krashnaia' date='28 February 2010 - 02:17 AM' timestamp='1267345267' post='2207995']
[u]To the people telling that MA can't fight and that we are a half-dead alliance:[/u]
Ask TOOL's founder and leader Graham Keatley. Or TOOL's ex #1 and #2 Dealmaster and thomas20. Among others.
[/quote]

How did I miss this gem....

Dealmaster and thomas20 only took as much damage as they did because Hellas from Sparta had 18k tech nukes thrown at them every day. The nation they declared on in MA started off the war not even wanting to launch nuclear weapons. Yeah we all saw the prowess of MA's war machine. Who're you kidding?

Make sure you send some of that tech to Rezlov, his tech level isn't doing so well.

[Shodemofi-NPO]

[quote name='Thunder Strike' date='28 February 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1267397681' post='2208930']
For people arguing that reps are too harsh TOOL could have gotten out the war a lot earlier if they wished, but they choose to stay in.
To those saying that it was to defend allies they weren't actually able to do or doing this since they were getting curbstomped. But either way they choose to stay in.

And to TOOL, next time can you actually put up a fight, my opinion on your alliance has gone way down throughout this war. My targets generally didn't care about fighting and prefered to turtle, I was very disappointed. Take some war lessons from Argent.
[/quote]
Sorry...what?

There's a certain honor to taking a beating alongside your allies. Apparently some don't appreciate it anymore, but for those with any honor in the cyberverse, it's pure and utter cowardice to avoid going to war to defend your ally just because you're going to get curbstomped.

Also, what the hell is that second paragraph? First you talk about how they were getting curbstomped and then criticize them for not putting up enough of a fight? Do you think before you post? Ever? Turtling is a legitimate strategy to minimize damage to your nation in a losing war. It sure is awfully easy to talk tough when you're facing them at what? 3 to 1 odds?

I can tell you this war didn't affect my opinion of TOOL, but my opinion of RIA just plummeted.

[Rocky Horror]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' date='28 February 2010 - 02:17 PM' timestamp='1267388436' post='2208720']
The catch phrases thrown around by some leaders around here drive me absolutely nuts. I mean really, not that I agree with precautionary reps, but draconian? [i]Draconian[/i]????
[/quote]When people hear two words together, they repeat them. It's like "legs akimbo" or "busty blonde" -- you can't rely on them to give a fair description of the situation. Using the actual English language, these terms are not draconian. I can only imagine describing wonder deletion or forced disbandment as such, I don't even think NPO's surrender terms were, from Karma.

[quote name='kevin32891' date='28 February 2010 - 02:20 PM' timestamp='1267388666' post='2208726']
So do you really believe that the terms given by Sparta and MA are fair and deserved?
[/quote]I don't think they're deserved, but that doesn't mean they're [color=red][b]DRACONIAN[/b][/color]


[quote name='Ejayrazz' date='28 February 2010 - 04:08 PM' timestamp='1267395131' post='2208868']Does MK have every right to be upset with their terms from 2 or so years ago? Absolutely. But it saddens me to see members such as Crow saying such stupid things as what he did without realizing his own alliance's past.
[/quote]I'd rather everyone didn't run away with the fact that one MK member said something stupid.

[Zoomzoomzoom]

[quote name='Thunder Strike' date='28 February 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1267397681' post='2208930']
For people arguing that reps are too harsh TOOL could have gotten out the war a lot earlier if they wished, but they choose to stay in.
To those saying that it was to defend allies they weren't actually able to do or doing this since they were getting curbstomped. But either way they choose to stay in.

And to TOOL, next time can you actually put up a fight, my opinion on your alliance has gone way down throughout this war. My targets generally didn't care about fighting and prefered to turtle, I was very disappointed. Take some war lessons from Argent.
[/quote]
TOOL staying the war alone tied up war slots that could have been used against their ally, IRON. It's really rather simple.

Sorry if by the time RIA was able to fully join the party, TOOL had already been fighting for how many weeks? RIA on the other hand had to deal with Argent, alone. Argent was praised, and deserved it, for their upper ranks. Guess where TOOL saw a lot of success?

[Bob Janova]

Much of the damage to Dealmaster has been done since VE declared. You can tell because he was in range of me at the start of our war. You did not even bother trying to coordinate with the rest of us as far as I know, which the Spartan did. He fought well, kudos to him (referring to Dealmaster, though Hellas also did well from what I head).

[Dan123123]

[quote name='Xiphosis' date='28 February 2010 - 02:24 AM' timestamp='1267342101' post='2207908']
One of the major arguments within our side of Karma in favor of giving white peace was that it'd give those who got it a clean slate to start from. That failed. They all stayed allied to the same people, and they all come out of the wood work whenever a chance at vengeance is presented.

Call me evil if you'd like, but I fully intend on hanging people from the gates if they continue. You guys have been warned well in advance.
[/quote]

If you want them to abandon their allies, issuing progressively harsher reparations seems like a counterproductive way to do it. If anything, that would only breed increased animosity between them and you. If anything, it would strengthen their resolve to stand by their own allies after a war, rebuild, and then actively begin targeting you when they are at full strength. They have only ever attacked your allies as a byproduct of supporting their friends and honoring their treaties. You would create an active enemy by punishing them indirectly for their friendships. Frankly, it would lead to a situation where they would continually attack you and turn them from a passive threat to an active threat. You pretty much want them to stop being friends with their friends... I just can't imagine how continually harsher reparations will accomplish that goal.

Why not just force them to cancel all their treaties indefinitely? This way, they will never be a threat to your alliance ever again. I mean, if you truly believe punishing an alliance for honoring its treaties will make them stop honoring its treaties, you might as well take it to its logical extreme. This way, they would have no harsh reparation to whine about, and they would be utterly neutralized as a threat to GOD.

EDIT: Or you could talk to them, get to know them, and try to create amiable relations. Perhaps they would be less keen on attacking GOD's allies if they liked you as opposed to hated you or even felt indifferent towards you?

Edited February 28, 2010 by Dan123123

[DRail]

[quote name='Thunder Strike' date='28 February 2010 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1267397681' post='2208930']
For people arguing that reps are too harsh TOOL could have gotten out the war a lot earlier if they wished, but they choose to stay in.
To those saying that it was to defend allies they weren't actually able to do or doing this since they were getting curbstomped. But either way they choose to stay in.

And to TOOL, next time can you actually put up a fight, my opinion on your alliance has gone way down throughout this war. My targets generally didn't care about fighting and prefered to turtle, I was very disappointed. Take some war lessons from Argent.
[/quote]


Edited because I want to play nice.

Edited February 28, 2010 by DRail

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Rocky Horror' date='28 February 2010 - 05:57 PM' timestamp='1267398031' post='2208942']
I'd rather everyone didn't run away with the fact that one MK member said something stupid.
[/quote]

One member; exactly. Hence me using his name, not blaming MK as a faction for his words -- which, in turn, would be stupefying.

[Gamemaster1]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='28 February 2010 - 06:01 PM' timestamp='1267398272' post='2208953']
Much of the damage to Dealmaster has been done since VE declared. You can tell because he was in range of me at the start of our war. You did not even bother trying to coordinate with the rest of us as far as I know, which the Spartan did. He fought well, kudos to him (referring to Dealmaster, though Hellas also did well from what I head).
[/quote]
Bob, kudos to you. Deal was so proud of the damage he took, putting him at number 1 for the week.

Edited February 28, 2010 by Gamemaster1

[Penkala]

One note: there's a difference between taking reps in a defensive war (what we do) and making your curbstomped opponent pay for the luxury of being stomped, not being allowed to nukes, and having it all happen for no reason. One is what we have done, one is what you have done. Quit whining.

[BamaBuc]

[quote name='Penkala' date='28 February 2010 - 05:42 PM' timestamp='1267400740' post='2209018']
One note: there's a difference between taking reps in a defensive war (what we do) and making your curbstomped opponent pay for the luxury of being stomped, not being allowed to nukes, and having it all happen for no reason. One is what we have done, one is what [b]you[/b] have done. Quit whining.
[/quote]
Who is this "you"?

To those I personally went up against: Well fought.

-Bama

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='SilentFury' date='28 February 2010 - 03:47 PM' timestamp='1267393856' post='2208843']
Who ever says they did not need to accept the reps sounds like a ....you can finish the sentence ...

Any ways they had to accept ...its either accept or get killed even more,then get offered higher reps so dont go around saying TOOL did not have to cuz that is BS and we all know it.. That was their only choice for the better of The Order Of Light..
[/quote]

....and GOLD and \m/ and GOONS and ONOS and NAAC all had to accept disbandment.....Just because a choice is presented, doesn't mean it has to be accepted. FAN showed us that more so then anyone.

Though some may not want to admit it, might doesn't make right, it just makes you have the ability to ask for those reps, or to give the white peace. Might gives options, right gives a clean conscience.

Edited February 28, 2010 by LiquidMercury

[Kataklizm the Great]

[quote name='BamaBuc' date='28 February 2010 - 06:49 PM' timestamp='1267401152' post='2209026']
To those I personally went up against: Well fought.

-Bama
[/quote]
Very classy Bama, you are a gentleman.

[Shodemofi-NPO]

[quote name='BamaBuc' date='28 February 2010 - 05:49 PM' timestamp='1267401152' post='2209026']
Who is this "you"?

To those I personally went up against: Well fought.

-Bama
[/quote]

Presumably the alliances who demanded reps of TOOL for entering a war in defense of their allies.

[AirMe]

[quote name='Ejayrazz' date='28 February 2010 - 04:27 PM' timestamp='1267392640' post='2208817']
Likewise with MK when they accepted their terms from NPO.
[/quote]

We were told they would be the ONLY terms we would see for a long time.

[AirMe]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='28 February 2010 - 06:54 PM' timestamp='1267401465' post='2209033']
....and GOLD and \m/ and GOONS and ONOS and NAAC all had to accept disbandment.....Just because a choice is presented, doesn't mean it has to be accepted. FAN showed us that more so then anyone.

Though some may not want to admit it, might doesn't make right, it just makes you have the ability to ask for those reps, or to give the white peace. Might gives options, right gives a clean conscience.
[/quote]

NAAC disbanded by choice. Not because they were forced to. So as a former NAAC member I ask request that do not make them a rallying cry for alliances who were disbanded by others.

Edited March 1, 2010 by AirMe

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='AirMe' date='28 February 2010 - 05:58 PM' timestamp='1267401718' post='2209040']
NAAC disbanded by choice. Not because they were forced to. So as a former NAAC member do not make them a rallying cry for alliances who were disbanded by others.
[/quote]

My bad, I wasn't around for that time and although reading through the histories brings some insight, it is never the amount of insight from an actual member. I was in no way shape or form trying to use NAAC or any past alliance as a rallying cry by any means, merely using them as examples of disbanded alliances. I apologize for the misinformation in regards to NAAC being forceably disbanded when they were not.

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='AirMe' date='28 February 2010 - 06:56 PM' timestamp='1267401627' post='2209038']
We were told they would be the ONLY terms we would see for a long time.
[/quote]
Doesn't matter. Just using Crow's logic here. It is black and white; you accept them, they aren't 'so unjust'. Not my rhetoric, it's his.