Accepting the Consequenses of War

[Lord Stark]

Couldn't vote because neither option is correct.

The bottom line is that the reps are just asking for what has been lost by CnG et al. as a result of the aggressive actions by TOP. They are higher then reps in the past but more has also been lost in this war then wars in the past. We didn't declare this war we just want to be compensated for our loss as a result of the war of aggression launched by TOP.

With the said I'll happily keep fighting. As TonytheTiger points out TOP has bigger war chests and more nations in the 10k infra + then CnG does. Since we have such a numbers advantage though we can continue to deplete TOPs money and infra by spreading it over more nations causing less loss for us. Continue fighting and reps wont go away, but your only advantage will. So quite frankly - Please keep fighting. What we have offered is fair and there is no 'extortion' because we only ask to have returned what we have lost thus far in this horrible war that didn't even need to happen in the first place.

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Banksy' date='02 March 2010 - 05:22 AM' timestamp='1267525547' post='2211167']
Wow- nice phrasing of the questions

I see no bias

That aside- do whatever you want to do and stop Bawwing all over the CNF about it.
[/quote]
He can talk about whatever he wishes, I never knew people had to go through you to seek permission on what they can and can't speak about in order to stop the 'bawwwing.' At least argue intelligently like others have.

Edited March 2, 2010 by Ejayrazz

[Ashoka the Great]

This just in: Losing a war badly is now 'winning'.

(I've lost count of how many times I've heard this, and in nearly four years it has been wrong every single time.)

[Earogema]

Eh, either way they have to give up tech. I like C&G, but if I were TOP, I'd just keep fighting too.

Edited March 2, 2010 by Earogema

[der_ko]

[quote name='Lord GVChamp' date='02 March 2010 - 07:15 PM' timestamp='1267553929' post='2211493']
Really? Is this the official MK stance? Because I remember some of your members saying that you would just have to issue draconian terms at the beginning of the war because you needed to remove TOP as a threat, and that as time went on the advantage would drift more and more to your side. Which would preclude the need for reparations.
[/quote]
Yes, can't you see I'm Archon?

Edited March 2, 2010 by der_ko

[The Big Bad]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' date='02 March 2010 - 01:29 PM' timestamp='1267554754' post='2211501']
This just in: Losing a war badly is now 'winning'.

(I've lost count of how many times I've heard this, and in nearly four years it has been wrong every single time.)
[/quote]

I don't think we have seen the winning side this severly damaged going into a future strategic situation that that does not favor them.

[Sunstar]

Nulled vote because neither option applies to the current situation.

Edit: If the poll options were "Surrender now" and "Continue to fight for now" then I'd consider it a reasonable question.

Edited March 2, 2010 by Sunstar

[Trace]

Out of curiosity, if the terms given were extortion, what do you folks over there in TOP consider to be a reasonable reps level? I've not heard any figures thrown out, but I also haven't been paying much attention.

[Acca Dacca]

I think TOP should post a stats thread, havent had one of those since you started "pounding" CnG

[Rocky Horror]

Kcht. Never mind.

Edited March 2, 2010 by Rocky Horror

[Arcturus Jefferson]

[quote name='The Big Bad' date='02 March 2010 - 02:10 PM' timestamp='1267557249' post='2211528']
I don't think we have seen the winning side this severly damaged going into a future strategic situation that that does not favor them.
[/quote]
Your "future strategic situation" involves Superfriends attacking CnG, doesn't it?

[Tomcat]

TOP is the CN equivalent of somebody who punches a guy in the nose and then refuses to pay for his medical bills

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Trace' date='02 March 2010 - 02:18 PM' timestamp='1267557720' post='2211537']
Out of curiosity, if the terms given were extortion, what do you folks over there in TOP consider to be a reasonable reps level? I've not heard any figures thrown out, but I also haven't been paying much attention.
[/quote]
Good question which I hope to see some answers to, and I also have one for you if you don't mind. Even if said terms were lenient:

If MK were giving these terms, would you accept or decline? Or a better one, lets use a figurative alliance so we can avoid people speaking on behalf of official alliances as I'd like your personal view rather than MK's.

Theoretically speaking, say you are the benevolent dictator of an alliance called The Dawgz, which you were offered these terms, would you accept them or decline?

Edited March 2, 2010 by Ejayrazz

[Daikos]

The options for this poll are fair and balanced and are in no way biased.

[Krashnaia]

[quote name='Arcturus Jefferson' date='02 March 2010 - 08:29 PM' timestamp='1267558358' post='2211552']
[quote name='The Big Bad' date='02 March 2010 - 08:10 PM' timestamp='1267557249' post='2211528']
I don't think we have seen the winning side this severly damaged going into a future strategic situation that that does not favor them.
[/quote]
Your "future strategic situation" involves Superfriends attacking CnG, doesn't it?[/quote]

That's what happens when you make predictions based on your wishes rather than reality.

Edited March 2, 2010 by Krashnaia

[renegade4box]

[quote name='Tushar Dhoot' date='02 March 2010 - 11:46 AM' timestamp='1267548621' post='2211400']
According to our stats (taken from UE), TOP/IRON/TOOL/TORN has dished out:

916,838 tech damage and;
4,899,110 infra damage

While taking:

709,061 tech damage and;
3,771,445 infra damage

Keep in mind this is from Feb. 22nd 2010, when there were quite a few alliances stacked against us (albeit not as much as right now). The infra damage may go down, but another thing to consider is that TOP's infra will continue to get cheaper while CnG nations will be rebuilding and lose more expensive infrastructure. TOOL is also not in the war anymore, so their damages taken won't count, but neither will their damages given.

I tried to keep this as unbiased as possible. Don't maul me :S
[/quote]

The main factor you're ignoring: we can rebuild to 4k infra, collect after two rounds of wars, and make a profit plus get that infra for free. You guys are still losing money every war because you can't hit peace to effectively collect.

[Jens of the desert]

Die slowly or pay the reps, it's your decision, not ours.

[Jack Diorno]

Hahahahaha

It hardly matters if you surrender anymore, I am enjoying slowly pulling out your claws one by one.

[Believland]

[quote name='Banksy' date='02 March 2010 - 05:22 AM' timestamp='1267525547' post='2211167']
Wow- nice phrasing of the questions

I see no bias

That aside- do whatever you want to do and stop Bawwing all over the CNF about it.
[/quote]
What? Didn't you just shed some tears over the phrasing of those questions?

[quote name='ty345' date='02 March 2010 - 07:37 AM' timestamp='1267533641' post='2211211']
Lol. Just lol.

"We have bigger warchests than you and more tech and stuff..."
Go look at the War Stats. You have around 12mil NS vs C&G's 106mil NS. You are [i]not[/i] winning. I really couldn't care less what you do, but don't try to spin basic math.
[/quote]
People confuse "strategics" with numbers. Sooner or later you'll see a much more prepared FAN. And we all know how wonderful FAN did.

[quote name='Delta1212' date='02 March 2010 - 11:34 AM' timestamp='1267547877' post='2211381']
Unstoppable force meets immovable object.
[/quote]
Basically this. This is going to be like the Thrilla in Manilla. All sides will lose.

[quote name='Acca Dacca' date='02 March 2010 - 02:19 PM' timestamp='1267557750' post='2211539']
I think TOP should post a stats thread, haven't had one of those since you started "pounding" CnG
[/quote]
I'm pretty sure you're confused. 1) TOP(Really UE) has been running a stats thread for a long time. It's one of those pinned topics that no one actually reads. I would link it for you but, I don't really read pinned topics. 2) At the beginning of the war LM made a thread to show his accomplishment in a 1k infra damage nuke. Which is just mind blowing, no matter what side you're on.


If anything, this war will be a enjoyable one

[Franz Ferdinand]

The Order of the Paradox started this war and was the first onto the field... they should, therefore, reap what they sow and be the last off the field of battle no matter the duration.

If you do not like the terms you have been submitted, what exactly did you expect?

Just take the beating and continue whatever you guys are doing.

[MCRABT]

[quote name='kriekfreak' date='02 March 2010 - 12:24 PM' timestamp='1267532863' post='2211209']
Biased poll is biased. I hope you continue much longer cause it's funny to see TOP drop like a fly.

I'm also gonna predict that IRON will surrender more than a week before you will.
[/quote]

Im going to make a prediction and predict that you will be mistaken.

[quote name='King Louis the II' date='02 March 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1267548890' post='2211407']
If you are saying all this because of propaganda, It is right for you to do so.

If you REALLY BELIEVE on that...well..good luck man...
[/quote]

It's not really up for debate, go ask NPO how much of a thorn FAN was. IRON and TOP have just under 400 members capable of constantly throwing nukes forever. The fact is that tech takes a long long time to be destroyed, infra on the other hand does not. Once IRON and TOP are just re-buying to 1000 infra once a week to throw nukes at your bottom tear you can bet that would become a real thorn in your side.

Edited March 2, 2010 by MCRABT

[wickedj]

Pssst, you attacked them. dont attack someone if you cant pay for it

[Hyperbad]

[quote name='Lord Stark' date='02 March 2010 - 01:24 PM' timestamp='1267554483' post='2211497']
The bottom line is that the reps are just asking for what has been lost by CnG et al. as a result of the aggressive actions by TOP. They are higher then reps in the past but more has also been lost in this war then wars in the past. We didn't declare this war we just want to be compensated for our loss as a result of the war of aggression launched by TOP.[/quote]
If you're taking into account only damage received prior to talk of peace by your opponents then or damage received prior to the original NpO-\m/ wars being peaced out then I can see this as being a valid argument. Afer that it becomes a bit difficult. The initial fronts of a war typically lead others to feel there's nothing left to fight over and it can be argued your opponents felt that way. Likewise a desire your opponents may have felt in wanting to end the war previously had your side taken up this offer would have prevented a lot of damage from ever being inflicted upon your nations.

The problem comes in with the damage you've taken since your side stated peace wouldn't yet be offered but a desire to knock your opponents down a few pegs before terms are discussed is desired. Damage you've taken during that time is no ones fault but your own for your unwillingness (right or wrong) to see a conclusion to this conflict. You've effectively gone on the offensive and have given your opponents little choice but to fight much like you were at the start.

If the NpO-\m/ war seeing peace is used as the line then the proposed terms are most probably far too high. If the statements of your opponents receiving no peace yet are the reference point then the terms might even be too low to pay for all the damage they caused. I think this one of the many areas of concern in the debate over reparations.

[Sephiroth]

Continue to fight until they're more willing to offer reasonable terms is what I would do.

[Alterego]

Keep fighting until you run out of money, tech and nukes. Then they cant make any demands for tech and cash.