War Ends

[Tautology]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1283177300' post='2435761']
... the peace was reached.[/quote]
That's a lovely way to put it.

[Kalasin]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1283177213' post='2435759']
I said the reps were designed to drain large nations of tech. I didn't say they were exactly the same as the Polar terms.
[/quote]

But that was the implication. I'll refrain from sarcasm here, but tech reps are kind of intended to drain nations of tech! I don't see what your issue is. Even you've conceded that the reps impose on TOP are nothing like what was imposed on Polar.

[Bill Wallace]

Congrats to the various members of the Viridian Entente, GOD, Ragnarok, RnR, and TENE who were fortunate enough to participate in the crushing victory over the NSO in what has been termed the "Six Million Dollar [b]War[/b]" The mercy shown to the vanquished in only giving two weeks of war, a beer review, and admission of fault and defeat is proof the post-Karma world is indeed a better place for all of us.

Also, good luck to the Sith in rebuilding and replacing all of the infrastructure and tech that you lost. It will no doubt be challenging to recover from this curb stomp, but I have faith in you guys and I know you can do it.

[raasaa]

[quote name='Bill Wallace' timestamp='1283178130' post='2435771']
Congrats to the various members of the Viridian Entente, GOD, Ragnarok, RnR, and TENE who were fortunate enough to participate in the [b]crushing victory[/b] over the NSO in what has been termed the "Six Million Dollar [b]War[/b]" The [b]mercy shown to the vanquished[/b] in only giving two weeks of war, a beer review, and admission of fault and defeat is proof the post-Karma world is indeed a better place for all of us.
[/quote]
your funny....your post cracks me up

[kevin32891]

[quote name='Bill Wallace' timestamp='1283178130' post='2435771']
Congrats to the various members of the Viridian Entente, GOD, Ragnarok, RnR, and TENE who were fortunate enough to participate in the crushing [b]defeat[/b] over the NSO in what has been termed the "Six Million Dollar [b]War[/b]" The mercy shown to the vanquished in only giving two weeks of war, [s][s]a beer review[/s][/s], [b][b]"words"[/b][/b] is proof the post-Karma world is indeed a better place for [b]SF[/b].

Also, good luck to the Sith in rebuilding and replacing all of the infrastructure and tech that you lost. [b]It will no doubt be challenging to recover from this curb stomp[/b], but I have faith in you guys and I know you can do it.


[/quote]
I plan on rebuilding quite quickly thanks to our allies.

[Rayvon]

[quote name='Bill Wallace' timestamp='1283178130' post='2435771']The mercy shown to the vanquished in only giving two weeks of war, a beer review, and admission of fault and defeat is proof the post-Karma world is indeed a better place for all of us.[/quote]

It's also proof that the post-Karma era doesn't give two !@#$% about their allies word either and will even so much as entirely dismiss it for their own amusement. That is a much better place. While I was always heavy against the 'harsh and heavy' terms of the whole Hegemony era, atleast they were honest in their fronts.

[Williambonney]

[quote name='Bill Wallace' timestamp='1283178130' post='2435771']
The mercy shown to the vanquished in only giving two weeks of war, a beer review, and admission of fault and defeat is proof the post-Karma world is indeed a better place for all of us.
[/quote]

Funny that you didn't mention it also cut NSO's overall strength in half over a trivial matter that was also poorly handled by the "winners" of the war.

[Bill Wallace]

[quote name='William Bonney' timestamp='1283181540' post='2435813']
Funny that you didn't mention it also cut NSO's overall strength in half over a trivial matter that was also poorly handled by the "winners" of the war.
[/quote]


What do you mean? I wished them well in replacing all of their destroyed infra and tech. I thought that mentioning they had lost over half of their nation strength would only be rubbing it in.





[size="1"]Edit: spelling[/size]

Edited August 30, 2010 by Bill Wallace

[Hiro Nakara]

Roll on to another NSO victory, this victory wasn't as awesome as the previous victory...............Hopefully you guys can pull off another awesome victory to eclipse them all, or you could win the game and just disband :v

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1283177707' post='2435765']
But that was the implication. I'll refrain from sarcasm here, but tech reps are kind of intended to drain nations of tech! I don't see what your issue is. Even you've conceded that the reps impose on TOP are nothing like what was imposed on Polar.
[/quote]
Tech reps have in the past been used to help alliances rebuild. When the tech is produced by small nations, it in effect benefits both the victor and the loser in the war; for example the NPO-GATO tech deals (which weren't part of a formal reps agreement).

And no, the reps imposed on TOP weren't as bad as what was imposed on each Order. But "nothing like" is not how I'd describe it.

[Steve Buscemi]

One thing I miss about the old Hegemonic-NPO era: Not as much bawwing coming from the losing alliance.

Edited August 30, 2010 by Steve Buscemi

[silentkiller]

[quote name='Steve Buscemi' timestamp='1283197533' post='2436011']
One thing I miss about the old Hegemonic-NPO era: Not as much bawwing coming from the losing alliance.
[/quote]

You should get yourself checked out. Might have a case of short term memory loss.

[the masheen]

[quote name='kevin32891' timestamp='1283128493' post='2435181']
I'm not trying to make anyone mad, I'm just stating what I perceived the outcome of this battle. If you're getting frustrated by my comments, that's of your own doing.
[/quote]

If you are honestly being sincere in your posts, which I still assume you aren't, would you mind clarifying for me on what grounds the NSO proved to be victorious? I'm all ears and genuinely curious as to what you have to say.

[MrMuz]

[quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1283169679' post='2435693']
I'd say both sides have won in their own way.
Ragnarok and allies soundly defeated NSO, but NSO has managed to keep the conflict small and its allies out which they consider a victory.

It's a simply analyses. Overall the real loser in this entire conflict was diplomacy, because if that had been given a [i]real[/i] chance then this whole conflict would not have occurred and all involved alliances would have been spared a great deal of damage.
[/quote]

I think this describes it nicely. Tactical victory for Coalition. Strategic victory for NSO. Diplomatic hit for everyone.

I don't think the damage was all that bad. It woke up everyone and was rather entertaining to the spectators. NSO seems to be getting a lot of rebuilding aid from their allies. They'll be back to original strength in a few months.

[kevin32891]

[quote name='the masheen' timestamp='1283200093' post='2436066']
If you are honestly being sincere in your posts, which I still assume you aren't, would you mind clarifying for me on what grounds the NSO proved to be victorious? I'm all ears and genuinely curious as to what you have to say.
[/quote]
I'll be glad to explain. We didn't get our allies in the stomp, we made a half-ass'd forced apology, no reps, and an excellent beer review; unfortunately can no longer be seen.

To me this is a strategic victory for us.

[quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1283202290' post='2436096']
I think this describes it nicely. Tactical victory for Coalition. Strategic victory for NSO. Diplomatic hit for everyone.

I don't think the damage was all that bad. It woke up everyone and was rather entertaining to the spectators. NSO seems to be getting a lot of rebuilding aid from their allies. They'll be back to original strength in a few months.
[/quote]

I'm glad to see someone else that is sane in here.

Edited August 30, 2010 by kevin32891

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Bill Wallace' timestamp='1283178130' post='2435771']
the post-Karma world is indeed a better place for all of us.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]You know, while I won't argue that the terms are less harsh than those that would be given in a past era, no one believes that it is because at heart you all are really nice guys. You simply know that pulling the stuff the NPO did, too often anyway (in NPO's and TOP's case you had to), would only undermine your credibility and alienate the fringes of your group, on whom you rely in order to stay in power. You've got to be very specific about which petty grudges of yours to act upon. Nothing happened between Karma and TOP-CnG for the sole reason that TOP had a significant power base. Since they've been defeated you, SF specifically, have become more aggressive in your musings. While this may be the first time you acted on them, you've threatened quite a few people. You still can't go completely hostile though. Maybe if the next war then you'll be able to start rolling out again some of the policies you gave your endorsement to back when you were working with the NPO.

I don't know about you, but I haven't forgotten.[/color]

[quote name='Steve Buscemi' timestamp='1283197533' post='2436011']
One thing I miss about the old Hegemonic-NPO era: Not as much bawwing coming from the losing alliance.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]You know, I've never really understood this line of thinking. When it is the other guy stating a different opinion he's always a bawing baby, yet when it is you or one of your friends you're just sticking it to the man or some other loser with your cool and defiant smugness. Really, such caricaturing of your opponents and yourself is quite absurd.

If I recall correctly, a few years back FAN, NpO, and MK were all being labeled whiners? Why? Because they thought the responses to their alliances by those in power were unreasonable and unfair. They did not think they deserved to be rolled. They all fought though, for a long time too, and survived. I truly doubt any of you think that those alliances are full of whiners, yet they defended themselves in public just as the NSO has done. It seems to me that most of you think that if an alliance does anything but "shutting up and taking it" then it must be full of whiners, when truthfully no alliance with any desire to exist will do such a thing.[/color]

Edited August 30, 2010 by Rebel Virginia

[the masheen]

[quote name='kevin32891' timestamp='1283202391' post='2436098']
I'll be glad to explain. We didn't get our allies in the stomp, we made a half-ass'd forced apology, no reps, and an excellent beer review; unfortunately can no longer be seen.

To me this is a strategic victory for us.



I'm glad to see someone else that is sane in here.
[/quote]

You realize that the root of your "didn't get allies involved" argument for victory is based on an opinion about why the war was started in the first place. To call someone not "sane" because they don't share the same opinions as you is clearly unjust and unfair. Your opinion is that Rok started the war because they wanted to escalate the conflict to get your allies involved, some would specifically note the NPO. Other people, myself included, would argue that the war was started because Hoo told you that aiding sedrick would be considered an act of war and you did it anyways. Keeping your allies out of it was actually more of a victory for them because they could smash you harder without having to worry about someone else stepping in and wrecking them. The cold hard reality is, if Rok wanted to war with NPO or your other allies they would have declared war on the NPO or your other allies. There is nothing stopping them. Rok wanted to war with the NSO, hence why they declared on the NSO. I don't mind if you just agree to disagree, but at least try to comprehend where the other side of the argument is coming from and don't dismiss them as not "sane" for doing so.

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='the masheen' timestamp='1283203842' post='2436118']
You realize that the root of your "didn't get allies involved" argument for victory is based on an opinion about why the war was started in the first place. To call someone not "sane" because they don't share the same opinions as you is clearly unjust and unfair. Your opinion is that Rok started the war because they wanted to escalate the conflict to get your allies involved, some would specifically note the NPO. Other people, myself included, would argue that the war was started because Hoo told you that aiding sedrick would be considered an act of war and you did it anyways. Keeping your allies out of it was actually more of a victory for them because they could smash you harder without having to worry about someone else stepping in and wrecking them. The cold hard reality is, if Rok wanted to war with NPO or your other allies they would have declared war on the NPO or your other allies. There is nothing stopping them. Rok wanted to war with the NSO, hence why they declared on the NSO. I don't mind if you just agree to disagree, but at least try to comprehend where the other side of the argument is coming from and don't dismiss them as not "sane" for doing so.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]Actually, masheen, if RoK wanted to war the NPO they'd need a CB. Well, they don't really need one, but they'd have a hard time justifying the war without one, and the last thing they want is to look bad. They aren't stupid, as you may or may not know. So, when you can't get a CB on an alliance you want to hit, what do you do? Well, the next best thing is to find a smaller ally of theirs and hit it, flimsy CB or not, it doesn't matter. With any luck you'll draw them out.

Remember BDC? CIS? A few others as well. What did they all have in common? They were allied to the NpO and hit because certain parties were looking for a way to draw Polaris out. It eventually worked with Hyperion and GR, so don't worry fellows, hit enough alliances and maybe you might one day hit the jackpot.[/color]

[Bob Janova]

I don't really see how 'not getting your allies involved' is a victory. It stopped it from being a greater strategic defeat, yes, and was a sensible move on your part, but it simply reduced the scale of the defeat. You are in a worse position now than you were before the war, in my opinion – the sides are basically the same, but you lost the GATO treaty, and your NS is smaller than before while most of your enemies (in this war) are about the same.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1283205794' post='2436152']
I don't really see how 'not getting your allies involved' is a victory. It stopped it from being a greater strategic defeat, yes, and was a sensible move on your part, but it simply reduced the scale of the defeat. You are in a worse position now than you were before the war, in my opinion – the sides are basically the same, but you lost the GATO treaty, and your NS is smaller than before while most of your enemies (in this war) are about the same.
[/quote]
Losses during the war are roughly even actually, if you take into account the NSO's NS loss from turtling.

From the 8th when war was declared until the 24th when peace was achieved, the NSO lost 1,598,489 NS while the attacking alliances lost 907,774 NS.

[Bob Janova]

That's not really 'even', it's almost 2:1 . And even more than that, NSO's losses are around 55-60% of their NS, whereas 1 million is barely a scratch on the coalition that attacked them.

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1283206391' post='2436167']
That's not really 'even', it's almost 2:1 . And even more than that, NSO's losses are around 55-60% of their NS, whereas 1 million is barely a scratch on the coalition that attacked them.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]Yes, that's the grand thing about curb stomps. You can beat on someone smaller and take almost no damage. All the fun of ganging up on someone and none of the worrisome consequences of going it alone![/color]

[Corinan]

Remember neighbors, it's only whining when the [i]other[/i] guy does it. Now let's all go out and make the most of this beautiful day!

Edited August 31, 2010 by Corinan

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1283206391' post='2436167']
That's not really 'even', it's almost 2:1 . And even more than that, NSO's losses are around 55-60% of their NS, whereas 1 million is barely a scratch on the coalition that attacked them.
[/quote]
On a percentage basis, sure. But realistically, if the NSO had done say 20% of the attacking coalition's NS in damage, I think they'd have been perfectly fair in claiming massive victory.

(The ratio is about 3:2 - it remains to be seen how much of that damage is easily repaired at the NSO end. They've already regained about 250K strength, and it hasn't even been a week.)

[Augustus Autumn]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1283216999' post='2436382']
On a percentage basis, sure. But realistically, if the NSO had done say 20% of the attacking coalition's NS in damage, I think they'd have been perfectly fair in claiming massive victory.
[/quote]

I think the argument has been made before, but it's worth repeating - if an alliance signs a document where they say that they lost, then they lost. Whether or not the document was signed under duress, displays all the facts correctly or has the signatures of the full alliance on it, the fact remains that the accepted and legal voice of that alliance's government has accepted that the conflict has ended and that they were the ones to accept defeat. While the propaganda war will rage onward, the tactical facts of this conflict can hardly be disputed. The Sith lost the military engagement and that's really that.