Forcing alliances to disband is back

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1286093177' post='2472878']
People shouldn't attack assuming they'll just be let off the hook eventually. I'm sure that happens sometimes, but it definitely shouldn't be the norm (and even if it was, it's not how GOONS operates). I know personally, I'm under no obligation to accommodate my enemy. If their refusal to cooperate or pay reps results in an eternal war or their own disbandment, that's their fault.
[/quote]
It doesn't just happen sometimes, it happens every time an alliance doesn't force a large rogue to abandon his or her nation.

For example, thedestro. If UPN decides to demand reps from him amounting to say 2 times his damages, welllllll.... Were he to agree to that today, he'd still be paying in 2012. Now mind, he might still be at war then the way he's going, but that's another issue.

You guys have only dealt with smaller nation rogue attacks, where effective reps are in fact possible. Reps are basically useless in the large nation, large warchest arena.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1286119912' post='2472995']
It doesn't just happen sometimes, it happens every time an alliance doesn't force a large rogue to abandon his or her nation.

For example, thedestro. If UPN decides to demand reps from him amounting to say 2 times his damages, welllllll.... Were he to agree to that today, he'd still be paying in 2012. Now mind, he might still be at war then the way he's going, but that's another issue.

You guys have only dealt with smaller nation rogue attacks, where effective reps are in fact possible. Reps are basically useless in the large nation, large warchest arena.
[/quote]
Pretty sure destro is on the "Once this is over I'm gone" route, so reps would be impossible then, as I noted above. It only matters for rogues that decide that they want to stick around after they're tired of losing.

We have tons of small nations. So even if, just to set up a wacky scenario here, the 22nd largest nation in the entire game went rogue on us, we could ask for some amount of money and have it funneled to our newbies who can greatly benefit from money.

[Skap Q]

[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1285940426' post='2471015']
We would be coming full circle if GOONS wasn't offering peace. You can't just attack people and make ridiculous demands and then expect to get off scot free; if you do something as retarded and opportunistic as FnKa, you're going to end up paying high reps.

But I get it, the whole "GOONS TECH RAID!" line of propaganda was literally worthless so now you have to take quotes out of context to make your character attacks.
[/quote]

Lawl, because what we are doing is extremely opportunistic.

Opportunistic: Adj. exploiting chances offered by immediate circumstances without reference to a general plan or moral principle.

What are we exploiting? We have a general plan: don't surrender, and we have moral principle.

Now you sir have to make baseless insults to [b]your [/b]character attack.

[the rebel]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1286124688' post='2473069']
Pretty sure destro is on the "Once this is over I'm gone" route, so reps would be impossible then, as I noted above. It only matters for rogues that decide that they want to stick around after they're tired of losing.[/quote]

Only a small amount of aged nation rogues ive seen do the "Once this is over I'm gone", the majority seem to be the "seasonal rogue" when bored, but like mentioned before you cant get blood from a stone...

There comes a point when you have to decide if they refuse to pay reps, to either white peace once ZI'd/close or continue the war, one choice helps the alliance the other damages the alliance for months and months on end all because the alliance demanded over the top reps or war.

Edited October 3, 2010 by the rebel

[HeroofTime55]

If Ninjas/FnKa decide to carry this war until their own nations are but dust, and GOONS tries to demand impossible reps from them anyway, the resulting eternal war is all on GOONS. The fact that their nations are dust is enough that they are not "getting off the hook," there is no requirement that it be profitable for GOONS. A sufficient payment of blood absolves an individual or group from other forms of payment.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1286124688' post='2473069']
We have tons of small nations. So even if, just to set up a wacky scenario here, the 22nd largest nation in the entire game went rogue on us, we could ask for some amount of money and have it funneled to our newbies who can greatly benefit from money.
[/quote]
Not from one nation. The most one nation can send to your non-FAC newbies is 54M per month.

Drop in the bucket. You want reps to pay back the damages from Jim, well, he's probably already over the billion-dollar-damage mark.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1286161259' post='2473788']
Not from one nation. The most one nation can send to your non-FAC newbies is 54M per month.

Drop in the bucket. You want reps to pay back the damages from Jim, well, he's probably already over the billion-dollar-damage mark.
[/quote]
We're already working something out with Jim, and we're not that concerned about money-per-month.

[Baldr]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1286093177' post='2472878']
I know personally, I'm under no obligation to accommodate my enemy. If their refusal to cooperate or pay reps results in an eternal war or their own disbandment, that's their fault.
[/quote]

That quote is likely to come back and haunt you the first time GOONS loses a war.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Baldr' timestamp='1286249171' post='2475365']
That quote is likely to come back and haunt you the first time GOONS loses a war.
[/quote]
When we lose a war, and then decide we aren't going to pay any reps or cooperate in any way to stop the war, feel free to bring it up.

[Baldr]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1286249413' post='2475378']
When we lose a war, and then decide we aren't going to pay any reps or cooperate in any way to stop the war, feel free to bring it up.
[/quote]

Based on what you seem to be saying in the thread, it doesn't matter if you are willing to pay the reps. They can ask for reps that you couldn't possibly pay. After all, in your words, they "are under no obligation to accommodate their enemy".

Your talking about taking nations to ZI then asking for large reps that they can't pay, and then saying "Well, in that case, nothing I can do. They won't pay the reps."

I'd agree with you that some token reps would be reasonable. Huge reps that they essentially can't pay - well, in that case, since they can't do what you are asking for, you may as well say "You'll be at war forever" and quit pretending that you were reasonable.

[King Chill I]

Dammit and here i was hoping the practice was actually back (never really had an issue with it).

Damn you GOONS for miserably failing me.

[Udelar Johnson]

[quote name='Baldr' timestamp='1286250094' post='2475416']
Your talking about taking nations to ZI then asking for large reps that they can't pay, and then saying "Well, in that case, nothing I can do. They won't pay the reps."
[/quote]
Please provide me with a single example of where this was even remotely close to what a government official of Goon Order of Oppression, Negligence and Sadism has said about any situation, ever.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1286249413' post='2475378']
When we lose a war, and then decide we aren't going to pay any reps or cooperate in any way to stop the war, feel free to bring it up.
[/quote]
They're under no obligation to make it easy on you. They can demand, say, 50 thousand tech, and that'll be fine.

[thedestro]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1286164834' post='2473880']
We're already working something out with Jim, and we're not that concerned about money-per-month.
[/quote]
Already? It's disappointing most people aren't ready to lay it all down.
[quote]
I know personally, I'm under no obligation to accommodate my enemy. If their refusal to cooperate or pay reps results in an eternal war or their own disbandment, that's their fault.[/quote]
The underdogs always have the advantage. If you're expecting this to become a war of attrition, you will lose.

[Megamickel]

C'mon, don't let yourself be blinded by hate for GOONS.
Just let your Panzers be fueled by it.

[magicninja]

Just hit GOONs already and then we'll all fight for one side or the other and we can point and laugh at whoever loses. Anything to just shut you people up already.

[ChairmanHal]

GOONS has already established that only its rules on what constitutes an alliance matter to them and anything anyone else has to say is irrelevant. They have also established that in warfare they will set surrender terms at their convenience, and that if you do not like their terms, you may continue fighting--if that means that your nation(s) are ZIed a driven into deletion they honestly don't care.

Beyond that, several alliances have indicated that they are comfortable enough with GOONS policies that they are willing to call them "ally".

If you are a member of an alliance that hates GOONS and what they stand for, your mind is made up. You can allow them to continue to inhabit Planet Bob as is, or bring about the conditions that will allow them to be put to the sword, knowing that it will be no small task. If you are a member of an alliance that is allied with GOONS, work to change your government's position to one that opposes GOONS.

If you are ambivalent about GOONS, continue to read, research and make a decision. Make it soon, likely if you don't the treaty web will make it for you eventually.

If you like GOONS brand of governance, dualistic approach toward other alliances, their policies on raiding, and fuzzy IC/OOC boundaries, then your mind is made up as well most likely. Threads like like this one are a waste of time unless you simply want to defend GOONS from what you feel like are unfair attacks. Odds are at some point in the future you'll have to back them with more than just words.

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

Disbanding alliances is a good thing. Most of the time, it forces their members to seek out other alliances and they generally - but it's not always the case - bring their desire of revenge with them, thus fueling more wars and new conflicts. In general, harsher terms give a meaning and drive to both allies and enemies.

I hope GOONS and others (including my own alliance) will stop beating around the bush and really start imposing draconian terms, not so much in tech reparations but in broader terms.

[Sardonic]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1286755207' post='2480740']
and fuzzy IC/OOC boundaries
[/quote]
What are you implying, Hal?

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1286756530' post='2480755']
What are you implying, Hal?
[/quote]

You should read the posts of your own members some time.

[Hiro Nakara]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1286755207' post='2480740']
[b]GOONS has already established that only its rules on what constitutes an alliance matter to them and anything anyone else has to say is irrelevant.[/b] They have also established that in warfare they will set surrender terms at their convenience, and that if you do not like their terms, you may continue fighting--if that means that your nation(s) are ZIed a driven into deletion they honestly don't care.

Beyond that, several alliances have indicated that they are comfortable enough with GOONS policies that they are willing to call them "ally".

If you are a member of an alliance that hates GOONS and what they stand for, your mind is made up. You can allow them to continue to inhabit Planet Bob as is, or bring about the conditions that will allow them to be put to the sword, knowing that it will be no small task. If you are a member of an alliance that is allied with GOONS, work to change your government's position to one that opposes GOONS.

If you are ambivalent about GOONS, continue to read, research and make a decision. Make it soon, likely if you don't the treaty web will make it for you eventually.

If you like GOONS brand of governance, dualistic approach toward other alliances, their policies on raiding, and fuzzy IC/OOC boundaries, then your mind is made up as well most likely. Threads like like this one are a waste of time unless you simply want to defend GOONS from what you feel like are unfair attacks. Odds are at some point in the future you'll have to back them with more than just words.
[/quote]


And your alliance lets other outside influences dictate what your charter should be? Yes/No?

[LJ Scott]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1286755207' post='2480740']
GOONS has already established that only its rules on what constitutes an alliance matter to them and anything anyone else has to say is irrelevant. They have also established that in warfare they will set surrender terms at their convenience, and that if you do not like their terms, you may continue fighting--if that means that your nation(s) are ZIed a driven into deletion they honestly don't care.[/quote]

Every nation destroyed is a victory imo.

Also I seem to recall Valhalla trying to run a certain two alliances out of the game at one time or another. But oh yeah, that was the old Valhalla right?

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1286793740' post='2481427']
And your alliance lets other outside influences dictate what your charter should be? Yes/No?
[/quote]

The cool thing about any answer I give to this is that no matter the answer is, it's wrong--all I have to do is respond.

[Hiro Nakara]

So if an external group of people that you hold no ties with came in and said You have to change your charter to suit us, Valhalla would do this? I think you would not, if I'm wrong I will apologise. If that is indeed the case and you wouldn't allow any outsider dictate your charter, then your point a few posts above is mute and irrelevant.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='LJ Scott' timestamp='1286796821' post='2481439']
Every nation destroyed is a victory imo.[/quote]

I never bought into that old Pacifican fallacy that Planet Bob would be better off with fewer nation rulers when they were casually tossing it around in 2007--I still don't.

[quote]Also I seem to recall Valhalla trying to run a certain two alliances out of the game at one time or another. But oh yeah, that was the old Valhalla right?[/quote]

I can't say I personally ever believed that every single alliance, no matter how large or small, was a precious snowflake and that we must do everything we can to preserve them. I also however don't believe in being a richard needlessly.

If you want an official Valhalla response to that question, I suggest you consult Chefjoe.